58 ADMINISTRATIVE AGrIVITIES 1802-1812
provincial capital, and, finally, district schools (2 year curriculum),
varying in number from 10 to 30 per diocese. on the same level as
primary schools. The student body, as formerly, was composed of the
children of the clergy who were expected to follow their fathers'
profession. A serious effort was made to give the prospective priests
a good general academic education in addition to the specialized
training of their future calling. For this purpose, the curriculum of
the primary and secondary levels was expanded to include new subjects
of general educational value (natural sciences, modern languages) and
restricted so far as the narrowly theological and clerical subjects were
concerned. The curriculum of the academies and of the upper classes
of metropolitan seminaries was made frankly "professional", with
courses in exegesis, apologetics, theology, church history, intensive
study of Greek and Slavonic (as well as Latin). However, on all levels,
there took place a modernization of method and contents, with greater
emphasis give 11 to modern languages, mathematics, and natural sciences,
all of which were made compulsory.
Speransky's personal influence was clearly felt throughout all the
labors of the Commission. He worked to secure a greater uniformity
of ability and achievement among the student body by insisting that a
student's promotion from one level to the other should depend on his
performance at periodic examinations. The caliber of the teaching
staff was improved by the setting of definite and uniform standards, and
each candidate's qualifications were to be tested before he was allowed
to teach. From the administrative point of view, order was brought
about by subjecting the district and diocesan schools (Le. primary and
secondary levels) to the authority of the local bishop and by establishing
separate school budgets for each diocese. The inner administration of
each school was left in the hands of the regular teaching staff. The
four academies were under the direct supervision of the Holy Synod
and also allowed a large measure of internal administrative autonomy
(on the model of the University statute of 1804).
These educational and administrative reforms would have remained
a dead letter had not the ecclesiastic schools also been given a
stronger economic foundation. The state had little to spare, it felt,
from its own resources and was very reluctant to grant even an
absolute minimum. Speransky realized that it was of the utmost
importance that the reformed ecclesiastical schools have a regular and
dependable source of revenue, unaffected by the fluctuations in the
policy, personnel, and financial condition of the government. The
solution he proposed was quite simple and proved to be very success-