Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method【Articles】

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education:
The Introduction of the Theatrical Method
ライプニッツの君主教育論における演劇教育の導入について
Yamazaki Asuka（山崎明日香）Content
1. Introduction
2. Enlightenment Education of Royalty in Early Modern Germany
3. Entertainment Management and Control of the Public Mind
4. A Comparison with the Educational Thought of Comenius: Playful and Non-Hierarchical
Education
5. Educational Practice of the Art of Rhetoric and the Reproduction of Court Power
6. Acquisition of the Divine Perspective and Universal Recognition Through Spectacle
7. Conclusion
References
Abstract
This study deals with Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz’s theoretical essay, Lettre sur l’Éducation d’unPrince (Letter on the Education of a Prince) (1685–1686) by examining the introduction oftheatrical education for a prince; then it analyzes, from the viewpoint of both theatrical history and educational history, how Leibniz verifies the theatrical method and regards it as animportant pedagogical means of forming the prince’s universal personality and enhancing
his ability to govern the nation. As per his enlightened educational philosophy and his idea of“the theater of nature and art” that visually systematizes the phenomena of the world, a
prince should become a culturally refined, powerful, and influential monarch to better rule
the people. This proposal for the enlightened education of a prince using the theatricalmethod presents the image of a new leader who enlightens the people, as well as acquiring
the theatrical skills required to rule them and conduct diplomatic negotiation.

― 11 ―

総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method

1. Introduction
The French philosopher Pierre Bourdieu, author of La noblesse d’État: Grandes écoles et espritde corps (The State Nobility: Elite Schools in the Field of Power) (1996), asserts that the structure of establishment schools and the structure of power itself are mutually dependent andconnected (1996, pp. 263–290). Bourdieu defines the method and means that the bourgeois
employ to maintain their dominant position as their prevailing “reproductive strategy,” withwhich they execute and maintain their hereditary property, which is their economic and cultural capital. In particular, educational investment is considered an important strategy forestablishing and preserving their power; they integrate their children into their property
management system by providing them private and protective education. The ability of individuals of the wealthy class to attend exclusive establishment schools is instrumental inallowing them to obtain their bourgeois social status and solidify their social differentiationfrom common society. Additionally, this integration functions to reproduce the ruling classsystem and to uphold their power. In this way, educational strategy is emphasized in the“reproductive strategy” among the bourgeois class of Western Europe.
Based on this educational positioning of the noble class, this study examines a shortessay on princely education, Lettre sur l’Éducation d’un Prince (Letter on the Education of a
Prince) (1685–1686), written by the German philosopher, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716). Regarding the education of princes in Europe, Lucien Bély (1999, pp. 71–107) studies
the educational circumstances of French princes from the 16th to the 18th centuries. He
indicates that the various methods of intellectual and language instruction for princes were
designed to enrich their diverse experiences and to enable them to rule their future kingdom
more effectively.
In this context, we can refer to the famous Renaissance instructional book Il libro delcortegiano (The Book of the Courtier) (1528) by the Italian diplomat Baldassare Castiglione,
in which he describes the appropriate court manners and preferences, as well as proper conversational skills in court society. This famous book is a literary and political work serving tocreate an ethical and aesthetic code that the people follow both inside and outside of thecourt (Klaus Conermann, 1981, pp. 47–48). Castiglione suggested that courtiers learn various cultural norms of the court, such as mastering sophisticated intellectual conversational
skills, as well as knowing the complex ceremonies and social method of court life, so thatwithin an exclusive and elite community, people establish their identities as that of the courtier and receive distinction from others of different classes.
According to Wilfried Barner (1970, pp. 369–374), Cortegiano combines the militaryand chivalric principles of the French court with the ideals of Renaissance-humanistic education prevalent in Italy to form an intellectual court noble. This new courtier philosophy had a
総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）― 12 ―

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method

major impact on the courts and nobility of 17th century Europe. By the 1600s, Cortegiano
was a best seller that had been translated into 60 languages. Under this new court ideology,
courtiers were formed with an identity of the noble class based on the ideals of chivalry,
while receiving an education modeled on the intellectual ideals of Renaissance humanism.
This new ideal figure of the aristocracy also greatly influenced the German court. It has beenargued that Leibniz might have referred to this well-known book of the courtier when hewrote his essay on princely education (Yoshinori Tsuzaki, 2016, p. 92).
In the tradition of aristocratic education, Leibniz’s theory of princely education is also
appropriately situated as he aims to instruct the prince in the ways he should use to prepare
himself to acquire the necessary skills before his entry into public court society. This paper
focuses in particular on the theatrical method, which Leibniz introduces in his educational
theory for the aristocracy. From the perspectives of both theatrical history and educational
history, this paper analyzes the way Leibniz verifies the theatrical method and how he considers it an important pedagogical means of forming a universal personality and enhancing
the ability for national governance. Furthermore, we consider such modern monarchicaleducation in the reproduction of kingship and the maintenance of the royal system of control.
Leibniz’s short theoretical essay, which reflects his actual educational experience, wasrevised four times and finally published in the 1980s. From 1672–1673, when Leibniz wasstaying in Paris after being sent there by the Elector of Mainz, he began managing the education of young Phillip Wilhelm von Boineberg, the son of the former president of Mainz. At
the time, within the German-speaking sphere, the education of aristocratic children was usually conducted by a tutor; alternatively, the children attended the Ritterakademie (knight
academy), the educational institution for noble youths.
Regarding Leibniz’s essay on princely education, studies have been conducted by Willy
Moog (1967) on the history of the pedagogy in modern Germany and by Patrick Riley(1998) on Platonic educational philosophy. They have discovered reflections of modern educational philosophy in Leibniz’s essay and regard it as a fundamental educational concept.
The essay develops the basic philosophy of universal education of the modern Enlightenment and its individualism that diverged from the educational concept of the Baroque period.
In Leibniz’s discussion, the purpose of education is to develop diverse facets related to modern humanism and ruling philosophy that are essential functions of the prince. In this regard,
Leibniz emphasizes the need to build the character of the prince, as he is expected to becomea ruler with a strong sense of morality and a spirit of mercy, as well as a decent person (Leibniz, 1986, pp. 545–546). He should have a broad knowledge of all types of sciences andcultures; therefore, it is considered ideal to provide the prince an education based on a multifaceted, comprehensive, and academic foundation that incorporates cultural refinement.
As Moog and Riley argue, Leibniz’s theory of princely education is recognized as an
ideal and admirable theoretical essay that reflects modern educational philosophy for the― 13 ―

総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method

individual. However, we must remember that this pro-monarchical essay is a new, modern,strategic, and imperialistic theory that prescribes the spiritual life and cultural habits of theprince, who is considered a means of reproducing imperial and dominating power. During
the decline of the absolute monarchy in the Baroque period, Leibniz’s discussion eventuallyaims to preserve royal power and the governance of the people. In his consideration, we see
his advanced Enlightenment educational philosophy, where the conservative image of a monarch in power as determined by hereditary principle is combined with the image of themodern enlightened despot, as well as the educated courtier who had been formed under
the new courtier ideology since the Renaissance. It can be said that Leibniz’s princely educational theory, written during the transition from the declining absolutism of court society to
Enlightenment civil society, contains both pedagogically advanced and conservative argument.
This article deals with this educational thesis and considers Leibniz’s intention to introduce theatrical education into modern Enlightenment education as a way to strengthen themonarch’s diverse abilities to exert control. It also explores how Leibniz establishes a newimage of a refined ruler who understands the court’s cultural code and the rhetoric of his
contemporaries. No studies have investigated the relationship between monarchical education and theatrical education. For this reason, while analyzing Leibniz’s perspective, it isnecessary to refer to the proposals of theatrical education of the European philosophers andwriters from the Renaissance to the Baroque eras, as well as the role of school plays in Germany. Prior research on traditional rhetorical education and studies reassessing spectacle interms of political power are also considered.

