{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_40552/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_40552","id":"gutenberg_40552","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/40552","summary":null,"tags":["Aristotle, 384 BC-322 BC","Category: History - Ancient","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Teaching & Education","Education, Greek"],"text":"The Great Educators\n\nEdited by NICHOLAS MURRAY BUTLER\n\nARISTOTLE\n\nAND\n\nANCIENT EDUCATIONAL IDEALS\n\nBY\n\nTHOMAS DAVIDSON\n\nNEW YORK\nCHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS\n1892\n\n\n\n\nCOPYRIGHT, 1892, BY\nCHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS.\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE\n\n\nIn undertaking to treat of Aristotle as the expounder of ancient\neducational ideas, I might, with Kapp's _Aristoteles' Staatspaedagogik_\nbefore me, have made my task an easy one. I might simply have presented\nin an orderly way and with a little commentary, what is to be found on\nthe subject of education in his various works--Politics, Ethics,\nRhetoric, Poetics, etc. I had two reasons, however, for not adopting\nthis course: (1) that this work had been done, better than I could do\nit, in the treatise referred to, and (2) that a mere restatement of what\nAristotle says on education would hardly have shown his relation to\nancient pedagogy as a whole. I therefore judged it better, by tracing\nbriefly the whole history of Greek education up to Aristotle and down\nfrom Aristotle, to show the past which conditioned his theories and the\nfuture which was conditioned by them. Only thus, it seemed to me, could\nhis teachings be seen in their proper light. And I have found that this\nmethod has many advantages, of which I may mention one. It has enabled\nme to show the close connection that existed at all times between Greek\neducation and Greek social and political life, and to present the one\nas the reflection of the other. And this is no small advantage, since it\nis just from its relation to the whole of life that Greek education\nderives its chief interest for us. We can never, indeed, return to the\npurely political education of the Greeks; they themselves had to abandon\nthat, and, since then,\n\n A boundless hope has passed across the earth--\n\na hope which gives our education a meaning and a scope far wider than\nany that the State aims at; but in these days, when the State and the\ninstitution which embodies that hope are contending for the right to\neducate, it cannot but aid us in settling their respective claims, to\nfollow the process by which they came to have distinct claims at all,\nand to see just what these mean. This process, the method which I have\nfollowed has, I hope, enabled me, in some degree, to bring into\nclearness. This, at all events, has been one of my chief aims.\n\nIn treating of the details of Greek educational practice, I have been\nguided by a desire to present only, or mainly, those which contribute to\nmake up the complete picture. For this reason I have omitted all\nreference to the training for the Olympic and other games, this (so it\nseems to me) being no essential part of the system.\n\nIt would have been easy for me to give my book a learned appearance, by\ncheckering its pages with references to ancient authors, or quotations,\nin the original, from them; but this has seemed to me both unnecessary\nand unprofitable in a work intended for the general public. I have,\ntherefore, preferred to place at the heads of the different chapters,\nin English mostly, such quotations as seemed to express, in the most\nstriking way, the spirit of the different periods and theories of Greek\neducation. Taken together, I believe these quotations will be found to\npresent a fairly definite outline of the whole subject.\n\nIn conclusion, I would say that, though I have used a few modern works,\nsuch as those of Kapp and Grasberger, I have done so almost solely for\nthe sake of finding references. In regard to every point I believe I\nhave turned to the original sources. If, therefore, my conclusions on\ncertain points differ from those of writers of note who have preceded\nme, I can only say that I have tried to do my best with the original\nmaterials before me. I am far from flattering myself that I have reached\nthe truth in every case, and shall be very grateful for corrections, in\nwhatever spirit they may be offered; but I trust that I have been able\nto present in their essential features, the \"ancient ideals of\neducation.\"\n\n THOMAS DAVIDSON.\n\n \"Glenmore,\"\n Keene, Essex Co., N.Y.\n October, 1891.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\n BOOK I.\n\n INTRODUCTORY.\n PAGE\n\n CHAPTER I.\n Character and Ideal of Greek Education 3\n\n CHAPTER II.\n Branches of Greek Education 6\n\n CHAPTER III.\n Conditions of Education 9\n\n CHAPTER IV.\n Subjects of Education 12\n\n CHAPTER V.\n Education as Influenced by Time, Place,\n and Circumstances 15\n\n CHAPTER VI.\n Epochs in Greek Education 26\n\n\n BOOK II.\n\n THE HELLENIC PERIOD (B.C. 776-338).\n\n\n PART I.\n\n _THE \"OLD EDUCATION\"_ (B.C. 776-480).\n\n\n CHAPTER I.\n Education for Work and Leisure 33\n\n CHAPTER II.\n \u00c6olian or Theban Education 38\n\n CHAPTER III.\n Dorian or Spartan Education 41\n\n CHAPTER IV.\n Pythagoras 52\n\n CHAPTER V.\n Ionian or Athenian Education 60\n (1) Family Education 64\n (2) School Education 67\n (\u03b1) Musical (and Literary) Education 72\n (\u03b2) Gymnastics, or Bodily Training 77\n (\u03b3) Dancing 82\n (3) College Education 85\n (4) University Education 90\n\n\n PART II.\n\n _THE \"NEW EDUCATION\"_ (B.C. 480-338).\n\n\n CHAPTER I.\n Individualism and Philosophy 93\n\n CHAPTER II.\n Xenophon 114\n\n CHAPTER III.\n Plato 133\n\n\n BOOK III.\n\n ARISTOTLE (B.C. 384-322).\n\n\n CHAPTER I.\n His Life and Works 153\n\n CHAPTER II.\n His Philosophy 161\n\n CHAPTER III.\n His Theory of the State 166\n\n CHAPTER IV.\n His Pedagogical State 172\n\n CHAPTER V.\n Education during the first Seven Years 184\n\n CHAPTER VI.\n Education from Seven To Twenty-one 188\n\n CHAPTER VII.\n Education after Twenty-one 200\n\n\n BOOK IV.\n\n THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD (B.C. 338-A.D. 313).\n\n\n CHAPTER I.\n From Ethnic to Cosmopolitan Life 205\n\n CHAPTER II.\n Quintilian and Rhetorical Education 214\n\n CHAPTER III.\n Plotinus and Philosophic Education 225\n\n CHAPTER IV.\n Conclusion 231\n\n\n APPENDIX.\n The Seven Liberal Arts 239\n\n\n BIBLIOGRAPHY 249\n\n\n INDEX 253\n\n\n\n\nBOOK I\n\nINTRODUCTORY\n\n\n\n\nERRATA.\n\n\nPage 19, line 5 from below, insert 102.\n 53, \" 6 \" \" \" 133.\n 181, \" 14 \" \" for \"and\" read \"or.\"\n 250, \" 11 \" \" \" \"Watsno\" read \"Watson.\"\n\n\n\n\nARISTOTLE\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nCHARACTER AND IDEAL OF GREEK EDUCATION\n\n Nothing in excess!--Solon.\n\n No citizen has a right to consider himself as belonging to himself;\n but all ought to regard themselves as belonging to the State,\n inasmuch as each is a part of the State; and care for the part\n naturally looks to care for the whole.--Aristotle.\n\n\nGreek life, in all its manifestations, was dominated by a single idea,\nand that an \u00e6sthetic one. This idea, which worked sometimes consciously,\nsometimes unconsciously, was PROPORTION. The Greek term for this\n(_Logos_) not only came to designate the incarnate Word of Religion, but\nhas also supplied many modern languages with a name for the Science of\nManifested Reason--Logic. To the Greek, indeed, Reason always meant\nratio, proportion; and a rational life meant to him a life of which all\nthe parts, internal and external, stood to each other in just\nproportion. Such proportion was threefold; _first_, between the\ndifferent parts of the individual human being; _second_, between the\nindividual and his fellows in a social whole; _third_, between the\nhuman, as such, and the overruling divine. The realization of this\nthreefold harmony in the individual was called by the Greeks WORTH\n(\u1f08\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03ae, usually, but incorrectly, rendered Virtue). There has come down\nto us, from the pen of Aristotle, in whom all that was implicit in\nHellenism became explicit, a portion of a p\u00e6an addressed to this ideal.\nIt may be fitly inserted here, in a literal translation.\n\n\nTO WORTH.\n\n O Worth! stern taskmistress of human kind,\n Life's noblest prize:\n O Virgin! for thy beauty's sake\n It is an envied lot in Hellas even to die,\n And suffer toils devouring, unassuaged--\n So well dost thou direct the spirit\n To fruit immortal, better than gold\n And parents and soft-eyed sleep.\n For thy cause Jove-born Hercules and Leda's sons\n Much underwent, by deeds\n Thy power proclaiming.\n For love of thee Achilles and Ajax to Hades' halls went down.\n For thy dear beauty's sake Atarneus' nursling too widowed the glances\n of the sun.\n Therefore, as one renowned for deeds and deathless, him the Muses\n shall exalt,\n The daughters of Memory, exalting so the glory of Stranger-guarding\n Jove, and the honor of friendship firm.\n\nWith regard to this ideal, four things are especially noteworthy;\n_first_, that it took an exhaustive survey of man's nature and\nrelations; _second_, that it called for strong, persistent, heroic\neffort; _third_, that it tended to sink the individual in the social\nwhole and the universal order; _fourth_, that its aim was, on the whole,\na static perfection. The first two were merits; the second two,\ndemerits. The first merit prevented the Greeks from pursuing one-sided\nsystems of education; the second, from trying to turn education into a\nmeans of amusement. Aristotle says distinctly, \"Education ought\ncertainly not to be turned into a means of amusement; for young people\nare not playing when they are learning, since all learning is\naccompanied with pain.\" The first demerit was prejudicial to individual\nliberty, and therefore obstructive of the highest human development; the\nsecond encouraged Utopian dreams, which, being always of static\nconditions, undisturbed by the toils and throes essential to progress,\ntend to produce impatience of that slow advance whereby alone man\narrives at enduring results. To this tendency we owe such works as\nPlato's _Republic_ and Xenophon's _Education of Cyrus_.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nBRANCHES OF GREEK EDUCATION\n\n With thee the aged car-borne Peleus sent me on the day whereon from\n Phthia to Agamemnon he sent thee, a mere boy, not yet acquainted\n with mutual war or councils, in which men rise to distinction--for\n this end he sent me forth to teach thee all these things, to be a\n speaker of words and a doer of deeds.--(_Ph\u0153nix in_) Homer.\n\n Above all and by every means we provide that our citizens shall have\n good souls and strong bodies.--Lucian.\n\n\nLife is the original school--life, domestic and social. All other\nschools merely exercise functions delegated by the family and by\nsociety, and it is not until the latter has reached such a state of\ncomplication as to necessitate a division of labor that special schools\nexist. Among the Homeric Greeks we find no mention of schools, and the\nonly person recorded as having had a tutor is Achilles, who was sent\naway from home so early in life as to be deprived of that education\nwhich he would naturally have received from his father. In what that\neducation consisted, we learn from the first quotation at the head of\nthis chapter. It consisted in such training as would make the pupil \"a\nspeaker of words and a doer of deeds\"--a man eloquent and persuasive in\ncouncil, and brave and resolute on the field of battle. For these ends\nhe required, as Lucian says, a good soul and a strong body.\n\nThese expressions mark the two great divisions into which Greek\neducation at all periods fell--MENTAL EDUCATION and PHYSICAL\nEDUCATION--as well as their original aims, viz. goodness (that is,\nbravery) of soul and strength of body. As time went on, these aims\nunderwent considerable changes, and consequently the means for attaining\nthem considerable modifications and extensions. Physical education aimed\nmore and more at beauty and grace, instead of strength, while mental\neducation, in its effort to extend itself to all the powers of the mind,\ndivided itself into literary and musical education.\n\nAs we have seen, the Greeks aimed at developing all the powers of the\nhuman being in due proportion and harmony. But, in course of time, they\ndiscovered that the human creature comes into the world with his powers,\nnot only undeveloped, but already disordered and inharmonious; that not\nonly do the germs of manhood require to be carefully watched and tended,\nbut also that the ground in which they are to grow must be cleared from\nan overgrowth of choking weeds, before education can be undertaken with\nany hope of success. This clearing process was called by the later\nGreeks _Katharsis_, or Purgation, and played an ever-increasing part in\ntheir pedagogical systems. It was supposed to do for man's emotional\nnature what Medicine undertook to do for his body. The means employed\nwere mainly music and the kindred arts, which the ancients believed to\nexert what we should now call a d\u00e6monic effect upon the soul, drawing\noff the exciting causes of disturbing passion, and leaving it in\ncomplete possession of itself. It would hardly be too much to say that\nthe power to exert this purgative influence on the soul was regarded by\nthe ancients as the chief function and end of the Fine Arts. Such was\ncertainly Aristotle's opinion.\n\nWhen purgation and the twofold education of body and mind had produced\ntheir perfect work, the result was what the Greeks called _Kalokagathia_\n(\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03ba\u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u03af\u03b1) that is, Fair-and-Goodness. Either half of this ideal was\nnamed \u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03ae (_aret\u00ea_), Worth or Excellence. We are expressly told by\nAristotle (_Categories_, chap. viii.) that the adjective to \u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03ae is\n\u03c3\u03c0\u03bf\u03c5\u03b4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03c2 (_spoudaios_), a word which we usually render into English by\n\"earnest.\" And we do so with reason; for to the Greek, Excellence or\nWorth meant, above all, earnestness, genuineness, truthfulness,\nthoroughness, absence of frivolity.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nCONDITIONS OF EDUCATION\n\n Some hold that men become good by nature, others by training, others\n by instruction. The part that is due to nature obviously does not\n depend upon us, but is imparted through certain divine causes to the\n truly fortunate.--Aristotle.\n\n It is not merely begetting that makes the father, but also the\n imparting of a noble education.--John Chrysostom.\n\n There are two sorts of education, the one divine, the other human.\n The divine is great and strong and easy; the human small and weak\n and beset with many dangers and delusions. Nevertheless, the latter\n must be added to the former, if a right result is to be\n reached.--Dion Chrysostom.\n\n The same thing that we are wont to assert regarding the arts and\n sciences, may be asserted regarding moral worth, viz. that the\n production of a completely just character demands three\n conditions--nature, reason, and habit. By \"reason\" I mean\n instruction, by \"habit,\" training.... Nature without instruction is\n blind; instruction without nature, helpless; exercise (training)\n without both, aimless.--Plutarch.\n\n\nTo the realization of their ideal in any individual the Greeks conceived\nthree conditions to be necessary, (1) a noble nature, (2) persistent\nexercise or training in right action, (3) careful instruction. If any\none of these was lacking, the highest result could not be attained.\n\n(1) To be well or nobly born was regarded by the Greeks as one of the\nbest gifts of the gods. Aristotle defines noble birth as \"ancient wealth\nand worth,\" and this fairly enough expresses the Greek view generally.\nNaturally enough, therefore, the Greek in marrying looked above all\nthings to the chances of a worthy offspring. Indeed, it may be fairly\nsaid that the purpose of the Greek in marriage was, not so much to\nsecure a helpmeet for himself as to find a worthy mother for his\nchildren. In Greece, as everywhere else in the ancient world, marriage\nwas looked upon solely as an arrangement for the procreation and rearing\nof offspring. The romantic, pathological love-element, which plays so\nimportant a part in modern match-making, was almost entirely absent\namong the Greeks. What love there was, assumed either the noble form of\nenthusiastic friendship or the base one of free lust. In spite of this,\nand of the fact that woman was regarded as a means and not as an end,\nthe relations between Greek husbands and wives were very often such as\nto render the family a school of virtue for the children. They were\nnoble, sweet, and strong,--all the more so, it should seem, that they\nwere based, not upon a delusive sentimentality, but upon reason and a\nsense of reciprocal duty.\n\n(2) The value of exercise, practice, habituation, seems to have been far\nbetter understood by the ancients than by the moderns. Whatever a man\nhas to do, be it speaking, swimming, playing, or fighting, he can learn\nonly by doing it; this was a universally accepted maxim. The modern\nhabit of trying to teach languages and virtues by rules, not preceded by\nextensive practice, would have seemed to the ancients as absurd as the\nnotion that a man could learn to swim before going into the water.\nPractice first; theory afterwards: do the deed, and ye shall know of\nthe doctrine--so said ancient Wisdom, to which the notion that children\nshould not be called upon to perform any act, or submit to any\nrestriction, without having the grounds thereof explained to them, would\nhave seemed the complete inversion of all scientific method. It was by\ninsisting upon a certain practice in children, on the ground of simple\nauthority, that the ancients sought to inculcate the virtues of\nreverence for experience and worth, and respect for law.\n\n(3) The work begun by nature, and continued by habit or exercise, was\ncompleted and crowned by instruction. This had, according to the Greek,\ntwo functions, (_a_) to make action free, by making it rational, (_b_)\nto make possible an advance to original action. Nature and habit left\nmen thralls, governed by instincts and prescriptions; instruction,\nrevelation of the grounds of action, set them free. Such freedom, based\non insight, was to the thinkers of Greece the realization of manhood, or\nrather, of the divine in man. \"The truth shall make you free\"--no one\nunderstood this better than they. Hence, with all their steady\ninsistence upon practice in education, they never regarded it as the\nultimate end, or as any end at all, except when guided by insight, the\nfruit of instruction. A practicality leading to no widening of the\nspiritual horizon, to no freeing insight, was to them illiberal,\nslavish, paltry--\"banausic,\" they said,--degrading both to body and\nsoul.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nSUBJECTS FOR EDUCATION\n\n It is right that Greeks should rule over barbarians, but not\n barbarians over Greeks; for those are slaves, but these are free\n men.--Euripides.\n\n Barbarian and slave are by nature the same.--Aristotle.\n\n Nature endeavors to make the bodies of freemen and slaves different;\n the latter strong for necessary use, the former erect and useless\n for such operations, but useful for political life.... It is\n evident, then, that by nature some men are free, others slaves, and\n that, in the case of the latter, slavery is both beneficial and\n just.--_Id._\n\n Instruction, though it plainly has power to direct and stimulate the\n generous among the young ... is as plainly powerless to turn the\n mass of men to nobility and goodness (_Kalokagathia_). For it is not\n in their nature to be guided by reverence, but by fear, nor to\n abstain from low things because they are disgraceful, but (only)\n because they entail punishment.--_Id._\n\n\nIn thinking of Greek education as furnishing a possible model for us\nmoderns, there is one point which it is important to bear in mind: Greek\neducation was intended only for the few, for the wealthy and well-born.\nUpon all others, upon slaves, barbarians, the working and trading\nclasses, and generally upon all persons spending their lives in pursuit\nof wealth or any private ends whatsoever, it would have seemed to be\nthrown away. Even well-born women were generally excluded from most of\nits benefits. The subjects of education were the sons of full citizens,\nthemselves preparing to be full citizens, and to exercise all the\nfunctions of such. The duties of such persons were completely summed up\nunder two heads, duties to the family and duties to the State, or, as\nthe Greeks said, \u0153conomic and political duties. The free citizen not\nonly acknowledged no other duties besides these, but he looked down upon\npersons who sought occupation in any other sphere. \u0152conomy and Politics,\nhowever, were very comprehensive terms. The former included the three\nrelations of husband to wife, father to children, and master to slaves\nand property; the latter, three public functions, legislative,\nadministrative, and judiciary. All occupations not included under these\nsix heads the free citizen left to slaves or resident foreigners.\nMoney-making, in the modern sense, he despised, and, if he devoted\nhimself to art or philosophy, he did so only for the benefit of the\nState. If he improved the patrimony which was the condition of his free\ncitizenship, he did so, not by chaffering or money-lending, but by\njudicious management, and by kindly, but firm, treatment of his slaves.\nIf he performed any great artistic service to the State--for example, if\nhe wrote a tragedy for a State religious festival (and plays were never\nwritten for any other purpose)--the only reward he looked forward to was\na crown of olive or laurel and the respect of his fellow-citizens.\n\nThe Greeks divided mankind, in all the relations of life, into two\ndistinct classes, a governing and a governed, and considered the former\nalone as the subject of education; the latter being a mere instrument in\nits hands. The governing class required education in order that it\nmight govern itself and the other class, in accordance with reason and\njustice; that other, receiving its guidance from the governing class,\nrequired no education, or only such as would enable it to obey. It\nfollowed that the duty of the governing class was to govern; of the\ngoverned, to obey. Only in this correlation of duties did each class\nfind its usefulness and satisfaction. Any attempt to disturb or invert\nthis correlation was a wilful running in the teeth of the laws of\nnature, a rebellion against the divine order of things.\n\nAs husband, father, master in the family, and as legislator, officer,\njudge in the State, each member of the governing class found his proper\nrange of activities; and he did wrong, degrading himself to the level of\nthe serving class, if he sought any other. This view, in a more or less\nconscious form, pervades the whole ancient world, conditioning all its\nnotions and theories of education; and Paul the Apostle only echoed it\nwhen he said to wives: \"Wives, be in subjection to your own husbands as\nto the Lord\"; to children: \"Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for\nthis is right\"; and to slaves: \"Slaves, be obedient unto them that\naccording to the flesh are your masters with fear and trembling, in\nsingleness of heart, as unto Christ.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nEDUCATION AS INFLUENCED BY TIME, PLACE, AND CIRCUMSTANCES\n\n The peculiar character of each form of government is what\n establishes it at the beginning and what usually preserves it....\n Since the whole State has but one end, it is plainly necessary that\n there should be one education for all the citizens.--Aristotle.\n\n\nEducation among the Greeks, as among every other progressive people,\nvaried with times and circumstances. The education of the Homeric Greeks\nwas not that of the Athenians in the days of Aristotle, nor the latter\nthe same as the education of the contemporary Spartans or Thebans.\nMoreover, the education actually imparted was not the same as that\ndemanded or recommended by philosophers and writers on pedagogics. It is\ntrue that the aim was always the same; Worth, Excellence,\nFair-and-Goodness (\u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03ae, \u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03ba\u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u03af\u03b1); but this was differently\nconceived and differently striven after at different times and in\ndifferent places.\n\nAmong the Homeric Greeks, as we have seen, education, being purely\npractical, aiming only at making its subject \"a speaker of words and a\ndoer of deeds,\" was acquired in the actual intercourse and struggles of\nlife. The simple conditions of their existence demanded no other\neducation and, consequently, no special educational institutions. These\nconditions, as described by Homer, though by no means barbarous, are\nprimitive. Nomadism has long been left behind and the later\nvillage-communities have been mostly merged in walled towns, generally\nsituated at some distance from the shore, on or near a hill, whose\nsummit forms a citadel for refuge in cases of danger. Even in the most\nadvanced of these towns, however, the type of civilization is still\nlargely patriarchal. The government is in the hands of chiefs or kings\n(\u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u1fc6\u03b5\u03c2) claiming to be born and bred of Jove, as, indeed, in a sense,\nthey were, since they ruled quite as much by right of personal worth,\nwhich more than anything is due to the grace of God, as by hereditary\ntitle. Worth in those days consisted in physical strength, courage,\nbeauty, judgment, and power to address an assembly, and any king proving\ndeficient in these qualities would soon have found his position\ninsecure, or been compelled to fortify it by lawless tyranny. The\nfunctions devolving upon the king were mainly three, those of judge,\nmilitary commander, and priest. The first required judgment and ready\nspeech; the second, strength and intelligent courage; the third,\npersonal beauty and dignity. Though the kings were allowed to exercise\ngreat power, this was not irresponsible or arbitrary. On the contrary,\nit was compatible with great public freedom in speech and action.