CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND GIVEN IN 1 89 1 BY HENRY WILLIAMS SAGE oiin 2 1924 030 559 698 The original of tliis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924030559698 ROMAN EDUCATION CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE C. F. CLAY, Manager. ILanSon: FETTER LANE, E.G. (BlaBjofa: 50, WELLINGTON STREET. ILeipjis: F. A. BROCKHAUS. (Seta lorli; THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. BomteB anS ffiBlmfta: MACMILLAN AND CO. Ltd. [All Rig-hts reserved.'] ROMAN EDUCATION rv/- a: S. WILKINS, Litt.D., ll.d. Professor of Classical Literature in the Victoria University of Manchester Cambridge : at the University Press 1905 ffiamtitage : PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A. AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. PREFATORY NOTE. This little book is intended in the first place for the use of students. Happily in the case even of those who are preparing to take part in primary education, no inconsiderable proportion have now some knowledge of Latin. I have therefore felt at liberty to quote freely from the original sources, without always adding a translation, although this has been sometimes done. It has not been easy to resist the temptation of trespassing at times on the field of the historian of literature, rhetoric, or philosophy ; but I have done my best to keep within the limits imposed by the title-page. I append a list of the best modern authorities. It is only the last of these to which I am conscious of any special obligation, though I have been so long familiar with most of the others that my debt is probably greater than I am quite aware of. With rare exceptions all quotations have been read in and taken from the original authorities. To the Rev. W. Field and to Professor Summers of Sheffield I owe my best thanks for much kind help in revision. A. S. W. Manchester, May, 1905. LIST OF AUTHORITIES. (i) F. Cramer, Geschichte der Erziehung und des Unterrichts im Alterthicme. Elberfeld, 2 vols. 1832-8. (From its suggestiveness and breadth of view not yet anti- quated.) (2) J. H. Krause, Geschichte der Erziehung, des Unterrichts und der Bildimg bei den Griechen, Etruskern und Roeinern. Halle, 1851. (3) W. A. Becker, Gallus, oder Roemische Scenen, Vol. ii., pp. 57-98. Leipzig, 1863. (Excellent for its compass.) (4) J. L. Ussing, Darstellung des Erziehungs- und Unterrichts- wesens bei den Griechen und Roemern (translated from the Danish). Altona, 1870. (5) G. Bernhardy, Grundriss der Roemischen Litteratur, pp. 35-95, 5th ed. Brunswick, 1872. (Full of interesting points.) (6) G. H. Hulsebos, De Educatione et Institutione apud Romanos. Utrecht, 1875. (A very good survey of the whole subject.) (7) L. Grasberger, Erziehung und Unterricht im klassisclicn Alter- thum. Wurzburg, 3 vols. 1864-1881. (A large collection of materials, ill put together and arranged.) (8) J. Marquardt, Das Priyatleben der Roemer, pp. 80-126, 2nd ed. Leipzig, 1886. (An invaluable collection of all important references and quotations, brought together in a narrow space.) (9) E. JuUien, Les Professeurs de litie'rature dans Pancienne Rome. Paris, 1886. Mention should also be made of two recent English works, from which 1 have not felt at liberty to draw, as covering somewhat the same ground, though the former is much wider in its scope : Professor Laurie's Pre-Christian Education (1895), and Dr George Clarke's Education of Children at Rome (1896). CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. PAGE Introductory i_4 National ideals — Rome— Results of Greek Influence — Plan of the Book. CHAPTER H. Education in the Early Republic . . . 5-17 Home Education — Duties of the Mother — Slavery not ex- tensive — Schools — Characteristics desired — Religious Educa- tion — Training for Citizenship — Elementary Teaching at Home — Training of Girls — Defects of the Early Training — Greek and Roman Ideals. CHAPTER HI. Education under Greek Influence . . . 18-36 Acquaintance with Greek Culture — ICnovi'ledge of the Greek Language — Greek Literature — Livius Andronicus — Teaching of Literature — School of Carvilius — Subjects taught by Carvilius — Greek Teachers — Rhetoric and Philosophy — Teaching of Rhetoric — Exclusive Character of Higher Educa- tion — Philosophy — Physical Training — Dancing — Music — Representatives of the Newer Education. viii Contents. CHAPTER IV. PAGE Elementary Schools and Studies . . . 37-76 Education not National — The Power of the Father — Infancy — Paedagogi — The Schools — Buildings used for Schools — Furniture of Schools — Emoluments of Teachers — Holidays — School hours — Punishments — Age of beginning School Work — Methods of teaching the Elements — Text- books — Arithmetic — Schools of Literature — Homer — Other Authors studied — Grammar — Text-books of Grammar — The Interpretation of Poetry — Metre — Explanation of the Text — Correction of the Text — Criticism of style — Exercises of the Pupils — Teaching mostly given by Lectures. CHAPTER V. Higher Studies — Rhetoric and Philosophy . 77-92 Schools of Rhetoric — Preliminary Exercises — Exercises in the School of Rhetoric — Literature in relation to Rhetoric — Theory of Rhetoric — Declamation — Study of Philosophy — Higher Education in Greece. CHAPTER VI. Endowment of Education 93-98 State Endowment of Teachers — Control of the Schools by the State — Results of School Training in Grammar and Rhetoric. Index ......... 99-100 CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTORY. The education given to the children of a nation is of necessity National shaped by the desire which is commonly felt as to ^^ ^' what they shall become as citizens. We can see this very clearly in the history of education at Rome. In the free democracies of Greece the aim, at least of those who were most progressive and most in agreement with the genius of the nation, was directed to the full and harmonious developement of the whole nature. That the body should be trained to strength, activity and grg,ce, that the intelligence should be quick, accurate, and alert, guided in practical affairs by reason rather than tradition, that every citizen should bring to the judgment of the creations of art a trained and sensitive taste, and should be able to spend his seasons of leisure in musicj^ song or refined discussion, — to ends such as these the whole early training was consciously directed. But it was very different at Rome. So long as Rome remained what she was for nearly five centu ries of her national life — a small Italian state, with only rare and limited contact with the rich and fertile world of Greek culture — the education of her children aimed at no more than at the developement of those vir tues and ca pacities, the value of which was recognised in daily life. If a boy grew up healthy and strong in mind and body, if he revered tjie gods, his parents and the laws and institutions of his country, if he was familiar with the traditional w. I 2 Roman Education methods of agriculture, and had some knowledge of the way of conducting public business in times of peace and of serving in the field in time of war ; if a girl learnt from her mother to be modest, virtuous and industrious, skilled in the duties of the household, this was all that was needed, that children should grow up what their parents would have them to be. There was no conception of, still less any desire for, any system of progres- sive culture. The usage of their ancestors {mos maioruni) set -the standard at which the Romans aimed. What had been -good enough for the fathers was good enough for the sons. It was the severest censure to say of a man that he had acted as his fathers Would not have done (contra morem maioruni). And to maintain this tradition of conduct no system of teaching by outsiders was needed or desired ; the discipline of the home could do all that was required. With the methods adopted the State did not in any way concern itself. Indirectly it did much to hold up a high standard of civic duty and devotion. But the manner in which this should be taught was left to the individual citizen. It has been noted as something of a paradox that while the Greeks were always disposed to look with favour on the interference of the State in questions of training and education, they never secured the same devotion and obedience to the State as were shown at Rome, where the lessons of patriotism were learnt in the home. In the best days of the Republic the training of the children was the concern of the father and the mother, and it was not until the time of the Empire that the State did anything to control or even to assist it. But as time went on, great changes came about under foreign and especially Greek influence. The Results of , ° , , ^ , -^ ■. „ Greek better educated classes, m Rome at all events, had set before them a new ideal of culture, and new methods of attaining to it, which fascinated them with their novel charms. All were not equally attracted by them, and for generations there was a ceaseless struggle between the Introductory 3 champions of the old and the advocates of the new. But at last the latter won the inevitable and complete victory. GreelcN methods, Greek models, Greek ideals came to be dominant in Roman education ; and these largely in the hands of Greeji/ teachers. Still we must distinguish two periods in the history of Roman education under Greek influence. During the earlier the Romans were gradually learning