2. Enlightenment Education of Royalty in Early Modern Germany
Martin Bircher (1981, pp. 105–127) analyzes the image of Augustus the Younger, Duke ofBraunschweig-Lüneburg (1579–1666), who was a well-known monarch of the German court
during the Renaissance. Not only did he as a great statesman issue 500 administrative permits to enhance the public welfare, but he was also an intellectual and philosophicalmonarch, publishing his own literary books. August found an ideal in Plato’s philosophy andrespected scholarship and books. In the 17th century, a monarch who was a politician as wellas intellectual was rare, so August was praised by the writer for his illuminating contributions, which were compared to the sunshine.
Such a new image of the monarch as ruler and as intellectual developed from the
Baroque period to the Enlightenment. This transformation of the character of monarchy was
related to the modern view of education and rise of the bourgeoisie in the public sphere. In
this regard, Albert Reble (2015, pp. 181–184) analyzes how the modern educational view
developed within the context of the following phenomenon: while the centralized and feudal総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）― 14 ―

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method

ist rationalism of the Baroque era moved into the era of Enlightenment rationalism of the
18th century, criticism arose against absolutism and church authority. As the statecraft
became secularized, the connection of the state with religion loosened. Based on rationality
and reason, the individual, as a person, was appreciated as an element of society and released
from the bonds of the state, while the recognition of the individual’s right to freedom and dignity expanded. Under these states’ enlightened philosophies, the monarch no longer
represented an absolute man of power governing his people as a national father. The idea
developed that the monarch should be presented as an “educator” for the people’s edification(Ibid., p. 183), and thus he was required to enlighten the people and ensure their happinessas autonomous individuals.
During this era when the new figure of the monarch was propounded, Leibniz’s viewson education were already established, as discussed by Kazunori Tanabe (1982) and Reble(2015), in addition to Moog and Riley. Leibniz was alive when the secular and courtly educational philosophy was being developed and modern French culture became the educationalmodel. However, in accordance with his universal philosophy, Leibniz eliminates the old
Baroque view of education and introduces one of Enlightenment and rationalism, in which
the people have the responsibility to autonomously achieve self-formation. As individuals,
they should have a strong awareness of being part of a whole and strive for completenessand the establishment of their autonomy.
Leibniz creates a new educational approach in the academic and cultural fields anddesigns a modern educational philosophy based on modern languages, such as German, andthe natural sciences. In his opinion, Enlightenment-based scientific education is necessary
for all people and, in particular, for a governing monarch. To exemplify this point, we canrefer to his letter to Johann Friedrich, Duke of Braunschweig-Lüneburg, in which Leibniz
indicates his belief that only the monarch, the most powerful tool of God’s good will, can provide a remedy for public evils, and therefore the monarch should be rational and loved by the1）people in order to ensure happiness and well-being of everyone (Leibniz, 1970, p. 504). We
can see here the theological and conservative elements of his image of the monarch who, asa representative of God, integrates and rules the people. Meanwhile, he expected the monarch to use his power and wealth to enrich the people’s common welfare, as Leibniz aims toform a new ideal and enlightened monarchy figure.
Before analyzing Leibniz’s views of princely education, it is necessary to mention his
relationship with the Ritterakademie (knight academy), a traditional German educational
institution that implemented the education of royal and aristocratic children, which existed
mainly from the Renaissance to the Baroque periods. According to Ulrich Herrmann (2005,
pp. 77–78), the aristocracy in Western Europe, which held influence and power for morethan a thousand years, was often compared with the church authority in terms of its strong
political, social, and cultural influence. Education of the sons and daughters of aristocratic― 15 ―

総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Methodfamilies was usually entrusted to male or female tutors from the commoner class. However,
because of the expense of tutors, the popularity of higher education at universities or knight
academies, modeled on Tübingen’s Collegium founded in 1589, increased. In particular, inthe latter half of the 16th century, due to the continuing development of court society and thecompetition between the aristocracy and the government officials of the citizen classappointed there, the number of aristocratic youths who entered the university increased.
After the decline of the university during the Thirty Years’ War, knight academies became
important educational institutions for the youth of the noble class.
A knight academy was an exclusive institution characterized by the issues of social status and the class system that was founded during the era that the absolutist system waserected. It persisted for 200 years, from the 17th to the 18th centuries (until 1705). The curriculum of these institutions included advanced and practical contents and was organized toprovide the bureaucratic training necessary for the absolute nation state. Reducing theemphasis on classical language learning, such as Latin and Greek, instead they valued foreign language learning, such as French, to meet students’ needs for diplomatic negotiation
skills. Subjects such as law, history, geography, and mathematics, as well as traditional aristocratic knightly education, such as riding, fencing, knight’s play, and dancing, were highly
esteemed, while instruction in military exercises and rehearsals for court officials were alsooffered. Within the context of the expansion of the political power of court society, whichcame to take center stage in culture and education, the function of the knight academy as an
educational facility was fortified. It provided princes instruction in exercises and a model forcourt life and offered them the opportunity to socialize with other aristocratic youth.
As is well known, Leibniz was given the important position by the Court of Hannover in
1676 of librarian of the ducal library of Braunschweig-Wolfenbüttel, where the royal academy(1688–1712), a kind of knight academy that acted as an education institution for princes, wasestablished by Duke Anton Ulrich. Norbert Conrads (1982, pp. 273–322) discusses Leibniz’s
involvement in this academy of Wolfenbüttel, where he worked as a competent adviser andcontributed to its development. In the latter half of the 17th century, this royal academy
became an important educational facility in Germany and had a great influence on the establishment of another academy. This royal knight academy enrolled a great number of wealthy
aristocratic youths, who were taught by professors of the university. At this institution,
instruction not only in political and historical subjects but also natural sciences and civil law
were offered, which became increasingly important to the nobility, as well as foreign language courses.
Leibniz sometimes visited Wolfenbüttel and was involved in the development of thisacademy (Conrads, 1982, pp. 315–319). He conceived of an ideal knight academy that had acurriculum based on subjects such as riding, fencing, dancing, language, eloquence, history,
mathematics, architecture, and law (Ibid., p. 320). One reason Leibniz contributed to main総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）― 16 ―

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method

taining and developing this knight academy was that he had experience as a tutor in the2）
education of young Phillip, the son of Boineberg. Leibniz highly valued this advanced academy and organized a modern and realistic curriculum that became educationally ideal for thecultivation of youth. However, during the decline of the German knight academy, the academy in Wolfenbüttel also closed in 1713.
In the following four sections, with reference to the circumstances of the education of
the aristocratic youth in modern times and the pedagogical thought of Leibniz, this paper
examines how Leibniz intended to ensure the educational and cultural refinement of theprince through the introduction of theatrical education in relation to his Enlightenment educational philosophy. It also analyzes how Leibniz aimed to cultivate the prince as a person of
power and authority by instructing him in a technique of control. Furthermore, this newimage of a leader, complete with the acquisition of theatrical skills to rule countries and peoples, is also examined.