\nSlavery existed only to a limited extent and in a mild form. All free\nheads of families, however poor, had a right to attend the popular\nassembly, which the king consulted on all important matters, and at\nwhich the fre\u00ebst discussion was allowed. When the kings exercised\njudicial power, they did so in accordance with certain _themistes_ or\nlaws, held to have originated with Zeus, and not according to their own\ncaprice. As there was little commerce in those days, the inhabitants of\nthe ancient cities, when not engaged in warfare, devoted themselves\nchiefly to agriculture, cattle-raising, and the useful arts. In these\neven the kings thought it no shame to engage. We find Paris helping to\nbuild his own palace, Odysseus constructing his own bed, Lycaon cutting\nwood to make chariot-rails, and so on. Similarly, we find Helen and\nother princesses spinning and weaving, while Nausicaa, the daughter of\nthe Ph\u00e6acian king, washes the clothes of the family.\n\nIn such a primitive society, unacquainted with letters, the higher\neducation found but few aspirants. The only persons of scientific\npretensions mentioned by Homer are the physicians (who are likewise\nsurgeons) and the soothsayers. The former are highly appreciated, and\nare always chiefs. The soothsayers are the exponents of divine omens to\nthe community, and occupy a kind of official position, like the Hebrew\nprophets. No artists, strictly speaking, are mentioned by Homer, except\nthe bard, and he is much honored, as historian, teacher, and inspirer.\nWe find, indeed, that Achilles and Paris are proficients in music; but\nsuch cases seem exceptional. Of artisans, several are mentioned--the\nworker in wood, the worker in horn and ivory, the potter (who uses the\nwheel), and so on. The existence of others is implied--the weaver, the\nmason, the metal-worker, etc.\n\nIf there were no special schools in the heroic age, life was so lived as\nto be an excellent school. Then, as at all other times, it was\nextremely social, far more so than our modern life. This was due chiefly\nto three causes, (1) the smallness of the states, which made it possible\nfor every citizen to know, and to feel his solidarity with, every other,\n(2) the absence of titles and formalities, which had not yet been\nintroduced from the East, (3) the fact that the people, especially the\nmen, spent the greater part of the day in the open air,--in the streets\nand agora,--and so were continually rubbing against each other. This\nsociality had much to do with the shaping of the Greek character, the\nsalient elements of which are thus enumerated by Zeller, the historian\nof Greek philosophy: \"A strong sense of freedom, combined with a rare\nsusceptibility to proportion, form, and order, a keen relish for\ncompanionship in life and action, a social tendency which compelled the\nindividual to combine with others, to submit to the general will, to\nfollow the traditions of his family and his community.\"\n\nBetween the simple social condition described by Homer and that for\nwhich Aristotle wrote, there intervened a period of at least six hundred\nyears. During that time many great changes took place in the social and\npolitical life of the Greeks, demanding corresponding changes in\neducation. These changes were due to several causes, (1) the natural\nhuman tendency toward freedom, (2) the influence of foreign nations, (3)\nthe development of commerce, (4) the introduction of letters, (5) the\nrise of philosophy, (6) the Persian Wars. Though all these are closely\ninterwoven with each other, there can be no harm in treating them\nseparately.\n\n(1) The tendency toward freedom, so essentially characteristic of human\nnature, was especially so of the nature of the Greeks. Among them it\nrapidly manifested itself in an ordered series of political forms,\nbeginning with patriarchalism, and ending variously in the various\nstates and races. There is, indeed, hardly a single form of political\nlife that was not realized among the Greeks at some time or place. It\nwas this that made it possible for Aristotle to write a work on Politics\nwhich, in the words of a recent political writer, \"has remained for two\nthousand years one of the purest sources of political wisdom.\"\n\nThe varied and changeful political life of the Greeks was in itself a\ngreat education. It made them aware of the principles, political and\nethical, upon which society rests, and rendered necessary a faculty of\nclear and ready expression, which reacted most favorably upon their\nintellectual and \u00e6sthetic faculties. It was in the school of practical\npolitics that the Greeks acquired their rhetoric; and Aristotle, in his\ntreatise on Poetry, tells us that, while \"the older poets made their\ncharacters talk like statesmen, the later ones made theirs talk like\nrhetoricians.\" Not only, indeed, did political life react upon the\ndrama, but, in developing rhetoric, it drew attention to language and\nled to the sciences of grammar and logic, both of which were thus called\ninto existence by real social needs (see p. 102).\n\n(2) Greece, lying, as it did, between three continents, and in the\nthoroughfare of the ancient nations, could hardly fail to be visited by\nmany different races, or, considering its beauty and commercial\nadvantages, to be coveted by them. From this followed two consequences,\n(_a_) that the Greeks were a very mixed race, (_b_) that they were, from\nthe first and at all times, in manifold contact with foreign peoples.\nThat they were a mixed race, is attested alike by their language, their\nmythology, and their legends. That they were in close and continual\ncommunication with foreign peoples, is rendered evident by their\nalphabet, their art, and the direct statements of their historians.\nAlthough it is true that the Greeks, especially after the Persian Wars,\nregarded themselves as a superior and chosen people, calling all others\n\"barbarians,\" and considering them as fit only to be slaves, it is not\nthe less true that hardly one of all the arts and sciences which they\nultimately carried to a high degree of perfection had its origin in\nGreece proper. All appear first in the colonies settled among\n\"barbarians,\"--in Egypt, Asia Minor, Thrace, Crete, Sicily, or Italy.\nArchitecture, sculpture, painting, poetry--epic, lyric, dramatic--music,\nhistory, politics, philosophy, were all borrowed, transformed, and, with\nthe exception perhaps of tragedy and painting, carried to a high degree\nof excellence in the colonies, before they were transplanted to the\nmother-country. It is beyond any doubt that even the Homeric legends are\nof \"barbarian\" origin, though from what people they were borrowed is\nuncertain. It was the plasticity and versatility of their character, due\nin part to their mixed blood, that, by enabling them to appropriate and\nassimilate the arts and sciences of their neighbors, raised the Greeks\nto a new plane of civilization and made them the initiators of a new\nepoch in history, the epoch of life according to reason. Sir Henry\nSumner Maine says, \"Except the blind forces of Nature, nothing moves in\nthis world which is not Greek in its origin.\"\n\n(3) It was chiefly through commerce that the arts and sciences borrowed\nby the colonial Greeks found their way into Greece proper. That foreign\nart-objects were introduced into it at an early period, is rendered\ncertain by the recent discoveries at Mycen\u00e6, Sparta, and other places,\nas well as by statements in the Homeric poems. That these were followed\nlater by artists, bringing with them foreign art-processes and\nappliances, is equally certain. The earliest sculptors whose names are\nknown to us, Dip\u0153nis and Scyllis, were natives of Crete, settled in\nSicyon; and the earliest poetic guild of which we have any mention is\nthat of the Homerid\u00e6 in the island of Chios. But, besides introducing\nart and artists into Greece, commerce tended to educate the Greeks in\nother ways. It made them acquainted with foreign manners and luxuries,\nand forced them to learn the arts of navigation, ship-building and\nexchange, which again rendered necessary an acquaintance with arithmetic\nand the art of writing. And this leads us to\n\n(4) The Introduction of Letters. This event, the date of which is\nuncertain, not only exercised a most furthering influence on the arts\nand sciences, but gave rise to a new branch of education. Letters were\nprobably first used for diplomatic and trade purposes, then for\ninscriptions, and last of all for the perpetuation of literary\nproductions. So much of a change did they effect in Greek education that\neven in the best times the whole of the literary and scientific\neducation was called simply \"letters\" (\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1). As late as the time of\nPlato letters seem to have been considered a part of Music, and to have\nbeen taught by the same teacher as the latter; but Aristotle already\ndistinguishes the two. It is extremely probable that the introduction of\nletters was the immediate cause of the establishment of schools for\nyouth; for we find no mention of them prior to that event.\n\n(5) The introduction of letters was closely followed by the rise of\nPhilosophy, or the reflective spirit. Up to about the year 600 B.C., the\nGreeks, like the rest of the world, lived by habit, tradition, and\nprescription, handed on, with little or no criticism, from generation to\ngeneration. Their ideal world was shaped by the works of Homer and\nHesiod. \"Hesiod is the teacher of most,\" says Heraclitus. About the date\nnamed, however, society having advanced to a condition of organization\nwhich made possible a leisure class, there begins to appear a new\nspirit, destined to revolutionize, not only Greece, but the whole world.\nArmed with a _what?_ a _which?_ a _why?_ and a _wherefore_? it no longer\nblindly accepts the world of nature and man, but calls upon it to give\nan account of itself. Science, philosophy, and art are the result.\n\nAt first the new spirit turns to nature with a _what?_; but, gradually\ndiscovering that the answer to this brings no complete explanation of\nthe world, it propounds its other questions. It thus arrives at a\nconsciousness of four distinguishable elements in the constitution of\nthings,--four causes (\u03b1\u1f34\u03c4\u03b9\u03b1, \u03b1\u1f30\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03b9), as they were termed,--(1) matter,\n(2) form, (3) efficiency, (4) end or aim. At the same time, and by the\nsame process, it is forced to a recognition of the presence of reason\n(\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2) and intelligence (\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2) in the world, since form, efficiency,\nand aim all presuppose both. It is thus compelled to turn from nature to\nman, and man's mind, as the highest known expression of reason and\nintelligence, and to devote itself to the consideration of spirit, as\nalone promising any true explanation of the world. The process is a slow\nand difficult one, and the history of it is the history of Greek\nscience, philosophy, and art.\n\nBefore the rise of philosophy, the teacher of the people had been the\nrhapsode, or public reciter; after that event he gradually gives place\nto the sophist (\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2, one who makes wise), or, as he later with more\nmodesty calls himself, the philosopher (\u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03cc\u03c3\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03c2, lover of wisdom). The\nhistory of Greece for centuries is, on its inner side, a history of the\nstruggle between what the rhapsode represents and what the philosopher\nrepresents, between popular tradition and common sense on the one hand,\nand individual opinion and philosophy on the other. The transition from\nthe first to the second of these mental conditions was accomplished for\nthe world, once for all, by the Greeks, and the turning-point in the\nprocess is marked by\n\n(6) The Persian Wars (B.C. 490-479). The victories gained in these at\nMarathon, Salamis, and Plat\u00e6\u00e6, victories the most brilliant that history\nrecords, exerted a most powerful influence upon the thought and life of\nthe Greeks. The consciousness of having, with their small numbers, over\nand over again, both by land and by sea, discomfited and crushed the\ncountless hosts of an empire which for generations had threatened their\npeace and liberty, made them at once feel the superiority of their own\ncharacters and civil institutions to those of the Persians, and draw a\nclear line of demarcation between Greek and barbarian. From this point\non, they felt themselves to be a chosen people, a nation destined by the\ngods to rule all others. \"The soul of Greece had conquered the bulk of\nPersia.\" Persia was bulk and body; Greece was soul and spirit. This\nconviction appears at once in all the departments of Greek life. In the\nsphere of art we may instance the _Prometheia_ of \u00c6schylus and the\nParthenon. In the former, what does the conflict between Zeus and\nPrometheus mean but the conflict between Greek spirituality, intellect,\nand freedom, on the one hand, and barbarian materiality, instinct, and\nthraldom or necessity, on the other? And what is the latter but a\nmatchless p\u00e6an in stone to Divine Wisdom, as the conqueror of brute\nforce? In the sphere of thought, we find Parmenides, Anaxagoras and,\nabove all, Socrates (born ten years after the second Persian War),\nturning consciously to the study of spirit. \"To be and to think are the\nsame thing,\" says the first of these: \"All things were confused; then\nMind came and reduced them to order,\" says the second; \"Know thyself\" is\nthe chosen motto of the third. In the political sphere we find the\nAthenians trying to make the State an instrument of intelligence and\nvirtue, and insisting upon education as a means thereto. Other and less\ndesirable results followed from the Persian Wars; but these can be\nbetter stated and estimated in another connection.\n\nSuch were the chief causes that contributed to transform the simple\npatriarchal State of the Homeric Greeks, with its purely practical\neducation at home and in the field, into the free polity of the Greeks\nof the days of Miltiades, Themistocles, and \u00c6schylus, with its\ncomplicated institutions and manifold education. It has seemed better to\nenumerate these causes than to try to trace the steps of the\ntransformation itself. Indeed this would have been a hopeless task,\nowing to the lack of historical data.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI\n\nEPOCHS IN GREEK EDUCATION\n\n When they (our ancestors) began to enjoy leisure for thought, as the\n result of easy circumstances, and to cherish more exalted ideas with\n respect to worth, and especially when, in the period before and\n after the Persian Wars, they came to entertain a high opinion of\n themselves, on account of their achievements, they pursued all kinds\n of education, making no distinction, but beating about\n generally.--Aristotle.\n\n\nIn treating of Greek education subsequent to the introduction of letters\nand the establishment of schools, we shall be obliged, in the interest\nof clearness, to make three distinctions:--\n\n(1) Between the educational systems of different periods.\n\n(2) Between the educational systems of different peoples and states.\n\n(3) Between the education actually imparted in the various states, and\nthat recommended by theorists or philosophers.\n\nIn pursuance of the first, it will be convenient first to distinguish\ntwo main periods, the Hellenic, and the Hellenistic, and then to\nsubdivide these into minor periods.\n\nI. _The Hellenic Period_ (776-338 B.C.). This includes, roughly\nspeaking, the whole historic life of free Greece, from the date of the\nfirst Olympiad to that of the absorption of Greece into the Macedonian\nEmpire. It naturally subdivides itself into two periods, (_a_) 776-450;\n(_b_) 450-338.\n\n(_a_) That of the \"Old Education,\" authoritative and puritanical, whose\naim was the training of good citizens, god-fearing, law-abiding,\npatriotic, and brave.\n\n(_b_) That of the \"New Education,\" rationalistic and \"liberal,\" whose\naim was the training of formidable individuals, self-centred,\nlaw-despising, time-serving, and cunning.\n\nIt is in the struggle between the two systems, and in the practical\ntriumph of the latter, that Greece loses her moral fibre; so that her\ncitizens, weakened through sundering selfishness, fall an easy prey to\nthe foreign invader.\n\nII. _The Hellenistic Period_ (338 B.C.-313 A.D.). This extends from the\nBattle of Ch\u00e6ronea, in which Greece lost her independence, to the\ndefinitive triumph of Christianity, which brought a new ideal and a new\nspirit into life and education. It naturally subdivides itself into two\nperiods, (_a_) B.C. 338-146; (_b_) B.C. 146-A.D. 313.\n\n(_a_) The Macedonian Period, during which Macedonian influence\nprevailed, and Greek thought and education, absorbing foreign, chiefly\nOriental, elements, tended toward an encyclop\u00e6dic cosmopolitanism.\nDuring this period, Alexandria is the centre of Greek influence.\n\n(_b_) The Roman Period, during which, as Horace says, \"Captive Greece\ntook captive her rude conqueror,\" and Rome became, alongside Alexandria,\na diffusive centre of Greek thought, art, and education.\n\nBetween the two great periods, the Hellenic and the Hellenistic, stands\nthe man who draws up the testament of the former and outlines the\nprogramme of the latter, the Macedonian Greek, Aristotle.\n\nOur second distinction will lead us to treat separately, in the Hellenic\nperiod, the educational system of the three Greek races, (1) the \u00c6olic,\n(2) the Doric, (3) the Ionic, the first having its chief centre at\nThebes, the second at Sparta, the third at Athens. For an account of the\neducation of the first our data are but meagre; with the main features\nof Spartan and Athenian education we are well acquainted. In education,\nas in everything, Sparta was conservative, socialistic, and\naristocratic, while Athens tended to liberalism, individualism, and\ndemocracy. Hence Sparta clung desperately to the \"Old Education,\" and\nalmost closed her doors against art, letters, and philosophy, while\nAthens, dragged into the \"New Education,\" became the home of all these.\nIt must always be borne in mind that, in favoring individualism and the\n\"New Education,\" Athens was abandoning the Hellenic ideal, and paving\nthe way for the cosmopolitanism of the Hellenistic period. In this\nlatter, we shall have to distinguish between the educational systems of\nAthens, Alexandria, and Rome.\n\nOur third distinction is that between individual theory and popular\npractice. In all epochs of their history the Greek states produced men\nwho strove to realize in thought and imagination the ideal of their\npeople, and to exhibit it as an aim, an encouragement, and an\ninspiration, in contrast with the imperfect actual. In more than one\ncase this ideal modified the education of the following periods. Of\ncourse, such theories did not arise until practice was compelled to\ndefend itself by producing sanctions, either in religion or in reason,\nand it may perhaps be affirmed that the aim of them all was to discover\nsuch sanctions for the Greek ideal. Among the many educational theorists\nof Greece, there are six who especially deserve to be considered: (1)\nPythagoras, who in Southern Italy sought to graft on the Doric ideal a\nhalf-mystical, half-ethical theology, and a mathematical theory of the\nphysical world; (2) Xenophon, who sought to secure the same ideal by\nconnecting it with a monarchical form of government; (3) Plato, who\nsought to elevate it, and find a sanction for it in his theory of\nsuper-sensuous ideas; (4) ARISTOTLE, who presented in all its fulness\nthe Hellenic ideal, and sought to find sanctions for it in history,\nsocial well-being, and the promise of a higher life; (5) Quintilian,\nwho, in Rome, embodies the rhetorical or worldly education of the\nHellenistic period; and (6) Plotinus, who presents an ideal of\nphilosophical or other-worldly education, and paves the way for the\ntriumph of Christian dogma.\n\n\n\n\nBOOK II\n\nTHE HELLENIC PERIOD (B.C. 776-338)\n\n\n\n\nPART I\n\nTHE \"OLD EDUCATION\" (B.C. 776-480)\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nEDUCATION FOR WORK AND FOR LEISURE\n\n When we consider the different arts that have been discovered, and\n distinguish between those which relate to the necessary conditions\n of life and those which contribute to the free enjoyment of it\n (\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae), we always consider the man who is acquainted with the\n latter wiser than him who is acquainted with the former, for the\n reason that the sciences of the latter have no reference to use.\n Hence it was only when all the necessary conditions of life had been\n attained that those arts were discovered which have no reference\n either to pleasure or to the common needs of life; and this took\n place first in those countries where men enjoyed\n leisure.--Aristotle.\n\n The free life of God is such as are our brief best moments.--_Id._\n\n It is not fitting that the free enjoyment of life should be\n permitted to boys or to young persons; for the crown of perfection\n belongs not to the imperfect.--_Id._\n\n Obviously, the free enjoyment of life demands not only the noble but\n also the pleasant; for happiness consists of these too.--_Id._\n\n\nAmong the Homeric Greeks, whose life was almost entirely devoted to\npractical pursuits, education was mainly practical, aiming to produce \"a\nspeaker of words and a doer of deeds.\" As civilization advanced, and\nhigher political forms were evolved, certain classes of men found\nthemselves blessed with leisure which they were not inclined to devote\nto mere play. In order to make a worthy use of this leisure, they\nrequired a certain training in those arts which were regarded as\nbefitting a free man. Education, accordingly, in some states, widened\nits scope, to include those accomplishments, which enable men to fill\ntheir hours of freedom with refined and gracious enjoyment--music and\nletters. Music, indeed, had been cultivated long before, not only by\nprofessional bards, but even by princes, like Achilles and Paris; this,\nhowever, was for the sake of amusement and recreation rather than of the\nfree enjoyment of life. It had been regarded as a means, not as an end.\nWe must be careful, in our study of Greek life and education, not to\nconfound play and recreation, which are for the sake of work, with the\nfree enjoyment of life, which is an end in itself, and to which all work\nis but a means. \"Enjoyment is the end.\" We shall see, as we proceed, to\nwhat momentous results this distinction leads, how it governs not only\nall education but all the institutions of life, and how it finally\ncontributes to break up the whole civilization which it determines. It\nmay fairly be said that Greece perished because she placed the end of\nlife in individual \u00e6sthetic enjoyment, possible only for a few and\nregarding only the few.\n\nIn historic Greece, music came to be an essential part of the education\nof every free man. Even free women learnt it. Along with music went\npoetry, and when this came to be written down, it was termed \"letters.\"\nAs every free man came to be his own minstrel and his own rhapsode, the\nprofessional minstrel and rhapsode disappeared, and the Homeric poems\neven, in order to be preserved from oblivion, were committed to writing\nby an enlightened tyrant--Pisistratus.\n\nThe first portion of the Greek people that attained a degree of\ncivilization demanding an education for hours of leisure, was the \u00c6olian\nrace, and particularly the Asiatic portion of it. Accordingly we find\nthat all the earliest musicians and poets, didactic and lyric, are\n\u00c6olians--Hesiod, Terpander, Arion, Alc\u00e6us, Sappho, Pittacus, etc. Lesbos\nseems to have taken the lead in this \"higher education.\" The last five\nnames all belong to that island, which produced also the earliest Greek\nhistorian and prose-writer--Hellanicus. But the \u00c6olians, though earliest\nin the field, were soon outstripped by the other two races, the Doric\nand the Ionic. \u00c6olian education and culture never advanced beyond music\nand lyric poetry. It knew no drama, science, or philosophy.\n\nThe \u00c6olians were followed, almost simultaneously, by the Dorians and\nIonians, who pursued two widely divergent directions. The former\nborrowed the lyric education and culture of the \u00c6olians, and produced\nseveral lyric poets of distinguished merit--Tyrt\u00e6us, Alcman, Ibycus,\nStesichorus: nay, they even advanced far enough to take the first steps\nin science, philosophy, and dramatic poetry. Pythagoras, Epicharmus,\nSophron, Xenarchus, and Susarion were all Dorians. But the progress of\nthe race was retarded and finally checked by rigid political\ninstitutions of a socialistic character, which, by suppressing\nindividual initiative, reduced the whole to immobility.\n\nThe Ionians, on the contrary, borrowing freely from both \u00c6olians and\nDorians, and evolving ever freer and freer institutions, carried\neducation and culture to a point which has never been passed, and\nrarely, if ever, reached, in the history of our race. And when they\nceased to grow, and decay set in, this was due to exactly the opposite\ncause to that which stunted them among the Dorians; namely, to excessive\nindividualism, misnamed liberty. Individualism ruined Athens.\n\nAlthough education assumed different forms among different portions of\nthe Greek race, there are certain features that seem to have been common\nto all these forms during the epoch of the \"Old Education.\" Two of these\ndeserve attention.\n\n_First._ Education was everywhere a branch of statecraft, and the State\nitself was only the highest educational institution. This was equally\ntrue whether the schools were public, as at Sparta, or private, as at\nAthens. Everywhere citizenship was a degree, conferred only upon sons of\nfree citizens, after a satisfactory examination (\u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1).