We have seen that in the Grecian education, rhetoric and philosophy went hand in hand, and that the metaphysical genius of the Greeks at length caused philosophy to stand forth as the highest summit of intellectual culture. But such was not the result at Rome. The idea of Isocrates, that oratory is the pinnacle of human excellence, and that a faultless orator is the most perfect specimen of human nature, was first nationalized in the Roman world. The genius of Rome was not of a philosophical cast. Philosophy, as well as all culture, was introduced into Rome by the Greeks, and in later times it was extensively cultivated there. But it never found a genial soil. Rome produced no great philosopher. The versatile genius of Cicero gave him a taste for philosophical studies, and his writings show that he knew how to prune away the rhetorical amplifications of which he was so fond, and to approach in his style more nearly to the simplicity which philosophy requires. But the orator is ever bursting forth and assuming his native predominance. Even in his treatises on the theory of rhetoric itself the practical is always uppermost. In the early ages of Rome, both rhetoric and philosophy were viewed with a jealous eye, and regarded as highly dangerous to the public morals. The old simplicity and sternness struggled long against them, and through the influence of Cato, the Greek philosophers and rhetoricians were at length banished frome Rome.* We must no doubt suppose that there was something in the doctrine and characters of the men who then taught philosophy and rhetoric that increased the existing prejudice against such studies. But after the introduction of philosophy into the Latin language by Cicero, and especially after the establishment of an extensive intercourse with Greece through the Roman conquests in the east, it was impossible to repress the study of philosophy and rhetoric. Teachers in both these sciences were eagerly sought by the youth at home and abroad. Rhetoric especially was cultivated with ardor. Cæsar not only wrote commentaries in the camp and a Latin grammar, but also assiduously practised declamations. In the early days of the republic unconditional obedience prevailed in the armies of Rome, but * Bucheri Institutiones Histor. Philos. 287. in later times, and especially under the empire, oratory was resorted to as a means of influencing the troops. Not Cæsar alone but Pompey, Anthony, Augustus, and other Roman commanders were in the constant habit of declamation. While the speculative spirit of the Greeks delighted in philosophy, the practical feeling of the Romans preferred oratory. In the higher schools at Rome, rhetoric became in later times the chief means of intellectual discipline. Law and eloquence were there regarded as the noblest objects of pursuit. The bonds of Grecian philosophy, which for centuries bound the modern world, are broken; but the jurisprudence of Rome has given permanent laws to Christendom. Thus have we sketched some of the features of the Greek and Roman education. In doing this we have aimed not at the exhibition of details but at the development of principles; for there was not time for both, and the root is more essential than the branch. If any one supposes that because the institutions of which we have been speaking passed away two thousand years ago, their characteristics are to us of no practical importance, he errs; for human nature remains. unchanged, and the principles which must govern the right education of man are immutable The nature, limits, and application of the power of the state in education; the extension of the benefits of education to all the children of the state; the time to be devoted to this purpose; the necessity, and the mode of physical culture; the union of development and instruction; the systematic employment of music as an instrument of education; the cultivation of the taste in connection with morals; and the relation of philosophy and oratory to each other and to education as a whole;-these points in the Grecian system are of equal interest in our own. Nor are those which have been touched upon in the Roman education less practical. The plastic power of domestic education without the interference of the state; the influence of mothers and of the whole female sex; the principle of utility in education, and the superior advantages which attend the cultivation of the moral part of our nature, are topics which must command the attention of all who are called to influence the opinions of their countrymen on this important subject. We boast ourselves the freest and best educated nation the world has ever seen. And doubtless we have many advanta ges of position, and some excellencies of character. But we make this boast with two little knowledge of ourselves, and a very limited acquaintance with facts. The truth is that as in theoretical education we are mere children, so in practical education we are only unskilful beginners. If the spirit of Plato were restored to this world, and instead of being transported to the classic soil of his native Greece, were set down in one of our villages, and after having been pointed to the place where our youth are prepared for the highest stage of their education, were told, "This is the Academy!" what think you he would say ? It may not be easy to determine what he would say, (for the Greeks were polished men,) but as his mind reverted to the graceful proportions, the fluted columns, and the embowering groves of the original Academus, we are sure he must think that his eye had lighted on a very imperfect imitation. If a Grecian of the age of Pericles were shown one of our school-houses-standing on or in the street, its windows broken, its steps gone, its door creaking, its one chair wrenched out of shape, its desk reeling to its fall,—and were informed that this is the place where our children are educated-where their faculties are developed, their taste formed, their first impressions of science received, and their intellectual character to a great extent fixed,-should he speak out his thoughts, it would be strange if he did not exclaim, "No wonder they are barbarians!" He would undoubtedly suppose himself in Scythia.