3. Entertainment Management and Control of the Public Mind
In relation to princely education using the theatrical method in Leibniz’s theory, we mustfirst note that he recommends providing the prince a place to experience art and entertainment, including music and theater, which were common cultural codes of court society. Fromaesthetic, educational, and sociocultural perspectives, this is intended to broaden the prince’s
understanding of upper-class culture and to allow him to acquire personal and intellectual
charm, as well as to practice court etiquette and dialogue in social occasions. By increasing
his interest in and comprehension of art and entertainment and by developing his performance abilities, the prince is expected to enhance his artistic entertainment skills so as toperform in future court festivals.
As Alewyn and Sälzle analyze this in their Das grosse Welttheater (The Great World Theater) (1985), a typical festival of the absolute royal monarchy in the Baroque period was aspectacular event, indispensable for raising awareness of the national authority and for demonstrating the power of the sovereign. Considering that the political and cultural festival was
linked with the expansion of such royal dignity, theatrical education was considered todevelop the prince’s competence in the management and direction of entertainment, together
with the acquisition of cultural knowledge. The theatrical method is calculated for use in creating the political and cultural control abilities necessary for leadership as a future ruler,
such as the management and manipulation of the minds of the people. We refer to the following passage here.
J’ay souhaitté qu’un Prince soit non seulement éclairé mais encore agreable. Pour cela ilest bon, qu’il soit eloquent, tant en parlant qu’en ecrivant ; qu’il puisse dire des bons mots ;― 17 ―

総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method

qu’il sçache mille jolies choses capables de donner du plaisir, et particulierement la danse etautres exercices ; qu’il entende l’art des ornemens, et sçache la belle disposition ; qu’il ait
l’oreille bonne pour juger de la Musique, quoyqu’ on ne doive point exiger, qu’il sçache luymême composer, chanter, ny jouer, si ce n’est, qu’il se plaise à toucher quelque instrument
de Musique. Il sera bon encore, qu’ il jone bien toute sorte de beaux jeux, et sçache employer
plusieurs divertissemens honnestes, pour regaler ses amis, tels que sont les ces Tournois, lesWirtschafts, les spectacles, les chasses. Plus il sera entendu luy même en toutes ces choses, etplus il en relevera l’eclat et l’agrement. (Leibniz, 1986, p. 547)
(Translation)
I wanted a Prince to be not only enlightened but also pleasant. For this it is good that
he is as eloquent in speaking as in writing; that he can say sophisticated words; that heknows a thousand beautiful things capable of giving pleasure, especially dancing andother exercises; that he understands the art of ornaments, and knows how to beautifully
place them; that he has a good ear for judging music, while it is not always necessarythat he should himself know how to compose, sing, and play, and if he does not, that heshould like to touch some instrument of music. Moreover, it will be good for him to haveall sorts of beautiful games and know how to use several honest amusements to regale
his friends, such as tournaments, saloons, spectacles, and hunts. The more he will
understand even all these things, the more he will increase his brightness and attractive3）
ness.
According to Leibniz, theatrical education spurs the development of the creation of pleasure
and a playful spirit that lays the foundation of a cultivated princely character, and it inculcatesin him diverse, sophisticated, and artistic tastes. The prince will thereby know how to exhibit
excellent communication with the aristocracy at social interactions, as well as how to build
adequate and exclusive social relationships with them. In addition to increasing his interests
in and understanding of various arts and other amusements, the prince is expected to perform various forms of entertainment because he should be the center of attention and gain
the respect of the people. Moreover, as the above quotation shows, Leibniz considers important the learning of la belle disposition̶the prince should cultivate an excellent aesthetic
sense of the harmonious arrangement of things, spatially and aesthetically combining artistic
and aesthetic objects. As these expectations of the prince indicate, he should be able to manage a high-level, aesthetic entertainment. That is to say, having a courtly, entertaining natureand cultural ability is required to organize an absolute hierarchical society in which entertainment and distraction are inseparably incorporated into the court calendar, as in
ceremonial events and festivals.
In the context of the positive effects of princely education through the introduction oftheatrical culture, we can consider the advanced culture of France at that time and the role
総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）― 18 ―

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Methodthat the theater played there (Taro Sugawara, 1973; Yasuo Fujii, 1995; Christian Quaeitzsch,
2015; Marie-Claude Hubert, 2016). Since the 16th century, the influence of Italy caused
French theatrical culture to flourish. In particular, under the reign of Louis XIV, who was
known as an excellent dancer, the tradition of leadership in cultural policies for the promotion and preservation of the academy and the arts was established by Cardinal Richelieu, andthus theatrical culture further bloomed. From the late 16th to the 17th centuries, as the educational function of the theater expanded, the classic tragedy of dramatist Pierre Corneillecame to play a great role through his magnificent works exploring virtue and morality.
In the context of French theater culture, it is worth mentioning here to Michel de Montaigne, the French Enlightenment philosopher. Chapter 25, “Children’s Education,” inVolume 1 of his famous book Les Essais (The Essays) (1580), provides some interesting
descriptions. From his experience during his younger years when he himself gave outstanding recitations at school, he recommended the introduction of theatrical education foraristocratic children.
Alter ab undecimo tum me vix ceperat annus, (* I had just entered my twelfth year.) (Virgil, Eclogues, viii. 39)– I played the chief parts in the Latin tragedies of Buchanan, Guerente, and Muret, thatwere presented in our college of Guienne with great dignity; [ ] and I was looked upon
as one of the best actors. It is an exercise that I do not disapprove in young people ofcondition; and I have since seen our princes, after the example of some of the ancients,
in person handsomely and commendably perform these exercises; it was even allowed
to persons of quality to make a profession of it in Greece. [ ] (Montaigne, 1952, pp. 79–
80)
Additionally, he describes:
Nay, I have always taxed those with impertinence who condemn these entertainments,
and with injustice those who refuse to admit such comedians as are worth seeing into
our good towns, and grudge the people that public diversion. Well-governed corporations take care to assemble their citizens, not only to the solemn duties of devotion, butalso to sports and spectacles. They find society and friendship augmented by it; and,besides, can there possibly be allowed a more orderly and regular diversion than what is
performed in the sight of everyone, and, very often, in the presence of the supreme
magistrate himself? And I, for my part, should think it reasonable, that the prince should
sometimes gratify his people at his own expense, out of paternal goodness and affection;and that in populous cities there should be theatres erected for such entertainments, if
but to divert them from worse and private actions. (Ibid., p. 80)― 19 ―

総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method

Even in the days of discrimination and prejudice against traveling performers and actors,
Montaigne pays remarkable attention to actors for providing civic entertainment, thereby
contributing to enriched and harmonized social communication, as well as creating a friendly
atmosphere. He also suggests the significance to governance of promoting the performancesand entertainment of actors and urges the ruler to be tolerant in providing the people withsuch entertainment. Moreover, the ruler should be encouraged to display a spirit of understanding and afford the people protection and promotion of entertainment. Here, the politicaland cultural relevance of spectacular theatrical performance as a tool for the manipulation of
the minds of the people is regarded as considerable.
Theatrical activities, as artistic entertainment, were ways of acquiring precious social
skills within society through role practice and dialogue training. The French court philosophy since the Renaissance period held theater and performance as a means of political andcultural control of the people that endured into the 17th century: we also see such a perspective in a discussion of Francis Bacon and in an essay about Blaise Pascal, in which theatricaleducation for upper-class children is recommended for its utility and effectiveness. In his
Essays or Counsels Civil and Moral, Bacon states that young people should not ignore thelocal culture when traveling to other countries (Bacon, 1962, p. 417), and Pascal’s niece Marguerite Perrier wrote in her memoir about the family of Pascal how they were familiar withtheatrical culture: from the children around Paris, Pascal’s younger sister was chosen to act
in a children’s play that Cardinal Richelieu wished to see, in which she gave an excellent performance (Marguerite Périer, 1964, pp. 1094–1095). Thus, it can be understood that theater
was considered a significant educational tool for children and youth of the noble class, rather
than an ordinary entertainment for them. In addition to such cultural effects of French-styletheatrical education in aristocratic education, from the viewpoint of court political life Leibniz
also considers education employing artistic training as significant in maintaining the court
system and the reproduction of power.