\n\n_Second._ The stages or grades of education were everywhere the same,\nalthough their limits were not everywhere marked by the same number of\nyears. The first, extending usually from birth to the end of the seventh\nyear, was that of home education; the second, extending from the\nbeginning of the eighth year to the end of the sixteenth or, perhaps\noftener, the eighteenth year, was that of school education; the third,\nextending from the beginning of the seventeenth or nineteenth year to\nthe end of the twentieth (in Sparta of the thirtieth), was that of\ncollege education, or education for the duties of citizenship; the\nfourth, including the remainder of life, was that of university\neducation, or education through the State, which then was the only\nuniversity. At the beginning of the third period, the young men took\ntheir first State examination, and if they passed it successfully, they\nreceived the degree of Cadet or Citizen-novice (\u1f14\u03c6\u03b7\u03b2\u03bf\u03c2); but it was only\nat the beginning of the fourth period, and after they had passed a\nsecond examination (\u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2), that they received the degree\nof Man and Citizen and were permitted to exercise all the functions of\nfreemen. The State then became, in a very real sense, their _Alma\nMater_.\n\nIn most states, this graded education fell only to the lot of males, the\neducation of females stopping short with the first grade, the family,\nwhich was regarded as their only sphere. It was otherwise at Sparta,\nTeos, and apparently among the \u00c6olians generally. As a consequence it is\nonly among the \u00c6olians and Dorians that any poetesses of note\nappear--Sappho, Corinna, Telesilla, etc. Although, however, woman's\nsphere was the family, and she was considered to have done her duty when\nshe worthily filled the place of wife, mother, and mistress, there was\nnothing to prevent her from acquiring the higher education, if she chose\nto do so. That she did not often so choose, seems true; still there are\nexamples of learned women even among the Athenians. The daughter of\nThucydides is said to have continued his history after his death, and,\nwhether the statement be true or not, the fact that it was made shows\nthat the ability to write history was not regarded as impossible or\nsurprising in a woman.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\n\u00c6OLIAN OR THEBAN EDUCATION\n\n Hesiod is the teacher of most.--Heraclitus.\n\n When thou art dead, thou shalt lie in the earth.\n Not even the memory of thee shall be\n Thenceforward nor forever; for thou hast\n No share in the Pierian roses; but\n Ev'n in the halls of Hades thou shalt flit,\n A frightened shadow, with the shadowy dead.\n --Sappho (_to an uneducated woman_).\n\n What rustic hoyden ever charms the soul,\n That round her ankles cannot kilt her coats?--_Id._\n\n\nThe \u00c6olians appear to have been the earliest of the Greek races to make\nany considerable advance in culture. Their claim to Homer can hardly be\nsustained; but they certainly produced Hesiod, most of the greater lyric\npoets and poetesses, and the first historian. For a time they bade fair\nto lead the culture of Greece. But the promise was not fulfilled. During\nthe palmy period of Greek history, they were not only the most\nuncultured and uncouth of the Greeks, but they even prided themselves\nupon their boorishness of speech and manner, and derided culture. In the\nglorious struggle in which Greece maintained the cause of culture and\nfreedom against Persia, Thebes, then the chief centre of \u00c6olianism,\nsided with the barbarian, as, indeed, was natural.\n\nTheban education was, of course, a reflex of the character of the Theban\nand, indeed, of the B\u0153otian, people. Its main divisions were those of\nGreek education generally,--Gymnastics and Music; but the former was\nlearnt solely for athletic purposes, and the latter mainly for use at\nbanquets and drinking-bouts, in which the B\u0153otians found their chief\ndelight. Letters were studied as little as at Sparta (see p. 47), and\nthe language of the people remained harsh and unmusical. Of higher\neducation there was hardly a trace. The sophists passed B\u0153otia by. Even\nPindar, who was by birth a Theban, and a sincerely patriotic one, sought\nand found recognition anywhere rather than among his own people. He did\nnot even write in their dialect.\n\nThe reason for this backwardness on the part of the B\u0153otian \u00c6olians lay\nin the fact that they lived, as a conquering race, in the midst of a\npeople superior to them in every respect save strength, and could\nmaintain their ascendency only by brute force. When this failed, and the\nconquered race, which had never forgotten Cadmus and its ancient\ntraditions, came to the front, education and culture found their way\neven to Thebes. It was due to this change in political conditions that a\nPindar could arise, and it was doubtless the demand for culture\nconsequent thereupon that induced certain members of the scattered\nPythagorean school (see p. 54) to seek refuge in Thebes and there devote\nthemselves to teaching. Among these were Philolaus[1] and Lysis, the\nlatter of whom was probably the author of the famous \"Golden Words\"\n(see p. 57). But he has a better claim to fame than this; for he was the\nteacher of the bravest and most lovable man that Greece ever\nproduced--Epaminondas.\n\nIf any enthusiastic believer in the power of education desire to fortify\nhis cause by means of a brilliant example, he will find none superior to\nEpaminondas; for there can hardly be any question that it was the\nearnest, systematic, religious, and moral Pythagorean training which he\nreceived from the aged Lysis, whom he treated as a father, that made him\nwhat he was, and enabled him to do what he did,--which was nothing less\nthan to place Thebes at the head of Greece. Thebes rose and fell with\nEpaminondas. But that was not all. It was the example of Epaminondas\nthat kindled the ambition of Philip of Macedon, who was educated under\nhis eye, and of his far more famous son, Alexander, who made all Greece\na province of his empire. Pythagoras, Lysis, Epaminondas, Philip,\nAlexander--in five brief generations an earnest teacher conquers a\nworld!\n\nFrom the time of Epaminondas on, Thebes followed the ordinary course of\nGreek education.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nDORIAN OR SPARTAN EDUCATION\n\n Go, tell at Sparta, thou that passest by,\n That here, obedient to her laws, we lie.\n --Simonides (_Epitaph on the Three Hundred who fell at Thermopyl\u00e6_).\n\n This is a matter for which the Laced\u00e6monians deserve approbation:\n they are extremely solicitous about the education of their youth and\n make it a public function.--Aristotle.\n\n The Laced\u00e6monians impart to their children the look of wild beasts,\n through the severity of the exercises to which they subject them,\n their notion being that such training is especially calculated to\n heighten courage.--_Id._\n\n These are so far behind in education and philosophy that they do not\n learn even letters.--Isocrates.\n\n OLD MEN. We _were_ once strong men (youths).\n\n MEN. And we _are_; if you will, behold.\n\n BOYS. And we _shall be_ far superior.--_Spartan Choric Anthem._\n\n They asked no clarion's voice to fire\n Their souls with an impulse high:\n But the Dorian reed and the Spartan lyre\n For the sons of liberty!\n So moved they calmly to their field,\n Thence never to return,\n Save bearing back the Spartan shield,\n Or on it proudly borne!--Hemans.\n\n There was a law that the cadets should present themselves naked in\n public before the ephors every ten days; and, if they were well knit\n and strong, and looked as if they had been carved and hammered into\n shape by gymnastics, they were praised; but if their limbs showed\n any flabbiness or softness, any little swelling or suspicion of\n adipose matter due to laziness, they were flogged and justiced there\n and then. The ephors, moreover, subjected their clothing every day\n to a strict examination, to see that everything was up to the mark.\n No cooks were permitted in Laced\u00e6mon but flesh-cooks. A cook who\n knew anything else was driven out of Sparta, as physic for\n invalids.--\u00c6lian.\n\n\nEvery rational system of education is determined by some aim or ideal\nmore or less consciously set up. That of the Dorians, and particularly\nof the Spartans, may be expressed in one word--STRENGTH, which, in the\nindividual, took the form of physical endurance, in the State, that of\nself-sufficiency (\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03ac\u03c1\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1). A self-sufficient State, furnishing a\nfield for all the activities and aspirations of all its citizens, and\ndemanding their strongest and most devoted exertions--such is the Dorian\nideal. It is easy to see what virtues Dorian education would seek to\ndevelop--physical strength, bravery, and obedience to the laws of the\nState. Among the Dorians the human being is entirely absorbed in the\ncitizen. The State is all in all.\n\nThe Dorian ideal realized itself chiefly in two places, Crete and\nSparta. Both these were repeatedly held up in ancient times as models of\nwell-governed states, and even Plato puts the substance of his _Laws_\ninto the mouth of a Cretan.\n\nAbout the details of Cretan education we are but poorly informed. Two\nthings, however, we know: (1) that Lycurgus, the reputed founder of\nSpartan education, was held to have drawn many of his ideas from Crete,\nand (2) that the final result of Cretan education--and the same is true\nof all education that merges the man in the citizen--was, in spite of\nits strictness, demoralizing. The character of the people was summed up\nby their poet Epimenides, a contemporary of Solon's, in a famous line\nquoted by St. Paul, \"The Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy\nbellies.\"\n\nWith regard to Spartan education our information is much greater, and we\nmay therefore select it as the type of Dorian education generally.\n\nThe Peloponnesian Dorians having, through contact with the more\ncivilized peoples whom they conquered, lost much of that rigorous\ndiscipline and unquestioning loyalty which made them formidable, were,\nin the ninth century B.C., becoming disorganized, so that in two of the\nDorian states they were assimilated by the native population, the\nArgives and the Messenians. The same process was rapidly going on in the\nthird state, Laced\u00e6mon, when Lycurgus, fired with patriotic zeal,\nresolved to put an end to it, by restoring among his people the old\nDorian military discipline. To prepare himself for this task, he visited\nCrete and studied its institutions. On his return he persuaded his\ncountrymen to submit to a \"Constitution,\" which ever afterwards went by\nhis name. This constitution included a scheme of education, whose aim\nwas a thorough training of the whole of the free citizens, both male and\nfemale, (1) in physical endurance, and (2) in complete subordination to\nthe State. The former was sought to be imparted by means of a rigorous\nand often cruel, system of gymnastics; the latter, through choric music\nand dancing, including military drill. Spartan education, therefore, was\nconfined to two branches, Gymnastics and Music. Instruction in letters\nwas confined to the merest elements. Sparta accordingly never produced a\npoet, an historian, an artist, or a philosopher of any note. Even the\narrangers of her choruses were foreigners--Tyrt\u00e6us, Terpander, Arion,\nAlcman, Thaletas, Stesichorus.\n\nAs Spartan education was nothing more or less than a training for\nSpartan citizenship, we must preface our account of it by a few words on\nthe Spartan State.\n\nThe government of Sparta was in the hands of a closed aristocracy, whose\nsole aim was the maintenance of its own supremacy, as against (1)\nforeign enemies, (2) _Perioikoi_, or disfranchised native citizens, (3)\nHelots, or native serfs. To secure this, it formed itself into a\nstanding army, with a strict military organization. Sparta, its one\nabode, was a camp; all free inhabitants were soldiers. Though they were\ncompelled to marry, the city contained no homes. The men and, from the\nclose of their seventh year, the boys, lived in barracks and ate at\npublic tables (_Phiditia_). The women had but one recognized function,\nthat of furnishing the State with citizens, and were educated solely\nwith a view to this. No other virtue was expected of them. Aristotle\ntells us that \"they lived in every kind of profligacy and in luxury.\"\nPolyandry was common, and, when a woman lost all her husbands, she was\noften compelled to enter into relations with slaves, in order that she\nmight not fail in her political duty.\n\nAmong a people organized on the basis of brute force, it were vain to\nlook for any of the finer traits of human nature--gentleness,\ntenderness, sympathy, pity, mercy. The mercilessness and cruelty of the\nSpartans were proverbial. Perioikoi and Helots incurring the displeasure\nor suspicion of the authorities were secretly put to death, without even\nthe form of a trial. A striking instance of such cruelty is recorded by\nThucydides. The facts are thus stated by Grote (_History of Greece_,\nvol. ii, pp. 376-7): \"It was in the eighth year of the Peloponnesian\nWar, after the Helots had been called upon for signal military efforts\nin various ways, ... that the ephors felt especially apprehensive of an\noutbreak. Anxious to single out the most forward and daring Helots, as\nmen from whom they had most to dread, they issued proclamation that\nevery member of that class who had rendered distinguished services\nshould make his claim known at Sparta, promising liberty to the most\ndeserving. A large number of Helots came forward to claim the boon: not\nless than two thousand of them were approved, formally manumitted, and\nled in solemn procession round the temples, with garlands on their\nheads, as an inauguration to their coming life of freedom. But the\ntreacherous garland only marked them out as victims for sacrifice: every\nman of them forthwith disappeared; the manner of their death was an\nuntold mystery.\"\n\nSpartan education was entirely conducted by the State, at the expense of\nthe State, and for the ends of the State. It differed in this respect\nfrom nearly every other system of Greek education. It was divided into\nfour periods, corresponding respectively to childhood, boyhood, youth,\nand manhood.\n\n(_a_) CHILDHOOD.--As soon as the Spartan child came into the world, the\nState, through officers appointed for that purpose, sent to examine it.\nIf it seemed vigorous, and showed no bodily defect, it was permitted to\nlive, and forthwith adopted by the State; otherwise it was carried to\nthe mountains and thrown over a precipice. The children accepted by the\nState were for the next seven years left in charge of their mothers,\nbut, doubtless, still under State surveillance. Just how they were\ntrained during these years, we do not know. We can only guess that they\nunderwent very much the same process as other Greek children, any\ndifference being in the direction of rigor. As the details of Greek\neducation generally will be dealt with under the head of Athens, they\nmay be omitted here.\n\n(_b_) BOYHOOD.--On completing his seventh year, the Spartan boy was\ntransferred from his mother's house and care to a public barracks and\nthe direct tuition of the State. Although the boys were in charge of a\nspecial officer (\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2), who divided them into squads and\ncompanies, and arranged their exercises for them, they were nevertheless\ntaught to regard every grown man as a teacher, and every such man was\nexpected to correct them promptly and rigorously, whenever he saw them\ndoing wrong. At the same time, every boy was expected to form an\nintimate connection with some one man, who then, to a large extent,\nbecame responsible for his conduct; and, though the choice in this\nmatter rested with the parties concerned, it was considered a disgrace\nin a man, no less than in a boy, to be without such connection. Though\nthis arrangement, it is said, often led to lamentable abuses, there can\nbe no doubt that it admirably served the purposes of Sparta. It\nfurnished every boy with a tutor, who, under the circumstances, could\nhardly fail to treat him kindly, and who was interested in making him\nsurpass all other boys in courage and endurance. This friendly influence\nof teacher on pupil was something in which the Greeks at all times\nstrongly believed, and which formed an important force in all their\neducation. In Sparta, as in Crete and Thebes, it was legally recognized.\nOne of the duties of Spartan \"inspirer\" (\u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03c0\u03bd\u03ae\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2 or \u03b5\u1f34\u03c3\u03c0\u03bd\u03b7\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2), as he\nwas called, was to teach his young friend (\u1f00\u0390\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2) to demean himself\nproperly on all occasions, and to hold his tongue except when he had\nsomething very important to say. In this way it was that the young\nSpartans received their moral education, and acquired that effective\nbrevity of speech which to this day we call \"laconic.\"\n\nThe formal education of Spartan boys consisted mainly of gymnastics,\nmusic, choric dancing, and larceny. Their literary education was\nconfined to a little reading, writing, and finger-arithmetic; everything\nbeyond this was proscribed. And the reasons for this proscription are\nnot difficult to discover. Sparta staked everything upon her political\nstrength, and this involved two things, (1) equality among her free\ncitizens, and (2) absolute devotion on their part to her interest, both\nof which the higher education would have rendered impossible. Education\nestablishes among men distinctions of worth quite other than military,\nand gives them individual interests distinct from those of the State. It\nwas the same reason that induced Rome, during the best period of her\nhistory, to exclude her citizens from all higher education, which is\nessentially individual and cosmopolitan.\n\nThe education of the Spartan boys was conducted mostly in the open air\nand in public, so that they were continually exposed to the cheers or\nscoffs of critical spectators, to whom their performances were a\ncontinual amusement of the nature of a cock-fight. Whether the different\n\"inspirers\" betted on their own boys may be doubtful; but they certainly\nused every effort to make them win in any and every contest, and the\n\"inspirer\" of a \"winning\" boy was an envied man. The result was that\nmany boys lost their lives amid cheers, rather than incur the disgrace\nof being beaten. Inasmuch as the sole purpose of gymnastics was strength\nand endurance; of dancing, order; and of music, martial inspiration, it\nis easy to see what forms these studies necessarily assumed; and we need\nonly stop to remark that Dorian music received the unqualified\napprobation of all the great educational writers of antiquity,--even of\nAristotle, who had only words of condemnation for Spartan gymnastics.\n\nThere was only one branch of Spartan school-education that was not\nconducted in public, and that was larceny. The purpose of this curious\ndiscipline was to enable its subjects to act, on occasion, as detectives\nand assassins among the ever discontented and rebellious Helots. How\nsuccessful it was, may be judged from the incident recorded on page 45.\nLarceny, when successfully carried out under difficult circumstances,\nwas applauded; when discovered, it was severely punished. A story is\ntold of a boy who, rather than betray himself, allowed a stolen fox,\nconcealed under his clothes, to eat out his entrails.\n\nIn one respect Spartan education may claim superiority over that of most\nother Greek states: it was not confined to one sex. Spartan girls,\nthough apparently permitted to live at home, were subjected to a course\nof training differing from that of their brothers only in being less\nsevere. They had their own exercise-grounds, on which they learnt to\nleap, run, cast the javelin, throw the discus, play ball, wrestle,\ndance, and sing; and there is good evidence to show that their exercises\nhad an admirable effect upon their physical constitution. That the\nbreezy daughters of Sparta were handsomer and more attractive than the\nhot-house maidens of Athens, is a well-attested fact. Many Spartan women\ncontinued their athletic and musical exercises into ripe womanhood,\nlearning even to ride spirited horses and drive chariots. If we may\nbelieve Aristotle, however, the effect of all this training upon their\nmoral nature was anything but desirable. They were neither virtuous nor\nbrave.\n\n(_c_) YOUTH.--About the age of eighteen, Spartan boys passed into the\nclass of _epheboi_, or cadets, and began their professional training for\nwar. This was their business for the next twelve years, and no light\nbusiness it was. For the first two years they were called _melleirenes_,\nand devoted themselves to learning the use of arms, and to light\nskirmishing. They were under the charge of special officers called\n_bideoi_, but had to undergo a rigid examination before the ephors every\nten days (see p. 41). Their endurance was put to severe tests. Speaking\nof the altar of Artemis Orthia, Pausanias says: \"An oracle commanded the\npeople to imbrue the altar with human blood, and hence arose the custom\nof sacrificing on it a man chosen by lot. Lycurgus did away with this\npractice, and ordained that, instead, the cadets should be scourged\nbefore the altar, and thus the altar is covered with blood. While this\nis going on, a priestess stands by, holding, in her arms the wooden\nimage (of Artemis). This image, being small, is, under ordinary\ncircumstances, light; but, if at any time the scourgers deal too lightly\nwith any youth, on account of his beauty or his rank, then the image\nbecomes so heavy that the priestess cannot support it; whereupon she\nreproves the scourgers, and declares that she is burdened on their\naccount. Thus the image that came from the sacrifices in the Crimea has\nalways continued to enjoy human blood.\" This Artemis appears, with a\nbundle of twigs in her arm, next to Ares, among the Spartan divinities,\non the frieze of the Parthenon. At twenty years of age, the young men\nbecame _eirenes_, and entered upon a course of study closely resembling\nactual warfare. They lived on the coarsest food, slept on reeds, and\nrarely bathed or walked. They exercised themselves in heavy arms, in\nshooting, riding, swimming, ball-playing, and in conflicts of the most\nbrutal kind. They took part in complicated and exhausting dances, the\nmost famous of which was the Pyrrhic, danced under arms. They manned\nfortresses, assassinated Helots, and, in cases of need, even took the\nfield against an enemy.\n\n(_d_) MANHOOD.--At the age of thirty, being supposed to have reached\ntheir majority, they fell into the ranks of full citizens, and took\ntheir share in all political functions. They were compelled to marry,\nbut were allowed to visit their wives only rarely and by stealth. They\nsometimes had two or three children before they had ever seen their\nwives by daylight. When not engaged in actual war, they spent much of\ntheir time in watching the exercises of their juniors, and the rest in\nhunting wild boars and similar game in the mountains. Like Xenophon,\nthey thought hunting the nearest approach to war.\n\nSuch was the education that Sparta gave her sons. That it produced\nstrong warriors and patriotic citizens, there can be no doubt. But that\nis all: it produced no men. It was greatly admired by men like Xenophon\nand Plato, who were sick of Athenian democracy; but Aristotle estimated\nit at its true worth. He says: \"As long as the Laconians were the only\npeople who devoted themselves to violent exercises, they were superior\nto all others; but now they are inferior even in gymnastic contests and\nin war. Their former superiority, indeed, was not due to their training\ntheir young men in this way, but to the fact that they alone did so.\"\nAnd even Xenophon, at the end of a long panegyric on the Spartan\nconstitution, is obliged to admit that already in his time it has fallen\nfrom its old worth into feebleness and corruption, and this in spite of\nthe fact that he had his own sons educated at Sparta. When Sparta fell\nbefore the heroic and cultured Epaminondas, she fell unpitied, leaving\nto the world little or nothing but a warning example.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nPYTHAGORAS\n\n Virtue and health and all good and God are a harmony.--Pythagoras.\n\n One is the principle of all.--Philolaus the Pythagorean.\n\n All things that are known have number.--_Id._\n\n The principles of all virtue are three, knowledge, power, and\n choice. Knowledge is like sight, whereby we contemplate and judge\n things; power is like bodily strength, whereby we endure and adhere\n to things; choice is like hands to the soul, whereby we stretch out\n and lay hold of things.--Theages the Pythagorean.\n\n\nThe Doric discipline, even in Sparta, where it could exhibit its\ncharacter most freely, produced merely soldiers and not free citizens or\ncultivated men. It was, nevertheless, in its essential features, the\nHellenic ideal, and numerous attempts were made to remedy its defects\nand to give it permanence, by connecting it with higher than mere local\nand aristocratic interests. One of the earliest and most noteworthy of\nthese was made by Pythagoras.\n\nThis extraordinary personage appears to have been born in the island of\nSamos in the first quarter of the sixth century B.C. Though he was born\namong Ionians, his family appears to have been Achaian and, to some\nextent, Pelasgian (Tyrrhenian), having emigrated from Phlius in the\nArgolid. After distinguishing himself in Ionia, he emigrated in middle\nlife to Magna Gr\u00e6cia, and took up his abode in the Achaian colony of\nCroton, then a rich and flourishing city. The cause of his emigration\nseems to have been the tyranny of Polycrates, which apparently imparted\nto him a prejudice against Ionic tendencies in general. Whether he\nderived any part of his famous learning from visits to Egypt, Ph\u0153nicia,\nBabylonia, etc., as was asserted in later times, is not clear. It is not\nimprobable that he visited Egypt, and there is good reason for believing\nthat he became acquainted with Ph\u0153nician theology through Pherecydes of\nSyros. That he was an omnivorous student is attested by his\ncontemporary, Heraclitus. He was undoubtedly affected by the physical\ntheories current in his time in Ionia, while he plainly drew his\npolitical and ethical ideas from Sparta or Crete.