what treasures of beauty and wisdom were stored in the literature of Greece, and were coming to feel that some knowledge of these, either directly or through the medium of translations, was essential to culture. At a later stage they were no longer content with this ; they accepted Greek ideals of culture and adopted Greek methods of training, and these not only for general mental developement, but with direct reference to the demands of public life. A higher stage of education was pursued by all or most of those whose means and leisure would allow it, so that Greek philosophers and Greek rhetoricians came to supply an essential part of the higher education of a young Roman noble. It will be necessary then that we should follow the histori- pian of cal method, and study Roman education in its this Book. successive stages. First will come the purely national stage, when as yet there was no outside influence. Here we encounter at once a serious difficulty. For more than five centuries we have nothing like contemporary evidence ; traditions may have been, and in some cases we know that they were, coloured by the usage of later times, and therefore may often be misleading. We must proceed as we do in studying for example the religion of early Rome. If we wish to conceive for ourselves the 'religion of Numa,' so beautifully sketched by Mr Walter Pater in his ' Marius the Epicurean,' we must first take pains to put out of our minds all that we can ascertain to have been of later growth or importation, and especially all that we know to have been borrowed from Greece. So whatever we can ascribe to Greek teachers or methods, we must put aside 4 Roman Education when we try to picture to ourselves the training of the early Republic, by which ' rerum facta est pulcherrima Roma.' Next we shall have to trace the effect in this direction of that great flood of Greek influence, which poured into Rome from the middle of the third century B.C. onwards, and this in the distinct departments of literary — or what we might now call secondary — education, and in the higher training of rhetoric and philosophy. Then, when we have learnt by what stages and under what influences education at Rome came to be what it was in the days of the later Republic and early Empire, we may study it in the form which it had then taken both in the elementary and in the higher stages. Finally it \yill be necessary to glance at the introduction of something like a State-system of organisation and endowment of education. CHAPTER II. EDUCATION IN THE EARLY REPUBLIC. The younger Pliny tells us in one of his letters (viii. i, 4-6) : Home 'I' was the custom of old that we should learn Education. £j.qjjj q^j. gi(jgrs^ jjot Only through our ears, but through our eyes as well, what we should presently have to do, and by a kind of succession to hand this down to our juniors. Each had his own father for an instructor, or to him who had no father the oldest and most illustrious citizens stood in the place of one.' Pliny is no very good authority for a state of things which had long passed away when he wrote ; but he is no doubt right in holding that there was a time when all the education given to children was that furnished by the training — much more physical and moral thanintellectual — of the home. But witti this'fraimng, as we have already had occasion to notice, the State had no direct concern, and did not, as a rule, in any way meddle! Cicero^ys (de Rep. iv. 3, 3), ' with regard to the training of boys of free birth — and this was the only point on which our guest Polybius censures our institutions for carelessness — to which the Greeks devoted much pains to no effect, our ancestors held that there should be no__fixed^5tem, laid down by the laws, or set forth by authority, or_the same foralL' This was certainly not as a resiilFoTany dissatisfaction with the outcome of the State regulation of education in various Greek communities, of which the Romans at this time had little or no knowledge. It was a direct result of the Roman 6 Roman Education jionception of the unlimited authority of the father {patria potestas). As the father had by law the absolute right of regu- lating the life of the son as he pleased, so he naturally had the -entire control of his education. The end of the future citizen's training was recognised to be that he should learn those ' arts ' — including both moral qualities and intellectual capacities — which fitted men to be of service to the State (Cicero, de Rep. i. 20, 33) ; and a father was open to grave censure who failed -to do his best to secure this. But to lay down in detail which these were, and how they should be acquired, would have been regarded as an encroachment on the sacred sphere of the family, in which the father reigned alone and supreme. In practice doubtless the charge of the child in its earlier Duties of the years fell to the mother. And the Roman matrons. Mother. ^j. ^ events in the better days of the Republic, were not unworthy as a rule to discharge this duty. The position of a wife at Rome was very different from what it was in Greece, especially in the Ionian States. She shared -with her husband the rule of the house, and though legally his subordinate, and as much under his control (in manu eius) as a daughter, was in her own sphere acknowledged as his equal. -The formula used in marriage expressed this clearly : ' Where ■-you are master, I am mistress ' {ubi tu Gaius, ego Gaid). If she had not by law a potestas like that of the father, which in the nature of things could not be divided, yet the mos maiorum — the usage of former generations — gave her an authority which in practice may have been hardly less. The character of a woman of the early Republic does not always appear attractive. There is often in it a hardness, a pride in rank, a narrowness and a lack of sympathy, which are not amiable features. On the other hand there is usually a purity, a dignity, a gravity, an industry and a devotion to her family and her country, which fit her to be the head of a household, and to bring up worthy citizens. She rarely discharged duties which were considered menial. Plutarch has a curious discussion in his Roman Education in the Early Republic • 7 Questions as to why Roman women did not grind corn or cook in the old days. These were held to be the tasks of slaves. . But the mater familias would sit in the hall {atrium), spinning and weaving with her daughters and hqr maids, and directing the affairs of the household. So the child was brought up on its rnother's knees {in gremio matris educabatur). Tacitus tells us {Dial. c. 28) that at times some elderly kinswoman of well- approved character was choSen to take care of all the children of one I family'. This practice, which we are almost surprised to find that Tacitus thinks worthy of mention, can hardly have been very common ; but it may have been observed in cases where the children of several sons continued to live under the family roof, or where some hindrance kept the mother from taking the whole charge herself. For the early days of the Republic there is little or no direct evidence as to the attain- ments of the women, but there is no reason to think that they were inferior to those of the men, and these, as we shall see hereafter, were greater thaa tias often been supposed. We cannot doubt that a Roman mother was, as a rule, well able to give her children at least the rudiments of such education as it was desired that they should receive. From one of the gravest anxieties of later days she must Slavery not have been in a great measure free. It has always extensive. been one of the most fatal curses of an extensive system of domestic slavery that it tends so much to demoralise the children of the slave-owners. The Romans learnt this, and the best of them lamented over it bitterly, in later days. But in early times the number of slaves at Rome was much smaller. What there were, were either vernae, born and bred lin the / ^ 'Nam pridem suus cuique filius, ex casta parente natus, non in cella emptae nutricis, sed gremio ac sinu matris educabatur, cuiusque praecipua laus erat tueri domum et inservire liberis. Eligebatur autem maior aliqua natu propinqua, cuius probatis spectatisque moribus omnis eiusdem familiae suboles committeretur ; coram qua neque dicere fas erat quod turpe dictu, neqile facere quod inhonestum factu videretur.' 8 Roman Education house, and often the playmates or even the foster-brothers of their young masters ; or else they were citizens who had fallen into misfortune^nd had been compelled by J/ an excellent practice, not that his merits will be appreciated while the judgment is still but weak, but there is time for this afterwards, and he will not be read once only. Meanwhile the elevation of the poetry and the greatness of the theme will have an inspiring effect. The same was true of Vergil, who was introduced into the school course by ' Q. Caecilius Epirota, a freedman of Atticus, not long after the poet's death, and always held a place of preeminence. Other recent poets were also lectured upon by the same critic (Sueton. Gramm. 