4. A Comparison with the Educational Thought of Comenius:
Playful and Non-Hierarchical Education
Leibniz’s educational theoretical essay Lettre sur l’Éducation d’un Prince is concerned withhow theatrical education is to be used as an important cultural teaching tool for the prince.
Leibniz emphasizes the playful and pleasant learning process through real dialogue as a way
for the prince to acquire the manner of speech and rhetoric necessary for his future role asruler. Focusing on Leibniz’s mention of the playful learning method, in this section, we examine his concept based on the educational philosophy of Johannes Amos Comenius(1592–1670), a Czech philosopher and progressive educator, whose influence on modern
pedagogical thought is highly rated. We refer to the following Leibniz quotation:
総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）― 20 ―

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method

Mais quant à un jeune Prince il est bon, que tout soit reglé sous une liberté apparente, et qu’il apprenne en croyant de se divertir. [...] Le moyen de le detourner dequelque desir peu raisonnable consiste dans la varieté des plasirs. On le divertirapar des mouvements et spectacles agreables, qui commenceront d’abord à être instructifs. [...] En même temps on luy formera la parole, prenant garde que ceux, qui sontauprés de luy, parlent bien et distinctement, et s’expliquent agreablement sur plusieurs
choses. Avec le temps on y mélera des petites Comedies, et on choisira au Prince deCompagnons d’Estude et de plaisir, [...]. (Leibniz, 1986, pp. 549–550)(Translation)
However, for a young prince, it is good that everything should be regulated under anapparent freedom, and that he should learn and find it amusing. [...] The way todivert him from some unreasonable desire consists in the variety of pleasures. The
prince will be entertained by pleasant movements and spectacle, which will begin to be
instructive at first. [...] At the same time, they who are next to him will shape his speech,taking care that they speak well and distinctly, and explain themselves agreeably on several things. With time, they will mix short Comedies, and choose friends for him to
study with to share the pleasure, [...].
Leibniz values a playful element in theater performance and believes that it has a great effecton the prince’s language learning during such play. This viewpoint resembles Montaigne’s
description above. However, regarding the playful learning method in Leibniz’s concept, it
seems to have been developed based on the educational thought of Comenius, whose philosophy greatly influenced the modern Enlightenment and pedagogical thought of the 17th
century. His famous textbook Orbis Pictus (The Visible World) (1658) was a pioneering workin the development of the intuitive teaching method, and it became a model of modern education in Europe. Since many researchers have studied his playful learning method andconcept of theatrical education (e.g., Will S. Monroe, ca. 1900, 1971; Dietrich Mahnke, 1931;
Shoji Ishii, 1981; D. Kožmínová, 1986; Junzo Inoguchi, 1998; Yuko Kitazume, 2015, etc.), we
will analyze Leibniz’s concept with reference to their studies.
In the age of Comenius, the medieval teaching method, emphasizing style over content
through the acquisition and memorization of dogma, was still dominant. Departing fromsuch a rigorous teaching method requiring the obedience of children, Comenius developed
and theorized his comfortable and playful learning system by introducing the theatricalapproach. These concepts are expressed both in his drama Schola Ludus (School as Play)(1656), which combines his idea and a dramatic script, and in his great pedagogical book
Pampaidea (Pampaidea: Improving Lifelong Education) (1666) (This work corresponds toPart 4 of De rerum humanarum emendatione consultatio Catholica (The Deliberation on
Humanity). In Schola Ludus, Comenius explains his concept using the words “schola omnis― 21 ―

総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method

ludus fiat” (“to change school to play”) (Comenius, 1657, p. 830). Additionally, in Pampaedia,
he stresses, “schola vera lusio mera” (“a true school, pleasant work”) (Comenius, 1960,
p. 136).
Comenius values a learning process in which children can intuitively learn and recognize things, while their initiative is encouraged as pleasure through the introduction ofgames or plays. In particular, he considers drama to have a great learning effect as the children imitate natural phenomena or things in a theatrical way that results in rousing their joy
and motivation for learning. Comenius thought that this is a natural learning process thatincorporates the intrinsic nature of humanity (Comenius, Pampaedia, 1960, pp. 197–199).
This intuitive teaching method that emphasizes natural processes that accord with theinherent nature of humanity is based on the nature-oriented educational philosophy of such
British empiricists as Bacon and John Locke, that gave birth to the modern enlightened pedagogical philosophy of Leibniz, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi. In
contrast to the teaching method of the Renaissance period, which was basically intended forboth the aristocracy and the intelligent elite (Ishii, 1981, p. 14), Comenius developed his educational theory not only for the people of the upper class but for all citizens, including
uncultivated people. In his educational concept for all, the introduction of the theatricalmethod is recommended for empirically learning foreign languages and concepts in real timeand space. Indeed, through the role of acting out exercises with colleagues, it provides thepupils an opportunity to interactively improve their management of social relationships.
In the context of Comenius’ theatrical and intuitive teaching methods, Leibniz is also
concerned with developing the prince’s spontaneity, intellectual desires, and interests, whileaiming to build his strong social relationships among his chosen friends. By preparing a comfortable and amusing intellectual environment through play, the prince is encouraged todevelop his own abilities as an individual in order to become a sophisticated ruler who integrates and governs his lands and people.
In contrast to the Renaissance, in the Baroque period, monarch was considered less of atranscendental entity, but was expected as a ruler to be an intelligent figure humanistic educated, as well as becoming a sophisticated courtier. In the Age of the Enlightenment, thistendency became intensified, with the monarch required to be an enlightened person and anational educator possessing universal reason and knowledge. In response to the decline of
the royal governing institution of absolutism, Leibniz proposes a new teaching method torestore the royal rulership and maintain the prince’s influence following the changes in social
relations between the ruler and the people. His short essay sets forth a new monarchicaleducational theory to establish a new image of the ruler, while avoiding the decline in kingship; however, ironically, we can see his concept as constituted by means of accepting theuniversal educational method of Comenius, which had a great influence on the modern
Enlightenment: Comenius advocates educational reform that is not restricted to the elite
総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）― 22 ―

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Methodclass but is meant for all people equally. The theoretical boundaries of educational methods
between the ruling class and the civil class were actually lost. Such a change in the modern
educational situation relates interestingly to the parallel decline of the German knight schoolfor the aristocracy.

5. Educational Practice of the Art of Rhetoricand the Reproduction of Court Power
According to Richard A. Lanham (1994, pp. 2–3), a researcher in the history of rhetoric, thearistocratic society of Western Europe specifically emphasized the traditional dramaticallearning of rhetoric from early childhood as they implemented this educational practice as away of reproducing literary and historical events. The exercises of roleplay and the improvement of speech technique and social behavior, as well as social-emotional development insensing social situations and acquiring skills of persuasion in dialogue, were encouraged.
Education in rhetoric was the core of aristocratic education because it was their only
path to public life and thus was necessary to obtain honor and wealth. Monica Ferrari (2015,
pp. 19–32), who investigates royals’ education through the art of speech of the 15th century,
indicates that for the aristocracy, elocution was the essential instrument of the transmissionof knowledge, dissemination of institutions and customs, and declarations and public speaking. The prince, who is set to become the monarch, has many obligations, as he will act as a
diplomat and conduct negotiations with important people from foreign countries, in addition
to being a speaker who must persuade his colleagues. The acquisition of persuasive and public speaking technique is indispensable for the fundamental political function of the monarch.
For this reason, for many centuries in the political history of Western Europe, the mastery of
the art of speaking served to maintain order in a hierarchical and inequitable society and wasregarded as a criterion for distinguishing people in the social hierarchy (Ibid., p. 31). Indeed,according to Bély (1999, pp. 88–94), language education was also significant in princely education, and the important members of royal families in the courts in France, England, Italy,
and Germany from the 16th to the 17th centuries emphasized the mastery of multiple foreign languages centered on Latin̶the international language.
In this way, the man who has mastery of eloquence demonstrates his understanding of acode of intelligence that was commonly manipulated by people of the upper classes; he illustrates his proof of belonging to this class. Such traditional rhetoric and speech practices
within establishment education in Western Europe are also reflected in Leibniz’s theory of
princely education. In this section, we examine the relevance of rhetoric education using thetheatrical method to the princely education that emerges in his essay. Additionally, Leibniz’s
intention to establish a new monarchical image by educating the prince is considered. First,
we refer to the following two quotations:― 23 ―