\n\nOf his activity in Ionia we know little; but we may perhaps conclude\nthat it was of the same nature as that which he afterwards displayed in\nItaly. Here he appeared in the triple capacity of theologian, ethical\nteacher, and scientist. His chief interest for us lies in the fact that\nhe was apparently the first man in Greece, and, indeed, in the western\nworld, who sought to establish an ethical institution apart from the\nState. In this respect he bears a strong resemblance to the prophet\nIsaiah, who may be said to have originated the idea of a Church (see p.\n133). Pythagoras' aim seems to have been to gather round him a body of\ndisciples who should endeavor to lead a perfect life, based upon certain\ntheological or metaphysical notions, and guided by a rule of almost\nmonastic strictness. Like other men who have found themselves in the\nmidst of irreverence, selfishness, and democratic vulgarity and anarchy,\nhe believed that his time demanded moral discipline, based upon respect\nfor authority and character, with a firm belief in future retribution,\nand inculcated by a careful study of the order and harmony of nature;\nand such discipline he strove, with all his might, to impart. Having no\nfaith in the capacity of the State to be an instrument for his purpose,\nhe set to work independently of it, and seems to have met with very\nmarked success, drawing to him many of the best men and women of\nSouthern Italy. So numerous and powerful, indeed, did his followers\nbecome that they held the balance of power in several cities, and were\nable to use it for the enforcement of their own principles. As these\nwere exceedingly undemocratic, and opposed to the tendencies of the\ntime, they finally roused bitter opposition, so that the Pythagoreans\nwere persecuted and attempts made to exterminate them with fire and\nsword. In this way their political influence was broken, and their\nassemblies suppressed; but the effect of Pythagoras' teaching was not\nlost. His followers, scattered abroad throughout the Hellenic world,\ncarried his precepts and his life-ideal with them. In the following\ncenturies they found many noble sympathizers--Pindar, Socrates, Plato,\nEpicharmus, etc.--and underwent many modifications, until they finally\nwitnessed a resurrection, in the forms of Neo-Pythagoreanism and\nNeo-Platonism, after the Christian era. In these later guises,\nPythagoreanism lost itself in mysticism and contemplation, turning its\nfollowers into inactive ascetics; but in its original form it seems to\nhave been especially adapted to produce men of vigorous action and\nfar-sighted practicality. Milo of Croton, the inimitable wrestler;\nArchytas of Tarentum, philosopher, mathematician, musician, inventor,\nengineer, general, statesman; and Epaminondas, the greatest and noblest\nof Theban generals, were professed Pythagoreans.\n\nWe might perhaps express the aim of Pythagoras' pedagogical efforts by\nthe one word HARMONY. Just as he found harmony everywhere in the\nphysical world, so he strove to introduce the same into the constitution\nof the human individual, and into the relations of individuals with each\nother. He may perhaps be regarded as the originator of that view of the\nworld, of men, and of society which makes all good consist in order and\nproportion, a view which recommends itself strongly to idealists, and\nhas given birth to all those social Utopias, whose static perfection\nseems to relieve the individual from the burden of responsibility, and\nwhich have been dangled before the eyes of struggling humanity from his\ndays to ours. According to this view, which had its roots in Greek\nthought generally, the aim of education is to find for each individual\nhis true place and to make him efficient therein. Man is made for order,\nand not order for man. He is born into a world of order, as is shown by\nthe fact that number and proportion are found in everything that is\nknown. Pythagoras, in his enthusiasm for his principle, carried his\ndoctrine of numbers to absurd lengths, identifying them with real\nthings; but this enthusiasm was not without its valuable results, since\nit is to Pythagoras and his school that we owe the sciences of geometry\nand music. Moreover, experience must have taught him that it is one\nthing to propound a theory, another to make it effective in regulating\nhuman relations. In order to accomplish the latter object, he invoked\nthe aid of divine authority and of the doctrines of metempsychosis and\nfuture retribution. Hence his educational system had a strong religious\ncast, which showed itself even outwardly in the dignified demeanor and\nquiet self-possession of his followers.\n\nHarmony, then, to be attained by discipline, under religious sanctions,\nwas the aim of Pythagoras' teaching. Believing, however, that only a\nlimited number of persons were capable of such harmony, he selected his\npupils with great care, and subjected them to a long novitiate, in which\nsilence, self-examination, and absolute obedience played a prominent\npart. The aim of this was to enable them to overcome impulse,\nconcentrate attention, and develop reverence, reflection, and\nthoughtfulness, the first conditions of all moral and intellectual\nexcellence. While the first care was directed to their spiritual part,\ntheir bodies were by no means forgotten. Food, clothing, and exercise\nwere all carefully regulated on hygienic and moral principles.\n\nRegarding the details of Pythagoras' educational system we are not well\ninformed; but the spirit and tendency of it have been embalmed for us in\nthe so-called _Golden Words_, which, if not due to the pen of Pythagoras\nhimself, certainly reach back to very near his time, and contain nothing\nat variance with what we otherwise know of his teaching. We insert a\nliteral version.\n\nTHE GOLDEN WORDS.\n\n The Gods immortal, as by law disposed,\n First venerate, and reverence the oath:\n Then to the noble heroes, and the powers\n Beneath the earth, do homage with just rites.\n\n Thy parents honor and thy nearest kin,\n And from the rest choose friends on virtue's scale.\n To gentle words and kindly deeds give way,\n Nor hate thy friend for any slight offence.\n Bear all thou canst; for Can dwells nigh to Must.\n These things thus know.\n\n What follow learn to rule:\n The belly first, then sleep and lust and wrath.\n Do nothing base with others or alone:\n But most of all thyself in reverence hold.\n\n Then practise justice both in deed and word,\n Nor let thyself wax thoughtless about aught:\n But know that death's the common lot of all.\n\n Be not untimely wasteful of thy wealth,\n Like vulgar men, nor yet illiberal.\n In all things moderation answers best.\n\n Do things that profit thee: think ere thou act.\n\n Let never sleep thy drowsy eyelids greet,\n Till thou hast pondered each act of the day:\n \"Wherein have I transgressed? What have I done?\n What duty shunned?\"--beginning from the first,\n Unto the last. Then grieve and fear for what\n Was basely done; but in the good rejoice.\n\n These things perform; these meditate; these love.\n These in the path of godlike excellence\n Will place thee, yea, by Him who gave our souls\n The number Four, perennial nature's spring!\n But, ere thou act, crave from the gods success.\n\n These precepts having mastered, thou shalt know\n The system of the never-dying gods\n And dying men, and how from all the rest\n Each thing is sunder'd, and how held in one:\n And thou shalt know, as it is right thou shouldst,\n That nature everywhere is uniform,\n And so shalt neither hope for things that lie\n Beyond all hope, nor fail of any truth.\n\n But from such food abstain as we have named,\n And, while thou seek'st to purge and free thy soul,\n Use judgment, and reflect on everything,\n Setting o'er all best Thought as charioteer.\n\n Be glad to gather goods, nor less to lose.\n\n Of human ills that spring from spirit-powers\n Endure thy part nor peevishly complain.\n Cure what thou canst: 'tis well, and then reflect:\n \"Fate never lays too much upon the good.\"\n\n Words many, brave and base, assail men's ears.\n Let these not disconcert or trammel thee;\n But when untruth is spoken, meekly yield.\n\n What next I say in every act observe:\n Let none by word or deed prevail on thee\n To do or say what were not best for thee.\n Think ere thou act, lest foolish things be done;--\n For thoughtless deeds and words the caitiff mark;--\n But strongly do what will not bring regret.\n Do naught thou dost not know; but duly learn.\n So shall thy life with happiness o'erflow.\n\n Be not neglectful of thy body's health;\n But measure use in drink, food, exercise--\n I mean by 'measure' what brings no distress.\n\n Follow a cleanly, simple mode of life,\n And guard against such acts as envy breed.\n Then, if, when thou the body leav'st, thou mount\n To the free ether, deathless shalt thou be,\n A god immortal,--mortal never more!\n\n\nIn this system six things are noteworthy: (1) Its comprehensiveness, in\nthat it takes account of man's whole nature,--body, soul, and spirit;\naffections, intellect, and will, and of all his relations--to gods and\nmen, to self and nature: (2) Its aimfulness, in that it promises\nhappiness here and blessedness hereafter, as the reward of right living:\n(3) Its piety, in that it everywhere recognizes the need of divine\nassistance: (4) Its appreciation of science, as insight into the nature\nand grounds of multiplicity and unity: (5) Its stress laid on right\ndoing, as the condition of right knowing: (6) Its belief in man's\ndivinity and perfectibility. It is curious that the poem contains no\nreference to the doctrine of metempsychosis, which might apparently have\nbeen appealed to as a powerful moral sanction.\n\nThat a system like that of Pythagoras, combining the religious, the\nmystical, the scientific, the ethical, and the social tendencies of the\nHellenic mind, should have exerted a deep and abiding influence, need\nnot surprise us. We find profound traces of it, not only in all\nsubsequent Greek thought, but even in foreign systems, such as Essenism,\nwhose elements were Hebrew Nazarenism and Greek Pythagoreanism. The\nrelations between Essenism and Christianity have not yet been\ndetermined. Of the effect of Pythagoras' teaching on Epaminondas I have\nalready spoken.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nIONIAN OR ATHENIAN EDUCATION\n\n Let me now give an account of the Old Education, when I, uttering\n words of justice, was in my prime, and self-control was held in\n respect. In the first place, a child was not allowed to be heard\n uttering a grumble. Then all the boys of the quarter were obliged to\n march in a body, in an orderly way and with the scantest of\n clothing, along the streets to the music master's, and this they did\n even if it snowed like barley-groats. Then they were set to rehearse\n a song, without compressing their thighs,--either \"Pallas, mighty\n city-stormer,\" or \"A shout sounding far,\" putting energy into the\n melody which their fathers handed down. And, if any one attempted\n any fooling, or any of those trills like the difficult inflexions _\u00e0\n la_ Phrynis now in vogue, he received a good threshing for his\n pains, as having insulted the Muses. Again, at the physical\n trainer's, the boys, while sitting, were obliged to keep their legs\n in front of them.... And at dinner they were not allowed to pick out\n the best radish-head, or to snatch away anise or celery from their\n elders, or to gourmandize on fish and field-fares, or to sit with\n their legs crossed.... Take courage, young man, and choose me, the\n Better Reason, and you shall know how to hate the public square, to\n avoid the bath-houses, to be ashamed of what is shameful, to show\n temper when any one addresses you in ribald language, to rise from\n your seat when your elders approach, and not to be a lubber to your\n own parents, or to do any other unseemly thing to mar the image of\n Modesty, or to rush to the house of the dancing-girl, and, while you\n are gaping at her performances, get struck with an apple by a wench\n and fall from your fair fame, or to talk back to your father, or,\n addressing him as Japhet, to revile the old age which made the nest\n for you.... Then, fresh and blooming, you will spend your time in\n the gymnasia, and not go about the public square, mouthing monstrous\n jokes, like the young men of to-day, or getting dragged into\n slippery, gumshon-bamboozling disputes, but, going down to the\n Academy, with some worthy companion of your own age, you will start\n a running-match, crowned with white reed, smelling of smilax,\n leisure and deciduous white poplar, rejoicing in the spring, when\n the plane-tree whispers to the maple. If you do the things which I\n enjoin, and give your mind to them, you will always have a\n well-developed chest, a clear complexion, broad shoulders, and a\n short tongue.--Aristophanes, _Clouds_ (_Speech of Right Reason_).\n\n In their systems of education, some states strive to impart a\n courageous habit to their people from their very childhood by a\n painful and laborious training, whereas we, though living in a free\n and natural way, are ready to meet them in a fair field with no\n favor.--Pericles' _Funeral Oration_ (_Thucydides_).\n\n I will never disgrace these sacred arms, nor desert my companion in\n the ranks. I will fight for temples and public property, both alone\n and with many. I will transmit my fatherland, not only not less, but\n greater and better, than it was transmitted to me. I will obey the\n magistrates who may at any time be in power. I will observe both the\n existing laws and those which the people may unanimously hereafter\n make, and, if any person seek to annul the laws or to set them at\n nought, I will do my best to prevent him, and will defend them both\n alone and with many (all?). I will honor the religion of my fathers.\n And I call to witness Aglauros, Enyalios, Ares, Zeus, Thallo, Auxo,\n and Hegemone.--_Oath of the Athenian Epheboi._\n\n Consider, Men of Athens, what careful provision was made by Solon,\n the ancient lawgiver, by Draco, and other lawgivers of that period,\n for the cultivation of good morals. In the first place, they made\n laws to secure a moral education for our children, and laid down, in\n plain terms, just what the free-born boy should study and how he\n should be nurtured; secondly, they made regulations regarding young\n men; and, thirdly, with regard to the other periods of life in their\n order, including both private persons and public speakers; and,\n having recorded these laws, they left them in your keeping,\n appointing you their guardians.--\u00c6schines (_against Timarchus_).\n\n\nIf systems of education are to be classified according to their\nresults--and these are perhaps the fairest test--then the \"Old\nEducation\" of Athens must be assigned a very high place. The character\nwhich she displayed, and the exploits which she performed, in the early\ndecades of the fifth century B.C., bear unequivocal testimony to the\nvalue of the training to which her citizens had previously been\nsubjected. This training could perhaps hardly be better characterized\nthan by the word \"puritanical.\" The men who fought at Marathon, Salamis,\nand Plat\u00e6\u00e6 were puritans, trained, in a hard school, to fear the gods,\nto respect the laws, their neighbors, and themselves, to reverence the\nwisdom of experience, to despise comfort and vice, and to do honest\nwork. They were not enfeebled by \u00e6sthetic culture, paralyzed by abstract\nthinking, or hardened by professional training. They were educated to be\nmen, friends, and citizens, not to be mere thinkers, critics, soldiers,\nor money-makers. It was against a small band of such men that the hosts\nof Persia fought in vain.\n\nIt is natural that this \"Old Education\" of Athens should have a special\ninterest for us, inasmuch as it seems, in great measure, to have solved\nthe problem that must be uppermost with every true educator and friend\nof education, viz. How can strong, wise, and good men be produced? For\nthis reason, as also because we are the better informed regarding the\neducational system of Athens than that of any other Greek state, it\nseems proper to devote special attention to it, treating it as\npre\u00ebminently Greek education. Indeed, whatever is permanently valuable\nin Greek education is to be found in that of Athens, other systems\nhaving mainly but an historical interest for us.\n\nIn comparing the education of Athens with that of Sparta, we are at once\nstruck with two great distinctions: (1) While Spartan education is\npublic, Athenian education is mainly private; (2) While Sparta educates\nfor war, Athens educates for peace. As to the former of these, it is not\na little remarkable that, while many of the first thinkers of Greece,\nincluding Plato and Aristotle, advocated an entirely public education,\nAthens never adopted it, or even took any steps in that direction. It\nseems as if the Athenians felt instinctively that socialistic education,\nby relieving parents of the responsibility of providing for the\neducation of their own children, was removing a strong moral influence,\nundermining the family, and jeopardizing liberty. Perhaps the example of\nSparta was not without its influence. No liberty-loving people, such as\nthe Athenians were, would consent to merge the family in the State, or\nto sacrifice private life to public order. As to the second distinction,\nwhich was all-pervasive, it divides the two peoples by an impassable\ngulf and assigns them to two different grades of civilization. And it\nwas one of which both peoples were entirely conscious. While Sparta\nrepresented her ideal by a chained Ares, Athens found hers in a Wingless\nVictory, a form of Athena, the divinity of political and industrial\nwisdom. As the aim of Sparta was strength, so that of Athens was\nWISDOM--the wise man in the wise state. By the \"wise man,\" was meant he\nwhose entire faculties of body, soul, and mind were proportionately and\nco\u00f6rdinately developed; by the \"wise state,\" that in which each class of\nthe population performed its proper function, and occupied its proper\nrelation toward the rest, and this without any excessive exercise of\nauthority. If the Spartan, like the artificially tamed barbarian,\nsubmitted to living by rule and command, the Athenian, like the\nnaturally civilized man, delighted to live in a free and natural way\n(\u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b9\u03c4\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9) governed from within, and not from without. To\nmake possible such life was the aim of Athenian education, which,\ninstead of seeking to merge the man in the State, or to rend the two\nasunder, treated them as necessary correlates and strove to balance\ntheir claims.\n\nThe endeavor on the part of Athens to steer a middle course between\nsocialism and individualism, is manifest in the fact that, though she\nhad no public system of education, she took great care to see that her\ncitizens were thoroughly educated in the spirit of her institutions,\nand, indeed, made such education a condition of citizenship, which was\nthus an academic degree, conferred only after careful examination. By a\nlaw of Solon's, parents who had failed to give their sons a proper\neducation lost all claim upon them for support in their old age.\nFurthermore, Athens subjected all her male citizens to a systematic\npreparation for civil and military functions, before she allowed them to\nexercise these.\n\nAthenian education comprised four grades corresponding to four\ninstitutions, (1) the family, (2) the school, (3) the gymnasium or\ncollege, (4) the State. We may consider these in their order.\n\n\n(1) FAMILY EDUCATION.\n\nThe birth of a child was regarded by the Athenians as a joyful event, as\nsomething calling for gratitude to the gods. This expressed itself in a\nfamily festival, called the Amphidromia, celebrated usually on the\nseventh day after the birth. On this occasion, the child was carried\nrapidly round the family altar and received its name. A sacrifice was\nthen offered to the gods, the mother was purified, and christening\npresents were displayed. The child was now a member of the family and\nunder the protection of its gods. For the next seven years, it was\nwholly in the hands of parents and nurses, the latter being usually\nslaves. During this time its body was the chief object of care, and\neverything seems to have been done to render it healthy and hardy.\nCradles do not seem to have been in use, and the child was sung to sleep\non the nurse's knee. While it was being weaned, it was fed on milk and\nsoft food sweetened with honey. As soon as it was able to move about and\ndirect attention to external objects, it received playthings, such as\nrattles, dolls of clay or wax, hobby-horses, etc., and was allowed to\nroll and dig in the sand. Such were the simple gymnastics of this early\nperiod. As to the other branch of education, it consisted mostly in\nbeing sung to and in listening to stories about gods and heroes,\nmonsters and robbers, of which Greek mythology was full. By means of\nthese the child's imagination was roused and developed, and certain\n\u00e6sthetic, ethical, and national prepossessions awakened. Though children\nwere often frightened from certain acts and habits by threats of bogles\ncoming to carry them off, yet the chief ethical agency employed was\nevidently strict discipline. To secure good behavior in his children was\nthe first care of the Athenian parent. Though disinclined to harshness,\nhe never doubted that \"he who spareth the rod hateth the child.\"\nChildren were never placed upon exhibition or applauded for their\nprecocious or irreverent sayings. They were kept as much as possible out\nof the way of older people, and, when necessity brought them into the\npresence of these, they were taught to behave themselves quietly and\nmodestly. No Greek author has preserved for us a collection of the smart\nsayings or roguish doings of Athenian children.\n\nThough the Kindergarten did not exist in those old days, yet its place\nwas, in great measure, filled by the numerous games in which the\nchildren engaged, in part at least under their nurses' superintendence.\nGames played so important a part in the whole life of the Greek people,\nand especially of the Athenians, that their importance in the education\nof children was fully recognized and much attention devoted to them.\nDuring play, character both displays itself more fully, and is more\neasily and deeply affected, than at any other time; and, since the whole\nof the waking life of the child in its earliest years is devoted to\nplay, this is the time when character is formed, and therefore the time\nwhich calls for most sedulous care. In playing games, children not only\nexercise their bodies and their wits; they also learn to act with\nfairness, and come to feel something of the joy that arises from\ncompanionship and friendly rivalry in a common occupation. Moreover, as\ngames have no end beyond themselves, they are admirable exercises in\nfree, disinterested activity and a protection against selfish and sordid\nhabits. Of all this the Athenians were fully aware.\n\nThere are probably few games played by children in our day that were not\nknown in ancient Athens. It seems, however, that games were there\nconducted with more system, and a deeper sense of their pedagogical\nvalue, than they are with us. We hear of running, leaping, hopping,\ncatching, hitting, and throwing games, gymnastic games, and games of\nchance. The ball, the top, the hoop, the swing, the see-saw, the\nskipping rope, the knuckle-bones were as much in use in ancient, as in\nmodern, times. Cards, of course, there were not; and, indeed, games of\nchance, though well known, seem rarely to have been indulged in by\nchildren. It hardly seems necessary to remark that there were some games\npeculiar to boys and others to girls, and that the latter were less rude\nthan the former. Doubtless, too, the games played in the city, where the\nchildren would have few chances of going beyond their homes, were\ndifferent from those played in the country, where almost complete\nfreedom to roam in the open air was enjoyed. We must always bear in mind\nthat well-to-do Athenian families spent the greater part of the year at\ntheir country-houses, which, with few exceptions, were so near the city\nthat they could be reached even on foot in a single day. This country\nlife had a marked effect upon the education of Athenian children.\n\n\n(2) SCHOOL EDUCATION.\n\nAbout the age of seven, the Athenian boy, after being entered on the\nroll of prospective citizens in the temple of Apollo Patro\u00f6s, and made a\nmember of a phratria, went to school, or, rather, he went to two\nschools, that of the music-master, and that of the physical trainer. He\nwas always accompanied thither and back by a _pedagogue_, who was\nusually a slave, who carried his writing-materials, his lyre, etc.\n(there being no school-books to carry), and whom he was expected\nimplicitly to obey. The boys of each quarter of the city collected every\nmorning at some appointed place and walked to school, like little\nsoldiers, in rank and file. They wore next to no clothing, even in the\ncoldest weather, and were obliged to conduct themselves very demurely in\nthe streets. The school hours were very long, beginning early in the\nmorning and continuing till late in the evening. Solon found it\nnecessary to introduce a law forbidding schoolmasters to have their\nschools open before sunrise or after sunset. It thus appears that boys,\nafter the age of seven, spent their whole day at school, and were thus\nearly withdrawn from the influence of their mothers and sisters, a fact\nwhich was not without its bearing upon morals.