IRLF o o REPRINTED FROM TEACHERS COLLEGE RECORD, FOR NOV. 1920 FOR THE AMERICAN CLASSICAL LEAGUE A REASONABLE PLEA FOR THE CLASSICS* By GONZALEZ LODGE Professor of Latin and Greek, Teachers College, Columbia University It is always a pleasure to address an audience of teachers for many reasons but particularly, from my point of view, because our very profession commits us to an attitude of unprejudiced fairness in regard to all questions. Those to whom the education of the young is entrusted are of necessity the most potent influ- ences in forming their minds and their outlook on life. And in our form of government where everything must be settled by discussion and persuasion, our principle not only as citizens but as individuals must be, "Prove all things, hold fast to that which is good." No one should minimize the importance of a careful weighing of the merits of every part of the curriculum through which the children of the nation are to be led. But of much greater impor- tance is it that we should have as true a conception as possible of what the aim of our general educational system should be. For upon this aim will depend the curriculum and the choice and relative value of different subjects. In what I have to present to you I shall have regard, of course, to the high-school curricu- lum, except in so far as a part of it would naturally apply to that new experiment in our system, the so-called junior high school. Only a comparatively small number of youth will go to college. To the vast majority the high school represents the highest reach of their education. The question at once arises: "What should be the main trend of the high school training?" Up to a few * An address delivered at a meeting of the Maryland State Teachers Associa- tion, Ocean City, June 29, 1920. i 1 <> < r\ , rO'lO I /. ' k PLEA FOR CLASSICS years ago there was substantial unanimity that this should be what is usually called "cultural." But during these last few years there has been a strong movement in favor of the "voca- tional" high school. This resulted first in the establishment of commercial high schools; later the technical school came into being, and so on. The line of cleavage between this new variety of training and the old has gradually come to be marked by the inclusion or exclusion of certain subjects, which have thus come to be looked upon as peculiar, particularly classics, although very recently there have been those who would build up what they call a cultural curriculum without the inclusion of the subjects which for centuries have been regarded as the founda- tion of all culture. My subject this evening, then, is to see whether there is any reasonable basis for the inclusion of classical study in any well- rounded high school curriculum. It is generally admitted that the pre-collegiate training is and should be essentially developmental in its character, that is, it should be adapted to develop as far as possible the faculties of the child so as to enable him to meet intelligently the demands of his unfolding life. These demands will be manifold and vari- ous. Many have been inclined to direct their attention to the material demands of life, especially the means of livelihood. But the biblical precept, "Man shall not live by bread alone," was never more true than it is to-day, when the practical ques- tions of existence are depending more and more upon the solu- tion of problems which pertain almost entirely to the mind. We all live in a social and political organization, and our real prob- lems are not those of labor and the procuring of bread and butter, but those of social and political relations, the solutions of which will carry with them the solutions of the material ques- tions. Hence the education of the masses, if it is to be the solvent of all our ills, as so many confidently claim, must have its chief regard to the things of the mind, to habits of right think- ing, of right acting, in a word, of right living. If this is true, and I believe you are all as fully convinced of it as I am, how far are the classics valuable in preparing for this end? It is obvious that in the short time at my disposal, I cannot treat this subject from all angles. I shall therefore only draw A PLEA FOR CLASSICS ' 3 your attention to the most important points in which classical teaching seems to me to be valuable, without any serious attempt to discuss them. Most of my remarks will be confined to Latin, for obvious reasons. ^ Language is the great achievement of the human race. It above everything else marks the supremacy of man over the brute creation. It is the most potent influence in our lives to- day as it has always been in the past. As the instrument of communication of ideas, it is fundamentally essential in all human relations. In the study of Latin the child usually makes his first acquain- tance with language as a created instrument. Even if he be- gins with some other language, Latin usually gives him his first idea of the possibilities of speech and his first opportunity to get the full benefit of linguistic study. In studying Latin one of the first demands is accuracy of observation. The very nature of an inflected language involves the closest attention to the variations in ending, which often affect only a single letter, if the exact meaning is to be dis- covered. Inaccurate observation means failure. The condi- tions under which a child learns his mother tongue unfortunately afford