16). The influence which cliques of teachers might have in promoting or retarding the popularity of a poet is indicated by Horace {Ep. i. 19, 40), 'non ego...grammaticas ambire tribus et pulpita dignor.' In Greece it was nothing uncommon for both the Iliad and the Odyssey to be known by heart (Xen. Symp. 3, 5). At Rome something less was omnes tamquatn dictata perdiscant,' but this may refer to those who were at the next stage, studying rhetoric rather than literature. On tlie other hand there is evidence to bear out Cicero's phrase [de Oral. i. 42, 187), 'in grammaticis poetarum pertractatio, historiarum cognitio, verborum inter- pretatio, pronuntiandi quidam sonus.' History was regarded, according to Quintilian's own definition (x. 1, 31), as 'proxima poetis et quodam modo carmen solutum,' written 'ad narrandum non ad probandum ' and therefore coming within the sphere of pure literature. Cicero contrasts it with forensic oratory in Orat. 20, 66. ' Cp. Plin. Ep. ii. 14: 'sic in foro pueros a centumviralibus causis auspicari, ut ab Homero in scholis.' Horace in describing his scliool days (Ep. ii. i, 42) says : ' Romae nutriri mihi contigit atque doceri, iratus Graiis quantum nocuisset Achilles.' S8 Roman Education usually attempted, but the poems were known with extra- ordinary thoroughness. A teacher was expected to be able to answer all the countless questions which arose out of the text' _Homer would furnish abundant material, not only for the study of the language, but also for the elucidation of points of ancient history and mythology, geography and religion, manners and customs. Quintilian has a high idea of the varied knowledge required of the grammaticus. He says (i. 4, 4), 'nor is it enough to have read the poets : every kind of writer must be studied, not only on account of the histories contained in them, but also for the language ; for words often derive their rights from the authorities which sanction them. Further grammatice cannot be complete without music, as we have to treat of metres and rhythms : and if a man is ignorant of the stars, he cannot understand the poets, who, to pass over other points, so often use the risings and settings of constellations as indications of time. Nor can the professor of literature be ignorant of philosophy, not only because of many passages in almost all poems derived from a close and exact knowledge of the problems of nature, but also because of the poems of Empe- docles in Greek and Varro and Lucretius in Latin, writers who have taught in verse the doctrines of philosophy.' He goes on to argue that no little eloquence is also needed to speak with appropriateness and copiousness on such topics, and that a branch of study is by no means to be despised, which affords the indispensable basis for the higher training of the future orator. ' The puzzles in Juvenal (vii. 231-236) are all from Vergil: the name of the nurse of Anchises, the native land of Anchemolus, the age of Acestes and the number of jars of wine that he gave to the Trojans: and Prof. Mayor justly remarks that Servius would have furnished many more. Suetonius ( Tib. 70) says of Tiberius : ' grammaticos eiusmodi fere quaestioni- bus experiebatur : "quae mater Hecubae?" "quod Achilli nomen inter virgines fuisset?" "quid Sirenes cantare sint solitae?'" Elementary Schools and Studies 59 But while Homer was the invariable basis of literary study, the pupils were by no means confined to him. other ^ ■' Authors lioys, not yet of an age for the more thorough studied. ... . . ,,-, traming m style given m the schools of the rhetori- cians, were taught to tell the fables of Aesop in pure and simple language (Quint, i. 9, 2). Hesiod with his prudential morality, his homely common sense, and his practical maxims, was a favourite school book; Cicero {Ep. vi. 18, 5) would have the son of his friend Lepta learn his Hesiod by heart, though he is as yet too young to^ appreciate Cicero's own ^Orator. Quintilian (i. 8, 6) approves of the tragedians ; the lyric poets he thinks should only be read in selections ; amatory elegies and hendecasyllables (which would generally be of a satiric character) should be banished altogether or reserved for a riper age. Comedy is especially useful for the future orator, but it must be studied with the same reservation as to the age of the pupil. Menander seems to have been always a favourite, doubtless owing to his happy sententiousness. Statins {Silv. ii. I, 114) couples him with Homer as the subjects of a boy's studies : ' seu gratus amictu Attica facundi decurreret orsa Menandri.' The two go together as late as Ausonius {Protr. ad Nep. 46) : ' conditor Iliados et amabilis orsa Menandri evolvenda tibi.' Of the bishop Fulgentius we read that as soon as he had thoroughly mastered Homer, his mother would have him read much of Menander. Statins {Silv. v. 3, 146-175) gives a long list of the Greek poets who were studied and paraphrased in his father's school at Naples, but we must remember that this was in a city which was largely or mainly Greek, and in the most distinguished school of its time. Ovid (Trist. ii. 70) speaks of Menander as read by boys and girls, although none of his plays is without some love-affair. We find less reference than we should have expected to the tragedians, but the protest of Augustine {de Civ. Dei, ii. 8) against the place given to stage-plays in education shows that they were so used in his time, and we cannot doubt that Quintilian is only sanctioning 6o Roman Education the usual practice in approving of their study. The Greek poets of Alexandria do not appear to have been studied in the Roman schools. Popular as they were under the early Empire, the tradition of the Greek teachers seems to have kept them out of the ordinary curriculum, and their influence, which was great, was mostly indirect through poets such as Catullus, Propertius and Ovid. In the schools of Latin' literature the place of Vergil, at all. events after his death, was comparable to that of Homer in the. „_Greek schools. It is rather curious that we find no mention of any translation of the Iliad before the time of Sulla ; but the old translation of the Odyssey by Naevius was one of the chief text-books in the boyhood of Horace. A place of hardly less honour was given to the Annals of Ennius. The dramatists like Pacuvius, Accius, Afranius, Plautus, Caecilius, and Terence were also studied ; but under the early Empire there seems to have been a reaction against the older writers. Along with Vergil, though not without excisions, Horace made his way into the schools, and we read that the poems of Lucan, ' of Statins, and even of Nero were lectured upon during the life- time of their authors. But when Ovid boasts of the glory which he had won while still living, he is certainly thinking more of the general reading public than of boys in schools, as some have supposed. In any case the choice of authors seems to have been left entirely to the teacher, subject to the general principle ' non multa sed multum.' Whatever was studied, was studied with minuteness and with great diligence and known thoroughly. Quintilian (i. 4) divides grammar into two parts : ' recte loquendi scientia' and ' poetarum enarratio.' He Grammar. . , ,,,... , points out that both divisions of the subject involve a good deal more than might at first appear. It is not a matter of any great difficulty to distinguish consonants from vowels, or semi- vowels from mutes. But a precise exactness is required of those who would make a closer study of what we should now call phonetics. For instance, are any letters wanting in the Latin Elementary Schools and Studies 6i alphabet? How are we to express the middle vowel in the word which is not exactly 'opfumus' nor yet 'optimus'} Or are any redundant, such as k and q ? Are any of the vowels ever used as consonants, as when uos (vos) is written in the same way as tuos? What is to be done when two or even three vowels come together ? A pupil must learn what there is distinctive in letters and what common element, so that e.g. he may not be surprised to find that the diminutive of scamnum is scabillum. He must be familiar with the changes which are brought about by inflexion, as cado, cecidi, or by composition, as calcat, exculcat ; and not less with those which have come about in the history of the language ; e.g. Lares, clamor, mersare, hordeum, bellum were the forms current in his own time, for which in older days men said Lases, clamos, mertare, fordeum, duellum. (In this section Quintilian gives us much which is of the greatest value for the history of the Latin language.) Then the pupil must go on to study the parts of speech.. The number of these has been disputed. The ancients, including Aristotle, recognised only verbs, nouns and conjunctions. Philosophers, especially the Stoics, added others ; to conjunctions they added articles and prepositions, to nouns the substantive (appellatid) and the pronoun, to the verb the participle and the adverb. The Latin language did not need the article, but it recognised the inter- jection. Other divisions of the 'parts of speech had been pro- posed, which Quintilian did not approve, and the system of the Roman grammarians has been until recently that universally adopted. The next thing to be thoroughly mastered is the inflexion of nouns and verbs. Many teachers neglect this, wishing to make a display of their pupils' progress in more showy branches, but they get on all the more slowly for their short cut, and they never really master what should follow. Under this head how- ever Quintilian includes more than we might have expected. A good teacher e.g. will not be satisfied with teaching about the three genders and words that are common to two or to more. 62 Ro7nan Education He will explain how a