« AnteriorContinua »
the foundation of more grammar schools. But the rapacity of Edward's council left scanty funds to endow them. The reign of Mary was disastrous to education. The general want of schools, decay of the Universities, and decay of learning, were represented to Elizabeth in the strongest terms. But, except by private liberality, little was done to meet the want.
The statutes of the grammar schools or free schools founded by the Crown and by private benefactors are nearly all on one model, combining classical with religious instruction. The archetype may be found in Dean Colet's Statutes (1509) for St. Pauls. Scholastic Latin was to be strictly excluded, but not so Christian writers in good Latin. The head-master was to be "learned in good and clean Latin literature, and also in Greek, if such may be gotten." Such was gotten, in the person of Lilly, the author of Propria quæ maribus and As in presenti. Erasmus, who had been much consulted in the whole matter, and helped to draw up the grammar, considered this school to be the best in England.
The statutes of the school founded at Manchester (1525), by Bishop Oldham, may serve further to set forth the conception of a grammar school. He had observed that “the children in the same country having pregnant wits had been most part brought up rudely and idly," and determined to give them an opportunity of learning grammar, as being "the ground and fountain of all the other arts and sciences. ... the gate by the which all other been learned and known in diversity of tongues and speeches." There is no special mention of Greek.
The Shrewsbury Grammar School, founded by Edward VI. (1551), is de- . scribed by Camden as "the best filled in all England, being indebted for its flourishing state to provision made by the excellent and worthy Thomas Ashton." Ten years later, Laurence Sheriff made similar provision for Rugby. Harrow was founded (1571) as "the Free Grammar School of John Lyon." He names for use many of the best Latin and Greek books, but only one Greek poet, Hesiod. The boys are "to be initiated in the elements of Latin versification very early." And “no girls shall be received to be taught in the same school." The head-master “may take of the foreigners such stipends and wages as he can get, so that be take pains with all indifferently, as well of poor as of rich."
The statutes of the later free schools generally prescribe verses, and Greek. Archbishop Grindal, for example, requires for St. Bees (1583) "a meet and learned person that can make Greek and Latin verses, and interpret the Greek Grammar and other Greek authors." The only other Greek author named is "the little Greek Catechism set forth by public authority.” Archbishop Sandys expects from the Hawkshead School, in Lancashire (1588), that "the chiefest scholars shall make orations, epistles, and verses in Latin and Greek for their exercises," and all the scholars "shall continually use the Latin tongue or the Greek tongue as they shall be able.” Archbishop Harsnet wishes for Chig. well (1629) “a man skillful in the Greek and Latin tongues, a good poet. For phrase and style he is to infuse no other save Tully and Terence; and to read the ancient and Latin poets, no novelties or conceited modern writers."
Latin plays are not much mentioned in the statutes, but were frequently acted; at Shrewsbury weekly. In a few cases Hebrew is required of the head-master, as at Bristol, Southwark (1614), and Lewisham (1652). But in
by far the larger number of schools Greek and Latin alone are specified, and in some it is expressly said that “Greek and Latin only," or "the classics only," are to be taught.
Charterhouse (founded 1611) is an exception. For, although the statutes (dated 1627) prescribe.“ pone but approved authors, Greek and Latin, such as
Sunday upon some part of the Second Lesson, it is added that the scholars shall be taught “ to cypher and cast an account, especially those that are less capable of learning and fittest to be sent to trades."
When grammar schools have received new statutes by Act of Parliament, there has seldom been an essential change. At Leeds, an attempt was made to introduce a more modern education. But it was decided in Chancery (1805) that "the Free School in Leeds is a free grammar school for teaching, grammatically, the learned languages, according to Dr. Johnson's definition." In general, little has been done to meet the requirements of a later age. Endowments have been wasted by the cessation of demand for classical instruction.
RECENT MOVEMENTS. The recognition of Greek learning as an indispensable element in literary culture, and of the language as a necessary part of a liberal education, effected in England, three centuries ago, by such men as Grocyn, Linacre, More, Erasmus, and Dean Colet, has been not only questioned, but successfully resisted within the last few years. The demands of modern science and living languages and literatures, and particularly those of Germany and France, have made such impression on public opinion and educational authorities, that by a decision of the Senate of the University of London, in 1872, Greek is no longer required as an obligatory subject at the Matriculation Examination. The Public School Commission, charged with readjusting the relations of the great secondary schools in England to the universities, and to the industrial interests of the age, through their chairman, Lord Lyttleton, have addressed the governing authorities of the universities, no longer to make Greek indispensable to admission or graduation, and to receive candidates who shall stand an adequate test in modern languages and natural science. The House of · Convocation of Oxford responded favorably, and after Michaelmas term, 1874,
it will be no longer necessary to offer either Greek or Latin for an academic . degree. The Senate of Cambridge rejected a similar proposal by only a majority of seven. The head masters of the endowed grammar schools at a recent conference, have pronounced that 'Greek should not be an essential in passing through the university course.'