little opportunity for this kind of training. The early appeal is wholly to the ear, and the use of the eye only comes in at a later stage when the language has been already learned. In learning a modern European language appeal is indeed made to the eye, and thus some opportunity is provided for attention to form, but the large loss of their ancient inflections brings these languages more near to our own in their value for training the observation. In Latin, on the other hand, it is impossible to make any progress without constant practice in this import- ant faculty, and a large amount of drill has to do with this alone. But accuracy of observation would be of very slight value without accuracy of interpretation, which also involves accur- acy of record, if frequently only mental record. In our ordinary intercourse, we consistently help out the inadequacy of expres- sion in every possible way, before resorting to the question, "Do you mean?" Cases occur every day where one who has observed an action most intently is unable to report accurately what he has seen. Manv of the disr>ute c in r I 4 k * ' A PLEA FOR CLASSICS evidence turn upon the ability of a witness to report accurately what he thinks he knows. It is also a matter of common knowl- edge that much litigation, especially in our courts of appeal, has to do with the interpretation of phrases which, if properly ex- pressed, would have needed none. In the study of Latin, it is of small moment whether the student observes clearly, com- pared with whether he can record accurately and interpret correctly what he observes. It thus appears that in the study of Latin, in addition to the strengthening of the memory, 1 a child has had developed his faculties of accurate observation, of accurate record, of ac- curate interpretation. Do I claim these advantages as the ex- clusive effect of classical training? By no means. For all of these advantages may be gained from other studies, even from those which make the smallest demands upon the mind. But in the case of most if not all other studies, especial attention must be paid to these results, if they are to be obtained, while in the study of the classics, they constitute the training itself; they are inevitable to a certain degree, even if they are not in the mind of the teacher in the classroom. The fact that each pro- cess requires active mental effort, as well as active exertion of the will in the case of the vast majority of pupils, instead of the merely passive mental attitude which appears in most kinds of reading, for example, may be one of the reasons why so many children find Latin distasteful, not to say difficult. The habit of fixed attention as Dean Briggs, of Harvard, termed it, and which he claimed was the distinguishing mark of classically trained freshman as opposed to others, is not a habit which pupils acquire willingly. The difference may be likened to the difference between gaining physical strength by active exercise of one's muscles, and by massage. Many find massage much more pleasant. The development of the habits we have just discussed should begin with the beginning of the study of Latin. But it is with 1 The learning of the forms makes a powerful demand upon the memory. I am aware that it has been the fashion to decry the cultivation of the memory, but my own experience has taught me that the memory can be strengthened by practice, and there is universal testimony to the value of a good memory. The learning of forms gives this practice in a way different from learning A PLEA FOR CLASSICS 5 the beginning of translation that perhaps the most vital advan- tage of the study becomes apparent. You have all heard over and over again of the advantages of translation, and I imagine that many of you are sceptical. I will not weary you, therefore, by rehearsing the benefits claimed for it. The essential point is that the pupil in his first attempt to translate from a foreign language into the vernacular, begins to realize the difference between an idea and the way in which it is expressed, begins in a word to use language consciously. Perhaps the hardest thing in the teaching of English is to lead pupils to express themselves in more and more effective and elegant fashion. I know that many have been found to hold that, given an idea, the expression will come of itself, but we all know that the manner of expres- sion of the street differs from that of the drawing room, and that the latter is more nearly our ideal. A dirty urchin can make his wants known in picturesque language, but we should hardly desire our President to address Congress in that manner, nor would we want the Bible written in that form. In fact the whole question here is the question of art and non-art. And this question is one of universal application. You are all familiar with the great improvement in the tastes of our people regarding architecture during the last thirty years. We all know that the architecture of the 70*5 and 8o's was atro- cious; that the colonial form on the other hand was good. Yet we threw aside the colonial architecture for the atrocities of the latter part of the last century. What was the reason of this? It was because the ignorant, the uneducated, the devoid of natural taste had control of building. It is almost inconceiv- able, but there have been stories, and true stones too, of people painting old mahogany Chippendale or Sheraton pieces white, or disposing of them at a