word feminine in form may sometimes denote a male, as ' Murena,' or a neuter form a female, as ' Glycerium.' He will also — and this seems to us to be straying rather wide of his theme — enquire into the origin of names, and especially of cognomina, where this is no longer obvious, as with Sulla, Agrippa, Vopiscus, Cotta, and many others. Then there are questions as to the nature and number of the cases ; there is nothing ' ablative ' for instance in such an instrumental construction as 'percussi hasta.' The ordinary inflexions of verbs may be assumed to be known : 'litterarii paene ista sunt ludi et trivialis scientiae.' Still some ambiguous forms may cause difficulty. Words like 'ledum' and 'sapiens' might be either participles or substantives : the deponent imperatives 'fraudaior' and 'nutritor' look like nouns. Impersonal passives, and irregular inflexions, such as that of 'fero,' call for explanation. Next the diction will need to be studied, which should be (i) correct, (2) clear, and (3) elegant. To secure the first we must avoid barbarism, which is a faulty use of an individual word, and solecism, which consists in an incorrect combination of words. Barbarism is shown sometimes in the use of a foreign word, sometimes in the capricious or ignorant variation of a Latin word. Under this head too come false quantities and other errors in pronunciation and in accent, of which Quin- tilian gives many examples. If all these errors are avoided the result will be 'correct speech' (opOoiireLo). Solecisms arise when one or more words are incorrect in their present com- bination : as e.g. when to the question ' quem video ? ' the answer is given ' ego.' Hence it can be found ' in uno verbo ' but not ' in solo verbo.' The author goes on to illustrate the nature of solecisms with some fulness, but not systematically, for, as he says, he is not writing a grammatical treatise. The mention of imported words leads him into a digression on the correct way of declining words borrowed from the Greek, which is followed by another on the limits of composition Elementary Schools and Studies 63 in Latin words, which are much narrower than those allowed in Greek, and by a warning against the danger of coining words. Then he goes on to consider what authorises diction, and finds four bases on which it can rest : — ratio, vetustas, auctoritas, and consuetudo. The first, which we may perhaps render 'theory,' relies mainly on analogy, whereby what is un- certain is established by something similar which is certain. But it is sometimes aided by etymology. There is a certain dignity and almost sanctity attaching to what is archaic. Orators and historians will furnish authority ; poets are less safe guides, because of the constraints of metre. But the certissima loqiiendi magistra is usage, and the diction employed must be current coin. He proceeds to give many interesting instances of the application of analogy, and others in which it fails us, 'for when men were first made, analogy was not sent down from heaven to give them a fashion of speech, but was discovered when they were already talking, and it was noticed in language how each word came out. . . .Analogy itself was created by nothing but usage.' On etymology he has some cautions to give, which the progress of the science of language would lead us to emphasise, and some of the examples which he gives of pro- posed etymologies sound to us like very bad jokes ; but he is himself quite conscious of their absurdity. Care must be taken that archaic words when employed are not so obsolete as to be unintelligible ; and in the same way no authority can justify the use of words which the hearer cannot understand. As for usage we must remember that this means the usage of scholars, not of the mob. With regard to orthography ' recte scribendi scientia ' he points out that the elementary rules are not a matter for the grammaticus ; they will have been learnt in the primary school ; and disputed questions, of which he gives some examples by no means without interest, are best left to the judgment of the teacher. His own opinion is that the closer spelling can follow the pronunciation the better. The treat- ment of elegance of diction he leaves to the rhetoricians. 64 Roman Education Such are the general outlines of the grammar which the greatest schoolmaster of his day would have taught in the schools. Some, he tells us, thought many of these questions too petty to trouble pupils with, but he argues that such training is not harmful to those who pass through it, but only to those who linger too long over it ; and he confirms his own judgment by that of high authorities, including Cicero, who ' artis huius diligentissimus fuit et in filio recte loquendi asper quoque exactor.' As for text-books we do not know of any in the time of the Text-books Republic, either prepared or adapted for use in of Grammar, gchools. Treatises on questions of grammar had been written at an early date by men like L. Aelius Stilo Praeconinus, the first who wrote with competent learning and a philosophic breadth of view ; and the poet Lucilius gave much space to the discussion of points of orthography and grammar. But writers such as these appealed to scholars, not to learners. The teacher had to take some Greek compendium as his guide, and adapt it as best he might to the requirements of his Roman pupils, a task- which was of course made all the easier by the fact that his teaching was naturally expected to be oral. The Greek book generally selected for this purpose was the ele- mentary treatise of Dionysius Thrax (born about 166 B.C.). His little manual of barely 1 6 pages ' remained the standard work on grammar for at least 13 centuries' (Sandys, Hist, of Class. Scholarship, i. p. 137). The first Latin grammar intended ex- pressly for use in schools was compiled by the teacher of Quintilian, the famous Q. Remmius Palaemon. It must have been written early in the reign of Vespasian. We probably have the substance of it in Quintilian's own treatise. From this time onwards Latin grammars were produced in great abundance, so that collections of such as are extant are very voluminous. The remark has been justly made that there seems to have been something in the study of grammar especially congenial to the somewhat rigid and prosaic turn of the Roman. Elementary Schools and Studies 6$ temper. But the writers upon it kept to the same general lines and differed only on unimportant details. The second part of the teacher's duty — the 'poetarum „, , enarratio ' — Ouintilian introduces with some re- The Inter- ^ pretation marks on readme. This can only be taught in of Poetry. , . ° . ., y . ° actual practice ; it is not possible to give any general rules for raising or lowering the voice, for pronouncing more rapidly or more slowly, and the like. The main thing is a proper understanding of the passage to be read. Great care must be taken that the reading of poetry does not fall into an affected modulation of the voice. The difference between verse and prose must be marked but not exaggerated. Quintilian quotes a remark of Caesar when a boy, addressed apparently to a fellow-pupil : ' if you are singing, you are singing badly ; if you are reading, you are singing.' Nor should the personifica- tion of characters be carried so far as on the stage. A reader is not required to act his parts. ' Lectio ' was the first of the four stages which Varro laid down for the study of literature ; Atticus had a high reputation for his skill as a reader, and Quintilian was proud of his son's promise in this respect (vi. Prooem. ii). An inscription at Rome (C. I. L. vi. 9447) runs : ' I have been a grammarian and a reader, but one of those readers who please by the purity of their diction.' For the proper reading of verse of course some knowledge of metre was required. The earliest national poems had been written in the rude Italian verse known as Saturnian, the exact nature of which is still a matter of discussion among scholars. It seems certain however that like most modern verse it was based upon accent. The Greek metres were regulated by quantity, i.e. by a definite sequence of long and short syllables, and the writers who had brought the Greek poetry to the knowledge of the Romans had as a rule adopted Greek measures for their translations, not however without certain licenses and variations ; and these — both rules and exceptions — had to be made the matter of the most exact w. 5 66 Roman Education study. Special treatises on metre were composed by Ennius — according to Suetonius not the famous poet but a later writer of the same name' — Epicadus, a freedman of Sulla, Varro, who left nothing untouched, and Caesellius Vindex, a con- temporary of Augustus. Even boys, says Quintilian, under- stand the nature of metrical feet, from which it is plain that it was one of the earliest subjects taught in schools. As soon as this was mastered, the teacher would explain to his pupils how to recognise them in a piece of verse. There is extant a fragmentary commentary by Priscian on the first twelve lines of the Aeneid, which probably is a fair specimen of the kind of teaching usual in the schools. It begins with a discussion of the verse, which includes a pretty full treatment of the laws of the hexameter metre. The teacher in reciting the lines would mark off the divisions of the feet either by snapping his fingers ('crepitu digitorum,' Quint, ix. 4, 55), by a stroke