総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method

L’Histoire formera des cas et des exemples curieux; et le jeune Prince sera du conseil
des anciens Empereurs et Rois pour mieux presidér un jour dans le sien. (Leibniz,
1986, pp. 553–554)(Translation)
History will form curious cases and examples; the young prince will be under theadvice of the ancient emperors and kings, in order to govern better one day in his
country.
Je ne veux point, qu’ on s’amuse aux humanités, à la Rhetorique et à la Philosophie suivant
la façon ordinaire des Colleges. Car on a déja pourvu à l’Histoire et aux langues; la Rhetorique doit être toute de practique ; qu’on aidera par des preceptes adroitement mêlés. Le
jeune Prince parlera souvent: premierement dans les petites Comedies, et puis dans lesConseils imaginaires, où l’on résoudra des ces importans de droit et de fait tirés del’Histore. (Ibid., p. 554)
(Translation)
I will never hope that the people will have fun with humanities, rhetoric and philosophy
in the usual way of the colleges. Because they have already provided for history and languages, Rhetoric must be practical to the last, so it will help by skillfully mixed precepts.
The young prince will often speak, first in the small comedies, and then in imaginary
counsels, where they will solve important laws and facts drawn from history.
The Colleges (or Kollegium), in the second quotation, are classified into the Hohe Schule(higher Education Institution), which is one level below the university, and there the youthsof the intellectual elite or aristocratic classes studied modern academic subjects. According
to Isa Schikorsky (2005, p. 356), in Braunschweig, where Leibniz lived, a Kollegium also
existed in which not only “old” language courses were offered, such as Latin, Greek, and4）
Hebrew, but also new language courses, such as English, French, German, and Italian.
Generally, in the Kollegium in the Baroque period, the traditional rhetorical educationfrom the Middle Ages to the Renaissance, which consisted of the classical and formal rhetoric education for memorizing texts of the classical Ages, was practiced (Barner, 1970,
pp. 241–258). There, the tradition of Aristotle and Cicero was strictly followed, and Greek
and Latin classical literary works were treated dogmatically. In the lessons, a scholastic andformal learning method was conducted in which quotations of works and ordinary phrases
and metaphorical expressions were reproduced by memorization, composition, and recitation, after which it was considered worthwhile to learn the traditional five categories ofrhetoric, inventio (invention), dispositio (disposition), elocutio (eloquence), memoria (memory) and pronuntiatio (pronunciation) or actio (presentation).
However, Leibniz denies the use of such traditional humanistic and Latin-centered edu総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）― 24 ―

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method

cation in eloquence that was conducted in the college, in which the student was compelled tomemorize classical texts. Rather than such formal and old ways, in his essay Leibniz encouraged a modern, practical, and dialogical education in rhetoric. In this regard, it is interestingthat Leibniz thought that the prince should first speak in a short comedy. The theater isregarded as a suitable exercise stage for the prince to practice his role and to improve his
dialogical rhetoric skill. This rehearsal contributes to the development of his future negotiation skills on the diplomatic stage or speech techniques at conferences.
In this respect, rhetorical education̶dramatically learning the living language̶wasalso seen in the theater culture in the German-speaking sphere of the Baroque period, suchas Schultheater (school Theater) and Jesuitentheater (Jesuits’ Theater). According to Denk
and Möbius (2017) and Grell (2005, p. 522), such school theaters for the youth played prominent roles in the development of their literary culture, as well as shaping their morality andvirtue. Through theatrical performances in Latin, the improvement and excellence of theirlanguage skills were promoted.
In contrast to Leibniz’s proposal of rhetoric education using a theatrical method, it is difficult to find such suggestions in the discourse of intellectuals in the English-speaking
sphere, although rhetorical education was promoted there at that time. In England after the
Renaissance period, the theater was under the strict supervision of the state; all performances of all theater companies in London, where the religious influence of the Puritans ofCalvinism was notably strong, were subject to censorship by the magistrate (Sugawara, 1973,
pp. 238–239). Since this conservative and rigorous cultural control over the theater was
imposed, the proposal of theatrical education from the latter half of the 16th to the 17th centuries was uncommon in the prominent intellectual discourse of England. For instance, nosuch discussion is found in Of Education (1664) by John Milton (1608–1674) or in Some
Thoughts Concerning Education (1693) by John Locke (1632–1704), which were written for
the nobility. However, in this era in England, the reform and further strengthening of language education (e.g., traditional Latin), as well as a national language were promoted(Murray Cohen, 1977, pp. 1–42). This rhetorical education not only aimed to help students
acquire common expressions but also to help them adapt to intellectual social life.
As mentioned above, the purpose of rhetorical education until the Baroque period wasto allow the learners to familiarize themselves with common grammar, expressions, and pronunciation of Greek and Latin as well as the national language because these languages werecurrent in the social life of the aristocracy. Moreover, rhetorical education was required togain the complicated language proficiency needed to conduct the governance and control of
the country and the people. The structure of eloquence learning in the educational system of
the aristocracy was a means for the reproduction of their power and the fixation of their hierarchical social class system. Through this dialogical rhetorical education, the characters of
the children of the aristocracy were cultivated, their moral dignity was enhanced, and their― 25 ―

総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method

cultural and scientific knowledge was broadened. As individuals, they were expected toachieve a considerable degree of independence and to become the authorities who strove toensure the happiness of all the people when they had completed their education of becominga monarch.
The emphasis on proficiency in the art of speech and rhetoric is also seen in Leibniz’s
patriotic essay on the national language of 1683, Ermahnung an die Teutsche, ihren Verstandund Sprache beßer zu üben samt beigefügten Vorschlag einer Teutschgesinten Gesellschaft(Admonition to the Germans to Better their Mind and Language with an Accompanying Proposal to Establish a German-Oriented Society), in which he advocates the necessity oflanguage education for the people. In a relevant passage, Leibniz stresses that
So ist die Sprache ein rechter Spiegel des Verstandes. (Leibniz, 1986, p. 815)(“Language is the correct mirror of intelligence.”)
Furthermore, he describes an undesirable environment for youth in which they receive a
harmful effect from it:
Man lasse einen jungen Menschen mit denen umgehen, so ungeschickt reden, manlasse ihn abgeschmackte Bücher lesen und viel in unbelebte Gesellschafften kommen,
es wird ihm lange genung anhängen. (Ibid., p. 816)(“Let a young man socialize with people who clumsily speak, let him read tastelessbooks, and not let him have vivified social communication, and then he will be bored outof his mind for too long and have enough.”)Leibniz, who was interested in public education, proclaimed the importance of implementing
national language education. Providing excellent language education in a positive environment for children would be beneficial by helping them acquire an intellectual, educated,courteous, and witty humanity. He realizes no social, hierarchical distinction of education
between monarch and citizen.
However, the primary purpose of princely education was usually not only to maintain thetransmission of the generational political, social, and cultural power of the aristocracy to theirdescendants but also to preserve the reproduction of the kingship. In particular, instructionin the art of rhetoric was their fundamental and central education, which served various
political and social functions of the monarch. During the period when Leibniz’s theory of
princely education was written, the humanistic and Latin-centric eloquent education began to
decline, and instead a theory of German rhetoric was created, leading to a paradigm shift
from traditional, eloquent education to practical and dialogic rhetoric. According to theresearch of Ingrid Lohmann (1993, pp. 5–6, 13 and 16), this transformation of rhetorical edu総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）― 26 ―

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method

cation was not only due to the appearance of a new class called the Beamtenaristocratie (anaristocracy of office or noblesse de robe), but also to the establishment of a civil public spacewith the rise of the commoner class. While there was a trend for commoners to rise to thenobility, the school was for students no longer a place to give speeches but a place to prepare
for speeches in their future. Rhetoric in the 17th century was still a common culture of intellectuals such as jurists and theologians, but rhetorical education gradually turned to practicaland not Latin-centric aims.
Leibniz was involved in this educational planning for rulers-in-training by adopting theadvanced educational methods of the age in order to provide the prince the opportunity tosocialize with aristocratic people and to afford him training in practical and social governancetechniques. In his Enlightenment and individualistic pedagogical philosophy, the prince isencouraged to obtain universal reason, who, as a sophisticated and ideal person, should possess fairness and mercy for the people. Using his excellent speech techniques, said Leibniz,
the ruler will better enlighten the educated and refined citizen through public education that
results in the reproduction of the power of the monarch and maintains the country’s systemof governance.

