Scuola e lumi in Italia nell'età delle riforme (1750-1780). La modernizzazione dei piani degli studi nei collegi degli ordini religiosi by Angelo Bianchi (review)

BOOK REVIEWS121 indices of titles, printers-bookseUers, and proper names. It would have been useful to have a chronological index. Thomas Clancy, SJ. New Orleans, Louisiana Scuola e lumi in Italia nell'età delle riforme (1750-1780). La modernizzazione deipiani degli studi net collegi degli ordini religiosi. By Angelo Bianchi. (Brescia: Editrice La Scuola. 1996. Pp. 318. lire 38,000 paperback.) This is a study of plans for reforming the curricula of reUgious-order schools in the middle of the eighteenth century. At this time the curricula of reUgiousorder schools of northern Italy were heavUy based on the Jesuit Ratio studiorum , a thorough if somewhat rigid program based on Latin and Greek classics and Aristotle. Governments and various thinkers loosely identified with the EnUghtenment pressured religious orders to change their schools and sometimes took control.This useful book demonstrates how three pedagogical reformers responded. Giacinto Sigismondo Gerdil (1718-1802) entered the Barnabite Order at age sixteen, then had a distinguished career as scholar and teacher at various Barnabite schools and the University ofTurin, and from 1776 as a cardinal in Rome. His plan for curriculum renewal showed him to be opposed to the "Ubertines" of the EnUghtenment, but enthusiastic for Newtonian science and weUacquainted with the work of current French scientists such as G-L. Buffon. He wanted schools to emphasize experimental science, optics, prism experiments, the laws of gravity and dynamics, and physics and natural history generaUy. His new scientific synthesis left the Ratio studiorum behind. Giuseppe Maria Pujati (no dates given), a Somaschan teacher and scholar, wrote polemics against EnUghtenment irreUgion, but also rejected what he saw as the corruption and metaphysical subtleties ofthe Ratio approach. In four letters of 1769 he outlined an integrated curriculum which emphasized the unity and simpUcity of knowledge, mostly within the humanities. Jean-Joseph Rossignol (1726-1817), a French Jesuit who taught for many years in Italy, proposed the most radical reform. In a plan drafted in 1775 for the schools of Embrun (in France), he rejected the step-by-step graded approach of the Ratio studiorum in favor of an integrated and eclectic scientific education. Rossignol wanted experiments , scientific observations, and excursions into nature, to dominate. In spring he wanted students to collect butterflies and insects; in summer they should survey the countryside. Older students should study air, pressure, and climate, perform experiments with machines, find proofs of motion and gravity, and so on. His plan was rejected. These three clergymen embraced change.They rejected what they saw as the atheistic currents of the EnUghtenment, including John Locke's Essay Concern- 122BOOK REVIEWS ing Human Understanding, which was placed on the Index of Prohibited Books in 1734. But they enthusiasticaUy endorsed the study of experimental science. Bianchi has done a good job in bringing to Ught some forgotten proposals for educational reform. His book includes one hundred pages from the writings of GerdU, Pujati, and Rossignol, plus considerable documentation from printed works of the eighteenth century, archival references, and recent bibUography .This book opens a window into the educational aspirations of some dedicated teachers and scholars of the eighteenth century. Paul F. Grendler University ofToronto Late Modern European Edmund Rice: 1762-1844. By Dáire Keogh. (Dublin: Four Courts Press. Order from International Specialized Book Services, Portland, Oregon. 1996. Pp. 126. $14.95.) This short volume would perhaps be better entitled "The Irish Education Question, the CathoUc Church, and the Role of Edmund Rice," since, though it is advertised as a "new biography" of Rice, his Ufe is very secondary to the major thrust of the book.The reason for this fact, the author admits, is due to the serious lack of primary sources which makes it impossible to provide more than a "mere glimpse" (p. 101) of Rice; that would surely disqualify it from being caUed a"biography."However,Rice's beatification on October 6, 1996,would appear to be the major reason for the book's appearance at this time. Given this objective, there are elements of the "pious" and "apologetic" throughout, and while this weakens it, the book does often provide a critical assessment of Rice and the chaUenges that faced Irish Catholic education. Still, some questions remain...