of his thumb (Hor. Carm. iv. 6, 35), or perhaps more frequently by stamping with the foot. In view of the fact that Epic poets were generally the earliest to be studied, pupils would commonly begin with the hexameter; and the Latin grammarians have much to say in praise of its varied beauties and capabilities, which were studied in the greatest detail. Next to this would come the trimeter iambic, the metre most extensively used in dramatic literature, comedy and tragedy alike. It is very curious to note that the licenses allowed in comic verse seem to have been less clearly understood by Horace and even by Cicero than they are by scholars of our own day I Questions of rhythm held a hardly less important place in prose than in 1 Cp. Teuffel, Rom. Lit. § 159, 13. ^ Horace {A. P. 270 flf.) implies that neither the rhythm nor the wit of Plautus would have found favour, if his contemporaries had had as good taste as the men of Horace's own day. Cicero says expressly (Orat. 55, 184), 'comicorum senarii propter similitudinem sermonis sic saepe sunt abiecti ut nonnunquam vix in eis numerus et versus intellegi possit' — a confession which a modern scholar would be slow to make. Elementary Schools and Studies 67 verse ; but they seem to have been reserved for the higher stage, i.e. for the teaching of the rhetoricians. The lectio of the pupils was, as we have seen, preceded by the praelectio of the teacher. The latter would first read or recite the passage himself, then each pupil would read it and be corrected, unless indeed the class was a large one, when only one would read, and the rest would listen to the criticisms addressed to him^. Next to the lectio, in Varro's division, came the enarratio or Explanation explanation of the text. This naturally made the of the Text, gj-eatest calls upon, and gave the best chances for the display of the erudition of the teacher. A grammaticus of repute was supposed to have at his fingers' ends all the knowledge needed to explain the incidents and allusions in the books usually studied, and to be able to illustrate them by appropriate stories. The popular collection ' Factorum et Dictorum Memorabilium Libri Novem ' by Valerius Maximus, so largely read in the Middle Ages, has been not unreasonably supposed to have been drawn up for the use of teachers. We have noticed already (p. 58 note) the trivial and absurd pedantry into which this enarratio was apt to fall, and we cannot wonder that Seneca brands it with the contemptuous name of ' litterarum inutilium studia ' ; but if kept within due bounds the method must have quickened and satisfied an intelligent curiosity better than any other possible at that time. Some of the great teachers of the Renascence show us clearly what fruitful results in the most diverse fields can be gained by the minute study of classic poets. The various definitions of this branch of a teacher's duty prove how wide was the range which it covered ; one generally accepted was ' obscurorum sensuum quaestionumque narratio ' (Keil, Gramm. Lat. vii. p. 376); another less comprehensive 'secundum poetae voluntatem uniuscuiusque descriptionis explanatio ' {ib. vi. p. 188). Of course the life of the poet, and the circumstances ^ Quintil. ii. 5, 4-6. 5—2 68 Roman Education under which the poem was composed would fall to be discussed. In the case of dramas there would be the date and conditions of their first representation, on which such informa- tion was given as has often been preserved to us in the didascaliae of the Greek, and the indices of the Latin plays. Mythology naturally entered largely into the matter of both epics and dramas, and the Christian Fathers complain bitterly of the time spent in school on the legends of Paganism. Cicero (in Verr. Act. ii. i, i8, 47) assumes that Verres, if he had had a decent school education, would have naturally been familiar with the story of Latona and her children. We may notice that Quintilian gives much less space to the enarratio historiarum than he does to the ratio loquendi This is partly because he seems to assign to the former a much narrower range than some other authorities had done. Partly it is due to the sensible view which he takes of the duties of a teacher : ' mihi inter virtu tes grammatici habebitur aliqua nescire.' He tells us of a certain Didymus, who had written more than any one, and who criticised a story as quite absurd until it was shown to him in one of his own books. It is a great waste of time to try to understand everything which even the most worthless author has written : ' nam receptas aut certe Claris auctoribus memora- tas exposuisse satis est.' But here he seems to be limiting his remarks to one division of the enarratio, to which a much wider extension was often given. Perhaps his words refer not so much to the elucidation of narratives, occurring in the work under study, as to the illustration of sentiments or maxims found in them by means of appropriate anecdotes. In any case the limits of the explanation given to the text of an author were only fixed by the knowledge or the good sense of the teacher. The next duty of the grammaticus, according to Varro, lay Correction '^'^ the emendatio. Of this there were two kinds of Text. which in practice ran into one another more than would seem natural to us. The first dealt with the correctness Elementary Schools and Studies 69 of the text in the hands of the pupils. This question was a very different one at Rome from what it had been in Greece. The scholars of Alexandria had to establish a sound text, especially in the case of Homer, by a careful collation of copies containing varying traditions, and by the most exact study of the poet's usage and the requirements of the context. At Rome the task was much less difficult. From the first, care seems to have been taken that there should be authoritative texts of the leading poets ; thus Suetonius (de Gramm. 2) tells us that C. Octavius Lampadio edited with a commentary the Punic War of Naevius, and Q. Vargunteius did the same service for the Annals of Ennius, after they had already been edited by Lampadio (cp. Suet. u.s. Gell. xviii. 5, 11), in the generation after the death of the last-named critic^. The differing readings of later copies were due as a rule to the carelessness or ignorance of copyists. It was therefore a great point to secure MSS. as old as possible and derived from the best sources. Aulus Gellius delights to quote the evidence of copies ' mirandae vetustatis ' : cp. e.g. ii. 3, 5 ; V. 4, I etc. : and Cicero {Orat. 48, 160) quotes ' ipsius antiqui libri ' to decide how Ennius spelt a word. Of course if it was possible to consult the author's own autograph, this carried the greatest weight ; and Quintilian professes to have done this in the case of Cicero and Vergil ( ' quo modo et ipsum et Vergilium quoque scripsisse manus eorum docent'), and also Augustus ('in epistulis quas sua manu scripsit aut emendavit': i. 7, 20). Gellius too (xiii. 9, 14, 7) quotes an assertion of some critics that they had consulted the ' ideograph ' of Vergil. Elsewhere (xviii. 5, 11) he tells us of the trouble and expense to which a scholar had been put to hire a MS. of Ennius which was said to have been corrected by the hand of Lampadio, that he might ascertain if in a certain line the poet had written ' equus ' or ' eques.' This was rather a mechanical kind of business, depending on authority rather than learning or good judgment : and we do not find that textual criticism was in very 1 Cp. Teuffel, Rom. Lit. § 138. JO Roman Education high esteem, though disputed points were contested with no little energy and even acerbity. Gellius (ii. 14, 3) calls those scholars ' nequam et nihiU ' who do not recognise that stitisses and not stetisses is the right reading in a passage of Cato, and in another place (xii. 10, 3) crushes by the weight of authority certain ' agrestes et indomitos certatores.' Sometimes the opinion of an expert was taken on the correctness of a MS. offered for sale. Gellius (v. 4, i) tells us how he was sitting once in a bookseller's shop when a discussion arose over a copy of the Annals of Fabius. The seller declared that it was faultless ; a. grammaticus 'ab emptore ad spectandos libros adhibitus' said that he had found an error. The question was whether duo et vicesimo was a legitimate form. Of course a uniform text was necessary for teaching purposes, and so a high standard, if not of absolute correctness at any rate of uniformity, was maintained in the traditional text. The need of care to secure this comes out plainly from Cicero's words to his brother (a^/ Quint, iii. 5 and 6, 6) : ' de Latinis vero, quo me vertam nescio ; ita mendose et scribuntur et veneunt.' Hence one of the first duties of a teacher was to see that the texts in the hands of his pupils agreed with one another. Gellius (ii. 3, 5) tells us how a famous grammarian showed him a very ancient copy of the Second Book of the Aeneid, which was said to have belonged to Vergil himself, in which the spelling aena was corrected into ahena. It is obvious that the pupils' texts must have agreed on points such as this, if the teacher's comments were to be followed with intelligence. Questions of what is now, rather unfortunately, called the Criticism Higher Criticism, dealing with the authorship and of style. integrity of literary works, were left, as a rule, to the schools of rhetoric. But the second function of emendatio was the criticism of the