song in order to substitute the prod- ucts of the jigsaw, upholstered in plush. We have fortunately passed through that stage and emerged into a period when all our educational influences are directed to raise the standard of taste in building. The case is the same with regard to painting and sculpture. There are continually attempts on the part of the ignorant, the debased, the neurotic to introduce new styles in the fine arts. And it is true that our country, the whole land over, is dotted 6 A PLEA FOR CLASSICS with monstrosities in the form of statues, busts, monuments of all kinds. We are perpetually apologizing for them, and on investigation it would appear that the jury of award has usually been composed of untrained persons. But we are now coming to the trained art commissions, who take control of such things for the purpose of educating the public to an appreciation of what is good and what is bad in the fine arts ; while our museums both small and great are steadily consigning to the cellar the poorer paintings and statuary that have been donated to them and exhibiting for the enjoyment and education of the people only that which meets the approval of the expert. Yet people could and did live in comfort in the inartistic house and with inartistic furniture, and the country got along in spite of the hideous things masquerading as art with which it was disfigured. But we do not admit this as a justifiable argument for reverting to that period or practice. Now an idea may be expressed in wood or in stone, or in oil, or in musical notes, or in words. We have a structure in every case. And as in the case of all other structure there has been steady and continuous effort to evolve a standard of perfection, so too in the use of words there has always been a form which has been regarded as good, and which people have striven to reach. We have such a form in English which we call "good English." It is best exemplified in the works of those who are designated the English Classics, and form the basis of what we call "good usage." There are not wanting, of course, people who maintain that the English of the newspaper is good enough for them, just as one of the most popular automobiles, one con- demned by artists as showing no beauty of line at all, is per- fectly satisfactory to thousands of users; but the mass of the good teachers of English hold fast to standard, just as there is a perpetual striving for greater beauty in new designs of automo- biles. We seem to have gotten a long distance away from our sub- ject, but this is only apparently so, for I am making a plea for the support of all teachers of English, when I maintain that translation from a foreign language into English furnishes the best opportunity for training the pupil in what constitutes "good English." To most pupils the mere correction of their A PLEA FOR CLASSICS 7 use of the vernacular so that it is grammactically sound is nearly all that English teaching means. But in translation the most important question is not, "What is its meaning?" but "How can the meaning be best rendered into English? " I freely admit that many teachers of Latin have been and still are derelict in allowing all too much the hideous "translation English " which should shock every one. But that should not obscure the value of the practice. The very fact that such English is quite satis- factory to the pupil should rouse us to appreciate that the^ development of the "good" in the use of English is the most difficult as perhaps the most important problem that the teacher of English has to face. The question might be asked: "Granted that translation is a valuable exercise, would not the study of a modern language,^ be just as valuable for this purpose as an ancient? " This brings me to a matter of prime importance. The only reading material available for the Latin classes is that of the highest literary value. Latin students are accus- tomed to begin their serious reading with Caesar's Commentaries on the Gallic War. Many teachers have complained of this necessity and lamented that the ancients should not have written something adapted to school use. It is well known that the second or Caesar year is the most difficult in the whole Latin course. To my way of thinking the absence of any reading matter of a trivial nature is a distinct advantage. For it must be emphasized that Caesar's commentaries are not trivial. Leav- ing aside for the moment the fact that he is narrating the events of a war which was in very truth a turning point in the history of civilization, he did this in a way to warrant the extravagant praise of Cicero, one of the greatest critics of style that the world has seen. In fact, the Commentaries on the Gallic War are not only history but an artistic literary creation of the first rank; they form one of the great books of the world's progress. The very fact, then, that the early reading in studying a modern ' language is apt to be trivial, is a great point in favor of Latin. These ideas of Caesar are worth while. They are expressed in an artistic fashion. When rendered, therefore, they should be rendered, if rendered correctly, into artistic English, in other words, into the high style. This does not mean a florid or A PLEA FOR CLASSICS ornate style, for Caesar's style was not ornate, any more than a Doric temple is ornate. Simple, strong, pure English is the medium to reproduce the simple strong, pure Latin in which Caesar