To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

History 1 not essential to gov. majors? Not essential to history majors? Not given correctly in the past--too much emphasis on dates and maps?

Three "no's" to these questions impress me as the most rock-headed set of answers the Committee of Education has offered to date. In my opinion, and in the opinion of many of my friends, History 1 has proven the most important single course in Harvard College. The origin and growth of every modern European nation not important? Falderol.

Concerning the way in which Professor Taylor and Professor Karpovitch have handled the course--I think they have done a magnificent job. They have stressed broad understanding rather than petty detail or a number of arbitrary points. They have asked no questions that are not obviously important after one careful reading of the assignment. As for the dates and map assignments, unlike those in every other history course I have taken, they were (1) easy, (2) helpful as hooks on which to hang more facts, (3) helpful as a way of making all migrations, territorial changes, etc., more meaningful and more lastingly remembered.

It all looks to me like another chunk lopped off the long established supremacy of a Harvard education. I hope the equalizers are stuffed into some academic basement before they reduce Harvard education to the level of sloppy mediocrity that typifies most other American colleges. W. D. Mueller '47