author's style. Here the grammarians were accustomed to proceed with great freedom and boldness, even the most famous writers not escaping their censures. They acted fully up to the rule of Quintilian (x. i, 24), ' neque id statim Elementary Schools and Studies 71 legenti persuasum sit, omnia quae optimi auctores dixerint utique esse perfecta...summi enim sunt, homines tamen.' It was their duty {ib. i. 8, 14) 'to detect all that is barbarous, improper, or contrary to the laws of language.' Gellius gives us in more than one place (cp. especially ii. 6) criticisms which had been passed on the language of Vergil. Vexasse was thought to be too weak a word to be applied {Ed. vi. 76) to the damage done by Scylla to ships ; and illaudati far too gentle an epithet for the tyrant Busiris {Georg. iii. 5). It is a faulty expression to say ' squalentem auro' {Aen. x. 314), for the ugliness connoted by squalor is inconsistent with the glitter and brightness of gold. To these and other similar criticisms Gellius gives what we may be sure were the answers current by tradition in the schools, and if sometimes the criticism seems to us somewhat shallow or the defence a little sophistical, they show at least the care with which the text of the poet was studied. Naturally it was not only the diction which was criticised. Gellius (ix. 10, 6) tells us how a distinguished grammarian, Annaeus Cornutus, the teacher of the poet Persius, to whom were due the criticisms quoted above, found fault with Vergil for not managing skilfully a figurative expression which he employs {Aen. viii. 406). The moderate and seasonable use of metaphors was felt to add brilliance to style ; but if they are too numerous or far-fetched they only produce obscurity and disgust (Quint, viii. 6, 14). The effect of the order of words had to be explained and illus- trated by the teacher {ib. ix. 4, 23). Care had to be taken that the arrangement of words in a sentence did not bring together either vowels or consonants which sounded harshly in juxtaposition. And in particular the teacher is to impress upon his pupils any merits or defects which there may be in the structure of the work as a whole, in the selection of topics and reflexions, and in knowing where a fuller treatment is in place, and where conciseness is required. It was evidently impossible to draw a hard and fast line between such treatment of literary works and that which was appropriate to the school of rhetoric ; hence there were many 72 Roman Education complaints that the grammaticus encroached on the sphere of the rhetorician. (Cp. p. 77.) So far as to the duties of the teachers. But what meanwhile Exercises of Were the tasks of the pupils ? Can we learn the the Pupils, j^ijjd of exercises which were set to them at the various stages of their study of literature ? Happily Quintilian gives us full and interesting information on this point (i. 9, I sqq.). The first step was for the pupil to reproduce, either by word ^/^f mouth or in writing, the substance of a story told by the ( teacher. Fables, especially those of Aesop, were commonly — employed for this purpose, as furnishing simple and brief narratives. Here clearness and correctness of style were the chief things aimed at. Then the pupil had to make his first attempt at paraphrase. At first he was not required to do much more than to turn verse intolprose ; then he was expected to give the sense in other words, and finally to paraphrase more boldly, abbreviating or embellishing, yet so as to preserve the sense. But paraphrase, as Cicero observed', is open to the objection that a great writer will have already expressed his meaning in the best way possible, so that it is apt to amount only to practice in putting worse words in the place of better ones. Hence it has been well urged of late that only second- rate pieces of literature should be set for paraphrase. Quintilian (x. 5, 5) does not altogether agree with this^. Then followed the treatment of themes (sententiae), or reflexions, which, if put into the mouths of definite persons, were called chriae^. Great store was set, both in speaking and writing, on a command of an abundance of general truths or commonplaces"; and even ' de Orat. i. 154. ^ ' Ab illis dissentio, qui verteie orationes Latinas vetant, quia optimis occupatis, quidquid aliter dixerimus, necesse sit esse deterius.' ' These also may be treated apud grammaiicos, because the necessary material is supplied by literature. * Buecheler, Carm. Lat. Epig. i. 434, quotes the inscription on the tomb of a boy who died at the age of ten years and some months, in ■which we read ' dogmata Pythagorae sensi studiumque sophorum et libros legi.' Ek'ynentary Schools and Studies 73 at school boys were trained to commit them to memory, to expand them and to illustrate them from history. The first stage of the expansion was of a very mechanical character, involving merely a change in the form of the sententia by the use of different cases ; but obviously there was an opportunity for the employment of any amount of ingenuity and rhetorical skilP. Finally the pupils wrote little stories from the material supplied by the poets; but we are rather surprised to learn from Quintilian (i. 9, 6) that this was more to make them familiar with the matter than to improve their style, 'notitiae causa, non eloquentiae tractandas puto.' Translation was, as we have seen, invented by the Romans as a means of literary training ; there was nothing of the kind in Greece. Yet it does not appear to have been much in use in ordinary schools. Quintilian does not mention it as part of the work of the grammaticus, nor even of the teacher of rhetoric in the first stage of his instruction. It was practised by those who had attained some proficiency in rhetoric, and by many who had passed out of the training school altogether, as the best means of improving their style, e.g. by Cicero in mature manhood. But from the point of view of style it seems to have been little used in schools. Possibly it may have been felt that the task of producing really artistic translation was too difficult for pupils, so long as the Latin language was so little plastic as it was when literary training was introduced into Roman schools, and that afterwards the conservatism natural to teachers hindered its more common adoption. It was only gradually that it became a part of the course". ^ M. Jullien happily compares the way in which M. Jourdain in Moliere {Bourg. Gentil. ii. sc. 6) turns about the line 'Belle marquise, vos beaux yeux me font mourir d'amour.' The most instructive modern example of instruction in formal rhetoric is the De Ctf/ra of Erasmus (1511), which is an extraordinary storehouse of methods of variation, expansion, enrichment etc. , as applied to Latin prose-writing. ^ Prof. Henry Sidgwick says (Miscellaneous Essays, p. 297), 'Teaching the art of Rhetoric by means of translation only, is like teaching a man to climb trees in order that he may be an elegant dancer.' 74 Roman Education It is somewhat curious that we have no definite information as to the place which was held among the exercises of the schools Verse- ^y Composition in verse. This is probably due writing. tQ (-}jg fg^(,j. jj^^^ jjjg most Systematic and complete account of Roman education which we possess, that of Quintilian, treats of it in its relation to the training of an orator, so that the practice of verse-writing might naturally pass unnoticed. But we have many references to the early age at which verses were produced, which presume a school training in the mechanism of rhythm and diction, and indeed this is almost implied in the studies of metrical questions, to which we have already referred. The Phaenomena of Aratus were rendered into verse — much of which is still extant — by Cicero 'admodum adulescentulo,' and Quintilian says (x. 5, 16), 'ideo mihi videtur M. Tullius tantum intulisse lumen eloquentiae, quod in hos quoque studiorum secessus excurrit.' Vergil had written his Culex by the age of sixteen ; Persius had produced a play and other poetical works before he had laid aside the dress of boy- hood ; Ovid had only cut his beard — as he tells us in Trisi. iv. 10, 57 — once or twice when he recited poems in public ; Lucan had written a poem at fourteen or fifteen.. These and other instances which might be added, are quoted as cases of pre- cocity; but they point to a widely diffused facility. Indeed there are phrases used of some of the Emperors which indicate this pretty plainly : e.g. of Nero, Tacitus (xiii. 3) says, 'Puerilibus annis...aliquando carminibus pangendis inesse sibi elementa doctrinae ostendebat,' while of Verus we read (Jul. Cap. Ver. 2), ' amavit in pueritia versus facere, post orationes.' This points to the fact, which is probable enough in itself, that verse-writing was practised with the graminaticus, and declamation with the rhetor. But the subjects will have been much the same. An' interesting monument was discovered not long ago, erected by his mourning parents in honour of Q. Sulpicius Maximus. This boy, who died before he was twelve years of age, had gained the prize for Greek verse in a.d. 94 at the Capitoline Games, instituted by Domitian. He had composed ex tempore 43 Elementary Schools and Studies 75 hexameters describing how Zeus rebuked Helios for entrusting his car to Phaethon, a common theme for declamation : and these verses the parents had engraved upon his tomb for fear that posterity should