May 1 8, 191 6] 



NATURE 



25' 



did picture of a red bear, stags, bison, and a figure 

 of a bird with a long, slightly curved beak, with a 

 protuberance on the throat, which may make it pos- 

 sible to identify the species. 



This type of prehistoric art is also illustr.ated in a 

 novel way in a paper in the same issue of L'Anthro- 

 pologie by M. E. F. Gautier, entitled " Nouvelles 

 Stations de Gravures rupestres Nord-Africaines," which 

 describes a series of rock sculpturings at a place to 

 the north of Figuig, on the Algerian-Moroccan frontier. 

 These include elephants, lions, an animal possiblv a 

 giraffe, and ostriches. The author remarks that 

 eminent geologists, on the analogy of the prehistoric 

 drawings in the French caves, are disposed to assign 

 the North African specimens to the Quaternian age. 

 But he warns us that the collection of examples was 

 made in the course of a rapid tour, and that it is 

 still far from complete. Much further exploration is 

 required before any definite conclusion regarding this 

 type of prehistoric art and the ethnology of the artists 

 can be formulated. 



SCIEXCE AND CLASSICS IN MODERN 

 EDUCATION.^ 



npHE resolution I have the honour to move seems to 

 -■■ need but few words to commend it to a meeting 

 of scientific men. But we have to bear in mind that 

 it is not scientific men that have to be convinced, and 

 it becomes necessary therefore to state clearly what it 

 is that we desire, and why we desire it. 



I propose to begin, however, Dy slating what it is 

 that we do not desire, my reasons for so doing being 

 that our aims have been grossly misrepresented in the 

 past, as they will no doubt continue to be misrepre- 

 sented in the future. Thus, in expressing the opinion 

 that science ought to oust the study ot Greek and 

 Latin from the prominent position which these sub- 

 jects hold in the educational course of our schools, we 

 have been accused of wishing to kill all learning but 

 our own. The accusation is baseless. We have never 

 expressed any such desire. No one of us would be so 

 foolish as to wish that the classics should not continue 

 to be a serious branch of study. We do not contest 

 that an intimate knowledge of Greek and Latin may 

 help towards the attainment of literary and oratorical 

 style, or that it may even add to the amenities of con- 

 versational intercourse. We admire — some of us from 

 a long distance — the favoured few who are possessed 

 of those advantages. But it is the many we have 

 to consider in the matter of general education, and 

 we ask ourselves — looking over the circle of our 

 acquaintances at those who have had the inestimable 

 privilege of having Greek and Latin swished into 

 them from their earliest years — whether in the great 

 majority there is any sign that there was ever much 

 penetration beyond the skin, and whether the educa- 

 tional benefits which the — for the most part long- 

 forgotten — acquisition of these languages has be- 

 stowed are really worth the enormous amount of time 

 and trouble expended upon them. This is, of course, 

 an entirely different question from what I may perhaps 

 be permitted even by our opponents to call the scien- 

 tific study of classical languages and literature, w^hich 

 is on an altogether different footing, and cannot be 

 promoted by forcing Greek and Latin on every school- 

 boy, whether he has aptitude for it or not, to the 

 exclusion of subjects the knowledge of which would at 

 least be of some benefit to him in after life. 



We must all admit that there is not time for any 

 adequate study of both the classics and the natural 



1 Remarks made by Sir Edward Schaftr, F.R.S., in proposing the first 

 resolution at the meeting on the Neglect of Science held at Burlington House 

 on May 3 (see Nature, May 11, p. 230). 



sciences in the general educational curriculum; surely, 

 therefore, it is scarcely nitmg to omit subjects which 

 in any conceivable circumstance of life may prove of 

 some value m or<ler to retain those whicn can only 

 be valuable m professions which demand a certain 

 standard of literarj- attainment. But I am not pre- 

 pared to concede that knowledge ot the classics is 

 necessary for the production of the best English. 1 

 refer to this point particularly because the claim has 

 been recently made by one of the champions of the 

 present system of education that without such know- 

 ledge we are unable adequately to express our ideas 

 in our own language. The absurdity of this conten- 

 tion is obvious at a time when we are commemorating 

 the tercentenary of the author whose immortal works 

 were written under all the disadvantages of the posses- 

 sion of " small Latin and less Greek." Perhaps it is 

 unfair to bring in evidence so transcendant a 

 genius as Shakespeare; he, one feels, even with a 

 complete classical education, would still have succeeded 

 in bewitching the world with his wonderful imaginings 

 and in inspiring his characters with the attributes 

 and sentiments which his puny fellow-mortals have 

 marvelled at for three hundred years, and will doubt- 

 less continue to admire as long as our world continues. 

 Nevertheless, if Shakespeare had gone through 

 a course of Eton and Oxford the language those senti- 

 ments are clothed in would certainly have been 

 different, and I imagine that not even the most pro- 

 classical of our opponents but is thankful that he 

 escaped. 



I am content, however, to leave Shakespeare on his 

 pinnacle — unattained and unattainable — and to recall 

 the name of one John Bunyan. Has anyone amongst 

 the polished eighteenth-century essayists written in a 

 clearer style than this Bedfordshire tinker's son, whose 

 literary studies were mainly confined to the Bible? 

 Or, to take an instance from our own times, was 

 there ever a finer political speaker than John Bright, 

 "the great tribune," whose utterances, couched in 

 simple, vigorous English, were wont to pass straight 

 from his own heart to that of his audience? And is 

 there not another writer and speaker of whom we are 

 many of us proud to have been the disciples, and 

 whose spirit we may well imagine to be with us this 

 afternoon, who, without the advantage of a classical 

 upbringing, was pre-eminent amongst nineteenth- 

 century authors for his faultless diction and for the 

 direct and terse enunciation of his ideas; needless to 

 say, I refer to Thomas Henrj- Huxley. 



We have further been accused of desiring, in our 

 enthusiasm for science, to oust such subjects as 

 modern history-, and geography, and the study of the 

 English language and literature from the educational 

 curriculum. No accusation can be more unfair. We 

 recognise that these subjects must for us form a 

 fundamental part of all education. They have been 

 ousted from the present scheme because their imme- 

 diate relation to the classical languages and literature 

 was remote, and the amount of knowledge of Greek 

 and Latin which has been required in competitive 

 examinations has needed all the time at the school- 

 master's disposal. We believe, however, that there 

 will, if the greater part of that time can be recovered, 

 be opportunity afforded for . the acquisition of such 

 knowledge of the subjects in question as will help 

 to fit our boys and girls to become worthy citizens of 

 this great island-empire. 



But in order that there shall be a reasonable chance 

 of our being able to maintain our place in the world 

 it is above all necessary that we should move with 

 the times. We are a long way from the eighteenth 

 century — when a sound education in classics was re- 

 cognised as the be-all and end-all of a boy's upbring- 



NO. 2429, VOL. 97] 