* There is among us a great * Since this passage was indited, the writer has met with a description of the school-houses in one of the best counties of a state which, in respect to education, is second to none in the Union. It is by W. R. B. Hubbard, of Northampton, Massachusetts. A few sentences are here extracted: "In many districts, the poorest and most unsightly building that offends the eye of the traveller is the school-house. Is there some. where near the geographical centre of the district a gore of land unsuitable for cultivation-valueless as a building spot even for a blacksmith's shop-some sand bank, or some marsh, of which the frogs have held undisputed possession time out of mind, there you may expect to find a temple of science. There the youth of many generations are to congregate, and imbibe principles and acquire habits which will accompany work yet to be done in education. And the first if not the most important part of the work is to acquire a competent acquaintance with the subject. Theoretical knowledge must precede or accompany practical efforts, or they will be sadly misdirected. The people of Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, and some other portions of the Union have already taken in this matter important steps. In some of these states Boards of Education have been established, officers created, whose duty it is to spend their time for the improvement of education, and appropriations more or less liberal made to colleges, academies, and common schools. A beginningimperfect though it is-yet a beginning has been made. But there are still some states even in New England, and a much larger number in other parts of the country, which have hitherto sat by in silence and looked idly on. It is to be hoped, however, that this indifference will not be much longer continued. It may not be improper, in concluding this article, to bring into view a topic which there is here no room to examine at length, but which seems to us to deserve a more extensive and thorough examination than it has yet received. We refer to the question, "What in a national view is the legitimate connexion between education and religion?" Some, while they admit that physical and intellectual education are not sufficient to produce national morality, because this is not their object, nevertheless imagine that the end in view can be attained by the introduction of a code of ethics, and a suitable attention to moral education. If religion exists in the them through life. Most of the dwelling houses have an air of neatness and comfort; many have shade trees and ornamental shrubbery about them. But if you find a weather.beaten building, with its blinds swinging upon one hinge, or lying upon the ground-with clapboards flapping in the wind-with window panes filled with hats and shawls-with a pile of logs before the door, without a tree or shrub to relieve the eye, and every thing around indicating the march, not of mind, but of the destroyer; depend upon it, that is the place selected for the wooing of the muses. Some may think this an overdrawn picture, but it is from real life. Would that it existed only in imagination." community, it is, they think, sufficient without an attempt to introduce it into systems of education. Others believe that if national morality is to be secured, religion ought to be and must be a constituent element of national education. Even if they admit with M. Guizot,* that morality in its elements can be distinguished from religion, yet they deny that it can be sustained without religion by education of any kind or of all kinds. To us it appears that on this subject much is to be learned from antiquity. The importance of religion and the insufficiency of education without it to secure morality and give permanence to free institutions, are abundantly illustrated by the history of the two nations of which we have been speaking. Greece was educated, but her columns fell. In the midst of the most splendid developments of Grecian genius, the eloquence of Demosthenes could not save his country, because her morals were destroyed. Respecting the moral impotence of education in Greece we have the testimony of Professor Meiners. "But a sad observation is this, that in the very position in which the number and extent of the acquirements and arts in which the youth were instructed increased, education itself grew worse, and that the more their minds were accomplished with beautiful and rare arts and attainments, the more their morals and hearts were corrupted."+ Rome, when she knew but little, was virtuous and free. On the other hand, when she knew much, she was corrupted by vice and oppressed by arbitrary power. At the most enlightened period of Italian history, previous to the despotism of the Cæsars, Cato Uticensis, despairing of the liberties of Rome, bared his bosom to his sword.. We have said that the Roman education was in a moral view superior to the Athenian. The cultivation of the principle of reverence, the constant appeal to some rule of right or of decorum, and the elevation of maternal influence gave to the Roman education in this respect an advantage over the Greek. The moral tendencies of the mode of training youth at Rome were not without their salutary influence. But after all it was not these that fixed the moral character of the Romans, for that was formed by the religious institutions of Numa. It must be * History of Civilization p. 117. † Geschichte der Wissenschaften II: 63. SECOND SERIES, VOL. VIII. NO. I. 4 |