think their opinion of his skill misled by their affection. (See Baedeker, Guide to Rome, 'New Capitoline Collection,' Room III.) The prize does not appear to have been limited to boys, like that for the ephebi at Athens, but Sulpicius must have been well trained to make success, where there were 52 competitors, possible. There is nothing surprising in the fact that the composition was in Greek ; the younger Pliny wrote a tragedy in Greek at the age of fourteen. It is true that he adds humorously : ' I do not know what kind of one it was ; it was called a tragedy'.' But the purpose of these exercises, and such as Cicero wrote at school (Plutarch, Cic. 2), was simply to acquire a ready command of language; and those were wisest who, like Marcus Aurelius, wrote verses daily, showed them to no one, and burnt them each night. It may be noted that, in spite of this graduated system of _ , . exercises, the attitude of the pupils, at all events in Teaching ' _ if if t mostly given ■ the schools of literature, was much more passive by Lectures. than wfr should consider in accordance with sound method. Quintilian (ii. 5, 15) says, it is true, 'in omnibus fere minus valent praecepta quam experimenta.' But as a rule the ^_^ammaticus in explaining authors delivered eloquent pre- lections, and his hearers took down in their note-books as much as they could of his explanations and criticisms. The notes of lectures seem to have much resembled those of students nowadays : sometimes remarkably full and accurate, some- times confused and teeming with blunders (Quint, ii. 11, 7). It is a probable conjecture that a string of carefully chosen epithets for great writers of the past, such as that given by 1 Plin. Ep. vii. 4, 2: 'Nunquam a, poetice...alienus fui ; quin etiam quattuordecim annos natus Graecam tragoediam scripsi. Qualem? inquis. Nescio : tragoedia vocabatur.' 76 Roman Education Horace \ may have been derived from the traditional teaching of the school-room. Sometimes the notes of pupils found their way into circulation against the wishes of the teacher (Quint. Frooe7n. 7), as has also been the case in modern times. Sometimes however a master of eminence would publish his own notes — ' profitentium commentariolos,' as Quintilian calls them. Out of the almost unlimited field of knowledge which was tilled by the grammarians as a body, each would choose his own special corner, and so, when his notes were published, each came to add something to the stores of learning to which later criticism is indebted so largely. (Cp. JuUien, Les Pro- fesseurs de litter ature, pp. 279 ff.) ^ Cp. Hor. Ep. ii. i, 50-62. CHAPTER V. HIGHER STUDIES— RHETORIC AND B«ILOSOPHY. In early days the ordinary schoolmasters {grammatki) Schools of taught the elements of rhetoric. So Suetonius Rhetoric. jgjjg ^g (^^g Gramm. 4) ; and indeed there could be no very clear line of division drawn between the exercises used for training in style and those used for teaching effective speech. Hence some speakers took part in public life with no other training than that of the schools, and won distinction as advocates (Suet. ib. 7 and 10). In Quintilian's time it was recognised as the right thing that rhetoric should be taught only in the special advanced schools conducted by the rhetoricians. But he expresses and concurs in the common complaint that boys are sent on — always to the Latin teachers of rhetoric, and generally to the Greek — later than they should be. This is due, he says, to the fact that the teachers of rhetoric — the Latin especially — have neglected their own duty, while the teachers of literature have usurped that of others. The former Hmit themselves to teaching declamation, and that only on themes adapted to deliberative assemblies or the law- courts, while the latter not only pounce upon what the others pass over, but seize even on topics which make the greatest claims upon the speaker. The result is that pupils who are due at higher training are kept hanging about at school, and are not thought fit to be sent to a professor of declamation 78 Roman Education before they know how to declaim. This complaint seems only in part justified. It is in the nature of things that a school- master should wish to retain a promising pupil and teach hini all he can ; and equally natural that the more advanced teacher should like to have his student sent to him as soon as he is fit. But a good deal of the work done in the school of rhetoric with a view to special training was not less suitable for the general culture, and in particular for the formation of style, which was the business of the school. It need be no matter of surprise then if we find the exercises in the one class of school largely the same as those in the other, though with some differences both in method and in extent. The order in which the preliminary rhetorical exercises — Preliminary c?^t&.progymnasmata — were taken was a traditional Exercises. ^^^^ derived from the Greek usage. The exercises themselves closely resemble those which we have already noticed. The first is practice in narrative, with regard to which Quintilian (ii. 4, 2) would now drop the fable and the story (argumentum), though others would retain these if treated with sufficient freedom, and would confine the matter to history. On this follows naturally the critical treatment of narratives — what the Greeks called anaskeue and kataskeue, i.e. an attack on or a defence of the truth of the story. Then come panegyrics and invectives, which give a wide scope for oratory. The chria in rhetoric — so called, we are told, because it was the most useful of all the exercises — was' much more developed than in literature. It became an exhaustive discussion, according to the rules of the art, of a sentiment ascribed to some definite person. The usual treatment was somewhat as follows : first the author of the saying was eulogised ; then his words were paraphrased and developed, so as to bring out the meaning. Next the truth of the thought was established, both positively and negatively, in the latter case by pointing out what results would follow if it were not true. Then came a comparison, an example drawn from Higher Studies — Rhetoric and Philosophy 79 history, confirmatory quotations from standard authors, and finally a conclusion, which often took the form of an exhortation. The sententia was treated in a very similar manner, which indeed has been the model on which the art of literary composition has been taught ever since, both in medieval and in more modern schools. Examples have been preserved to us of model exercises written by the teachers for the guidance of their pupils'. But all these exercises and the oiCaex progymnas- mata were intended — in whatever kind of school they were employed — only as introductory to the main exercises of rhetoric, i.e. declamations. Even if a boy had had some training in the preliminary „ . . exercises before he came to the rhetorician, his Kxercises in . . the School more serious work at them would begin there. Quintilian (ii. 4 ff.), in speaking of the earliest teaching of the master of rhetoric, ' cuius aliquid simile apud grammaticos puer didicerit,' treats first of narration, in the form of history, ' tanto robustior quanto verior,' in composing which he would have the greatest attention paid to style, and desires the pupil 'ante discat recte dicere quam cito.' Then follows the ' opus destruendi confirmandique narrationes,' the destructive or defensive criticism of stories, such as that of the raven which perched on the helmet of Valerius Corvus. Then follows the more difficult task of panegyric and invective, which is of especial value, partly from the varied demands which it makes upon the mental powers, partly from its developement of the moral judgment, and partly from the way in which it stores the memory with examples to be used on occasion. ' Commonplaces,' i.e. general reflexions on vices, are of imme- diate service in legal cases ; and even more so are 'theses,' i.e. abstract questions involving a comparison, such as ' is country life to be preferred to life in a town ? ' There are other ' theses ' of a deliberative kind, e.g. 'should a man marry?' These if 1 Cp. Jullien, op. cit. p. 303. 