\n\nThere are several interesting points in connection with Athenian school\nlife about which our information is so scanty that we are left in some\ndoubt respecting them. For example, though it is quite plain that Athens\nhad no system of public instruction, it is not so clear that she did not\nown the school buildings. Again, it is not certain whether music\n(including letters) and gymnastics were, or were not, taught in the same\nlocality. Thirdly, there is some doubt about the number and order of the\nhours devoted to each of the two branches of study. In regard to these\npoints I can state only what seems to me most probable.\n\nAs to school buildings, we are expressly told by the author of the\nfragmentary tract on _The Athenian State_, currently attributed to\nXenophon, but probably written as early as B.C. 424, that \"the people\n(\u03b4\u1fc6\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2) builds itself many pal\u00e6stras, dressing-rooms, baths, and the\nmasses have more enjoyment of these than the few that are well-to-do.\"\nIf we assume that some of these pal\u00e6stras were for boys, as we\napparently have a right to do, we must conclude that some, at least, if\nnot all, of the schools for bodily training were public edifices, let\nout by the State to teachers. Like all the great gymnasia, some, and\npossibly all, of them were situated outside the city walls and had\ngardens attached to them. Whether the music-schools were so likewise, is\ndoubtful, and this brings us to our second question--whether the two\nbranches of education were taught in the same place. That they were not\ntaught in the same room, or by the same person, is clear enough; but it\ndoes not follow from this that they were not taught in the same\nbuilding, or at any rate in the same enclosed space. Though there seems\nto be no explicit statement in any ancient author on this point, I think\nthere are sufficient reasons for concluding that, generally at least,\nthey were so taught. If we find that Antisthenes, Plato, and Aristotle,\nwho may be said to have introduced a systematic \"higher education\" into\nAthens, opened their schools in the great public gymnasia, frequented by\nyouths and men, we may surely conclude that the lower mental education\nwas not separated from the physical. In the _Lysis_ of Plato, we find\nsome young men coming out of a pal\u00e6stra outside the city walls, and\ninviting Socrates to enter, telling him that their occupation (\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03ae)\nconsists _mostly_ in discussions (\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u1f10\u03bd \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2), and that their\nteacher is a certain Miccus, an admirer of his. Socrates recognizes the\nman as a capable \"sophist,\" a term never used of physical trainers. On\nentering, Socrates finds a number of boys and youths (\u03bd\u03b5\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9) playing\ntogether, the former having just finished a sacrifice. It seems to\nfollow directly from this that intellectual education was imparted in\nthe pal\u00e6stras. If this be true, we may, I think, conclude that in Athens\nthe schools generally were outside the city walls, though the case was\ncertainly different in some other cities.\n\nIn regard to our third question, it is clear that, if boys spent their\nwhole day in one place, it would be more easy to divide it profitably\nbetween musical instruction and gymnastics than if they spent one part\nof it in one place, and another in another. Just how it was divided, we\ndo not know, and I have little doubt that much depended upon the notions\nof parents and the tendencies of different periods. It is quite clear,\nfrom certain complaints of Aristotle's, that in Athens parents enjoyed\ngreat liberty in this matter. In any case, since, as we know, the\ninstitutions of education were open all day, it seems more than probable\nthat one class of boys took their gymnastic lesson at one hour, another\nat another, and so with other branches of study. It cannot be that the\nphysical training-schools were deserted when the music-schools were in\nsession. I think there is sufficient reason for believing that,\ngenerally, the younger boys took their physical exercises in the\nmorning, and their intellectual instruction in the afternoon, the order\nbeing reversed in the case of the older boys. How much of the time spent\nat school was given up to lessons and how much to play, is not at all\nclear; but I am inclined to think that the playtime was at least as long\nas the worktime. The schools were for boys what the agora and the\ngymnasium were for grown men--the place where their lives were spent.\n\nBefore we consider separately the two divisions of Athenian education, a\nfew facts common to them may be mentioned. In the first place, they had\na common end, which was, to produce men independent but respectful,\nfreedom-loving but law-abiding, healthy in mind and body, clear in\nthought, ready in action, and devoted to their families, their\nfatherland, and their gods. Contrary to the practice of the Romans, the\nAthenians sought to prepare their sons for independent citizenship at as\nearly an age as possible. In the second place, the motives employed in\nboth divisions were the same, viz. fear of punishment and hope of\nreward. As we have seen, the Athenian boy, if he behaved badly, was not\nspared the rod. As an offset against this, when he did well, he received\nunstinted praise, not to speak of more substantial things. Education,\nlike everything else in Greece, took the form of competition. The\nHomeric line (_Il._, vi, 208; xi, 784),\n\n \"See that thou ever be best, and above all others distinguished,\"\n\nwas the motto of the Athenian in everything. In the third place, in both\ndivisions the chief aim was the realization of capacity, not the\nfurthering of acquisition. Mere learning and execution were almost\nuniversally despised in the old time, while intelligence and capacity\nwere universally admired. In the fourth place, in both divisions the\nutmost care was directed to the conduct of the pupils, so that it might\nbe gentle, dignified, and rational. In the fifth place, education in\nboth its branches was intended to enable men to occupy worthily and\nsociably their leisure time, quite as much as to prepare them for what\nmight be called their practical duties in family, society, and State.\nThe fine arts, according to the Greeks, furnished the proper amusements\nfor educated men (\u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9).\n\n\n(\u03b1) _Musical (and Literary) Instruction_.\n\nThough the Greek word _music_ (\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae) came in later times to have an\nextended meaning, in the epoch of which we are treating, it included\nonly music in our sense, and poetry, two things which were not then\nseparated. Aristophanes, as late as B.C. 422, can still count upon an\naudience ready to laugh at the idea of giving instruction in astronomy\nand geometry, as things too remote from human interests (_Clouds_, vv\n220 sqq.). The poetry consisted chiefly of the epics of Homer and\nHesiod, the elegiacs of Tyrt\u00e6us, Solon, Theognis, etc., the iambics of\nArchilochus, Simonides, etc., and the songs of the numerous lyrists,\nTerpander, Arion, Alc\u00e6us, Alcman, Sappho, Simonides, etc. The music was\nsimple, meant to \"sweeten\" (\u1f21\u03b4\u03cd\u03bd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd) the words and bring out their\nmeaning. In fact, the music and the poetry were always composed\ntogether, so that the poet was necessarily also a musician. What we call\n\"harmony\" was unknown in Greek music at all times, and instrumental\nmusic was almost entirely confined to solo-playing.\n\nIn treating of Athenian, and, indeed, of all Greek, education, it is of\nthe utmost importance to realize that the intellectual and moral part of\nit has music and poetry for its starting-point. This is the core round\nwhich everything else gathers; this is what determines its character,\ninfluence, and ideal. Culture, as distinguished from nature, is the\nmaterial of Athenian intellectual and moral education; and by this is\nmeant, not the history or theory of culture, as it might be set forth in\nprose, but culture itself, as embodied in the ideals and forms of\nmusic-wedded poetry, appealing to the emotions that stir the will, as\nwell as to the intelligence that guides it.\n\nBy making the works of the great poets of the Greek people the material\nof their education, the Athenians attained a variety of objects\ndifficult of attainment by any other one means. The fact is, the ancient\npoetry of Greece, with its finished form, its heroic tales and\ncharacters, its accounts of peoples far removed in time and space, its\nmanliness and pathos, its directness and simplicity, its piety and\nwisdom, its respect for law and order, combined with its admiration for\npersonal initiative and worth, furnished, in the hands of a careful and\ngenial teacher, a material for a complete education such as could not\nwell be matched even in our own day. What instruction in ethics,\npolitics, social life, and manly bearing could not find a fitting\nvehicle in the Homeric poems, not to speak of the geography, the\ngrammar, the literary criticism, and the history which the comprehension\nof them involved? Into what a wholesome, unsentimental, free world did\nthese poems introduce the imaginative Greek boy! What splendid ideals of\nmanhood and womanhood did they hold up for his admiration and imitation!\nFrom Hesiod he would learn all that he needed to know about his gods and\ntheir relation to him and his people. From the elegiac poets he would\nderive a fund of political and social wisdom, and an impetus to\npatriotism, which would go far to make him a good man and a good\ncitizen. From the iambic poets he would learn to express with energy his\nindignation at meanness, feebleness, wrong, and tyranny, while from the\nlyric poets he would learn the language suitable to every genial feeling\nand impulse of the human heart. And in reciting or singing all these,\nhow would his power of terse, idiomatic expression, his sense of poetic\nbeauty and his ear for rhythm and music be developed! With what a\ntreasure of examples of every virtue and vice, and with what a fund of\nepigrammatic expression would his memory be furnished! How familiar he\nwould be with the character and ideals of his nation, how deeply in\nsympathy with them! And all this was possible even before the\nintroduction of letters. With this event a new era in education begins.\nThe boy now not only learns and declaims his Homer, and sings his\nSimonides or Sappho, he learns also to write down their verses from\ndictation, and so at once to read and to write. This, indeed, was the\nway in which these two (to us) fundamental arts were acquired. As soon\nas the boy could trace with his finger in sand, or scratch with a stylus\non wax, the forms of the letters, and combine them into syllables and\nwords, he began to write poetry from his master's dictation. The\nwriting-lesson of to-day was the reading, recitation, or singing-lesson\nof to-morrow. Every boy made his own reading-book, and, if he found it\nillegible, and stumbled in reading, he had only himself to blame. The\nGreeks, and especially the Athenians, laid the greatest stress upon\nreading well, reciting well, and singing well, and the youth who could\nnot do all the three was looked upon as uncultured. Nor could he hide\nhis want of culture, since young men were continually called upon, both\nat home and at more or less public gatherings, to perform their part in\nthe social entertainment.\n\nThe strictly musical instruction of this period was almost entirely\nconfined to simple, strong Doric airs, sung to an accompaniment which\nwas played on an instrument closely resembling the modern guitar (\u03bb\u03cd\u03c1\u03b1,\n\u03ba\u03af\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2). Complicated and wind instruments were unpopular, and the\nsofter or more thrilling kinds of music, Lydian, Phrygian, etc., had not\nyet been introduced, at least into schools. Anything like the skill and\nexecution demanded of professional players, who were usually slaves or\nforeigners, was considered altogether unworthy of a free man and a\ncitizen, and was therefore not aimed at. Fond as the Athenians were of\nthe fine arts, they always held professional skill in any of them,\nexcept poetry and musical composition, to be incompatible with that\ndignity and virtue which they demanded of the free citizen. A\nrespectable Athenian would no more have allowed his son to be a\nprofessional musician than he would have allowed him to be a\nprofessional acrobat.\n\nIt is difficult for us to understand the way in which the Greeks\nregarded music. Inferior as their music was to ours in all technical\nways, it exerted an influence upon their lives of which we can form but\na faint conception. To them it was a d\u00e6monic power, capable of rousing\nor assuaging the passions, and hence of being used for infinite good or\nevil. No wonder, then, that in their education they sought to employ\nthose kinds which tended to \"purgation\" (\u03ba\u03ac\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2), and to avoid those\nthat were exciting, sentimental, or effeminate! No wonder that they\ndisapproved of divorcing music from the intellectual element contained\nin the words, and allowing it to degenerate into a mere emotional or\nsensual luxury! Music the Greeks regarded, not indeed as a moral force\n(a phrase that to them, who regarded morality as a matter of the will,\nwould have conveyed no meaning), but as a force whose office it was, by\npurging and harmonizing the human being, to make him a fit subject for\nmoral instruction. Music, they held, brought harmony, first into the\nhuman being himself, by putting an end to the conflict between his\npassions and his intelligent will, and then, as a consequence, into his\nrelations with his fellows. Harmony within was held to be the condition\nof harmony without.\n\nIn the period of which I am speaking, no distinction was yet made\nbetween music and literature (\u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1), both being taught by the\n_citharist_ (\u03ba\u03b9\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2). Indeed, the term for teacher of literature\n(\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2) was not then invented. But the citharist not only taught\nliterature: he also taught the elements of arithmetic, a matter of no\nsmall difficulty, considering the clumsy notation then in use. This was\ndone by means of pebbles, a box of sand, or an abacus similar in\nprinciple to that now used by billiard players to keep count of their\nstrokes.\n\nAs to the schoolrooms in ancient Athens, they were apparently simple in\nthe extreme; indeed, rather porches open to sun and wind than rooms in\nthe modern sense. They contained little or no furniture. The boys sat\nupon the ground or upon low benches, like steps (\u03b2\u03ac\u03b8\u03c1\u03b1), while the\nteacher occupied a high chair (\u03b8\u03c1\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2). The benches were washed,\napparently every day, with sponges. The only decorations permitted in\nthe schoolrooms, it seems, were statues or statuettes of the Muses and\nApollo, and the school festivals or exhibitions were regarded as\nfestivals in honor of these. Indeed, in Greece every sort of festival\nwas regarded as an act of worship to some divinity. The chief school\nfestival seems to have been the _Mus\u0113a_ (\u03bc\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1), at which the boys\nrecited and sang.\n\n\n(\u03b2) _Gymnastics or Bodily Training_.\n\nUnder the term _Gymnastics_ (\u03b3\u03c5\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae), the Greeks generally included\neverything relating to the culture of the body. The ends which the\nAthenians sought to reach through this branch of education were health,\nstrength, adroitness, ease, self-possession, and firm, dignified\nbearing. A certain number of boys, intending to take part in the Olympic\nand other great games, were allowed to train as athletes under a gymnast\n(\u03b3\u03c5\u03bc\u03bd\u03b1\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03c2, \u1f00\u03bb\u03b5\u03af\u03c0\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2) in the public gymnasia, and under the direction of\nthe State; but these were exceptions. The athlete was not an ideal\nperson at Athens, as he was at Thebes and Sparta.\n\nGymnastic exercises were conducted partly in the pal\u00e6stras, or wrestling\nschools, partly on the race-courses, both of which were under the\ndirection of professional trainers (\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b2\u03b1\u03b9). In early times, the\npal\u00e6stra and race-course were simply an open space covered with sand and\nprobably connected with the school (\u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03c3\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd), thus corresponding to\nour playground. Later, this space was partly covered over and furnished\nwith dressing-rooms, a bath, seats for spectators, an altar for\nsacrifices, statues, etc. Of the five gymnastic exercises in which boys\nwere trained, all except wrestling seem to have been conducted on the\nrace-course, so that the pal\u00e6stra was reserved for what its name\nimplied. It is by no means certain that every pal\u00e6stra had a race-course\nconnected with it, at least in the time of which we are speaking, and\npossibly in many cases the boys took part of their exercises in the\npublic race-course running from the agora to beyond the walls. Just as\nthe schoolroom was decorated with images of Apollo and the Muses, so the\npal\u00e6stra was decorated with images of Hermes, Heracles, and Eros,\nsymbolizing, respectively, adroitness, human strength, and youthful\nfriendship. The special patron of the pal\u00e6stra was Hermes, and the\ngymnastic exhibition took the form of a festival to him, the Herm\u00e6a, at\nwhich a sacrifice was offered and the boys were allowed the use of the\nbuilding to play games in, the victors wearing crowns.\n\nIt would be impossible, in a work of this compass, to enter into a\nminute description of all the exercises of the Athenian pal\u00e6stra. We\nmust be content with a general statement, which may be prefaced with the\nremark that these exercises were at first light, increasing gradually in\nrigor and difficulty as the strength and skill of the growing child\npermitted.\n\nThe chief gymnastic exercises were five, named in this order in a famous\nline of Simonides: (1) leaping, (2) running, (3) discus-throwing, (4)\njavelin-casting, (5) wrestling (\u03c0\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7), which last gave the name to the\npal\u00e6stra. We shall not strictly follow this order, but begin with\n\n(1) _Running._--This was the simplest, lightest, most natural, and,\ntherefore, the most easily taught of exercises. It was probably also the\noldest. We find even Homer making his ideal Ph\u00e6acians begin their games\nwith it, and this practice seems to have been general throughout\nantiquity. In taking this exercise, the boys divested themselves of all\nclothing and had their bodies rubbed with oil. The running appears to\nhave been of the simplest kind. Hurdle-races, sack-races, etc., were\napparently excluded from education. At the same time, the running was\nrendered difficult by the soft sand with which the course was covered to\nthe depth of several inches. The races were distinguished according to\ntheir length in furlongs or stadia: (1) the furlong-race, (2) the\ndouble-furlong race, (3) the horse (four-furlong) race, (4) the long\nrace, whose length seems to have been twenty-four furlongs, or about\nthree miles. The stadion was = 202\u00bc yards English. The shorter races\ncalled for brief concentration of energy, the longer for persistence and\nendurance; all were exercises in agility; all tended to develop\nlung-power.\n\n(2) _Leaping or Jumping._--This exercise seems, in the main, to have\nconfined itself to the long leap. Though the high leap and the pole-jump\ncan hardly have been unknown, we have no evidence that they were ever\nemployed in the gymnastic training of boys. There may have been hygienic\nreasons which forbade their use. On the other hand, boys were taught to\nlengthen their leap by means of weights, somewhat similar to our\ndumb-bells, carried in their hands, and swung forward in the act of\nleaping. Such leaping would be an exercise for the arms, as well as for\nthe legs and the rest of the body. But, just as there were two exercises\nintended chiefly for the legs, so there were two intended chiefly for\nthe arms--discus-throwing and javelin-casting.\n\n(3) _Discus-throwing._--The modern world has been rendered very familiar\nwith the method of this exercise by the copies of the _discobolus_ of\nMyron, preserved in Rome and extensively engraved and photographed, and\nthat of the _discobolus_ of Alcamenes which now stands in the Vatican\n(see Overbeck, _Griech. Plastik_ vol. i, p. 276). The discus was\ngenerally a flat, round piece of stone or metal, a sort of large quoit\nwith no hole in the middle, which the user sought to throw as far as he\ncould. The discobolus of Alcamenes shows us a youth balancing the discus\nin his left hand, and taking the measure of his throw with his eye; that\nof Myron shows us another in the act of throwing. He swings the discus\nbackward in his right hand, and bends his body forward to balance it.\nHis right foot, the toes contracted with effort, rests firmly on the\nground; the left is slightly lifted; the whole body is like a bent bow.\nIn the next instant the left foot will advance, the left hand, now\nresting on the right knee, will swing backwards, the body will resume\nits erect position, and the discus will be shot forward from the right\nhand like an arrow. Nothing could show more clearly than does this\nstatue the perfect organization, symmetry, and balance which were the\naim of Greek gymnastics. Not one limb could be moved without affecting\nall the rest,--which shows that the exercise extended to the whole body.\n\n(4) _Javelin-casting._--The aim of this exercise was to develop skill\nand precision of eye and hand, rather than strength of muscle. The\ninstrument employed was a short dagger or lance, which was aimed at a\nmark. He who could hit the mark from the greatest distance was the most\nproficient scholar. The spear, before being thrown, was balanced in the\nright hand at the height of the ear.\n\n(5) _Wrestling._--This very complicated exercise was evidently the\nprincipal one in the gymnastic course, the one to which the others were\nmerely preparatory. It was the only one which a boy could not practice\nby himself. It exercised not only the whole body, but the patience and\ntemper as well. The aim of the wrestler was to throw (\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03b2\u03bb\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd) his\nantagonist. Those who took part in this exercise had their bodies rubbed\nwith oil and strewn with fine sand. It seems that the wrestler was\nallowed to do anything he chose to his antagonist except to bite,\nstrike, or kick him. Before he could claim the victory he had to throw\nhim three times. After the contest the wrestlers scraped from their\nbodies, with a strigil, the oil and dust,[2] bathed, were again rubbed\nwith oil, exposed their bodies to the sun, in order to dry and tan them,\nand dressed. The bathing was done in cold water, and both the bathing\nand the sunning were in part intended to inure the body to sudden cold\nand heat, which inurement was considered a very essential part of\nphysical training.\n\nSuch were the chief exercises employed in the gymnastic training of the\nAthenians. Thus far, we have considered the two branches of education as\nconducted separately, and as not coming at any point in contact with\neach other. But it would have been very unlike the Greek, and especially\nthe Athenian, to leave the two divisions of education unrelated and\nunharmonized. And, indeed, he did not so leave them, but brought them\ntogether in the most admirable way in what he called _orchesis_, a word\nfor which we have no better equivalent than\n\n(\u03b3) _Dancing_ (\u1f44\u03c1\u03c7\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, \u03c7\u03bf\u03c1\u03cc\u03c2).\n\n\"Dancers,\" says Aristotle, \"by means of plastic rhythms (rhythms\nreproduced in plastic forms) imitate characters, feelings, and\nactions.\" Xenophon, in his _Anabasis_, describing a banquet that took\nplace in the wilds of Paphlagonia, says: \"After the treaty was ratified\nand the p\u00e6an sung, there first rose up two Thracians and danced in armor\nto the flute, leaping high and lightly, and using their swords. Finally\none of them struck the other, so that everybody thought he had wounded\nhim; but he fell in an artificial way. Then the Paphlagonians raised a\nshout; but the assailant, having despoiled the fallen man of his armor,\nwent out singing the Sitalcas. Then others of the Thracians carried out\nthe other as if he had been dead; but he was none the worse. Next, some\n\u00c6nianes and Magnesians stood up and danced the so-called Carp\u00e6a in\narmor. The manner of the dance was this: one man, putting his arms\nwithin reach, sows and drives a team, frequently turning round as if\nafraid. Then a robber makes his appearance. As soon as the other espies\nhim, he seizes his arms, advances to him, and fights in front of the\nteam. And the two did this keeping time to the flute. Finally the\nrobber, having bound the other, carries off both him and the team;\nsometimes, on the contrary, the ploughman binds the robber, in which\ncase he yokes him, with his hands bound behind his back, to his oxen and\ndrives off.\" Several other dances, performed by persons of different\nnationalities, follow; but enough has been quoted to show that the Greek\n\u1f44\u03c1\u03c7\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 was something very different from our dancing. It was, indeed, a\npantomimic ballet, interspersed with _tableaux vivans_.