6. Acquisition of the Divine Perspective
and Universal Recognition Through Spectacle
In Leibniz’s theoretical essay on princely education, the theoretical educational method is
introduced not only for the prince to practice dialogue and roleplaying but also to help him
acquire the encyclopedic, universal knowledge by the Enlightenment. Leibniz considers theconcept and function of the theater, which he regards as a place where everything is exhibited through academic systematization and arrangement. Regarding this point, let us refer tothe following passage from his essay:
Mais outre ces representation je serois d’avis qu’on se servit d’une manière de Cabinets
de l’art et de la nature, pour montrer au jeune Prince les echantillons des chosesmêmes, ou au moins leur modelles. Ce seroit, pour ainsi dire, un Théâtre de la Nature
et de l’Art. (Leibniz, 1986, p. 552)
(Translation)
However, in addition to these representations, I would be of the opinion that they use akind of cabinet of art and nature, to show the young prince the samples of things
themselves, or at least their models. It would be, so to speak, a theater of nature andart.
According to Bredekamp (2010, pp. 35–38), Leibniz’s notion of the “theater of nature and― 27 ―

総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Methodart” refers to the Kunstkammer (Cabinets of Wonder) based on a concept similar to that of
the book Methodus Didactica (1669) of German doctor Johann Joachim Becher (1635–1682)
in which all kinds of living things̶replicas of animals or plants in nature, inorganic substances, other artifacts, machines, etc.̶are collected, academically systematized, and thenexhibited together at the same time and in the same place. Based on an encyclopedic knowledge of all things existing in the world, a vivid impression and knowledge of things are
created through their heterogenous arrangement. This idea fascinated Leibniz, and he integrated it in his universal philosophy: in his concept of “theater of nature and art,” the viewers
could acquire visual and intuitive recognition of the things, as well as a comprehensive andpanoramic perspective of seeing everything. This leads to the expansion of the viewers’ perspectives and internalization of a divine visual-centric viewpoint as the dominant ideology.
In the German-speaking region of this era, based on the model of the ceremonial festivalof the political tyranny of Louis XIV, the aristocrats at the royal court performed gorgeousshows, such as opera or other entertainment, combining various arts, such as music, art,
dance, theater, and fireworks and more. Many new optical devices and machines were introduced to create spectacles that demonstrated the elite’s glory and sovereignty over thepeople. The problems of the spectacle and the representation of the ruler’s power and glory
have already been studied by several researchers, such as Guy Debord in his book La société
du spectacle (The Society of the Spectacle) (1993), but also by Nicola Gess and Tina Hartmann(2015, p. 20), who analyze the signification of the spectacle and state, “the spectacle reunites
what was dementalized and divided.” This integrative effect of the spectacle embodies thecourt ideology that realizes both the representation of sovereignty and the expansion of
power to unify the citizens in their political, cultural, and social aspects.
In this regard, Leibniz was under the influence of the theatrical culture of the French
court, which was oriented toward the visualization of spectacle and to realize a universal philosophy. Moreover, since 1675, Leibniz was in service to the Hannover court, where amagnificent and flamboyant Baroque absolutist court culture was flowering alongside contemporary München, Dresden, and Berlin. According to Gerda Utermöhlen (1996, p. 216),
opera, comedies, and similar works were performed as entertainment at the Hannover court,
on which Italian court culture was also modeled. Not only his experience of foreign culture
and spectacular art in France but also his luxurious and magnificent court exposure in Hannover influenced Leibniz’s ruling courtly ideology through the show of spectacle.
The expansion of intellectual interests and the further strengthening of sovereign power
through the experiences of spectacular performances in the Baroque period were also
reflected in Leibniz’s argument in his proposal for cultural policy Drôle de Pensée, touchantune nouvelle sorte de representations (Funny Thought: Touching on a New Kind of Representation), written in 1675. In this discussion, cross-cultural experiences of theatricalperformances or plays around the world are regarded as significant. For instance, in an open
総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）― 28 ―

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method

experiment in which many people are gathered, there could be shown a threatening spectacle, fireworks, displays of celestial bodies, exhibits of animals, demonstrations of fountains,
artificial war, musical instruments, musical concerts, illuminations, etc. According to Leibniz(1931, p. 563), in such an exhibition, a great story or comedy should be mixed in, as seen in
the three relevant passages:
On y pourroit apprendre et representer d’autres especes de jeux en grand. Jouer une comedie
entire des jeux plaisans de toutes sortes de pays. Les gens les imiteroient chez eux. (Leibniz,
1931, p. 564)
(Translation)
The people could learn and widely exhibit other kinds of games, and perform a comedy
full of fun games from all kinds of countries. They would imitate them in their home andin their own way.
Comedies des modes différentes de chaque pays. Une Comedie Indienne, une Turque, une
Persane etc. Comedies des métiers; une pour chaque métier, qui représenteroit leur adresses,
fourberies, plaisanteries, chefs d‘oeuvres, loix et modes particulieres ridicules. Au lieu desbouffons Italiens, Scaramucha et autres on chercheroit des bouffons françois qui joueroient
quelqves fois des bouffonneries. (Ibid., p. 564)
(Translation)
There are different styles or modes of comedy in each country, such as Indian comedy,
Turkish comedy, and Persian comedy. A craftsman’s play, one for each craftsman, would
represent their skillfulness, trickery, jokes, masterpieces, ridiculous rules, and customs.
Instead of the Italian jester, Scaramouche and others, the people would look for Frenchjesters who would occasionally play a buffoon.
L’usage de cette enterprise, seroit plus grand qu’on ne se pourroit imaginer, tant en public,qu’en particulier. En public il ouviroit les yeux aux gens ; animeroit aux inventions, donneroit des belles veües, instruiroit le monde d’une infinité de nouveautéz utiles ou ingenieuses.
Tout ceux qu auroient une nouvelle invention, ou dessein ingenieux, pourroient y venir, ils
y touvroient de quoi gagner leur vie, faire connoistre leur invention, en tirer du profit ; ceseroit un bureau general d’adresse pour tous les inventeurs. On y auroit bien tost un théâtre
de toutes les choses imaginables. (Ibid., p. 565)
(Translation)
The use of this enterprise would be greater than one could imagine, both in public andin private. Publicly, it would open the eyes of the people, animate inventions, give beautiful sights, and instruct the people about an infinite number of new things, useful andingenious. All those who would have a new invention or an ingenious design could come― 29 ―

