A: Manhattan, New York, New York, United States
The explanatory printed on the chart beneath the drawing of the Temple revealed two core tenets of Willard’s educational philosophy: that facts must be connected to one another to be meaningful, and that only by making them visually manifest may they be retained. She wrote:
“The attempt to understand chronology by merely committing dates to memory, is not only painful, but it is as useless as to learn latitudes and longitudes, without the study of maps. As in geography, the relation of any place to all other places is what is important to know; so in chronology, the relation which any given event bears to others constitutes the only useful knowledge….
“By putting the course of time into perspective, the disconnected parts of a vast subject are united into one, and comprehended at a glance;–the poetic idea of “the vista of departed years” is made an object of sight; and when the eye is the medium, the picture will, by frequent inspection, be formed within, and forever remain, wrought into the living texture of the mind. If this be done by a design whose beauty and grandeur naturally attract attention, then the teacher or parent who shall place it before his pupils and children will find that they will insensibly become possesses of an inner “Temple” in which they may, through life, deposite[sic], in the proper order of time, the facts of history as they shall acquire them. This we repeat is as important to the student of time as maps are to the student of place.”
Willard’s intention was that, once committed by students to memory, the Temple would serve as a framework within which students could organize and store future knowledge for future retrieval. With this presentation she aligned herself with the ancient technique of the “Memory Palace,” advocated in Greek and Roman treatises on oratory and rediscovered in the Renaissance. (Rosenberg and Grafton, Cartographies of Time, pp. 202-203)