CLASSICS IN MODERN EDUCATION. I2T 



loss of the languages. We shall have given them a hetter educa- 

 tion than all the present linguistic study can give them. " Sad 

 experience shows," says a recent Oxford writer, " what dense 

 and incredible ignorance about the ancient world, what it was, or 

 when it was, or where it was, or how it affects us, is possible to 

 some undergraduates who are supposed to have passed through 

 a classical education." Our present system fosters this ignorance 

 by misdirecting the attention and energies of the students to the 

 languages. As a result, our so-called " liberal " education does 

 anything but liberate the mind, anything but set it free in the 

 world of ideas. Granted that it is a fine thing to be able to read 

 the great Greek and Roman writers in the original texts with 

 the thorough understanding of a scholar — does it follow, I must 

 ask again, that our educational ideal should be to train a nation 

 of scholars ? Does it follow that to become a scholar is the only 

 way to get a liberal education? If it does follow", what a ghastly 

 failure is our actual education which claims to be " classical " 

 and " liberal " ! But, fortunately, it does not follow. For, 

 surely, it is possible to enjoy Homer though one knows no Greek; 

 to be inspired by Plato though one has to read his dialogues 

 in translations ; to learn from the history of the Athenian 

 democracy or the Roman Empire, though one has to go to (irote 

 and Gibbon instead of to Thucydides and Tacitus. But what do 

 we do in our schools? Do we train the pupils' eye and mind 

 by contact with the concrete achievements of the ancient mind? 

 Do we teach them how to appreciate the beauty of Greek Art? 

 Or to absorb the fine thoughts of Greek thinkers ? Or to learn 

 from the genius of the Romans for Law and Politics No — we 

 feed them on grammiar and composition. Hence, in the name 

 of true culture, I should like to say to every school and college: 



Abolish compulsory Greek : introduce compulsory Hellenism. 



§ lo. I may be asked : Why not abolish Latin as well ? On 

 general principles, it seems to me, it should be possible to give a 

 sound liberal education even without Latin, provided Roman 

 writers are studied in good translations and Roman history and 

 constitution in the works of men like Gibbon and Mommsen. 

 Still, a stronger case can be made out for retaining the linguistic 

 study of Latin than of Greek. Latin is necessary to the historical 

 study of English, French, Italian ..and other modern languages; 

 it is indispensable to the historian and lawyer for the study of 

 documents, treaties, codes of laws, etc. ; it is still, if not a lan- 

 guage of intercourse, at least a living language, being the official 

 meclium of the Roman Catholic Church. Even so, it may be 

 doubted whether it is necessary to make Latin compulsory 

 for everyone even in secondary schools. There is a great deal 

 to be said for the German system of having schools " with " 

 and " without " Latin. In dropping the languages and sub- 

 stituting good translations and handbooks, there is, of course, 

 the danger of cramming, but even the Oxford defender of 

 Classics, whom I have quoted above, acknpwledges : " The most 

 sordid of crammed handbooks is better than a blank mind." The 