総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method

there; they (such as the people who made the invention) would find there a place to earn
their living, to let them know their invention, to profit from it. It would be a general
office of skillfulness for all inventors. It would be a theater of all imaginary things.
Leibniz recommends that play and entertainment be used as a means of representation to
obtain recognition through the visual perspective, while he proposes pursuing the development and reformation of various sciences based on such an idea. That the exhibition of all
types of theater and entertainment of the world exists in a unified space and creates a spectacular space means objectively and academically organizing countless collected individual
objects, as well as constructing an aesthetic and artistic coding system. For viewers, itenables them to recognize the order holding between things and their mutual harmony, andthrough such an ordering and systematization of things, they gain visual recognition andcontrol over the objects. According to Quaeitzsch (2015, p. 42), a “despotic ruler theology” isformalized within spectacular entertainment. Referring to this theoretical viewpoint, Leibniz’s concept of a spectacular “theater of nature and art” that shows and exhibits all things
leads to his pursuit of a divine and global perspective. Providing the prince with a museumlike, playful theater wherein he experiences the dominance of the entirety of things throughvisual perception, the internalization of the consciousness of the ruler’s ideology is required.
Conclusion
Following traditional European ideas of aristocratic education, Leibniz’s universal monarchic
education program incorporates a new, playful, and theatrical teaching method in Comenius’
style, as well as the comprehensive teaching of dialogic and dramatic rhetoric art. Moreover,for the court festival, the monarch is required not only to acquire the necessary knowledge
and understanding of entertainment and spectacle, but additionally, under Leibniz’s conceptof the “theater of nature and art,” the prince is expected to experience the diversity and complexity of the world and to obtain a universal semiotic world recognition by exhibiting
different things and putting on plays and entertainment. Through such universal education,
the prince is trained to serve the public interest as he must in the future. In addition, theintroduction of theatrical education is regarded as a means of rehearsal to prepare the prince
for the rule of his kingdom, which is further used for the reproduction and preservation of
power. This can also be identified as a national constructive vision accomplished through thetheater.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Kaken grant (18K00487) from the JSPS, as well as theresearch fund of the College of Commerce, Nihon University.

総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）― 30 ―

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method

Notes1） Leibniz wrote to the Duke Johann Friedrich on Jan. 11, 1676, as follows: Comme c’est d’eux qu’on peut
attendre des remedes aux maux publics, et comme ils [*princes] sont les plus puissans instrumens de labonté divine, ils sont necessairement aimés de tous ceux qui ont des sentimens des-interessez, qui ne cherchent leur felicité que dans la publique, [...].
2） According to Matthew Stewart (2011, pp. 182–183), however, Leibniz forced this youth to live withhim and established a rigid learning schedule for him to study every day from 6:00 a.m. until midnight. Due to this strict management of his studies and life, young Philipp abandoned his learning;
Leibniz was then removed from his job as tutor.
3） All English translations of Leibniz’s primary sources (French and German) are mine.
4） This Kollegium of Braunschweig not only concentrated on language education but also provided thelatest subjects in the academic field, as well as such conventional subjects as philosophy, literature,geography, history, mathematics, physics, cameralism (German science of administration), police science, natural and technological sciences, law, medicine, and theology. Furthermore, they provided
training in art (painting, crafts, glass polishing, and music) and sports (riding, fencing, and dance). Cf.
Schikorsky, 2005, p. 356.

References
Alewyn, Richard and Karl Sälzle (1985) Das große Welttheater: die Epoche der höfischen Feste in Dokument
und Deutung. Transl. into Japanese by Shuhei Maruko. Tokyo: Hosei UP.
Bacon, Francis (1963) “Essay on Consels Civil and Moral,” id., The Works of Francis Bacon, collected andedited by James Spedding et al. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.
Barner, Wilfried (1970) Barockrhetorik: Untersuchungen zu ihren geschichtlichen Grundlagen. Tübingen:
Max Niemeyer.
Bély, Lucien (1999) La société des princes: XVIe-XVIIIe siècle. Paris: Fayard.
Bircher, Martin (1981) “Die Gelehrte als Herrscher. Der Hof von Wolfenbüttel,” August Buck et al. (ed),Europäische Hofkultur im. und. Jahrhundert. Hamburg: Ernst Hauswedell, pp. 105–127.

Bourdieu, Pierre (1996) The State Nobility: Elite Schools in The Field of Power. Transl. into English byLauretta C. Clough. Cambridge: Polity.
Bredekamp, Horst (2010) Die Fenster der Monade: Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz’ Theater der Natur und Kunst.
Transl. into Japanese by Kenji Hara. Tokyo: Sangyo Tosho.
Castiglione, Baldassare (1987) Il libro del cortegiano. Transl. into Japanese by Jyunichi Shimizu et al.
Tokyo: Toukai UP.
Cohen, Murray (1977) Sensible Words: Linguistic Practice in England,–. Baltimore: Johns Hop-kins UP.
Comenius, Johann Amos (1657) “Schola Ludus,” Opera Didactica Omnia. Excuderunt Christophorus Cunradus & Gabriel a Roy. Amsterdami: Impensis Laurentii de Geer. Pars. 3, Teil 4, pp. 830–1062. [*I also
use Japanese translation, Schola Ludus. Transl. by Teruo Fujita. Self-published in 1992 and 1993.]― 31 ―

総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method―― (1960) Pampaedia: lateinischer Text und deutsche Übersetzung. Hrsg. von Dmitrij Tschižewskij inGemeinschaft mit Heinrich Geissler und Klaus Schaller. Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer. [*I also use theEnglish translation, John Amos Comenius on Education. With an introduction by Jean Piaget. New
York: Teachers College Press, 1967.]
Conermann, Klaus (1981) “Der Stil des Hofmanns. Zur Genese sprachlicher und literarischer Formen aus
der höfisch-politischen Verhaltenskunst,” August Buck et al. (ed), Europäische Hofkultur im. und. Jahrhundert. Bd. 1, Hamburg: Ernst Hauswedell. pp. 45–56.
Conrads, Norbert (1982) Ritterakademien der frühen Neuzeit: Bildung als Standesprivileg im

. und

.

Jahrhundert. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Debord, Guy (1993) La société du spectacle. Transl. into Japanese by Makoto Kinoshita. Tokyo: Heibonsha.
出口裕子 (Deguchi, Yuko) (2005) “近世ドイツの貴族教育” (“Early Modern German Nobility Education”),

学術研究：地理学・歴史学・社会学編 (The Scientific Researches. Gakujutsu Kenkyu. Geography, History, Social Science. Academic Studies), Waseda University, School of Education, Vol. 54, pp. 31–38.
Denk, Rudolf and Thomas Möbius (2017) Dramen- und Theaterdidaktik. Eine Einführung. 3., neu bearbeitete und erweiterete Auflage. Berlin: Ehrich Schmidt.
Ferrari, Monica (2015) “L’éducation du prince par les arts du discours au XVe siècle: l’oratio comme outil
de formation et jeu de regards à la cour de Francesco Sforza,” Histoire de l’éducation, Vol. 143, pp. 9–
36. (DOI: 10.4000/histoire-education.3128)
藤井康生 (Fujii, Yasunari) (1995) フランス・バロック演劇研究 (A Study of French Baroque Theater).
Tokyo: Heibonsha.
Gess, Nicola and Tina Hartmann (2015) “Barocktheater als Spektakel. Eine Einführung,” Nicola Gess andTina Hartmann et al. (ed.), Barocktheater als Spektakel. Maschine, Blick und Bewegung auf der Opernbühne des Ancien Régime. München: Wilhelm Fink, pp. 9–40.
Grell, Hans-Jörg (2005) “Theater,” Notker Hammerstein et al. (ed.), Handbuch der deutschen Bildungsgeschichte. Jahrhundert Bd. , Vom späten. Jahrhundert bis zur Neuordnung Deutschlands um.

München: C.H. Beck, pp. 521–532.
Herrmann, Ulrich (2005) “Familie, Kindheit, Jugend,” Notker Hammerstein et al. (ed.), Handbuch derdeutschen Bildungsgeschichte
Deutschlands um. Jahrhundert Bd. , Vom späten. Jahrhundert bis zur Neuordnung. München: C.H. Beck, pp. 69–96.

