The teaching of Latin and Greek in the secondary school

Front matter

BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME FROM THE

SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND

THE GIFT OF

Contents

THE TEACHING OF LATIN IN THE SECONDARY SCHOOL

Page

Introduction — Historical Position of the Study of Latin

Introduction

HISTOKICAIi POSITION OF THE STUDY OP LATIN IN MODEEN EDUCATION

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

Paulsen, F. Geschichte des gelehrten Unterrichts auf den deutschen Schulen und Universitaten vom Ausgang des Mittelalters bis zur Gegenwart. Leipzig. 1885. Second ed., 1897.

Dettweiler, F., in Baumeister, A., Handbuch der Erziehungs- und Unterrichtslehre fUr hohere Schulen. Vol. iii. Didaktik und Methodik der einzelnen Lehrfacher, Erste Halfte, III. Lateinisch, p. 7 ff., 'Die geschichtliche Entwickelung des lateinischen Unterrichts.'

It ^ is a sufficiently familiar fact that, whatever considerations now determine the retention of Latin as

an instrument of the higher education, its „ _

° ' Fosltion of

place was not origmally secured as the re- tatin in the suit of conscious deliberation and choice, but ™*^*-^**- purely as the result of irresistible historical circumstances. The pohtical, ecclesiastical, and literary conditions of the Middle Ages made the study of Latin indispensable to every person of station. Latin was the language of the Church, of the State, of law, of scholars, of the professions. It was studied therefore in the monastic schools with the object of ac-

1 In this introductory chapter I have drawn largely upon the treatment of Dettweiler above cited.

I quiring a practical mastery of the spoken idiom for actual use. Pupils were trained in the preparation of letters and such other documents as the necessities of the political and ecclesiastical life of the day demanded. Latin was not only the medium of instruction in the schools, but was also the medium of all conversation. The Latin authors read served merely the purpose of increasing and improving the pupil's knowledge of the language and his facility in its employment The content of the Latin writers was practically disregarded throughout the entire period of the Middle Ages. This conception of the function of Latin naturally determined the method pursued in teaching. As the Latin vocabulary was confessedly inadequate for the needs of the day, it became necessary to add new words, coined to cover new conceptions. These were incorporated in special vocabularies, which pupils committed to memory. Mechanical oral reading was also extensively practised, — often before the pupils were capable of understanding what was read. Intended to serve merely mechanical purposes, Latin was studied exclusively in a mechanical way. Yet, irrational as the method seems to us, we can hardly deny that it was entirely consistent with the purposes which the study was at that time intended to subserve. Nor can we feel surprise that, with this conception of the function of Latin, there should have prevailed a low and almost barbarous standard in the employment of the spoken and written idiom.

With the humanistic revival of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries there manifested itself an altered and The Human- ^ loftier conception of Latin study. This new istic Revival, conception was a natural and inevitable result of the fundamental spirit of the humanistic movement. While throughout the Middle Ages all intellectual life had culminated in the ecclesiastical ideals of the scholastic philosophy, the new movement placed man, human capacities, human achievements, and human aspirations in the foreground. The great works of classical antiquity were recognised as of vital importance in understanding and solving the new problems.

This conception of Latin as an instrument of education speedily wrought a revolution in methods of teaching. Hitherto both form and content of the Latin masterpieces had been neglected. Now both began to meet recognition. The great Latin classics were read and studied for their vital bearings on the intellectual life and aspirations of the new era. They were no longer primarily a means of acquiring a familiarity with the disjecta membra of the barbarous idiom which had till recently prevailed.

Along with this appreciation of the substance of Roman thought went an appreciation for the form in which it was expressed. The spirit of the day was anti-barbarous to a degree. Correctness and elegance of diction came to be a passion with the Latinists of the time. This tendency naturally went too far, and we notice the beginning of an arbitrary exaltation of the Ciceronian manner of speech as the sole example worthy of imitation, — an attitude which unfortunately, despite frequent and vigorous protest, is still widely prevalent to-day.

It is essentially this humanistic conception of Latin study which has prevailed in modern education since the Renaissance. The special details of devel- i^anii, opment for Germany may be found pre- Recent xtoes. sented by a master hand in the work of Paulsen above cited. So far as I know, no such presentation of the historical stages of Latin study in any other European country is yet available. Probably in no other would such a history have the interest or the historical and pedagogical significance afforded by the experience of the German schools.