wrote. Teachers know that a simple, strong, pure style is the most difficult to master; so the translation of Caesar is a task worthy of the best efforts of both teacher and pupil. This matter of style some may think to be beyond the capac- ity of the young. But this gives the young too little credit. They can be taught what is good in music, in art, in architecture; they respond to what is good in character, in action. The heroic is the ideal of human nature. The young respond readily to the heroic. Then why should they not respond to style when it is properly put before them? In fact many pupils will tell you that they like Cicero as well as Caesar; and multitudes have liked Vergil. What they have liked in both has been, not the commonplace, but the unusual, the great, not merely in idea, but in the expression of it. I readily admit that Cicero had always an eye to his audience, that he prepared his speeches to be spoken. But as I have heard Cicero presented in a large number of class rooms, the very fact that he makes any impres- sion at all is the best of proof of the enormous vitality of an utter- ance which swerved Caesar from his settled political policy, and has come ringing down through twenty centuries of intervening years. But it rarely rings in the modern class room. The value of treating Caesar and Cicero as literature may be questioned by some, but certainly this view could not apply to the works of Vergil. His works are obviously literature, and he is universally recognized as one of the world's greatest authors. Why is it a pity that every high school pupil should not read Vergil? Not so much because the ^Eneid was the greatest achievement of the Roman genius ; not so much because he was a very great poet; as because he was and is one of the world's most potent influences. All English literature has been per- meated by him. His characters have become household words. During the whole of the Middle Ages he was the most impressive figure. The ^Eneid has had more influence morally than any book except the Bible. Both favorers and opponents of the early Christian church quoted Vergil. He was quoted as an oracle just as was the Bible. He was allegorized and regarded A PLEA FOR CLASSICS 9 as a picture of the whole sum of human progress long before John Bunyan made allegory a household experience. The sixth book is one of the most important in a long series of apo- calyptic books, and has been regarded by many as equal to the Book of Revelation in its influence. The ^Eneid is also the interpretation of the Roman ideal. The Hebrew chant, "He hath put down the mighty from their seats and exalted those of low degree," is set forth as the divine mission of Rome upon the earth, as the basis for their greater mission to preserve jus- tice and equity among the nations. Incidentally in reading Vergil many pupils get their first realizing sense of rhythm, of poetic imagery, of loftiness of expression, of the essential differ- ence between poetry and prose, of the place of poetry in life. All that I have said of these three great authors may be summed up in the idea that the pupil in studying their works should gain literary taste and some feeling for literary standards. Another side of Csesar and Cicero must not be left out of consideration, the political side. The time in which they lived was one of the most momentous in history. The Roman re- public had had a life of approximately 500 years, a long term as national existences go. It had grown from the first tentative stumbling steps after the overthrow of the kings, through the period of robust youth, of vigorous maturity, and was now show- ing all the signs of senility and approaching dissolution. It had withstood the privations of poverty, the cruelties and over- whelming sufferings of war, the trials and tempests of continual internal strife, as the idea of democracy gradually grew and moulded the institutions of government to yield finally to the deceitfulness of riches, the corruption of luxury, the debasing influence of the immigrant, the enervation of peace. It had n order to It had known the period when public office had been looked upon as a responsibility for service for which strict account- ability must be exacted, to come later to the period when public leadership was regarded as a private opportunity. The old Romans felt that they must live for their country, the new Romans were convinced that they. must live on their country. In a word, the greatest experiment in democratic government that the world thus far had seen was approaching its end. The 10 A PLEA FOR CLASSICS republic was dying in order that out of its corruption should arise another period of tyranny, and the cycle of progress should begin again, which should lead through its various stages to other experiments in democratic government. The progress of our own governmental experiment can be paralleled in minute detail in that of the Roman republic. Every problem that we have had to face was faced by the Ro- mans. The solution that was reached then can be studied in its ultimate effects, and can thus teach its lesson to us. The decay of public morality, the use of money in elections, the over riding of the popular will by legal chicanery, the playing off of one branch of the government against another, the weakness of popular government in meeting a crisis, the assumption of autocratic power by the leader to whom the state was entrusted in moments of