\n\nIn the dances here mentioned, the flute is the instrument employed, and\nthis the player could not accompany with his voice. But in the Athenian\nschools, in the old time, the flute, and all music without words, were\ntabooed. There can be no doubt, therefore, that in these the orchestic\nperformances were accompanied by the lyre, the player on which sang in\nwords what the dancers danced. It is obvious that in such performances\nthe musical (literary) and gymnastic branches of education came in for\nabout equal shares. Dancing exercised the whole human being, body and\nsoul, and exercised them in a completely harmonious way. It is this\nharmony, this rhythmic movement of the body in consonance with the\nemotions of the soul and the purposes of the intelligence, that is\n_grace_ (\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2). Hence, while the Greeks relied upon gymnastics to\nimpart strength and firmness to the body, they looked to dancing for\ncourtliness and grace. Plato places the two on the same footing, as\nparts of a single discipline.\n\nThe fact that the two divisions of education met in dancing seems to\nprove what I surmised above, viz. that they were conducted within the\nsame precincts; in which case we may suppose that, while the dancing\nexercises took place in the pal\u00e6stra, the music was supplied by the\nmusic master. We know that the chorus-leader was a public officer,\nappointed by the demos, and had to be over forty years old. In any case,\nit is curious enough to think that Athenian, and, generally, Greek,\neducation culminated in dancing. But this was a perfectly logical\nresult; for the chorus is the type of Greek social life, as we see most\nclearly in the _Republic_ of Plato. It hardly needs to be pointed out\nthat the supreme form of Greek art, the drama, was but a development of\nthe Bacchic or Dionysiac chorus. This development consisted in the\nseparation of the music from the pantomime, and the assignment of the\nformer to the chorus, which no longer danced, but walked, and of the\nlatter to the actors, who added the dialogue to it. Greek life was\ndivided into three parts--civil, military, religious. Music and letters\nwere a preparation for the first, gymnastics for the second, and dancing\nfor the third. Dancing formed a prominent part in Greek worship, and it\nmay be doubted whether free Athenians ever danced except \"before the\ngods \"--\u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03cc\u03b4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c2, as Xenophon says.\n\nTwo things still remain to be considered with regard to Athenian\nschools, (1) grading, (2) holidays. With respect to the former, the\npractice probably differed at different times; but we seem to be\njustified in assuming that, at the time of which I am speaking, there\nwere but two grades, boys (\u03c0\u03b1\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b5\u03c2) and youths (\u03bd\u03b5\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9). These are\nmentioned by Plato, in the _Lysis_, as celebrating the Herm\u00e6a together\nin a pal\u00e6stra. The first grade would include the boys from seven to\neleven years of age; the second, those from eleven to fifteen. As to\nholidays, they seem to have been simply the feast-days of the greater\ngods, when business of every sort was suspended. Such days amounted to\nabout ninety annually.\n\n\n(3) COLLEGE EDUCATION.\n\nAbout the time when he was blossoming into manhood, that is, some time\nbetween his fourteenth and his sixteenth year, the Athenian boy of the\nolden time was transferred from the private school and pal\u00e6stra, which\nbelonged to the family side of life, to the gymnasium, which belonged to\nthe State, and in which he received the education calculated to fit him\nfor the duties of a citizen. Having, in the family and the school, been\ntrained to be a gentleman (\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u03ba\u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03b8\u03cc\u03c2), he must now be trained to be a\ncitizen, capable of exercising legislative, judicial, and military\nfunctions. The State saw to it that he received this training, if his\nparents chose and could afford it.\n\nIn the time of Solon, about B.C. 590, two great gymnasia, the Academy\nand Cynosarges, were erected in the midst of extensive groves outside\nthe city walls. These groves were afterwards surrounded with high walls,\nfurnished with seats and other conveniences, and turned into city parks.\nThe Academy, which lay to the northwest of the city, in the valley of\nthe Cephisus, and was under the patronage of Athena, was the resort of\nthe full-blooded citizens, while Cynosarges, situated to the east of the\ncity, near the foot of Lycabettus, was assigned to those who had foreign\nblood in their veins, that is, who had only one parent of pure Athenian\nstock. This gymnasium was under the patronage of Heracles, whose worship\nalways implies the presence of a foreign and vanquished element. These\nwere the only two gymnasia belonging to Athens before the time of\nPericles. They were, probably, destroyed by the Persians in 480, and had\nafterwards to be rebuilt, and the groves replanted.\n\nWhile the children of nearly all the free citizens of Athens attended\nthe school and the pal\u00e6stra, it is clear that only the youth of the\nwealthier classes attended the gymnasium. One result of this was that\nthe government and offices of the State fell exclusively into the hands\nof those classes; and it was perhaps just in order to make this\ndivision, without introducing any class-law, that the shrewd Solon\nestablished the gymnasia, which thus became a bulwark against democracy.\n\nAs soon as the Athenian youth was transferred to the gymnasium, he\npassed from under the charge of the pedagogue, who represented the\nfamily, and came under the direct surveillance of the State. He was now\nfree to go where he would, to frequent the agora and the street, to\nattend the theatre, in which he had his appointed place, and to make\nhimself directly acquainted with all the details of public life. In the\ngymnasium he passed into the hands of a gymnast or scientific trainer,\nand for the next two or three years was subjected to the severer\nexercises, wrestling, boxing, etc. No special provision, beyond the fact\nthat he had to learn the laws, was made for his intellectual and moral\ninstruction. He was expected to acquire this from contact with the older\ncitizens whom he met in the agora, the street, or the public park. Thus,\nat what is justly regarded as the most critical age, he was almost\ncompelled to live a free, breezy, outdoor life, full of activity and\nstirring incident, his thoughts and feelings directed outwards into acts\nof will, and not turned back upon himself or his own states. At the same\ntime he was acquiring just that practical knowledge of ethical laws and\nof real life which could best fit him for active citizenship. He now\nlearnt to ride, to drive, to row, to swim, to attend banquets, to\nsustain a conversation, to discuss the weightiest questions of\nstatesmanship, to sing and dance in public choruses, and to ride or walk\nin public processions. If he abused his liberty and behaved in a lawless\nor unseemly way, he was called to account by the severe Court of the\nAreopagus, which attended to public morals. He saw little of girls of\nhis own age, except his sisters, unless it was at public festivals, when\nthere was little opportunity of becoming acquainted with them. His\naffectionate nature therefore expressed itself mostly in the form of\ndevoted friendships to other youths of his own, or nearly his own, age,\na fact which enables us to understand why friendship fills so large a\nspace, not only in the life, but also in the ethical treatises of the\nGreeks,--Plato, Aristotle, etc.,--and why love, in the modern sense,\nplays so insignificant a part. The truth is that, even in Athens, the\nState encroached upon the family. Plato's _Republic_ was only the\nlogical carrying out of principles that were latent long before in the\nsocial life of the Athenian people.\n\nIt would be impossible to treat in detail the exercises to which the\nAthenian youth was subjected during the years in which he attended the\npublic gymnasium as a pupil. The old exercises of the pal\u00e6stra were\ncontinued, running and wrestling especially; but the former was now done\nin armor, and the latter became more violent, and was supplemented by\nboxing. In fact, the physical exercises were now systematized into the\n_pentathlon_--running, leaping, discus-throwing, wrestling,\nboxing--which formed the programme of nearly all gymnastic exhibitions.\nDuring these years, the youth was still regarded as a minor, and his\nfather or guardian was responsible for his good behavior. But when he\nreached the age of eighteen, a change took place, and he passed under\nthe direct control of the State. His father now brought him before the\nreeve of his _demos_ (ward or village), as a candidate for independent\ncitizenship. If he proved to be the lawful child of free citizens, and\ncame up to the moral and physical requirements of the law, his name was\nentered upon the register of the demos, and he became a member of it. He\nwas now prepared to be presented to the whole people, and to pass the\nState examination. He shore his long hair for the first time, and donned\nthe black garment of the citizen. In this guise he presented himself to\nthe king-archon of the State, who, at a public assembly, introduced him,\nalong with others, to the whole people. He was then and there armed with\nspear and shield (supplied by the State if his father had fallen in\nwar), and thence proceeded to the shrine of Aglauros, where, looking\ndown on the agora, the city, and the Attic plain, he took the Solonian\noath of citizenship (see p. 61). He was now technically an _eph\u0113bos_,\ncadet, or citizen-novice, ready to undergo those two years of severe\ndiscipline which at once formed his introduction to practical affairs,\nand constituted the State examination. During the first year he remained\nin the neighborhood of Athens, drilling in arms, and acquiring a\nknowledge of military tactics. His life was now the hard life of a\nsoldier. He slept in the open air, or in the guard-houses (\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1)\nthat surrounded the city, and was liable to be called upon at any time\nby the government to give aid in an emergency. He also took part in the\npublic festivals. At the end of the year, all the _eph\u0113boi_ of one\nyear's standing passed an examination in military drill before the\nassembled people (\u1f00\u03c0\u03b5\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03be\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03b4\u03ae\u03bc\u1ff3 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c4\u03ac\u03be\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2[3]), after which\nthey were employed as militia to man the frontier guard-houses, and as\nrural _gendarmerie_ (\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9), scouring the country in all directions.\nThey now lived like soldiers in war-time, and learnt two important\nthings, (1) the topography of Attica, its roads, passes, brooks,\nsprings, etc., (2) the art of enforcing law and order. Their life,\nindeed, closely resembled that of the Alpine corps (_Alpini_) of the\nItalian army at the present day. These spend the summer in making\nthemselves acquainted with every height, valley, pass, stream, and\ncovert in the Italian Alps, often bivouacking for days together at great\nheights. That during this time the _eph\u0113boi_ should have taken any part\nin the legislative or judicial duties of citizens, seems in the highest\ndegree improbable. At the end of their second year, however, they passed\na second examination, called the citizenship or manhood examination\n(\u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03b1\u03c3\u03af\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u1f04\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2), after which they were full members of the State.\n\n\n(4) UNIVERSITY EDUCATION.\n\nThe Greek university was the State, and the Greek State was a\nuniversity--a _Cultur-Staat_, as the Germans say. That the State is a\nschool of virtue, was a view generally entertained in the ancient world,\nwhich, until it began to decay, completely identified the man with the\ncitizen. The influence of this view upon the attitude of the individual\nto the State, and of the State to the individual, can hardly be\noverestimated. The State claimed, and the individual accorded to it, a\ndisciplinary right which extended to every sphere and action of life.\nThus the sphere of morality coincided exactly with the sphere of\nlegality, or, to put it the other way, the sphere of legality extended\nto the whole sphere of morality, and this was considered true, whatever\nform the State or government might assume--monarchy, aristocracy,\ndemocracy, etc.\n\nTo give a full account of the university education of old Athens would\nbe to write her social and political history up to the time of the\nPersian Wars. This is, of course, out of the question. All I can do is\nto point out those elements in the State which enabled it to produce\nthat splendid array of noble men, and accomplish those great deeds and\nworks, which make her brief career seem the brightest spot in the\nworld's history.\n\nThe chief of these elements, and the one which included all the rest,\nwas the Greek ideal of harmony. Athens was great as a State and as a\nschool so long as she embodied that ideal, so long as she distributed\npower and honor in accordance with worth (\u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03ae) intellectual, moral,\npractical; in a word, so long as the State was governed by the best\ncitizens (\u1f04\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9), and the rest acknowledged their right to do so.\nNotwithstanding the contention of Grote and others, it is strictly true\nthat Athens was great because, and so long as, she was aristocratic (in\nthe ancient sense), and perished when she abandoned her fundamental\nideal by becoming democratic. This assertion must not be construed as\nany slur upon democracy as such, or as denying that Athens in perishing\npaved the way for a higher ideal than her own. It simply states a fact,\nwhich may be easily generalized without losing its truth: An institution\nperishes when it abandons the principle on which it was founded and\nbuilt up. Unless we bear this in mind, we shall utterly fail to\nunderstand the lesson of Athenian history. If it be maintained that some\nof Athens' noblest work was done under the democracy, the sufficient\nanswer is, that it was nearly all done by men who retained the spirit of\nthe old aristocracy, and bitterly opposed the democracy. We need name\nonly \u00c6schylus, Sophocles, Aristophanes, Plato, Aristotle, Demosthenes.\n\n\n\n\nPART II\n\nTHE \"NEW EDUCATION\" (B.C. 480-338)\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nINDIVIDUALISM AND PHILOSOPHY\n\n Homer ought to be driven from the lists and whipt, and Archilochus\n likewise.--Heraclitus.\n\n Thou needs must have knowledge of all things,\n First of the steadfast core of the Truth that forceth conviction,\n Then of the notions of mortals, where true conviction abides not.\n --Parmenides.\n\n All things were undistinguished: then Intellect came and brought\n them into order.--Anaxagoras.\n\n Man is the measure of all things.\n\n In regard to the Gods, I am unable to know whether they are or are\n not.--Protagoras.\n\n STREPSIADES. Don't you see what a good thing it is to have learning?\n There isn't any Zeus, Phidippides!\n\n PHIDIPPIDES. Who is there then?\n\n STREPS. Vortex rules, having dethroned Zeus.\n\n PHID. Pshaw! what nonsense!\n\n STREPS. You may count it true, all the same.\n\n PHID. Who says so?\n\n STREPS. Socrates the Melian, and Ch\u00e6rephon, who knows the footprints\n of fleas.--Aristophanes, _Clouds_.\n\n There is an old-fashioned saw, current of yore among mortals, that a\n man's happiness, when full-grown, gives birth and dies not\n childless, and that from Fortune there springs insatiate woe for all\n his race. But I, dissenting from all others, am alone of different\n mind. It is the Irreverent Deed that begets after it more of its\n kind. For to righteous homes belongs a fair-childrened lot forever;\n but old Irreverence is sure to beget Irreverence, springing up fresh\n among evil men, when the numbered hour arrives. And the new\n Irreverence begets Surfeit of Wealth, and a power beyond all battle,\n beyond all war, unholy Daring, twin curses, black to homes, like to\n their parents. But Justice shines in smoky homes, and honors the\n righteous life, and, leaving, with averted eyes, foundations gilded\n with impurity of hands, she draws nigh to holy things, honoring not\n the power of wealth, with its counterfeit stamp of praise. And her\n will is done.--\u00c6schylus\n\n From the time they are children to the day of their death, we teach\n them and admonish them. As soon as the child understands what is\n said to him, his nurse and his mother and his pedagogue and even his\n father vie with each other in trying to make the best of him that\n can be made, at every word and deed instructing him and warning him,\n \"This is right,\" \"This is wrong,\" \"This is beautiful,\" \"This is\n ugly,\" \"This is righteous,\" \"This is sinful,\" \"Do this,\" \"Don't do\n that.\" And if the child readily obeys, well and good; if he does\n not, then they treat him like a bent and twisted stick,\n straightening him out with threats and blows. Later on, they send\n him to school, and then they lay their injunctions upon the masters\n to pay much more attention to the good behavior of their sons than\n to their letters and music (\u03ba\u03b9\u03b8\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2); and the teachers act upon\n these injunctions. Later yet, when they have learnt to read, and are\n proceeding to understand the meaning of what is written, just as\n formerly they understood what was said to them, they put before them\n on the benches to read the works of good poets, and insist upon\n their learning them by heart--works which contain many admonitions,\n and many narratives, noble deeds, and eulogies of the worthy men of\n old--their purpose being to awaken the boy's ambition, so that he\n may imitate these men and strive to be worthy likewise. The\n music-teachers also, pursuing the same line, try to inculcate\n self-control (\u03c3\u03c9\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7) and to prevent the boys from falling into\n mischief. In addition to this, when they have learnt to play on the\n lyre, their masters teach them other poems, written by great lyric\n poets, making them sing them and play the accompaniments to them,\n and compelling them to work into their souls the rhythms and\n melodies of them, so that they may grow in gentleness, and, having\n their natures timed and tuned, may be fitted to speak and act. The\n truth is, the whole life of man needs timing and tuning.\n Furthermore, in addition to all this, parents send their sons to the\n physical trainer, in order that their bodies may be improved and\n rendered capable of seconding a noble intent, and they themselves\n not be forced, from physical deterioration, to play the coward in\n war or other (serious) matters. And those who can best afford to\n give this education, give most of it, and these are the richest\n people. Their sons go earliest to school and leave it latest. And\n when the boys leave school, the State insists that they shall learn\n the laws and live according to them, and not according to their own\n caprice ... And if any one transgresses these laws, the State\n punishes him ... Seeing that so much attention is devoted to virtue,\n both in the family and in the State, do you wonder, Socrates, and\n question whether virtue be something that can be taught? Surely you\n ought not to wonder at this, but rather to wonder if it could _not_\n be taught.--Plato, _Protagoras_ (_words of Protagoras_).\n\n \"Isn't it true, Lysis,\" said I, \"that your parents love you very\n much?\"--\"To be sure,\" said he.--\"Then they would wish you to be as\n happy as possible?\"--\"Of course,\" said he.--\"And do you think a\n person is happy who is a slave, and is not allowed to do anything he\n desires?\"--\"I don't, indeed,\" said he.--\"Then, if your father and\n mother love you and wish you to be happy, they endeavor by every\n means in their power to make you happy.\"--\"To be sure they do,\" said\n he.--\"Then they allow you to do anything you please, and never chide\n you, or prevent you from doing what you desire.\"--\"By Jove! they do,\n Socrates: they prevent me from doing a great many things.\"--\"What do\n you mean,\" said I; \"they wish you to be happy, and yet prevent you\n from doing what you wish? Let us take an example: If you want to\n ride in one of your father's chariots, and to hold the reins, when\n it is competing in a race, won't they allow you, or will they\n prevent you?\"--\"By Jove! no: they would not allow me,\" said he. \"But\n why should they? There is a charioteer, who is hired by my\n father.\"--\"What do you mean? They allow a hired man, rather than\n you, to do what he likes with the horses, and pay him a salary\n besides?\"--\"And why not?\" said he.--\"Well then, I suppose they allow\n you to manage the mule-team, and if you wanted to take the whip and\n whip it, they would permit you.\"--\"How could they?\" said\n he.--\"What?\" said I: \"is nobody allowed to whip it?\"--\"Of course,\"\n he said; \"the muleteer.\"--\"A slave or a free man?\"--\"A slave,\" said\n he.--\"And so it seems they think more of a slave than of their son,\n and entrust their property to him rather than to you, and allow him\n to do what he pleases, whereas they prevent you. But, farther, tell\n me this. Do they allow you to manage yourself, or do they not even\n trust you to that extent?\"--\"How trust me?\" said he.--\"Then does\n some one manage you?\"--\"Yes, my pedagogue here,\" said he.--\"But he\n is surely not a slave?\"--\"Of course he is, our slave,\" said he.--\"Is\n it not strange,\" said I, \"that a freeman should be governed by a\n slave? But, to continue, what is this pedagogue doing when he\n governs you?\"--\"Taking me to a teacher, or something of the kind,\"\n he said.--\"And these teachers, it cannot be that they too govern\n you?\"--\"To any extent.\"--\"So then your father likes to set over you\n a host of masters and managers; but, of course, when you go home to\n your mother, she lets you do what you like, in order to make you\n happy, either with the threads or the loom, when she is\n weaving--does she not? She surely doesn't in the least prevent you\n from handling the batten, or the comb, or any of the instruments\n used in spinning.\"--And he, laughing, said: \"By Jove, Socrates; she\n not only prevents me, but I should be beaten if I touched\n them.\"--\"By Hercules,\" said I, \"isn't it true that you have done\n some wrong to your father and mother?\"--\"By Jove, not I,\" he\n said.--\"But for what reason, then, do they so anxiously prevent you\n from being happy, and doing what you please, and maintain you the\n whole day in servitude to some one or another, and without power to\n do almost anything you like. It seems, indeed, that you derive no\n advantage from all this wealth, but anybody manages it rather than\n you, nor from your body, nobly born as it is, but some one else\n shepherds it and takes care of it. But you govern nothing, Lysis,\n and do nothing that you desire.\"--\"The reason, Socrates,\" he said,\n \"is, that I am not of age.\"--Plato, _Lysis_.\n\n The present state of the constitution is as follows: Citizenship is\n a right of children whose parents are both of them citizens.\n Registration as member of a deme or township takes place when\n eighteen years of age are completed. Before it takes place the\n townsmen of the deme find a verdict on oath, firstly, whether they\n believe the youth to be as old as the law requires, and if the\n verdict is in the negative he returns to the ranks of the boys.\n Secondly, the jury find whether he is freeborn and legitimate. If\n the verdict is against him he appeals to the Heli\u00e6a, and the\n municipality delegate five of their body to accuse him of\n illegitimacy. If he is found by the jurors to have been illegally\n proposed for the register, the State sells him for a slave; if the\n judgment is given in his favor, he must be registered as one of the\n municipality. Those on the register are afterwards examined by the\n senate, and if anyone is found not to be eighteen years old, a fine\n is imposed on the municipality by which he was registered. After\n approbation, they are called _epheboi_, or cadets, and the parents\n of all who belong to a single tribe hold a meeting and, after being\n sworn, choose three men of the tribe above forty years of age, whom\n they believe to be of stainless character and fittest for the\n superintendence of youth, and out of these the commons in ecclesia\n select one superintendent for all of each tribe, and a governor of\n the whole body of youths from the general body of the Athenians.\n These take them in charge, and after visiting with them all the\n temples, march down to Pir\u00e6us, where they garrison the north and\n south harbors, Munychia and Acte. The commons also elect two\n gymnastic trainers for them, and persons who teach them to fight in\n heavy armor, to draw the bow, to throw the javelin, and to handle\n artillery. Each of the ten commanders receives as pay a drachma\n [about 20 cts.] per diem, and each of the cadets four obols [about\n 13 cts.]. Each commander draws the pay of the cadets of his own\n tribe, buys with it the necessaries of life for the whole band (for\n they mess together by tribes), and purveys for all their wants. The\n first year is spent in military exercises. The second year the\n commons meet in the theatre and the cadets, after displaying before\n them their mastery in warlike evolutions, are each presented with a\n shield and spear, and become mounted patrols of the frontier and\n garrison the fortresses. They perform this service for two years,\n wearing the equestrian cloak and enjoying immunity from civic\n functions. During this period, to guard their military duties from\n interruption, they can be parties to no action either as defendant\n or plaintiff, except in suits respecting inheritance, or heiresses,\n or successions to hereditary priesthoods. When the three years are\n completed they fall into the ordinary body of citizens.