In the United States, Latin, as a study of the secondary education, naturally started with purely English In the United traditions. These traditions fortunately were states. humanistic in the best sense. Still, for a long

time Latin was thought to be peculiarly a study for boys who were preparing for college. In the earlier history of this country this meant that Latin was thought to have educative importance primarily for those looking forward to activity in the church, in letters, in the law, in medicine, or in teaching. During the last generation in particular a different attitude seems to be manifesting itself. The number of students of Latin in our secondary schools has in recent years been increasing out of all proportion to the number of students who go to college. Unless this phenomenon be attributed to an unaccountable infatuation, it admits to my mind of but a single interpretation : Latin is now recognised as an important element of secondary education for the average pupil, whether he be intending to go to college or not. It is perhaps unfortunate that the present tendency towards a larger study of Latin in our schools cannot be traced to any recent sober discussions of the value of Latin ; in fact it is not a little surprising that this rapidly increased recognition has occurred in the face of the most vigorous assaults upon the classics which this country has ever witnessed. Yet experience is the great teacher, more convincing than all the arguments of the academicians. Is it too bold to say that the experience of those who have studied Latin and of those who have seen the positive results of the study upon others, is after all the ultimate reason which is at present so potent in winning increased recognition for Latin? Whatever the cause of the existing conditions, they are with us. That they may be permanent is to be hoped. That there is abundant justification for their permanence, it will be the aim of the following chapter to show.

CHAPTER I THE JUSTIFICATIOIf OP LATIN AS AW INSTRUMENT OE SECONDARY EDUCATION

BIBLIOGRAPHY.i

Laurie, S. S. Lectures on Language and Linguistic Method. Cambridge University Press. 1890. Chapter i. and particularly Chapter vii.

Chapters on the Aims and Practice of Teaching, edited by Frederic Spencer. Cambridge University Press. 1897. Chapter ii., Latin, by "W. L. Paton.

Fouillee, Alfred. Education from a National Standpoint. London, Arnold. New York, Appleton. 1892.

Handbuch der Erziehungs- und Unterrichtslehre fiir hohere Schulen, herausgegeben von A. Baumeister. Munich. C. H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung. i8g8. Didaktik und Methodik der einzelnen Lehrfacher. III. Lateinisch, von P. Dettweiler.

Boyesen, H. H. ; Brandt, H. C. G. ; Sachs, Julius ; Mackenzie, James C. ; and others, in Proceedings of the First Annual Convention (1893) of the Association of Colleges and Preparatory Schools in the Middle States and Maryland. Published for the Association. Philadelphia. 1894. pp. 38-64.

Paulsen, Friedrich. Geschichte des gelehrten Unterrichts auf den deutschen Schulen und Universitaten. Leipzig. 1885. Veit & Comp. Particularly " Schlussbetrachtung." pp. 755-784.

Harris, "W. T. On the Function of the Study of Latin and Greek in Education. Journal of Social Science. 1885.

Harris, W. T. A Brief for Latin. Educational Review. April, 1899.

Peck, Tracy. Discussion in School Review. 1893. pp. 593 ff.

Shorey, Paul. Discipline vs. Dissipation. School Review. 1897. pp. 217 ff.

Collar, W. C. ; Burgess, Isaac ; Manny, Frank. Proceedings of the National Educational Association. 1896. pp. 563 ff.

Bennett, C. E. Latin in the Secondary School. School Review. May, 1893.

Spencer, Herbert. Education, Intellectual, Moral, and Physical. London, Williams & Norgate. New York, D. Appleton & Co. 1861.

1 Only the more important recent literature is here cited.

Bain, Alexander. Education as a Science. London, Kegan Paul & Co. New York, D. Appleton & Co. 1881.

Schmeding. Die Idassische Bildung in der Gegenwart. Berlin. 1885.

Frary, E. La Question du Latin. Paris. 1890.

JTames, Professor Edmund J. The Classical Question in Germany. Popular Science Monthly. January, 1884.