stress, the invisible government of bossism, the effects of overcrowding in cities as shown in the decay of social morality, the effects of a large floating and venal electorate, the evils of huge aggregations of people far from the food supplies, the surge of the rural population to the cities, and the conse- quent decay of agriculture in Italy, and manifold other evils with which we have to contend today, were experienced over a period of centuries by the Romans. We clamor nowadays for a course in citizenship in our schools; Rome furnishes all the exhibits. We ask for instruction in government; Rome pro- vides all the problems. We would try to guess what the future has in store for a democracy; Rome gives us the clue. We would know what to do to preserve our country, as well as what to avoid doing; Rome gives us our answers. We would train our youth to guide our country to a higher career in the develop- ment and uplift of mankind; Rome tells us how we must use the experience of the past to be our guide for the future. Now the turning point, as I have said, in Roman history, is the first century before Christ, and the chief figure, both sinister and beneficent is Caesar. A course in Roman history is not neces- sary to learn what I have enumerated; the period covered by high school Latin is all that is necessary. We, as Americans, should have a particular interest in Caesar for another reason, namely, his conquest of Gaul, because that made our existence in its present form possible. But for Caesar's A PLEA FOR CLASSICS II conquest of Gaul, we might have been as backward in our politi- cal development as the countries of the Central Empires. Caesar's invasion of Britain was the beginning of civilization for Britain, and, by consequence, for ourselves; and the fact that the Roman influence never penetrated far into Germany may account even now for the tremendous difference in political ideals that we experience upon crossing the Rhine. Caesar's conquest of Gaul gave us our alphabet, our principles of law, our principles of government, our literary direction; in fact it j was the responsible source of what we mean by "western civili- zation." The Germans give much importance to Caesar for being the first to give accounts of the German tribes. How much more highly should we rate him when he is the real source of our life and our views of life? Looked at in this way, the war for the conquest of Gaul was more than a mere war of con- \ j quest; it was the birth of a new life. In connection with Cicero, but more definitely, of course, in connection with Vergil, comes the opportunity to become acquainted with the artistic work of the classical peoples. Our editions are now full of illustrations, and there are actually special books devoted to illustrating the school classics. It would be well, to be sure, if every child could have a course in the history of art, but since this is not possible, what better can we do than to draw attention in his other studies to the achieve- ments of the greatest artists of antiquity, those who set up the standards which are still the standards unto this day. Here Greece, has, of course, the preeminence, but what Greece did Rome appropriated and through Rome it came to us. Our Capitol at Washington is but the greatest of a myriad of build- ings throughout our country, which show the dominance of the Greco-Roman ideals of building. All training in sculpture, too, goes back to the Greek masterpieces. No museum is complete without casts of what remains, and the aspiring spirit still goes to them for inspiration, for guidance, and for models. I come now to a point that has been much discussed in recent years, the dependence of English upon Latin. Latin influence upon English began with the invasions of Britain by Julius Caesar, and has continued up to the present day with increasing intensity. There have been in brief four periods: (i) From 12 A PLEA FOR CLASSICS the conquest of Britain to the overthrow of the Western Empire, the period when Britain was having to a certain degree the ex- perience of Gaul and Spain. Roman influence was direct and dominating and extended in language as far as the Britons could assimilate Roman ideas and habits. The new words came with the new ideas. (2) The Norman conquest when the English tongue suffered a large admixture of French words, which were themselves but decayed Latin. (3) The literary period, when English writers from Elizabeth to Anne designedly introduced an immense number of words directly from the Latin for the purpose of enriching the ordinary speech. (4) The modern or scientific period, when recourse is had to Greek and Latin to give a name to every novelty that appears. The result of this con- tinual borrowing is that the language that masquerades under the name English is almost as much Latin as is Italian or French, with a strong flavoring of Greek. Ignorance is prone to refer to the past with a fine air of condescension for the vagaries of the present. How often have I seen and heard opponents of spell- ing reform exclaim, "The spelling of Shakespeare is good enough for me," when we all know that if they were set to read their Shakespeare in the form in which Shakespeare spelled, a cry for help would soon pierce our ears. So too, how often has the expression "good old Anglo-Saxon" been used to cast oppro- brium upon such words as may have had their origin in Greek or Latin ! Whereas we all know that if our