Hubert, Marie-Claude (2016) Les grandes théories du théâtre. 3e éd. Malakoff: Armand Colin.
井ノ口淳三 (Inoguchi, Junzo) (1998) コメニウス教育学の研究 (A Study of Comenius Pedagogy). Kyoto:
Minerva-Shobou.
石井正司 (Ishii, Shouji) (1981) 直観教授の理論と展開 (Theory and Development of the Intuitive Teaching).
Tokyo: Meijitosho Shuppan.
北詰裕子 (Kitazume, Yuko) (2015) コメニウスの世界観と教育思想：17 世紀における事物・言葉・書物(Comenius’s Worldview and Educational Thought: Things, Words, Books in the Seventeenth Century).
Tokyo: Keiso Shobo.
Kožmínová, D. (1986) “Comenius’s Concept of the Play,” Marie Kyralová and Jana PĜívratská (ed.), Sympo総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）― 32 ―

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Methodsium Comenianum–: J. A. Comenius’s Contribution to World Science And Culture, Liblice, June

, Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences: Praha.

Lanham, Richard A. (1994) The Motives of Eloquence: Literary Rhetoric in the Renaissance. New Haven:
Yale UP.
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm (1931) “Drôle de Pensée,” Politische Schriften. Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe.
Hrsg. von der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Bd. 1., Darmstadt: O. Reichl, pp. 562–568.
―― (1986) “Lettre sur l’Éducation d’un Prince (1685–1686),” Politische Schriften. Sämtliche Schriften undBriefe. Hrsg. vom Zentralinstitut für Philosophie an der Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR.
Vol. 3., Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, pp. 545–557.
―― (1986) “Ermahnung an die Teutsche, ihren Verstand und Sprache beßer zu üben samt beigefügten
Vorschlag einer Teutschgesinten Gesellschaft,” Politische Schriften. Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe.
Hrsg. von der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Bd. 3., Darmstadt: O. Reichl, pp. 795–820.
―― (1995) “Eine eigenwillige Idee für eine neue Art, Vorführungen zu gestalten. Zum Text,” Wunderkammer des Abendlandes. Museum und Sammlung im Spiegel der Zeit. Kunst- und Ausstellungshalle derBundesrepublik Deutschland in Bonn

. Novemberbis. Februar, Die Kunst- und Ausstel-lungshalle der Bundesrepublik Deutschland: Bonn, pp. 120–126.
Lohmann, Ingrid (1993) Bildung, bürgerliche Öffentlichkeit und Beredsamkeit: Zur pädagogischen Transformation der Rhetorik zwischenund. Münster et al.: Waxmann.

Mahnke, Dietrich (1931) “Der Barock-Universalismus des Comenius. I. Die ‘natürliche’ Pädagogik,”
Zeitschrift für Geschichte der Erziehung und des Unterrichts: der neuen Folge der Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für deutsche Erziehungs- und Schulgeschichte. Vol. 21, pp. 97–128.
Monroe, Will Seymour (1971, c1900) Comenius and the Beginnings of Educational Reform, New York: Arno
Press.
Montaigne, Michel de (1952) The Essays of Michel Eyquem de Montaigne. Transl. into English by Charles
Cotton and ed. by W. Carew Hazlitt. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica.
Moog, Willy (1967) Geschichte der Pädagogik. Bd. . Die Pädagogik der Neuzeit vom. Jahrhundert bis zur

Gegenwart. Neu herausgegeben von Franz-Josef Holtkemper. Ratingen et al.: A. Henn et al.
Müller, Johannes (1930) Das Jesuitendrama in den Ländern deutscher Zunge vom Anfang (Hochbarock () bis zum). Augsburg: Benno Filser.

Münch, Paul (1996) “Lebensformen, Lebenswelten und Umgangserziehung,” Notker Hammerstein et al.
(ed.) Handbuch der deutschen Bildungsgeschichte, Bd. ,. bis. Jahrhundert, Von der Renaissanceund der Reformation bis zum Ende der Glaubenskämpfe. München: C.H. Beck, pp. 104–133.
永野藤夫 (Nagano, Fujio) (1974) バロック時代のドイツ演劇 (German Theater in Baroque Period). Tokyo:
Toyo Shuppan.
Périer, Marguerite (1964) “Mémoire sur Pascal et sa Famille,” Blaise Pascal, Œuvres complètes, texteétabli, présenté et annoté par Jean Mesnard. Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, pp. 1090–1105.
Quaeitzsch, Christian (2015) “Illusionsgrenzen: Grenzen der Illusion: Bühnenbilder, machines und ihre
Rezeption im Rahmen der höfischen Feste Louis’ XIV und der Académie royale de musique,” Nicola― 33 ―

総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）

Leibniz’s Theory of Princely Education: The Introduction of the Theatrical Method
Gess and Tina Hartmann et al. (ed.), Barocktheater als Spektakel. Maschine, Blick und Bewegung auf
der Opernbühne des Ancien Régime. München: Wilhelm Fink, pp. 41–70.
Reble, Albert (2015) Geschichte der Padagogik. Transl. into Japanese by Yoshiyuki Hirooka et al. Tokyo:
Seidosha.
Riley, Patrick (1998) “Leibniz as a Theorists of Education,” Amélie Rorty (ed.), Philosophers on Education.
New Historical Perspectives. London: Routledge, pp. 192–208.
Schikorsky, Isa (2005) “Hohe Schulen,” Notker Hammerstein et al. (ed.), Handbuch der deutschen Bildungsgeschichte, Bd. ,um. Jahrhundert, Vom späten. Jahrhundert bis zur Neuordnung Deutschlands. München: C.H. Beck, pp. 355–368.

Stewart, Matthew (2011) The Courtier and The Heretic: Leibniz, Spinoza, and The Fate of God in The Modern World. Transl. into Japanese by Sakurai Naofumi et al. Tokyo: Shoshi Shinsui.
菅原太郎 (Sugawara, Taro) (1973) 西洋演劇史 (The History of Western Theater). Tokyo: Engeki Shuppansha.
田辺和徳 (Tanabe, Kazunori) (1982) “ライプニッツと近代教育思想：近代教育思想の基礎づけをめぐる研究ノート,” (“Leibniz and Modern Educational Thought: A Reserch Notes On the Foundation ofModern Educational Thought”), 教育学論集 (Research Bulletin of the Course of Education), Department of Education, Osaka Kyoiku University, Vol. 11, pp. 83–94.
津崎良典 (Tsuzaki, Yoshinori) (2016) “注釈：王子の教育についての書簡” (“Note to Lettre sur l’Éducationd’un Prince”), Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, ライプニッツ著作集 (The Works of Leibniz), (ed. by Kiyoshi
Sakai et al.), II, Vol. 2. Tokyo: Kousakusha, pp. 88–105.
―― (2016) 解説：理想的為政者を教育するための自然と人工の劇場」(“Interpretation: The Theater of
Nature and Art for Educating ideal Monarch”), Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, ライプニッツ著作集 (TheWorks of Leibniz), (ed. by Kiyoshi Sakai et al.), II, Vol. 2. Tokyo: Kousakusha, pp. 106–107.
Utermöhlen, Gerda (1996) “Leibniz im kulturellen Rahmen des hannoverschen Hofes,” Herbert Breger
and Friedrich Niewöhner (ed.), Leibniz und Niedersachsen: Tagung anlässlich des. Geburtstages von

G.W. Leibniz. Wolfenbüttel: F. Steiner, pp. 213–226.

［日本語要旨］
本稿はライプニッツの君主教育論『王子の教育についての書簡』（Lettre sur l’Éducationd’un Prince, 1685–1686）を対象に，そこで提唱された王子に対する演劇教育の導入を検証する。その際に，演技に普遍的な人格形成と諸国統治のための教育価値が付されたことを，周辺諸国の知識人の教育的提言と比較するのみならず，演劇史的また教育学的観点からその重要性を検証する。ライプニッツの啓蒙主義的な教育理念と，世界の事象を視覚的に体系化する「自然と人工の劇場」の理念において，演劇教育は，公子を啓蒙文化的に洗練し，権力的主体としての視覚的な支配の影響力の養成を目的とした。この啓蒙的な演劇教育の提言は，周辺諸国と人民支配のための演劇的技巧を身につけた新しい指導者像を提示するものであった。

総合文化研究第 25 巻第 1 号（2019.6）― 34 ―