Barnett, P. A. Common Sense in Education and Teaching. Chapter viii. London and New York. Longmans, Green, & Co. 1899.

Jebb, K. C. Humanism in Education. (Romanes Lecture for 1899.) London. Macmillan & Co. 1899.

Eliot, C. W. American Contributions to Civilization. New York. The Century Co. 1897.

Sidgwick, Henry. Theory of Classical Education, in his Miscellaneous Essays and Addresses. London. 1904.

The question as to the educational worth of any study must always be a pertinent one. This is particularly true in the case of Latin, which has not only The Question for generations occupied a commanding place ^^'"^ "*• in the curriculum of American secondary education, but in recent years has even been winning enormously increased favour among us. Despite the extensive literature on the subject, it has seemed necessary, at the beginning of this volume on the teaching of Latin in the secondary school, to examine afresh the title of Latin to the present respect it enjoys, and to state anew the reasons why it is of value in secondary education. Lest there be any misconception as to the subject of the chapter, it is desirable to emphasize at the outset that the value of Latin as a college study does not here enter into consideration. That question, interesting and important as it is, seems to me entirely distinct from the question as to the value of Latin in the secondary school.

The fundamental importance of the examination proposed hardly needs to be urged. For obviously the general method of instruction to be followed in teaching Latin must depend largely upon the results that the study is capable of achieving, and the teacher who fails clearly to apprehend the goal to be attained must necessarily pursue but a groping course in imparting instruction. The recent increase, too, in the number of pupils studying Latin in our secondary schools makes it of increasing importance to get clearly before our minds the functions and purpose of the study. The Statistics of the Commissioner of Education for the United States show that in the eight years prior to 1 898 the number of pupils studying Latin in our secondary schools had increased 174 per cent, while the total enrolment of pupils in the secondary schools for the same period had increased but 84 per cent. In the eight years from 1898-1906 also the increase in the number of Latin students more than kept pace with the increase in school attendance. No thoughtful person can fail to be impressed by these figures. If Latin is not of basal importance in the secondary curriculum, then large numbers of students are making a prodigious error in pursuing the subject; and the sooner we understand this, the better. If, on the other hand, the increase is the result of wise choice or even of wise instinct, we must, while rejoicing at the greater recognition Latin is securing, at the same time admit our own vastly increased responsibility for its wise direction and promotion.

Before considering the special reasons that exist in favor of studying Latin, let us first consider the function

of language in general as an instrument of Educational j ■

Function of education.

^^^^^^ The function of education is confessedly

to prepare pupils to be useful members of

society. To make them such, it is essential that they be

taught to understand as fully as possible the nature and

character of the national life — social, civil, political,

religious — in which they are born or in which their lot is cast. To a certain extent, also, it is essential that they learn to apprehend the nature and character of the larger life of the race.

What now is the instrument best adapted to the attainment of this end? It is language. As pointed out by Laurie {^Lectures on Language and Linguistic Method, chapter i.), language is the supreme instrument in education, i. e. the higher education, because of its universal nature. It promotes intellectual discipline and brings intellectual power, because the study of language brings us at every turn face to face, as nothing else does, with subjects and questions of intellectual concern and intellectual interest. Language deals with ideas, it touches perpetually on problems of the relations of man to man, of man to society, of man to the State. Its analysis demands refinement and nicety of thinking. So long then as ideas are important, and so long as the underlying conceptions which reflect the national life of a people are important, the supreme value of the mastery of these through language study will continue to be recognised.

By the study of language is meant the study of one's own language ; but, as will be pointed out later in this chapter, this study of one's own language is achieved incomparably better by the indirect method of studying another language. Only so can the necessary processes of comparison be effectively instituted. To this it has often been objected that the Greeks, so con- significance spicuous for their brilliant civilization and ^^*^''*f'g'=' their permanent contributions to the intel- study by lectual life of subsequent ages, studied no *^ ®"''''- language but their own. An excited partisan,^ in the heat of discussion, once went so far as to assert, " Grant-

1 Professor E. L. Youmans in the Popular Science Monthly foi December, 1883, p. 270, b.

lO THE JUSTIFICATION OF LATIN

ing the unapproachable perfection of Greek literature, and that the Greeks surpassed the world in philosophical acuteness, the invincible fact remains that they expended no effort in the study of foreign languages, and common sense declares it was because of it." Obviously, if " common sense " declared anything so absurd, it should explain to us why the Hottentots or the Eskimos or the hordes of other barbarians who likewise know no language but their own, have not been similarly eminent for their contributions to human thought.