language were ruth- lessly pruned to the Anglo-Saxon elements, we should be able to communicate with each other scarcely so well as the animals in the Zoo. Our Anglo-Saxon advocate would even be bereft of a mind with which to make a pretence of thinking, though of course, not of a mouth with which to go on eating and drink- ing. Seriously, the Anglo-Saxon element ceased to grow in English after the Roman conquest, and hence represents the civilization of the primitive barbarian who opposed to Caesar's legions his scythe-armed chariots; in brief, the civilization of our American Indians when Columbus landed. Everything that pertains to the mental and spiritual side of man has been borrowed, and much that pertains to the physical. Medicine, law and theology, science and business use a language that is Greek and Latin. Men fight and die for Greek and Latin A PLEA FOR CLASSICS 13 words. Liberty, the word that has turned the world upside down more than once is Latin, while its antithesis, Tyranny, for which men have also fought and died, is Greek. Even the tyranny of the labor union is expressed not in English, but in Greek and Latin. (Can that be one of the reasons why the labor unions in/England are demanding a classical education for their chiloyen?) A century and a half ago, a new people issued to the world a new charter of Freedom, a declaration of independence. Our Anglo-Saxon friend, if living then, would have been fighting for the following: When in the of s, it becomes for one - to the bands which have ed them with another and to among the earth the and to which the and of s God them, a the s of mankind that they should which s them to the . Or would he really have been willing to fight for that? and would such an utterance have shaken thrones? During the last year a certain branch of our government which we will call "blank" has been fighting with another branch of our government which we will call "blank, " over a matter which we may call the "blank of blanks." This is soul-satisfying, is it not? Why, we could not even get a name for our country except from the Latin, and bad Latin at that. There is no new disease but what goes to the classical tongues for its name; there is hardly a new business device but what does the same thing. The newest material for raincoats is actually called aquascutum (a wrong formation by the way), and no new tooth-powder is ready for the market, and no new germ is ready for business without a classical title. Since this is true, we might at least ask that the borrowers borrow their borrowings properly, and that knowledge yield not to ignorance because the ignorant are content. Two recent examples are illuminating on this point: Greek has a termination -istes, Latinized as -ista and Angli- cized as ist. It is attached either to a noun or to an adjec- tive. Attached to the noun it means the practice of the noun ; to the adjective, it means the being of the adjective. 14 A PLEA FOR CLASSICS Before and during the war we heard much of those who made a fetich of peace. There was need of a designation, and of course Latin was immediately laid under contribution. Take the Latin word for peace, namely, pax, with stem pac, and add -4st, and lo! the thing is done, " pacist." This most natural formation seems never to have been seriously considered. Then there is the adjective, "pacific," from two Latin words, meaning "peace-making"; adding the termination -ist we get "pacifi- cist." This perfectly good word had some vogue at the begin- ning of the controversy among those who knew the right. But some one, ignorant of course, struck out the shortened form "pacifist," a monstrosity, without any meaning at all. This hideous barbarism, perhaps because of its adaptability to cheap jokes, was taken up and spread by the newspapers, who seem, as a rule, to have little sense of responsibility for language, and has thus become rooted in English. A still more recent example has a ludicrous side. Greek has a termination ides, meaning "descendant of," Anglicized as -4d. Latin has a termination -cida, meaning "slayer," Anglicized -tide. Now upon the overthrow of the German imperial government, the extreme wing of the Socialists took part in revolutionary movements under the name of "Spartacides," that is "descendants of Spar- tacus," a Roman gladiator who led a slave rebellion against Rome. The word was a mongrel, to be sure, consisting of a Greek termination upon a Latin name, but it told its story. American newspapers had a hard time with it. So long as they kept to the plural, they had no difficulty, but when they had need of a singular, their ignorance had full swing. Properly the English singular would have been "Spartacid," plural Spartacids." But taking "Spartacides" as a plural, which it was, and pronouncing it to rhyme with hides, what more natural than to make a singular " Spartacide, " which can only mean "slayer of Sparta," if it means anything at all. The crafty soon dropped the form altogether, and had recourse to "Spart- acan," a correct but different formation. Will any one have the temerity in view of such examples to claim that the classical tongues are dead? Would it not be far better to teach our people to use them correctly? A PLEA FOR CLASSICS 15 But it may be said, "The vast mass of the Latin words in English have become so much a part of the English language that they are learned as English words just like other English words." This, if true, which