To the discussions which have grown out of this action, the London Quarterly Review, for April, 1873, contributes an earnest plea against cutting off this right arm of liberal culture.' 'Among ancient studies, we claim for the Greek language and literature the two-fold place of the foundation and the keystone of the arch of knowledge, alike for its utility as the chief basis of all science, philosophy, and art, for its power to keep together every other element in the fabric of mental culture, and for its grace as the ornament of the whole structure.'
To sink the past beneath our feet, be sure
NATURAL SCIENCE AND MODERN LANGUAGES IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS.
Among the significant movements of the year (1870) are the following extracts from a communication, by the Chairman of the Endowed Schools Commission, to the chief authority in all the principal Universities in Great Britain :
That the course of study insisted on by the Universities must to a great ex. tent govern the course adopted in the higher schools, is a proposition which will probably he accepted without argument. Though it may be the case that only a very few scholars are intended for the University, those few are the most prominent, stay the longest, and give a bias to the whole education of the place; and numbers of schools are thus forced or irresistibly attracted into a course which is not that best suited to the bulk of those for whom they are designed.
The practical result is, that the study of the Greek and Latin Classics becomes the highest aim of all great schools; an end to which the whole system is adapted, and which has bitherto overshadowed and dwarfed all efforts in other directions.
We do not propose to discuss here the question whether the Greek and Latin languages are the finest and most efficient organs of mental training. We merely rest upon the fact that many competent judges say that they are not; and that very large numbers of the middle classes in England view with suspicion, if not with aversion, the predominance of these subjects in the ordinary school course. This suspicion or aversion may not always be very intelligent, or founded on clearly assignable reasons; but it is instinctive, it is widely spread, it tallies with the undoubtedly intelligent judgments above referred to, and the fact of its existence is a reason for endeavoring to establish other alternative and additional modes of training, more acceptable to at least a large number of people. The state of opinion is such as to leave no room for doubt that these newer methods will be followed by many, who, if they can not find sufficient aid in this country, will have recourse, as some are now doing, to Germany and other foreign countries.
We start, then, from the fact that there exists a strong demand for more training by other than classical studies, and that the subjects generally sug. gested are Mathematics, Modern Languages, and Natural Science.
Mathematics have a recognized footing in the country; they have long been the leading study at Cambridge, and are a fully-established study at Oxford; and we do not think it necessary to dwell upon them.
The advantage of Modern Languages for practical use is obvious enough. And there are many who think they may be made an excellent organ of mental training. On this head we refer to the Schools Inquiry Report, pp. 25–28.
The evidence in favor of Natural Science is stronger still. We would refer to the same Report, p. 34, and to a Report made in the year 1867 to the British Association, which will be found published by the Schools Inquiry Commission in vol. ii., p. 219. It is clear that amongst highly educated men who have studied the subject deeply, there are some who think that, both for the practical nature of the knowledge it conveys, and for its severe training of the whole range of mental faculties, Natural Science has a higher claim than any other subject to be the chief instrument of education.
It appears to us, as it appeared to the Schools Inquiry Commissioners (Re. port, p. 87), that a demand made by so many parents, and supported by strong proof of its reasonableness, ought to be ungrudgingly conceded. The question for us is not so much whether the demand should be met, as what measures are required to give it practical effect. It is not enough to establish schools with what may be called a modern curriculum, but intended only for those scholars who terminate their school career at fourteen or sixteen years of age; for the time does not allow of a fair trial of the new methods, nor would such schools meet the want of the more intelligent part of the parents who make the demand. Nor is it enough to add the modern studies to the ordinary classical curriculum in higher schools, for that involves the dangerous risk of distracting the minds of the pupils, and dismissing them with a smattering instead of a
solid hold of knowledge, and of encouraging babits of skimming over a variety of surfaces instead of grappling closely with difficulties. Nor can the ancient and modern studies be wisely put as rival objects of pursuit in the same school, with the almost inevitable result of the supremacy of the one and the decay of the other. For, as experience has shown, the one to decay is that which has not got on its side long usage, or established reputation, or the associations of old institutions, or the sympathies of the great body of teachers, or the substantial attractions of endowments.
We are convinced that, in order to give a fair trial and full play to the study of Modern Languages and Natural Science, it is necessary to establish some schools of the first grade (i. e. schools retaining their scholars to the age of eighteen or nineteen), in which these subjects should be the staple of the course, and to that end the time and importance assigned to Classics be much diminished.