As to the Greeks, it will probably always be impossible to account for the achievements of that wonderful people on the basis of their system of education. What they accomplished seems rather the result of an inexplicable national endowment. Their fine aesthetic sense, their keen speculative capacity, are as difficult to account for as the unique genius of the Romans for political organization, for government, and for law, or the profound sense of moral obligation to a higher power so impressively formulated by the Hebrews, — as difficult to explain as the rise of a Charlemagne in the eighth century or an Alfred in the ninth. Great as the Greeks were by endowment, they certainly were not great for their attainments. With all their highly developed aesthetic sense and their subtle speculative acumen, they were manifestly deficient in the capacities which it is the function of modern education to develop, namely, a just understanding of the problems of society, an understanding which shall secure and promote the stability of the social and political organism. Had the Greeks been as well educated as they were highly gifted, it is likely that their own national life would have run a longer and a more glorious course, and that their great legacy to posterity would thus have been immensely increased.

THE JUSTIFICATION OF LATIN II

At all events, the fact that the Greeks, despite their neglect of language study, nevertheless attained a certain national greatness in some directions, cannot be cited as disproving the educative value of such study for us to-day.

What, now, are the reasons for studying Latin in the secondary school? What are the effects of the study upon the pupil that are at present so potent Reasons for not merely in maintaining its status but in studying extending its vogue? These reasons are several, and I shall enumerate them in what seems to me the order of their importance.

First and foremost, I should say Latin is of value because it confers a mastery over the resources of one's mother tongue.^ This mastery comes as the direct and necessary result of careful daily translation, — a process involving on the one hand a careful consid- Trainine eration and analysis of the thought of the in the author read, and on the other a severe and laborious comparison of the value of alternative English words, phrases, and sentences, with the consequent attainment of skill in making the same effective as vehicles of expression. No one, I think, will undertake to deny that the results here claimed are actual ; and it actual, it can hardly be denied that they constitute an important justification for the study of Latin.

Training in English, then, as the result of careful translation from Latin is here set down as the first and most important reason for studying Latin. To my own mind this reason weighs more than all others combined,

1 This is not meant in the narrow sense of a. mere understanding of the nieanins;s of words ; it is the mastery of ideas of which words are but the symbols, and the assimilation of these into one's own intellectual life, that I have in mind.

though several other excellent reasons for the study of Latin will be discussed later. Let us examine more in Analysis of detail how translation from Latin gives such the Process, admirable training in English. Translation is a severe exercise. The lexicon or vocabulary tells the meanings of words, and the grammar states the force of inflected forms ; but it is only after the pupil, provided with this equipment, has attacked his Latin sentence with a view to translation that the real struggle begins. His vocabulary may have given him a dozen or even twenty meanings under a single verb or noun, and the pupil must reflect and nicely discriminate before he can choose the right word, the one just suited to the context. Further, his Latin sentence may be long, complex, and periodic, entirely different in structure from anything we know in English ; such a sentence must be broken up and so arranged as to conform to our English mode of expression ; or the Latin sentence may have one of those Protean ablative absolutes, — an idiom that our English style practically abhors. Every such ablative absolute has to be examined with care prior to an English rendering. It may express time, cause, concession, condition, attendant circumstance, means, or what not, and must be rendered accordingly. Again the Latin sentence may secure by its arrangement of words certain effects of emphasis which English can bring out only by the employment of very different resources.

For the purpose of further illustration, let us take the opening lines of Nepos's life of Miltiades, and note the problems that suggest themselves to the pupil's mind as he endeavours to secure a passable translation for the Latin. The text runs as follows: Miltiades, Cimonis filius, Atheniensis, cum et antiquitate generis et gloria majorum et sua modestia unus omnium maxime floreret.