for the sake of the argument I admit, carries with it the question, "Are they understood?" that is, "Is their full meaning appreciated?" Now I have had a good deal of experience in preparing teachers of Latin, and this experience has often amazed me. Young men and women of mature mind, even those who intend to become teachers of Latin, habitually use a large number of the less obvious Greek and Latin English words either in a wrong sense or with a very hazy idea of their true meaning. Time and again I have asked for a definition of an English word whose classical origin was evident, to find that the would-be teacher had a ludicrously false idea of it, sometimes actually confusing it with another word which had some little resemblance to it. I remember, when I was a pupil in the eighth grade, we had a particularly hated subject called "definitions." We were set to learn the definitions of a certain number of words each day. I also remember that in the examination (in which, by the way, I failed) , one of the six words given was seance, which I explained as "a short nap after dinner." Oh, but I was a child! Yes, but a colleague of mine, many years later, when a student asked him in class to explain more fully a certain matter that had come up said, "We have no time now. Let's have a siesta about it after luncheon." An extreme case? Perhaps. But another colleague of mine, a most distinguished man, is reported once in the course of a lecture to have defined feudalism as a "halo around the feet of monarchy" without any sense of in- congruity. No, the fact is that a large number of people have but the vaguest conception of the meanings of numerous words they see in print, especially if the subject is beyond the common- place, when an elementary knowledge of Latin, if intelligent, would make the sense perfectly clear. I think that all would admit that sufficient training to give this knowledge would be worth while. Of course we could not expect the people at large, even our legislators, to be as well trained as the members of the British Parliament of a century or more ago, who, if the story is true, while listening to a speech by a certain member by 1 6 A PLEA FOR CLASSICS the name of Dundas, were so amazed by his coinage of the mon- grel word "starvation," that the honorable member went by the sobriquet "Starvation Dundas" ever after. But we could at least expect that such monstrosities as "pacifist" and "Spar- tacide" should not disgrace us. And even in our trade names we might be saved such malformations as " aquascutum, " "sozodont," and the like. Since Latin is the origin and foundation of all the Romance languages, it is evident that a knowledge of Latin renders the acquisition of French, Italian or Spanish a matter of little difficulty. I am aware that sometimes we are urged to begin the linguistic training of the young with French or Spanish, and from these to pass to Latin. But the fact remains that the acquisi- tion of Latin is not appreciably accelerated by any previous study of French, for example, while the reverse is emphatically true. A pupil with two years' training in Latin will learn as much French in three years as would require five years to learn without the Latin. And the Latin equipment is just as effective for Italian or Spanish. From the easy to the more difficult is a good pedagogical principle; but in this matter when the more difficult carries with it to a large extent the less difficult, we have much the same situation as appears in the old story of the two holes in the door of the chicken-coop. In this country, we have thus far chosen Latin first, as a rule, and in the interests of economy it is to be hoped that we shall continue to do so. I think I have said enough to explain why a large number of people, among them many distinguished men, scholars and men of affairs have regarded the classics as with mathematics and science constituting in themselves a sufficient education for a youth. If we regard high school training as being essentially general and cultural in character, then sufficient knowledge to constitute a specialist is not required but only enough to give the main clues to the subject. Hence the student of the classics becomes familiar with the general characteristics of language, without becoming a specialist in linguistics, gains an insight' into the foundations of our civilization without specializing in history or institutions, gets some idea of the theory of politics without becoming a specialist in political economy, sees the effects of division and faction in the social organism without A PLEA FOR CLASSICS 17 specializing in sociology, learns what constitutes good taste in literature without specializing in literary composition, comes to an appreciation of the highest in art without becoming an artist, and finally obtains a better understanding of his own tongue without trying to become an expert in English philology. Verily this is a formidable array of incidentals. 