--Aristotle,\n _Constitution of Athens_ (_Poste's Version, with slight\n alterations_).\n\n\nThat perfect harmony between power and worth at which the Athenian State\naimed, was something not easily attained or preserved. As far back as\nits recorded history reaches, we find a struggle for power going on\nbetween a party which possessed more power than its worth justified, and\na party which possessed less; that is, between a party which, having\nonce been worthy, strove to hold power in virtue of its past history,\nand one that claimed power in virtue of the worth into which it was\ngrowing: in a word, a struggle between declining aristocracy and growing\ndemocracy. To the party in power, of course, this seemed a rebellion\nagainst lawful authority and privilege, and it did its best to suppress\nit. Hence came the rigorous legislation of Draco; later the more\nconciliatory, less out-spoken, but equally aristocratic legislation of\nSolon; then the tyranny of Pisistratus, lasting as long as he could hold\nthe balance of power between the contending parties; then the\nconstitution of Clisthenes, with the breaking up of the old Athenian\naristocratic system, the remodelling of the tribes, the degradation of\nthe Areopagus, and the definite triumph of democracy. To complete the\nmovement and, as it were, to consecrate it, came the Persian Wars, which\nmark the turning-point, the _peripeteia_, in Athenian history and\neducation. Whatever efforts aristocracy makes to maintain itself after\nthis, are made in the name of, and under cover of a zeal for, democracy.\n\nThe aristocratic Athenian State was based upon land-ownership, slavery,\nand the entire freedom of the land-owning class from all but family and\nState duties, from all need of engaging in productive industry. So long\nas the chief wealth of the State consisted in land and its produce, so\nlong the population was divided into two classes, the rich and the poor,\nand so long the former had little difficulty in keeping all power in\nits own hands. But no sooner did the growth of commerce throw wealth\ninto the hands of a class that owned no land, and was not above engaging\nin industry, than this class began to claim a share in political power.\nThere were now two wealthy classes, standing opposed to each other, a\nproud, conservative one, with \"old wealth and worth,\" and a vain,\nradical one, with new wealth and wants, both bidding for the favor of\nthe class that had little wealth, little worth, and many wants, and thus\nmaking it feel its importance. Such is the origin of Athenian democracy.\nIt is the child of trade and productive industry. It owed its final\nconsecration to the Persian Wars, and especially to the battle of\nSalamis, in which Athens was saved by her fleet, manned chiefly by\nmarines (\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b2\u03ac\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9) from the lower classes, the upper classes, as we have\nseen, being trained only for land-service. Thus the battle of Salamis\nwas not only a victory of Greece over Persia, but of foreign trade over\nhome agriculture, of democracy over aristocracy.\n\nThe fact that the Athenian democracy owed its origin to trade\ndetermined, in great measure, its history and tendencies. One of its\nmany results was that it opened Athens to the influx of foreign men,\nforeign ideas, and foreign habits, not to speak of foreign gods, all of\nwhich tended to break up the old self-contained, carefully organized\nlife of the people. In no department were their effects sooner or more\nclearly felt than in that of education. From about the date of the\nbattle of Salamis, when the youthful Ionian, Anaxagoras, came to Athens,\na succession of men of \"advanced\" ideas in art and science sought a\nfield of action within her borders. Such a field, indeed, seemed\npurposely to have been left open for them by the State, which had\nprovided no means of intellectual or moral education for its young\ncitizens, after they passed under its care (see p. 87). Nothing was\neasier or more profitable than for these wise foreigners to constitute\nthemselves public teachers, and fill the place which the State had left\nvacant. The State might occasionally object, and seek to punish one or\nanother of them for corrupting of the youth by the promulgation of\nimpious or otherwise dangerous ideas, as it did in the case of\nAnaxagoras; but their activity was too much in harmony with a tendency\nof the time,--a radical and individualistic tendency inseparable from\ndemocracy,--to be dispensed with altogether. Hence it was that, within a\nfew years after the battle of Salamis, there flourished in Athens a\nclass of men unknown before within her boundaries, a class of private\nprofessors, or \"sophists,\" as they called themselves, who undertook to\nteach theoretically what the State had assumed could be taught only\npractically and by herself, viz., virtue and wisdom. Their ideas were\nnovel, striking, and radical, hence congenial to a newly emancipated\npopulace, vain of its recent achievements, and contemptuous of all that\nsavored of the narrow, pious puritanism of the old time; their premises\nwere magnificent, and their fees high enough to impose upon a class that\nalways measures the value of a thing by what it is asked to pay for it;\ntheir method of teaching was such as to flatter the vanity, and secure\nthe favor, of both pupils and parents. No wonder that their success was\nimmediate and their influence enormous.\n\nFrom the days of Socrates to our own, 'sophist' has been a term of\nreproach, and not altogether unjustly so. Hegel, Grote, and Zeller have,\nindeed, shown that the sophists did not deserve all the obloquy which\nhas attached itself to their name, inasmuch as they were neither much\nbetter nor much worse than any class of men who set up to teach new\ndoctrines for money, and, as wise economists, suit supply to demand;\nnevertheless, it may be fairly enough said that they largely contributed\nto demoralize Athens, by encouraging irreverence for the very\nconceptions upon which her polity was built, and by pandering to some of\nthe most selfish and individualistic tendencies of democracy. If it be\nsaid that they have their place in the history of human evolution, as\nthe heralds of that higher view of life which allows the individual a\nsphere of activities and interests outside of that occupied by the\nState, this may at once and without difficulty be admitted, without our\nbeing thereby forced to regard them as noble men. The truth is, they\nrepresented, in practice and in theory, the spirit of individualism,\nwhich was then everywhere asserting itself against the spirit of\nnationalism or polity, and which perhaps had to assert itself in an\nexaggerated and destructive way, before the rightful claims of the two\ncould be manifested and harmonized. It is the incorporation of this\nspirit of individualism into education that constitutes the \"New\nEducation.\"\n\nThis spirit, as manifested in the sophists and their teaching, directed\nitself against the old political spirit in all the departments of\nlife--in religion, in politics, in education. It discredited the old\npopular gods, upon loyalty to whom the existence of the State had been\nsupposed to depend, substituting for them some crude fancy like Vortex,\nor some bald abstraction like Intellect. It encouraged the individual to\nseek his end in his own pleasure, and to regard the State as but a means\nto that end. It championed an education in which these ideas occupied a\nprominent place. What the sophists actually taught the ambitious young\nmen who sought their instruction, was self-assertion, unscrupulousness,\nand a showy rhetoric, in whose triumphal procession facts, fancies, and\nfalsehoods marched together in brilliant array. It is but fair to them\nto say that, in their endeavor to instruct young men in the art of\nspecious oratory, they laid the foundations of the art of rhetoric and\nthe science of grammar. So much, at least, the world owes to them.\n\nSince it was to the young men, who, freed from the discipline of home,\npedagogue, school, and pal\u00e6stra, could be met with anywhere, in the\nstreet, the agora, the gymnasium, that the sophists directed their chief\nattention, it was of course these who first showed the effects of their\nteaching. But their influence, falling in, as it did, with the\npronounced radical tendencies of the time, soon made itself felt in all\ngrades of education, from the family to the university, in the form of\nan irreverent, flippant, conceited rationalism, before whose\nself-erected and self-corrupted tribunal every institution in heaven and\nearth was to be tried. In the schools this influence showed itself in\nvarious ways: (1) in an increased attention to literature, and\nespecially to the formal side of it, (2) in the tendency to substitute\nfor the works of the old epic and lyric poets the works of more recent\nwriters tinged with the new spirit, (3) in the introduction of new and\ncomplicated instruments and kinds of music, (4) in an increasing\ndeparture from the severe physical and moral discipline of the old days.\nWe now, for the first time, hear of a teacher of literature, distinct\nfrom the music master, of teachers who possessed no copy of Homer\n(Alcibiades is said to have chastised such a one), of flutes, citharas,\nand the like in use in schools, of wildness and lewdness among boys of\ntender age. In the pal\u00e6stra the new spirit showed itself in a tendency\nto substitute showy and unsystematic exercises for the vigorous and\ngraded exercises of the older time, to sacrifice education to execution.\n\nBut, as already remarked, the new spirit showed itself most clearly and\nhurtfully in the higher education. The young men, instead of spending\ntheir time in vigorous physical exercise in the gymnasia and open\ncountry, began now to hang about the streets and public places,\nlistening to sophistic discussions, and to attend the schools of the\nsophists, exercising their tongues more than any other part of their\nbodies. The effect of this soon showed itself in a decline of physical\npower, of endurance, courage, and manliness, and in a strong tendency to\nluxury and other physical sins. They now began to imagine for themselves\na private life, very far from coincident with that demanded of a\ncitizen, and to look upon the old citizen-life, and its ideals,\nsanctions, and duties, with contempt or pity, as something which they\nhad learnt to rise above. The glory and well-being of their country\nwere no longer their chief object of ambition. The dry rot of\nindividualism, which always seems to those affected by it an evidence of\nhealth and manly vigor, was corrupting their moral nature, and preparing\nthe way for the destruction of the State. For it was but too natural\nthat these young men, when they came to be members of the State, should\nneglect its lessons and claims, and, following the new teachings, live\nto themselves. Thus, just as the character of the \"Old Education\" of\nAthens showed itself in the behavior of her sons in the Persian Wars, so\nthat of her \"New Education\" showed itself fifty years later in the\nPeloponnesian War, that long and disastrous struggle which wrecked\nAthens and Greece.\n\nYet Athens and her education were not allowed to go to ruin without a\nstruggle. The aristocratic party long stuck to the old principles and\ntried to give them effect; but, failing to understand the new\ncircumstances and to take account of them, it erred in the application\nof them, by seeking simply to restore the old conditions. Individuals\nalso exerted their best efforts for the same end. \u00c6schylus, who had\nfought at Marathon, and who, more than any other Greek, was endowed with\nthe spirit of religion, interpreted the old mythology in an ethical\nsense, and in this form worked it into a series of dramas, whereby the\nhistory and institutions of the Greek people were shown to be due to a\nguiding Providence of inexorable justice, rewarding each man according\nto his works, abhorring proud homes \"gilded with impurity of hands,\" and\ndwelling with the pure and righteous, though housed in the meanest cot.\n\u00c6schylus thus became, not only the father of Greek tragedy, but also the\nsublimest moral teacher Greece ever possessed. For moral grandeur there\nis but one work in all literature that can stand by the side of\n\u00c6schylus' _Oresteia_, and that is the _Divine Comedy_. Yet \u00c6schylus was\ndriven from Athens on a charge of impiety, and died in exile.\n\nBut it was not the tragic drama alone that was inspired and made a\npreacher of righteousness: in the hands of Aristophanes, the comic drama\nexerted all its power for the same end. For over thirty years this\ninimitable humorist used the public theatre to lash the follies, and\nhold up to contempt the wretched leaders, of the Athenian populace,\npointing out to his countrymen the abyss of destruction that was yawning\nbefore them. The world has never seen such earnest comedy, not even in\nthe works of Moli\u00e8re or Beaumarchais. Yet it was all in vain. Long\nbefore his death, Aristophanes was forbidden to hold up to public scorn\nthe degradation of his people.\n\nAmong the individual citizens who labored with all their might to bring\nback Athens to her old worth were two of very different character,\nendowments, and position, the one laboring in the world of action, the\nother in the world of thought. The first was Pericles, who, seeing that\ndemocracy was the order of the day, accepted it, and, by his personal\ncharacter and position, strove to guide it to worthy ends. In order to\nencourage gymnastic exercises, particularly among the sons of the newer\nfamilies, he built the Lyceum, in a grove sacred to Apollo, between\nCynosarges and the city walls, as a gymnasium for them. With a view to\nencouraging among them the study of music, he built an odeon, or\nmusic-hall, under the southeast end of the Acropolis. Both were\nmagnificent structures. What he did towards the completion of the great\ntheatre for the encouragement of dancing, we do not know; that this\nentered into his plan, there can hardly be any doubt. But Pericles was\ntoo wise a man to suppose that he could induce his pleasure-seeking\ncountrymen to subject themselves to the old discipline, without offering\nthem an object calculated to rouse their ambition and call forth their\nenergy. This object was nothing less than a united Greece, with Athens\nas its capital. How hard he tried to make this object familiar to them,\nand to render Athens worthy of the place he desired her to occupy, is\npathetically attested to this day by the Propyl\u00e6a and the Parthenon. On\nthe frieze of the latter is represented the solemn sacrifice that was to\ncement the union of the Hellenic people, and place it at the head of\ncivilization. When degenerate Greece resisted all his efforts to make\nher become one peaceably, he tried to make her do so by force, and the\nPeloponnesian War, started on a mere frivolous pretext, was the result.\nHe did not live long enough to learn the outcome of this desperate\nattempt to wake his countrymen to new moral and political life, and it\nwas well. If he had, he might have been forced to recognize that he had\nbeen attempting an impossible task,--trying to erect a strong structure\nwith rotten timber, to make a noble State out of ignoble, selfish men.\nUnfortunately, the example of his own private life, in which he openly\ndefied one of the laws of the State, and tried to make concubinage\n(\u1f11\u03c4\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2) respectable, more than undid all the good he sought to\naccomplish. The truth is, Pericles was himself too deeply imbued with\nthe three vices of his time--rationalism, self-indulgence, and love of\nshow--to be able to see any true remedy for the evils that sprang from\nthem. What was needed was not letters, music, gymnastics, dancing, or\ndream of empire, but something entirely different--a new moral\ninspiration and ideal.\n\nThis, the second of the men to whom reference has been made, Socrates,\nsought to supply. In the midst of self-indulgence, he lived a life of\npoverty and privation; in the midst of splendor and the worship of\noutward beauty, he pursued simplicity and took pleasure in his ugliness;\nin the midst of self-assertive rationalism and all-knowing sophistry, he\nprofessed ignorance and submission to the gods. The problem of how to\nrestore the moral life of Athens and Greece presented itself to Socrates\nin this form: _The old ethical social sanctions, divine and human,\nhaving, under the influence of rationalism and individualism, lost their\npower, where and how shall we find other sanctions to take their place?_\nTo answer this one question was the aim of Socrates' whole life. He was\nnot long in seeing that any true answer must rest upon a comprehension\nof man's entire nature and relations, and that the sophists were able to\nimpose upon his countrymen only because no such comprehension was\ntheirs. He saw that the old moral life, based upon na\u00efve tradition and\nprescription, sanctioned by gods of the imagination, would have to give\nplace to a moral life resting upon self-understanding and reflection.\nHe accordingly adopted as his motto the command of the Delphic oracle,\n_Know Thyself_ (\u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03b8\u03b9 \u03c3\u03b5\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u00f3\u03bd), and set to work with all his might to\nobey it.\n\nHe now, therefore, went to meet the sophists on their own ground and\nwith their own methods, and he did this so well as to be considered by\nmany, Aristophanes among them, as the best possible representative of\nthe class. What is true is, that he was the first Athenian who undertook\nto do what the sophists had for some time considered their special\nfunction,--to impart a \"higher education\" to the youth and men of\nAthens. He went about the streets, shops, walks, schools, and gymnasia\nof the city, drawing all sorts of persons into conversation, and trying\nto elicit truth for himself and them (for he pretended to know nothing).\nHe was never so pleased as when he met a real sophist, who professed to\nhave knowledge, and never so much in his element as when, in the\npresence of a knot of young men, he could, by his ironical, subtle\nquestions, force said sophist to admit that he too knew nothing. The\nfact was, Socrates, studying Heraclitus, had become convinced that the\nreason why men fell into error was because they did not know themselves,\nor their own thoughts, because what they called thoughts were mere\nopinions, mere fragments of thoughts. He concluded that, if men were\never to be redeemed from error, intellectual and moral, they must be\nmade to think whole thoughts. Accordingly, he took the ordinary opinions\nof men and, by a series of well-directed questions, tried to bring out\ntheir implications, that is, the wholes of which they were parts. Such\nis the Socratic or dialectic (= conversational) method. It does not\npretend to impart any new knowledge, but merely, as Socrates said, to\ndeliver the mind of the thoughts with which it is pregnant. And Socrates\nnot only held that saving truth consisted of whole thoughts; he held\nalso that all such thoughts were universally and necessarily true; that,\nwhile there might be many opinions about a thing, there could be but one\ntruth, the same for all men, and therefore independent of any man. This\nwas the exact opposite of what Protagoras the sophist had taught, the\nopposite of the gospel of individualism (see p. 93). Man is so far from\nbeing the measure of all things, that there is in all things a measure\nto which he must conform, if he is not to sink into error. This measure,\nthis system of whole truths, implying an eternal mind to which it is\npresent, and by which it is manifested in the world, is just what man\narrives at, if he will but think out his thoughts in their completeness.\nIn doing so, he at once learns the laws by which the universe is\ngoverned and finds a guide and sanction for his own conduct--a sanction\nno longer external and imposed by the State, but internal and imposed by\nthe mind. A system like this involved a complete reversal of the old\nview of the relation between man and the State, and at the same time\ntook the feet from under individualism. \"It is true,\" said Socrates in\neffect, \"that the individual, and not the State, is the source of all\nauthority, the measure of all things; but he is so, not as individual,\nbut as endowed with the universal reason by which the world, including\nthe State, is governed.\" This is the sum and substance of Socrates'\nteaching, this is what he believed to be true self-knowledge. This is\nthe truth whose application to life begins a new epoch in human history,\nand separates the modern from the ancient world; this is the truth that,\nreiterated and vivified by Christianity, forms the very life of our life\nto-day.\n\nIn adopting this view, Socrates necessarily formed \"a party by himself,\"\na party which could hope for no sympathy from either of the other two\ninto which his countrymen were divided. The party of tradition charged\nhim with denying the gods of his country and corrupting her youth; the\nradical party hated him because he convicted its champions of vanity,\nsuperficiality, and ignorance. Between them, they compassed his death,\nand Athens learnt, only when it was too late, that she had slain her\nprophet. But Socrates, though slain, was not dead. His spirit lived on,\nand the work which he had begun grew and prospered. Yet it could not\nsave Athens, except upon a condition which she neither would nor could\naccept, that of remodelling her polity and the life of her citizens in\naccordance with divine truth and justice. Indeed, though he discovered a\ngreat truth, Socrates did not present it in a form in which it could be\naccepted under the given conditions. He himself even did not by any\nmeans see all the stupendous implications of his own principle, which,\nin fact, was nothing less than the ground of all true ethics, all\nliberty, and all science. It is doubtful whether any one sees them now,\nand certain that they have been nowhere realized. Still his truth and\nhis life were not without their immediate effect upon Athens and\nAthenian education. Men, working in his spirit, and inspired with his\ntruth, more or less clearly understood, almost immediately replaced the\nsophists in Athens, and drew the attention of her citizens, old and\nyoung, to the serious search for truth. In fact, from this time on, the\nintellectual tendency began to prevail over the gymnastic and musical,\nand this continued until, finally, it absorbed the whole life of the\npeople, and Athens, from being a university-State, became a\nState-university. Such it was in the days of Cicero, Paul, Plutarch,\nLucian, and Proclus. That this one-sided tendency was fatal to the\npolitical life of Athens, and therefore, in some degree, to its moral\nlife, is clear enough; and, though we cannot hold Socrates personally\nresponsible for this result, we must still admit that it was one which\nflowed from his system of thought. Personally, indeed, Socrates was a\nmoral hero, and \"five righteous\" men like him, had they appeared, would\nhave gone far to save Athens; but this very heroism, this inborn\nenthusiasm for righteousness, blinded him so far as to make him believe\nthat men had only to know the right in order to be ready to follow it.\nHence that exaggerated importance attached to right knowing, and that\ncomparative neglect of right feeling and right doing, which in the\nsequel proved so paralyzing. Hence the failure of Socrates' teaching to\nstem the tide of corruption in Athens, and restore her people to heroism\nand worth.\n\nSocrates left behind him many disciples, some of whom distinguished\nthemselves in practical ways, others as founders of philosophic\nschools, emphasizing different sides of his teaching. He was but a few\nyears in his grave when two of these were teaching regularly in the two\nold gymnasia of Athens. Plato, a full-blooded Athenian, was teaching in\nthe Academy the intellectual and moral theories of his master, while\nAntisthenes, a half-breed (his mother being a Thracian), was inculcating\nthe lesson of his heroic life in Cynosarges. Their followers were\ncalled, respectively, Academics and Cynics. Thus, by these two men, was\nthe higher education for the first time introduced into the public\ninstitutions of Athens.\n\nSocrates' aim, as we have seen, had been purely a moral one, and this\nfact was not lost sight of by his immediate followers. The chief\nquestion with them all was still: How can the people be brought back to\nmoral life? But, thanks partly to the vagueness in which he had left the\ndetails of his doctrine, they were divided with respect to the means\nwhereby this was to be accomplished. One party, best represented by\nPlato, and following most closely in the footsteps of the master, held\nthat, man being essentially a social being, and morality a relation in\nsociety, it was only in and through a social order, a State, that virtue\ncould be realized. Another party, represented by Antisthenes, maintained\nthat virtue was a purely personal matter, and that the wise man stood\nhigh above any and all social institutions. These two views maintained\nthemselves, side by side, in nearly all subsequent Greek thought, and at\nlast found expression in the State and Church of the Christian world.\n\nTwo of Socrates' followers, believers in institutional morality, left\nbehind them treatises which have come down to us, giving their views as\nto the manner in which virtue might be cultivated. These are the\npractical Xenophon and the theoretic Plato, both men of pure Athenian\nstock. Nothing will better enable us to comprehend the evils of the \"New\nEducation\" than a consideration of the means by which these worthy men\nproposed to remedy them. Both are idealists and Utopians; but the former\nis conservative and reactionary, while the latter is speculative and\nprogressive. Both are aiming at one thing--a virtuous and happy State,\nto replace the vicious and wretched one in which they found their lot\ncast; but they differed in their views regarding the nature of such a\nState, and the means of realizing it.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nXENOPHON\n\n Never a good is the rule of the many; let one be the ruler.--Homer\n\n Wealth without Worth is no harmless housemate.