Probably the first stumbling-block to the pupil will be the proper rendering for modestia. The vocabularygives ' moderation,' ' modesty,' ' temperance,' ' humility,' ' discretion,' and the question is, which one of these represents the idea that Nepos is trying to convey. The pupil has to pause and consider. Reflection shows that ' humility ' will not do, and ' modesty ' is no better. These qualities hardly constitute a title to eminence. The pupil, therefore, turns to ' moderation ' or ' temperance.' The latter of these will hardly answer his purpose; it has an unfortunate acquired connotation suggesting predominantly an abstinence from strong drink. Nor will 'moderation' satisfy the pupil's sense of the demands of his native tongue, for we hardly speak of a man eminent for his moderation. Of the five words given for modestia, therefore, the last only, ' discretion,' will answer in the present passage. The pupil then passes to the following words : unus omnium m,axime. Their literal translation is easy, ' alone of all especially; ' but this is jargon, and clearly must be bettered in some way. By reflection, the pupil comes to see that ' alone of all ' may be rendered by our ' beyond all others,' or some other equally idiomatic phrase. But here a new problem presents itself, how to join ' especially ' with ' beyond all others.' Possibly after a few trials the boy hits upon the device of rendering ' far beyond all others.' Whether this phrase or another be chosen, however, may depend somewhat upon the rendering selected for floreret ; in fact at each point in a translation the rendering must be regarded as possibly only temporary; one's selection of words and phrases will often require modification as a result of the rendering chosen for other parts of the same sentence. The pupil meets no further special difficulty until he comes to qualem cognitmn judicarunt. Literally, ' such as they judged him known.' In and of itself, the participle may mean ' if known,' ' though known,' ' when known,' * since known.' All these possibilities, however, must be weighed before a safe decision can be reached as to the actual meaning here.

But I need not dwell further on the details of the process we are considering. Every teacher knows what it is ; he knows that it is serious work, often slow work, but he knows what it means to the pupil who submits to it. He knows that such a pupil is gaining a mastery over the resources of his mother tongue. Positive knowledge, except to a very limited degree, he is not gaining ; but he is learning what words mean ; he is learning to differentiate related concepts ; he is acquiring sense for form and style^ and if he be so fortunate as to be endowed with any native gifts of thought himself when he reaches maturer years, he has that indispensable equipment of the educated man, — the capacity to say what he says with directness, clearness, precision, and effect.

There has been a great outcry in recent years about the importance of EngHsh, and it has been one with which I think the body of thoughtful men have in large measure sympathized. All have cheerfully acknowledged the great importance of an ability to use one's native idiom with skill and power. It is because I sympathize so heartily with this sentiment that I enter this defence of translation. It is because translation from ^ Latin to English seems to me such a stimulating, vitalizing exercise, and so helpful to the student who would attain mastery of his own language, — it is because of this that I find full justification for the study of Latin.

Perhaps I approach this subject with prejudice, but I can never forget the inspiration of my own early Latin training, nor ever fail in gratitude to the teacher who first suggested to me the boundless resources of our own language, who by his own happy and faithful renderings of Cicero and Virgil stimulated a little class of us to do our best to make our own translations show truth, and strength, and literary form. Can we afford to underrate the value of such discipline? How many a lad has felt his heart kindle and his ambition rise at some happy rendering by mate or teacher? And with what persistence these little niceties of phrase cling to us and influence us? Language is subtle. We cannot explain its charm by any philosophy. But it is the key to literature, and our own language must ever be the best key to our own literature.

How finely Barrie has put this in his story of Tommy ! Who that has read that unique description of the essay-contest can have done so without feeling the profound truth it contains? You remember the scene in the old Scotch school-house, — how Tommy and young McLauchlan had been given paper and pen and set to work to write on " A Day in Church " in competition for the Blackadder Prize, and how at the end of the time allotted Tommy had brought himself to scorn for the lack of a word. " What word ? " they asked him testily ; but even now he could not tell. He had wanted a Scotch word that would signify how many people were in church and it was on the tip of his tongue, but would come no farther. " Puckle " was nearly the word, but it did not mean so many people as he meant. The hour had gone by like winking; he had forgotten all about time while searching his mind for the word.