2 Can any other sub- ject equal this showing or come anywhere near it? This is the subject we are asked to turn out of our curriculum, in order that every subject of which the pupil gets incidentally a general knowledge may be presented in such a way that the advantages of specialization are lost and all its disadvantages have their full fruition. Perhaps some of you may regard these claims as extravagant. But I assure you they are not so at all. The history of English government in and out of Parliament for the last four hundred years proves that. But certainly these claims are not justified by achievement in the United States. Well, perhaps not and yet a very good case can be made out from the works of the great men who made us a nation and managed our destinies up to the Civil War. Are we so proud of the works of the last fifty years that we would scorn that which preceded it? But they are certainly not borne out by the experience of the present day. This I freely grant. What I have been trying to show is what classical training gives the opportunity for, and oppor- tunity as we all know is too often not embraced. But surely that fact should not militate against a subject. There has been a great deal of more or less loose controversy about the value of the classical teaching as measured by accom- plishment. A practical people has asked for practical results, and has claimed not to find them in the results of classical train- ing. Particular point has been given this criticism by a pam- phlet issued a few years ago by Dr Abraham Flexner, of the Rockefeller Foundation, in which he cited figures from the results of the College Entrance Board examinations to show that Latin 2 It cannot be too strongly emphasized that these incidentals, as I have called them, in the case of most pupils do not accrue of themselves. The teacher must see that the pupil's attention is directed to them and must in- sist upon his obtaining them. Only the master mind will absorb them automatically. 1 8 A PLEA FOR CLASSICS made a very poor showing as compared with other subjects. These figures have been shown to be untrue, but the correction of an error never gains the circulation that the error itself had and perhaps some here are still under the delusion of that pam- phlet. The actual facts are that in the results of the College Entrance Board examinations Latin stands third, being slightly outranked by Greek, another classical tongue, and French, a daughter of Latin, and being far ahead of science, history, and English. An explanation of this has been sought in the asser- tion that the classics have been taught for so long that the technique of teaching them has been more highly developed than that of the other subjects. This, of course, is not true as to the second statement. The classics have been taught for a long time, but the teaching of them has been completely changed during the last fifty years, and their previous long vogue has been a detriment rather than an advantage in the difficult task of adapting the teaching more nearly to the needs and views of the present day. Hence, strictly speaking, practically all the subjects of the curriculum (even mathematics, I am told) are about on the same footing in the matter of technique of teach- ing, for they have all been completely reorganized during the last half century. Nor am I willing to admit that teachers of the classics have been or are better teachers than those of other subjects. The reason lies deeper. But I am not now concerned with the reason, but with the fact. All teachers know that the results of their teaching are often very disheartening. How few are they who are content. And in saying that the results of the teaching of Latin are better than those of any subject save Greek and French, I am claiming no superiority for these results. Good as they may be, they often leave the heart of the subject, as I have expounded it before, unrealized. Nor can we object to any subject that it does not function to any large extent in the after-life of the child. Is there any sub- ject, even English, in which a large proportion of the pupils do not manage later to forget almost all we hoped they had learned in school? No, ifv^vve were to be judged by what a large propor- tion of children get out of 'their studies, how few of us would look forward to the verdict without trepidation, and how few A PLEA FOR CLASSICS I subjects would remain in the curriculum at all! The real point is what the subject offers, not what the pupil gets. In high school, as afterwards in college, a sumptuous repast is spread; what the guest eats will depend upon his appetite, his capacity and his will. The real standard of measurement is what the master mind gets, for in the last analysis the progress of the master mind is the progress of the race; the master mind sets the pace, the mass must gradually work up to it. A subject that does not offer much more than the average pupil obtains can never serve as a stimulus to the unusual one. And if any of the subjects in our curriculum could be presented in such a way that all who study it could become perfect in it, it would be time for an investigation of that subject. s I have tried to show that, judged by the opportunities they offer, the classics stiii retain their claim to consideration. I make no claim that they should be taught to the exclusion of the other tested subjects, but I certainly do urge that before they are discarded in favor of untested subjects, those upon whom the responsibility rests should be sure that they can substitute something which will prove equally valuable and equally econ- omical, when the balance is struck by our descendants in after- times. To destroy is easy; to rebuild is exceeding difficult. Thus far no such substitute has been found. Perhaps the time may come when it will be found. When that time does come classical teachers will be the first to hail the new light.