CLASSICAL STUDIES.
SIR—There are two fallacies of frequent occurrence in controversial dis- cussions which are a very fruitful source of misunderstanding and strife. These (if one may venture to introduce the terms of a science which, in our days of materialism and utilitarianism' is held in almost equal disfavour with its sister-science of grammar) are the arguing "a dicta smoothie' quid ad dictum simpliciter ' and the "ignoratio elenchi." Both these fal- lacies lurk in the letter of your anonymous correspondent of last Saturday.
In the first place, he wishes to make me say that the tutors of England will only educate " a gifted few—First-Classmen or Wranglers," and that the ancients are the necessary teachers of poetry and philosophy. In the second place, he seems to imagine that because I advocate the teaching of the claseics upon a certain method, that, therefore, I am insanely crying, "The classics, the classics ! and nothing but the classics!" When I read his remarks, I had some misgivings, either that I had been wonderfully ob- scure in ray statements, or that some clerical error had been left uncorrected in the letter I wrote to you. On referring to your paper, I am satisfied that neither is the ease.
The guestion lies in a 'nutshell. First, Is the study of ancient languages conducive to intellectual refinement and soundness of thinking ? Second, Is the present method of teaching them the best, (not always a quick one, but the best on the whole,) or can another be pointed out to supersede it, not theoretically but practically ? The answers must be gathered from expe- rience. For the first. With the exception of an illustrious few, (and your correspondent will pardon me for reminding him of the maxim, exceptio probat regulana,") with the exception of a few names, the magnates in poli- tics, whether in the legislative or executive departments, in theology and philosophy, are men who have been more or lees distinguished for classical attainments. And, with all due deference to Messrs. Cobden and Bright, whose "correct Saxon" I would not wish to depreciate„—though I was not aware till now that neither of them had been initiated into the mysteries of the concords,—I would suggest that many of our county magistrates, our country parsons, and our Indian officials, would have been none the worse for a more intimate acquaintance in their youthful days with the Latin grammar.
For the second. I would appeal from myself to the "examiners for ma- triculation, little-go, or ordinary degrees," whom your correspondent invokes. I would appeal to the present race of Oxford tutors, whom he will not deny to be liberal and enlightened men, and who in the recent alteration of the statutes respecting examinations, far from slackening the reins of grammar and verbal criticism, have drawn them tighter than ever. I would appeal to the many hundreds of men who have failed to arrive at the minimum of classical knowledge required at the Universities—simply and solely, as every tutor knows, because they have not had in their school-days a sufficient drilling in the analysis of language. System after system has been tried in order to escape from elementary drudgery. But can your correspondent point to a distinguished name in lite- rature who has been trained by the Hamiltonian or other less obnoxious method ? It would indeed be strange if the method which is employed in every other branch of instruction should fail here ! How can geology, eth- nology, or astronomy be taught (unless superficially) except after a rudi- mentary course ? How can music be taught except we begin with the notes and the principles of harmony ? How can arithmetic be taught before the rules of multiplication and division are worked out ?
No one expects that all boys should turn out First-Classmen or Wranglers— no one expects that all who do not should be "hewers of wood and drawers of water." No one, except a madman, thinks that there is anything "of the upas-tree in other studies." Education is the proper direction and cultivation of tastes, and I protest as strongly as any one can do against the fashion of for- cing instruction upon an unwilhng or incapable subject. Perhaps if our schools were organized on a healthier footing, each of them should contain a num- ber of departments ; and after sufficient observation and due discrimination, each pupil should be drafted into the branch for which he has shown the greatest adaptation and inclination. But if—(remember that all the time we are proceeding on a supposition)—f! we are to have a certain number of boys annually instructed in classical literature, I must adhere to my former opinion, that taste and elegance of mind are only to be realized by this method" of stringent analysis. There is something in the instructional theories of the present day which tends to disparage the thorough investiga- tion of single branches of knowledge, and to attempt the metamorphosis of every unhappy schoolboy (far more unhappy now than of old) into a walking encyclopaedia, crammed with Tap ivy turr a of the sciences, instead of laying a solid foundation upon which a durable superstructure may afterwards be reared. I beg to say, in conclusion, that I have not been speaking of Chris- tian education, (which is simply the introduction of an invidious expression into the debate,) but of what you, Sir, justly designated "the use and abuse of classical instruction." This is, I fear, a longer and perhaps even more " discursive " letter than the last; but as you, doubtless, have a tire at hand in- this cold weather, you have it in your power " solvere tabulas risu."
I am, Sir, yours faithfully, I. GATES. P. S.—With Mr. Cookesley and his book I have no concern ; nor, after your just exposure of him last week, should I wish to appear his champion.
LWe think if Mr. Oates would draw up a list of magnates in polities, legis- lative or executive, and in philosophy, and carefully inquire into the real amount of their classical acquirements, he would find Latin and Greek have less to do with their eminence than he supposes. As we said in reply to his first letter, so we repeat, that we value as highly as he does accurate know- ledge, but think accurate knowledge of classics more likely to be attained if children are not taught by a dry repulsive method, and if, when the faculties are opening, and all nourishment is greedily imbibed, we do not refuse nourishment. We certainly understood Mr. Oates much as our correspond- ent of last week seems to have done, and we are glad that he does not. wish deliberately to keep up a system of education which to the majority is useless and even mischievous.—En.)
Previous page