Then the friends who had been waiting in confident expectation of Tommy's victory begin their reproaches. His teacher, Cathro, is the first. " What ailed you at ■manzy'?"hecries, "or" — . "I thought of 'manzy,'" replied Tommy, wofully, for he was ashamed of himself, "but — but a manzy 's a swarm. It would mean that the folk in the kirk were buzzing thegither like bees, instead of sitting still."

" Even if it does mean that," says another friend, " what was the sense of being so particular? Surely the art of essay-writing consists in using the first word that comes and hurrying on."

" That 's how I did," proudly says McLauchlan, the victorious competitor.

" I see," interposes another friend, " that McLauchlan speaks of there being a mask of people in the church. ' Mask ' is a fine Scotch word.".

" I thought of ' mask,' " says Tommy, " but that would have meant the kirk was crammed, and I just meant it to be middling full."

" 'Flow' would have done," suggested another.

" ' Flow' 's but a handful."

" ' Curran,' then, you jackanapes."

" ' Curran' 's no enough."

The friends throw up their hands in despair.

"I wanted something between 'curran' and ' mask,'" said Tommy, dogged, yet almost at the crying.

Then Ogilvy, the master of the victorious McLauchlan, but whose heart is secretly with Tommy, and who with difficulty has been hiding his admiration, spreads a n»t for him. " You said you wanted a word that meant middling full. Well, why did you not say ' middling full' or ' fell mask ' ? "

" Yes, why not? " demanded the others.

" I wanted one word," said Tommy.

" You jewel," muttered Ogilvy under his breath.

THE JUSTIFICATION OF LATIN I?

" It 's so easy to find the right word," reproachfully adds another.

" It's no', it 's as difficult as to hit a squirrel." Again Ogilvy nods approval. But Cathro, Tommy's master, can restrain himself no longer. In a burst of fury he seizes Tommy by the neck and runs him out of the parish school of Thrums. As the others offer their congratulations to Ogilvy, master of the victorious Mc- Lauchlan, the school door opens from without, and the face of Tommy, tear-stained and excited, appears once more. " I ken the word now; it came to me a' at once ; it is ' hantle.' "

" Oh, the sumph ! " exclaimed McLauchlan ; " as if it mattered what the word is now."

But Ogilvy gives his McLauchlan a push that nearly sends him sprawling, saying in an ecstasy to himself: " He ^a^to think of it till he got it; and he got it."

When Cathro savagely says, " I have one satisfaction ; I ran him out of my school," Ogilvy merely answers, " Who knows but what you may be proud to dust a chair for him when he comes back ? "

How many of us know well this quest for the right word ! How often we have struggled to find it when it was n't ' puckle ' and it was n't ' manzy,' nor ' mask,' nor ' flow,' nor ' curran/ but ' hantle ' ! Sometimes we have found it, sometimes we have missed it; but the quest has ever been honourable, and has helped us to find and know the way to truth.

Cicero was well aware of the importance of what I am urging when he wrote those memorable words in his </<? Optimo genere oratorum. Despite his thor- cicero's ough familiarity with Greek, he confesses that Testimony, he found it a useful exercise to translate with care from Greek to Latin. In this way he prepared Latin versions of Demosthenes on the Crown and of Aeschines against

Ctesiphon, not rendering word for word, but preserving the style and spirit of these two orationes nobilissiinae, weighing their words, he adds, not counting them.

Compare also what Lowell says. Speaking before the

Modern Language Association in 1889, after a life of wide

observation and careful reflection upon the

Lowell.

problems of education, he says : " In reading such books as chiefly deserve to be read in any foreign language, it is wise to translate consciously and in words as we read. There is no such help to a fuller mastery of our vernacular. It compels us to such a choosing, and testing, to so nice a discrimination of sound, propriety, position, and shade of meaning, that we now first learn the secret of the words we have been using or misusing all our lives, and are gradually made aware that to set forth even the plainest matter as it should be set forth is not only a very difficult thing, caUing for thought and practice, but is an affair of conscience as well. Translation teaches, as nothing else can, not only that there is a best way, but that it is the only way. Those who have tried it know too well how easy it is to grasp the verbal meaning of a sentence or of a verse. That is the bird in the hand. The real meaning, the soul of it, that which makes it literature and not jargon, that is the bird in the bush, which tantalizes and stimulates with the vanishing glimpses we catch of it as it flits from one to another lurking-place :