Nor can we doubt which part of the ordinary curriculum should be sacrificed for this purpose. Something not inconsiderable may, no doubt, be done by dropping some of the elegancies of Latin scholarship, and teaching that language more with a view to a knowledge of its structure and the capacity of understanding its literature than with a view to composition. But that Latin should in the main be retained, we do not question. If Modern Languages are to be studied, Latin lies at the base of Italian, Spanish, and French, and enters largely into English. Its practical use in life is appreciable; until within the last four centuries, Latin was the language in which the largest part of the business of Western Europe was recorded, and almost the whole of its literature was written. No ecclesiastic, lawyer, antiquarian, or physician can dispense with all knowledge of it. Greek bas none of these uses, while yet it takes more time to learn, is forgotten sooner, and is the object of greater suspicion and dislike to parents. It belongs to the classical region, and to that alone; and from its difficulty, and also its attractiveness, must be expected to receive a large share of the student's time and attention, if it is to answer any sufficient purpose. No school can be other than a classical school in which Greek is effectively studied.
Influenced by these considerations, we have determined to venture on the experiment of employing some of the Educational Endowments best adapted for the purpose, in establishing, among other schools of the first grade, some which may by way of distinction be called Modern; that is, schools in which Greek shall be excluded in order to provide adequate test and encouragement for the study of Modern Languages and Natural Science.
When, however, we propose to establish such schools, we are met by the objection that the Universities will be closed to the pupils, however competent, unless they will spend money and time in acquiring that quantum of Greek which is exacted from all who go there. The quantum itself is not great, and might doubtless be acquired perfunctorily, and, according to the common pbrase, by cram'; but in that case it would be of little value for the purpose of mental training, and the exertion spent in acquiring it would be almost pure waste in a life which may have little to spare.
The broad result is that, as long as Greek is made a sine quâ non at the Universities, those schools of the new type which it is proposed to establish will labor under the serious disadvantage of being cut off from direct connection with the Universities, through a want of agreement in their course of studies with University requirements, while, if the schools flourish, the Universities will in some degree lose their control over the higher culture of the nation.
We trust that we shall not be misunderstood as desiring to intrude speculations of our own concerning the internal arrangements of the Universities. But we are confident in the belief that, for our own work, we are bound to attempt to establish such schools as we have indicated; and it is with reference to them that we venture to suggest to the Universities to modify those arrangements; so that, for instance, a first-rate man of science, who knows no Greek, shall not (at least in theory and intent) be at any greater disadvantage than a firstrate Greek scholar who knows no science. How this is to be done, we do not pretend to suggest; but if once the object be considered desirable, we presume that no great practical difficulty will be felt in giving effect to it by those who are familiar with the details of University organization.
GRANT DUFF, M. P. Mr. Grant Duff, an accomplished scholar, and Member of the House of Com. mons for the Elgin Burghs, Scotland, presents the views which we have always held respecting the classical element in a scheme of general education.
'I did not consider the old-fashioned English classical education a good classical education. On the contrary, I consider it a very bad classical education, altogether one sided, failing to give any thing like the cultivation that a classical education ought to give, while it occupies a most unreasonable amount of time. I believe that you could with ease, in very much less than half the time usually occupied in classical studies, familiarize the mind with every thing that has come down from classical antiquity that ought to form any part of general education. I would produce these results in the following ways:- 1st, By teaching Greek as, what it is mainly, a living, not a dead language. 2d, By considering that the only object worth keeping in view with regard to Latin and Greek, considered as a part of general education, is to enable your youth to read whatever exists in Latin and Greek that you can not read as well in English, French, or German. To that end, I would immensely curtail the amount that is read, and even of the authors which must be read I would read in translations as much as could be with propriety read in that way. I would strike my pen remorselessly through every thing that was uncharacteristic in a first rate author; but, on the other band, I would include in my list of books a good deal that is usually, but most unreasonably, omitted. I would wholly banish from general education all Latin and Greek composition whatever, except in prose. On the other hand, I would consider it just as necessary that the persons who were to go through a classical education should have their eye familiarized with whatever is most beautiful in Greek coins, statues, gems, and buildings, as that the ear should be familiarized with the finest passages in the language. When I was at school it was the fashion to learn by heart thousands and thousands of lines of Latin and Greek. To all that I would put an utter end, and never encourage a line to be learnt that was not sufficiently good to be treasured through life as a possession for ever.
"The time is surely come for some scholar of commanding reputation, or better still, for some committee of scholars, to put forth an answer to this question - considering that Latin and Greek studies do bring the mind into contact with ideas with which it is not otherwise brought into contact, and considering that there are a vast number of the studies which it is absurd and disgraceful to neglect-what is there that you insist upon as specially worthy of attention ? I am persuaded that the list of books or part of books which would be written down in answer to such a question as this by scholars, who, in addition to having read widely in the classics and having made themselves acquainted with the chief treasures of classic art, have a wide knowledge of modern literature, would not be of unwieldly length. I yield to no one in the desire to keep classical study a part of education, but you must remember that the place which classical studies now hold in this country is a mere accidental result of their having been introduced when there was hardly any modern literature. Of late they have been studied from a fantastic notion that they are a peculiarly good discipline for the mind, that they are in some mysterious sense educative. They