8o Roman Education connected with a name become suasoriae — a term of which we shall hear again'. He speaks with favour of an exercise used by his own teachers, in which pupils had to divine the reason for something, as e.g. why Cupid was represented as a winged boy armed with arrows and a torch. The advocacy or criticism of laws calls for the utmost efforts of the speaker, involving as it does frequently questions of the greatest difficulty and importance, as well as of the greatest variety. These are the chief preliminary exercises by which the ancients trained the capacity for speaking. The practice of pleading in imaginary cases, as if actually in a law-court, was introduced, he says, by "Demetrius Phalereus at Athens (circ. B.C. 320). Before Quintilian goes on to speak of declamation proper, the special function of the rhetorician, he stops to Literature . , ^ , , . - in Relation pomt out how much advantage may be gamed e one. £j.Qjjj j-j^g critical study with a teacher, not now of the poets, but of history and especially of orators. The pupils must be trained to observe merits and faults, both of matter and of style, for themselves : ' nam quid aliud agimus docendo eos, quam ne semper docendi sint?' This training in careful criticism will be of more value than any amount of theoretical instruction, and pupils will much prefer to have the mistakes of others pointed out rather than their own. The best writers must be chosen — Livy rather than Sallust, who requires a more developed intelligence, but above all Cicero, who ' et iucundus incipientibus quoque et apertus est, nee prodesse tantum, sed etiam amari potest.' Neither the rough and archaic style of Cato and the Gracchi, nor the affected and over-ornate diction of Quintilian's own time, is to be taken as a model. Then he discusses the extent to which the teacher should offer sugges- tions to the student for the treatment of the subject, or should let him take his own course and afterwards correct him, and ^ A good example of the suasoria is given by Juvenal (i. 15), where he claims to have received an ordinary school education : ' et nos consilium dedimus SuUae, privatus ut altum dormiret.' Higher Studies — Rhetoric and Philosophy 8i prefers that there should be more of the former'. He greatly approves of the practice of learning by heart, but not, as was too commonly the case, the pupil's own compositions ; they should not be allowed to recite from memory their own productions until they have attained some excellence, and as a reward of their progress. Then follows an interesting discussion how far a pupil's strong points are to be developed and how far effort should be directed towards removing his weaknesses, raising thus the standing educational problem what amount of uncongenial work is to be imposed upon pupils of marked special capacity. He comes to the sensible conclusion that weaker intellects must not be pressed beyond their natural powers, but where there is more promising material, it must receive as complete culture as possible. After these somewhat discursive remarks on the preparatory studies Quintilian pro- nounces the pupil who is well trained and practised in these, ready to attack the subjects furnished by the suasoriae and forensic cases. He has still however something to say on the method and value of declamation. It is of late introduction, but it is the most useful of all exercises. Indeed some think that it is alone sufficient to develope eloquence. It has been undervalued because of the absurd themes, out of all relation with real life, which have been chosen as its subjects. It ought to keep in view the kind of occasions for which the speaker is being trained. In forensic cases art must be carefully concealed; but there are times when a display of oratorical skill is in place, in order to give pleasure to the audience. Quintihan (ii. ii) then goes on to demonstrate the value of a systematic study of ' The office of the master in supplying the necessary information to his pupils on the subject of their declamations was called his sermo ; and in what are (wrongly) called the ' Declamations of Quintilian ' we have some interesting specimens of the sermo. He states and explains the subject, shows how it may be treated, indicates the dangers and advantages of various lines of argument, and generally does, as we might incline to say, too much of the thinking for them. w. 6 82 Roman Education rhetoric, as against those who beUeved in nothing but natural powers and practice. He adds a satirical description of those speakers who look for a supply of matter and language to the inspiration of the moment : and disproves the contention that untrained speakers have more force, and therefore more power with an audience. The trained, he maintains, lose only their faults ; ' doctis est at electio et modus,' while the untrained pour out everything. It is only after these preliminary remarks that Quintilian goes on to define rhetoric, and to indicate in what way he means to treat it in the ten remaining books of his famous work. It does not come within the scope of the present book to Theory of describe in detail the system of rhetoric which. Rhetoric. originating in Sicily in the 5th century B.C. and developed at Athens and afterwards in Asia Minor, had now become traditional in the schools of rhetoric at Rome". But a few points may be worth noting. There were commonly recognised to be three kinds of oratory — the genus demonstra- ^ Renan once said [Discours de Reception de M, de Lesseps), ' You have a horror of rhetoric, and you are right ; it is (with poetics) the only misfalce of the Greeks. After having produced masterpieces, they thought they could give rules for producing them — a serious mistake. There i.s no art of speaking, any more than there is an art of writing. To speak well is to think aloud. Oratorical and literary success has never any cause but one, absolute sincerity.' But thinking is one thing, and speaking another ; and the pleasure derived from finished and beautifully modulated speech is as legitimate as that derived from any other form of art. It is one to which the Greeks, and under their teaching the Romans, were susceptible to a degree which we can hardly realise. Cp. Cicero, Orat. 50-1, 168—173: Capes, University Life at Athens, p. 88. But in addition to the aesthetic pleasure, there was also the practical usefulness of the art. The leading Greek and Roman statesmen were conscious that they did speak more effectively for having been trained (p. 27). At the beginning of the Civil War Pompeius took up again his practice of declamation, in order to be able to reply the better to Caesar's advocate Curio (Suet. Rhet. i), though as Boissier (Tacite, p. 202) remarks, it was thought afterwards that he might liave done better to raise legions. Higher Studies — Rhetoric and Philosophy 83 tivuin, the g. deliberativum, and the g. iudiciale. In the first the speaker makes a display of his own powers, usually in the way of panegyric or invective; in the second he endeavours to persuade his audience to take some action ; in the third he tries to establish the guilt or innocence of some one who is arraigned before a court of law. In all these forms of oratory there are five tasks which devolve upon the speaker, for which he has to receive instruction : (i) inventio, the devising of appropriate matter ; (2) dispositio, or arrangement ; (3) elocutio, the clothing of the matter in proper language ; (4) viemoria, remembrance of the arguments, the order and the language ; {<^) pronuntiatio, the delivery, including not only the management of the voice, but also gestures. Quintilian allots three books (iv.-vi.) to inventio, one (vii.) to dispositio, two (viii.-ix.) to style, including tropes and figures of speech ; in the tenth book he diverges into a review of Latin literature from the point of view of the orator ; in the eleventh he deals with adaptation, with memory, and with delivery ; in the twelfth he takes up various moral and intellectual requisites for success as an orator. His treatise preserves for us in the most interesting, though not the most systematic form the theory of rhetoric', which underlay the practical training especially in Greece ; and as we observe the moderation and good sense, which mark his treatment throughout, we do not wonder that he ranked as the most eminent teacher of his day. But whatever the value of a sound basis of theory, the main thing was practice in declamation. This was not solely a matter for the school. Cicero {Brut. 90, 310) says, 'com- ec amation. jjjgj^j^|-,g^j declamitans (sic enim nunc loquuntur) saepe cum M. Pisone et cum Q. Pompeio aut cum aliquo cottidie; idque faciebam multum etiam Latine, sed Graece saepius.' He carried on this practice of declaiming in Greek 1 The most systematic exposition of the theory is given in the anonymous treatise addressed 'ad Herennium,' and printed in Cicero's works. Cp. Cicero, de Oraiore (Clarendon Press edition), Introd. pp. 51-64. 6—2 84 Roman Education till the time of his praetorship, when he was forty years of age (Suet, de Rhet. i). And even later on in his life he guided the practice of his younger friends Hirtius and Dolabella. This practice would doubtless be on the lines laid down in the schools, but in these there was, as Suetonius tells us, a certain variety of method, according to the tastes of the teachers. But in Cicero's time ' the understanding was strengthened and the range of knowledge extended by the writing out of essays on general topics, proposita as Cicero called them, as the Greeks called them deaus, and by the treatment of communes loci, or the topics which were sure to come up in the course of any serious discussion of a matter of practice. The written treat- ment of QitTf.L% and commufies loci was the main if not the only exercise of originality known to the educationists ' of Cicero's day' (Nettleship, Essays, ii. p. 112). Cicero himself divides guaestiones into the limited or concrete {causae) and the unlimited or abstract {proposita) ; but of these the latter were much preferred as subjects for declamation. In the time of Quintilian declamations were commonly divided into suasoriae and controversiae. These names were not known to Cicero and his contemporaries^. (The word ' Cp.Cic. Top. 79: ' quaestionum duo genera, alterum definitum, alterum infinitum. Definitum est quod {nr68ed. A Manual of School Hygiene, written for the guidance of Teachers in Day-schools. By Edward W. Hope, M.D., Professor of Hygiene, University of Liverpool, and Edgar A. Browne, F.R.C.S.E., Lecturer in Ophthalmology, University of Liverpool. Crown 8vo. With several diagrams. 3^. dd.