--Sappho\n\n One to me is ten thousand, if he be best.\n\n All the Ephesians, from youth up, ought to be hanged and the State\n left to the boys, because they cast out Hermodorus, the worthiest\n man amongst them, saying: 'No one of us shall be worthiest, else let\n him be so elsewhere and among others.'--Heraclitus\n\n Reflecting once that, of the very small states, Sparta appeared to\n be the most powerful and the most renowned in Greece, I began to\n wonder in what way this had come about. But when I reflected upon\n the manners of the Spartans, I ceased to wonder. As to Lycurgus, who\n drew up for them the laws, by obedience to which they have\n prospered, I admire him and hold him to be, in the highest degree, a\n wise man. For he, instead of imitating other states, reached\n conclusions opposite to those of most, and thereby rendered his\n country conspicuous for prosperity.--Xenophon\n\n\nXenophon was in no sense a philosopher or a practical teacher, but he\nwas a man of sterling worth, of knightly courage, of wide and varied\nexperience, of strong sagacity, and of genial disposition, a keen\nobserver, and a charming writer. He was a true old Athenian puritan,\nbroadened and softened by study and contact with the world. He hated\ndemocracy so cordially that he would not live in Athens to witness its\nvulgarity and disorder; but he loved his country, and desired to see\nits people restored to their ancient worth. He believed that this could\nbe done only by some great, royal personality, like Lycurgus or Cyrus,\nenforcing a rigid discipline, and once more reducing the man to the\ncitizen. Unwilling, probably, to hold up hated Sparta as a model to his\nbeaten and smarting countrymen, he laid the scene of his pedagogical\nromance in far-off Persia.\n\nIn the _Education of Cyrus_ (\u039a\u03cd\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1) we have Xenophon's scheme\nfor a perfect education. Despite the scene in which it is laid, it is\npurely Hellenic, made up of Athenian and Spartan elements in about equal\nproportions. For this reason also it has a special interest for us. As\nthe portion of the treatise dealing directly with public education is\nbrief, we can hardly do better than transcribe it in a translation.\n\n\"Cyrus is still celebrated in legend and song by the barbarians as a man\nof extraordinary personal beauty, and as of a most gentle, studious, and\nhonor-loving disposition, which made him ready to undergo any labor, and\nbrave any danger, for the sake of praise. Such is the account that has\nbeen handed down of his appearance and disposition. He was, of course,\neducated in accordance with the laws of the Persians. These laws seem to\nbegin their efforts for the public weal at a different point from those\nof most other states; for most states, after allowing parents to educate\ntheir children as they please, and the older people even to spend their\ntime according to their own preference, lay down such laws as: Thou\nshalt not steal, Thou shalt not rob, Thou shalt not commit burglary,\nThou shalt not commit assault, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou\nshalt not disobey a magistrate, etc.; and if any one transgresses any of\nthese laws, they inflict punishment on him. The Persian laws, on the\ncontrary, provide beforehand that the citizens shall never, from the\nvery first, have any disposition to commit a wicked or base act. And\nthey do so in this way. They have what they call a Freemen's Square,\nwhere the royal palace and the other public buildings stand. From this\nsquare are removed all wares and chafferers, with their cries and\nvulgarities, to another place, so that their din and disorder may not\ninterfere with the decorum of the cultivated class. This square in the\nneighborhood of the public buildings is divided into four parts, one for\nboys, one for youths (\u1f14\u03c6\u03b7\u03b2\u03bf\u03b9), one for mature men, and one for men\nbeyond the military age. The hour when these shall appear in their\nplaces is settled by law. The boys and mature men come at daybreak, the\nolder men when they think fit, except on the special days when they are\nbound to appear. The youths pass the night by the public buildings in\nlight armor, only those who are married being excused. These are not\nhunted up, unless they have been ordered beforehand to appear; but it is\nnot thought decent to be often absent. Each of these divisions is under\nthe charge of twelve governors, one from each of the twelve tribes into\nwhich the Persians are divided. The governors of the boys are chosen\nfrom among the elderly men, with special view to their fitness for\nmaking the most of boys, while those of the youths are chosen from among\nthe mature men upon a similar principle. Those of the mature men are\nselected with a view to their ability to hold these to their regular\nduties, and to the special commands of the supreme authority. Even the\nold men have presidents appointed over them, who see that they perform\ntheir duty. What the duties of each are we shall now state, in order to\nshow just how provision is made for securing the highest worth on the\npart of the citizens.\n\n\"First, then, the boys, when they go to school, spend their time in\nlearning justice. They say they go for that purpose, just as our boys go\nto learn letters. Their governors spend the greater part of the day in\nacting as judges among them. It is needless to say that boys, as well as\nmen, bring charges against each other of theft and robbery and violence\nand deceit and slander, and similar things, and those whom the judges\nfind guilty of any of these they punish. But they also punish those whom\nthey find bringing false charges. They pronounce judgment likewise on a\ncharge which, more than anything else, makes men hate each other, and\nfor which they are judged less than for any other, namely, ingratitude.\nIf the judges find a boy in a position to return a favor and not doing\nit, they punish him severely, believing that persons who are ungrateful\nwill, more than any others, be undutiful to the gods, to parents,\ncountry, and friends. It is generally held that ingratitude, more than\naught else, leads to irreverence, and we need not add that _it_ is the\nprime mover in every form of baseness. They teach the boys also\nself-denial, and these are greatly aided in learning this virtue from\nseeing it daily practised by their elders. Another thing they teach them\nis obedience to those placed in authority over them; and they are\ngreatly aided in learning this, by seeing their elders strictly obeying\ntheir governors. Another thing yet which they teach them is\nself-discipline in matters of eating and drinking; and they are greatly\naided in this by seeing that their elders never absent themselves for\nthe purpose of eating, until they are permitted to do so by their\ngovernors, as well as by the fact that they (the boys) do not eat with\ntheir mothers, but with their teachers, and at a signal from their\ngovernors. As food, they bring with them from home bread, as a relish,\nnasturtium, and in order to drink, if they are thirsty, they bring an\nearthen cup to draw water from the river with. In addition to all these\nthings, the boys learn to shoot with the bow and to throw the javelin.\nUp to the age of sixteen or seventeen years, these are the studies in\nwhich the boys engage; after that they are transferred to the class of\ncadets (\u1f14\u03c6\u03b7\u03b2\u03bf\u03b9).\n\n\"These cadets spend their time in this way: For ten years from the time\nwhen they graduate from the boys' class, they sleep, as we have already\nsaid, in the precincts of the public buildings, acting at once as a\nguard to the city and practising self-denial. It is generally agreed,\nindeed, that this is the age which especially requires attention. During\nthe day they are at the disposal of their governors, and ready to\nperform any public service required. If no such service is demanded,\nthey remain in the neighborhood of the public buildings. When the king\ngoes out to hunt, which he does many times a month, he takes with him\none-half of the tribes, and leaves the other behind. Those youths who\naccompany him must carry with them bows and, in a sheath alongside\ntheir quivers, a bill or scimitar; also a light shield, and two javelins\napiece, one to throw, the other to use, if necessary, at close quarters.\nFor this reason they make hunting a matter of public concern, and the\nking, as in war, acts as their leader, hunts himself, and sees that the\nothers hunt, the Persians being of opinion that this is the best of all\npreparations for war. And, indeed, it accustoms them to rise early, and\nto bear heat and cold; it affords them exercise in marching and running,\nand compels them to use their bows or their javelins upon wild animals,\nwherever they happen to come upon them. They are often forced, moreover,\nto sharpen their courage, when they find themselves face to face with\nsome powerful animal. They must, of course, wound the one that comes to\nclose quarters, and hold at bay the one that attacks them. Hence it is\ndifficult to find in war anything that is absent from the chase. When\nthey go out to hunt, the young men, of course, take with them a larger\nluncheon than the boys are allowed to have; but this is the only\ndifference between the two. And while they are hunting, they sometimes\ndo not lunch at all; but, if they have to remain beyond their time on\naccount of some game, or otherwise, if they wish to prolong the chase,\nthey make a dinner of this lunch, and on the following day continue the\nhunt till dinner-time, counting the two days one, because they consume\nonly one day's food. And they do this for the sake of practice, so that,\nif ever they should run short of provisions in war, they may be able to\ndo the same thing. These youths have as a relish what game they capture\nin the chase, otherwise they have nasturtium. And if any one thinks\nthat they eat without pleasure, when they have only nasturtium with\ntheir food, or drink without pleasure, when they drink water, let him\nremember how sweet barley-cake and wheaten bread are when he is hungry,\nand how sweet water is when he is thirsty. The tribes that remain\nbehind, when the king goes hunting, spend their time in the same studies\nwhich they pursued as boys, including shooting and javelin-casting, and\nin these continual contests are going on. There are likewise public\nexhibitions in them, at which prizes are offered; and whichever tribe\ncontains most young men exceptionally proficient, manly, and steady, is\ncommended by the citizens, who likewise honor, not only their present\ngovernor, but also the governor who had charge of them as boys. The\nyoung men who are left behind are also employed by the authorities, if\nany such service is required as manning a guard-house, tracking out\nmalefactors, running down robbers, or anything demanding strength and\nswiftness. Such are the studies of the young men. And when they have\npassed ten years in these, they graduate into the class of mature men.\n\n\"From the date of this graduation, they spend five and twenty years more\nin the following manner: In the first place, like the young men, they\nplace themselves at the disposal of the authorities for any public\nservice requiring at once sagacity and unimpaired strength. If they are\nrequired to take the field in war, men proficient as they are go armed,\nno longer with bows and javelins, but with what are called hand-to-hand\nweapons, breast-plates, shields in their left hands, such as we see in\npictures of the Persians, and a sword or bill in their right. And all\nthe officials are drawn from this class, except the boys' teachers. And\nwhen they have passed twenty-five years in this class, they are\nsomething more than fifty years of age. At that age they graduate into\nthe class of elders, as, indeed, they are called.\n\n\"These elders no longer serve in war outside their own country, but,\nremaining at home, act as judges in public and private cases. They do so\neven in capital cases. They likewise choose all the officials, and if\nany person belonging to either of the classes of young and mature men\nneglects any of his lawful duties, the governor of his tribe, or any one\nelse who pleases, may report him to the elders, and these, if they find\nthe fact to be as reported, expel him from his tribe, and he who is\nexpelled remains dishonored all his life.\n\n\"To give a clearer notion of the polity of the Persians as a whole, I\nwill retrace my steps a little. After what has been said, this may be\ndone in a very few words: The Persians, then, are said to number about\none hundred and twenty thousand. Of these, none is excluded by law from\nhonors or offices; but all Persians are allowed to send their sons to\nthe public schools of justice. However, it is only those who are able to\nmaintain their sons without employment that send them there: the rest do\nnot. On the other hand, those that are educated by the public teachers\nare permitted to spend their youth among the _eph\u0113boi_, while those who\nhave not completed this education are not. Again those that pass their\nyouth among the _eph\u0113boi_, and come up to the legal requirements, are\nallowed to graduate into the class of mature men, and to participate in\nhonors and offices; whereas those who do not pass through the grade of\nthe _eph\u0113boi_ do not rise to the class of mature men. Finally, those who\ncomplete the curriculum of the mature men without reproach, pass into\nthe class of elders. Thus it is that this class of elders is composed of\nmen who have passed through all the grades of culture. Such is the\npolity of the Persians, and such is the system of training whereby they\nendeavor to secure the highest worth.\"\n\nThis Utopian scheme of education has a peculiar interest, because it is\nnothing more or less than the old ideal of Greek education become fully\nconscious of itself, under the influence of the new ideal. Let us call\nattention to the main points of it. (1) The education here set forth is\npurely political: men are regarded simply and solely as citizens; all\nhonors are civic honors. (2) No provision is made for the education of\nwomen, their range of activity being entirely confined to the family.\n(3) Distinction is made to rest upon education and conduct. (4) The\npoorer classes of the population, though not legally excluded from\neducation, position, and power, are virtually excluded by their poverty,\nso that the government is altogether in the hands of the rich, and is,\nin fact, an aristocracy, while pretending to be a democracy: hence, (5)\nSocial distinctions are distinctions of worth, which is just the Greek\nideal.\n\nThere is, however, one point in the scheme which shows that it is\nreactionary, directed against prevailing tendencies. Not one word is\nsaid of the intellectual side of education, of music or letters. It is\nevident that Xenophon, himself a man of no mean literary attainments,\nclearly saw the dangers to Greek life and liberty involved in that\nexaggerated devotion to literary and intellectual pursuits which\nfollowed the teaching of the sophists and Socrates, and that, in order\nto check this perilous tendency, he drew up a scheme of education from\nwhich intellectual and literary pursuits are altogether excluded, in\nwhich justice takes the place of letters, and music is not mentioned.\n\nThis suggests a curious inquiry in respect to his _Memoirs of Socrates_.\nThis work has generally been regarded as giving us a more correct notion\nof the real, living Socrates than the manifestly idealizing works of\nPlato. But was not Xenophon, who could not fail to see the future power\nof Socrates' influence, as anxious as Plato to claim the prophet as the\nchampion of his own views, and does not this fact determine the whole\ncharacter of his work? Is it not a romance, in the same sense that the\n_Cyrop\u00e6dia_ is, with only this difference, that the facts of Socrates'\nlife, being fairly well known to those for whom Xenophon was writing,\ncould not be treated with the same freedom and disregard as those of\nCyrus' life?\n\nBefore we part with Xenophon, we must call attention to another treatise\nof his, in which he deals with a subject that was then pressing for\nconsideration--the education of women. While, as we have seen, the\n\u00c6olian states and even Dorian Sparta provided, in some degree, for\nwomen's education, Athens apparently, conceiving that woman had no\nduties outside of the family, left her education entirely to the care of\nthat institution. The conservative Xenophon does not depart from this\nview; but, seeing the moral evils that were springing from the neglect\nof women and their inability to be, in any sense, companions to their\ncultured, or over-cultured, husbands, he lays down in his _\u0152conomics_ a\nscheme for the education of the young wife _by her husband_. As this\naffords us an admirable insight into the lives of Athenian girls and\nwomen, better, indeed, than can be found elsewhere, we cannot do better\nthan transcribe the first part of it. It takes the form of a\nconversation between Socrates and a young husband, named Ischomachus\n(Strong Fighter), and is reported by the former. Socrates tells how,\nseeing Ischomachus sitting at leisure in a certain portico, he entered\ninto conversation with him, paid him an acceptable compliment, and\ninquired how he came to be nearly always busy out of doors, seeing that\nhe evidently spent little time in the house. Ischomachus replies:--\n\n\"'As to your inquiry, Socrates, it is true that I never remain indoors.\nNor need I; for my wife is fully able by herself to manage everything in\nthe house.' 'This again, Ischomachus,' said I, 'is something that I\nshould like to ask you about, whether it was you who taught your wife to\nbe a good wife, or whether she knew all her household duties when you\nreceived her from her father and mother.' 'Well, Socrates,' said he,\n'what do you suppose she knew when I took her, since she was hardly\nfifteen when she came to me, and, during the whole of her life before\nthat, special care had been taken that she should see, hear, and ask as\nlittle as possible. Indeed, don't you think I ought to have been\nsatisfied if, when she came to me, she knew nothing but how to take wool\nand turn it into a garment, and had seen nothing but how tasks in\nspinning are assigned to maids? As regards matters connected with eating\nand drinking, of course she was extremely well educated when she came,\nand this seems to me the chief education, whether for a man or a woman.'\n'In all other matters, Ischomachus,' said I, 'you yourself instructed\nyour wife, so as to make her an excellent housewife.' 'To be sure,' said\nhe, 'but not until I had first sacrificed, and prayed that I might\nsucceed in teaching her, and she might succeed in learning, what was\nbest for both of us.' 'Then,' said I, 'your wife took part in your\nsacrifice and in these prayers, did she not?' 'Certainly she did,' said\nIschomachus, 'and solemnly promised to the gods that she would be what\nshe ought to be, and showed every evidence of a disposition not to\nneglect what was taught her.' 'But do, I beseech you, Ischomachus,\nexplain to me,' said I, 'what was the first thing you set about teaching\nher? I shall be more interested in hearing you tell that, than if you\ntold me all about the finest gymnastic or equestrian exhibition.' And\nIschomachus replied: 'What _should_ I teach her? As soon as she could be\nhandled, and was tame enough to converse, I spoke to her in some such\nway as this: Tell me, my dear, have you ever considered why I took _you_\nas my wife, and why your parents gave you to me? That it was not because\nI could not find any one else to share my bed, you know as well as I.\nNo, but because I was anxious to find for myself, and your parents were\nanxious to find for you, the most suitable partner in home and\noffspring, I selected you, and your parents, it seems, selected me, out\nof all possible matches. If, then, God shall ever bless us with\nchildren, then we will take the greatest care of them, and try to give\nthem the best possible education; for it will prove a blessing to both\nof us to have the very best of helpers and supports in our old age. But\nat present we have this as our common home. And all that I have, I pass\nover to the common stock, and all that you have brought with you, you\nhave added to the same. Nor must we begin to count which of us has\ncontributed the larger number of things, but must realize that whichever\nof us is the better partner contributes the more valuable things. Then,\nSocrates, my wife replied, and said: In what way can I co\u00f6perate with\nyou? What power have I? Everything rests with you. My mother told me\nthat my only duty was to be dutiful. Assuredly, my dear, said I, and my\nfather told me the same thing. But it is surely the duty of a dutiful\nhusband and a dutiful wife to act so that what they have may be improved\nto the utmost, and by every fair and lawful means increased to the\nutmost. And what do you find, said my wife, that I can do towards\nhelping you to build up our house? Dear me! said I, whatever things the\ngods have endowed you with the power to do, and the law permits, try to\ndo these to the best of your ability. And what _are_ these? said she. It\nstrikes me, said I, that they are by no means the least important\nthings, unless it be true that in the hive the queen-bee is entrusted\nwith the least important functions. Indeed, it seems to me, my dear, I\ncontinued, that the very gods have yoked together this couple called\nmale and female with a very definite purpose, viz. to be the source of\nthe greatest mutual good to the yoke-fellows. In the first place, this\nunion exists in order that living species may not die out, but be\npreserved by propagation; in the second, the partners in this union, at\nleast in the case of human beings, obtain through it the supports of\ntheir old age. Moreover, human beings do not live, like animals, in the\nopen air, but obviously require roofs. And I am sure, people who are\ngoing to have anything to bring under a roof must have some one to do\noutdoor duties; for, you see, ploughing, sowing, planting, herding, are\nall outdoor employments, and it is from them that we obtain all our\nsupplies. On the other hand, when the supplies have all been brought\nunder cover, there is needed some one to take care of them, and to\nperform those duties which must be done indoors. Among these are the\nrearing of children and the preparation of food from the produce of the\nearth; likewise the making of cloth out of wool. And, since both these\nclasses of duties, the outdoor and the indoor, require labor and care,\nit seems to me, I said, that God has constructed the nature of woman\nwith a special view to indoor employments and cares, and that of man\nwith a view to outdoor employments and cares. For he has made both the\nbody and the soul of the man better able than those of the woman to bear\ncold, heat, travelling, military service, and so has assigned to him\nthe outdoor employments. And, since he has made the body of woman less\nable to endure these things, he seems to me to have assigned to her the\nindoor employments. Considering, moreover, that he had made it woman's\nnature and duty to nourish young children, he imparted to her a greater\nlove for babies than he did to man. And, inasmuch as he had made it part\nof woman's duty to take care of the income of the family, God, knowing\nthat for care-taking the soul is none the worse for being ready to fear,\nbestowed upon woman a greater share of fear than upon a man. On the\nother hand, knowing that he who attends to the outdoor employments will\nhave to protect the family from wrong-doers, he endowed him with a\ngreater share of courage. And, since both have to give and receive, he\ndivided memory and carefulness between them, so that it would be\ndifficult to determine which of the sexes, the male or the female, is\nthe better equipped with these. And the necessary self-denial he divided\nbetween them, and made a decree that, whichever of the two, the husband\nor the wife, was the superior, should be rewarded with the larger share\nof this blessing. And just because the nature of man and the nature of\nwoman are not both equally fitted for all tasks, the two are the more\ndependent upon each other, and their union is the more beneficial to\nthem, because the one is able to supply what the other lacks. And now,\nsaid I, my dear, that we know the duties which God has assigned to us\nrespectively, it becomes each of us to do our best, in order to perform\nthese duties. And the law, I continued, coincides with the divine\nintention, and unites man and woman. And, just as God has made them\npartners in offspring, so the law makes them partners in the household.\nAnd the law sets its approval upon that difference of function which God\nhas signified by the difference of ability which marks the sexes. For it\nis more respectable for a woman to remain indoors than to spend her time\nout of doors, and less respectable for a man to remain indoors than to\nattend to outdoor concerns. And, if any one acts in a manner at variance\nwith this divine ordination, it may be that his transgression does not\nescape the notice of the gods, and that he is punished for neglecting\nhis own duties or performing those of his wife. It appears to me, said\nI, that the queen-bee also performs duties that are assigned to her by\nGod. And what duties, said my wife, does the queen-bee perform, that\nhave any resemblance to those incumbent upon me? This, said I, that she\nremains in the hive and does not allow the other bees to be idle, but\nsends out those that have to work to their business, and knows and\nreceives what each brings in, and takes care of it till it is needed for\nuse. And when the time for using comes, she distributes to each her just\nshare. Besides this, she attends to the construction of the honey-combs\nthat goes on indoors, and sees that it is done properly and rapidly, and\ncarefully sees that the young swarm is properly reared. And when it is\nold enough, and the young bees are fit for work, she sends them out, as\na colony, under the leadership of one of the old ones. And will it be my\nduty, said my wife, to do these things? Exactly so, said I, it will be\nyour duty to remain indoors, to send out together to their work those\nwhose duties lie out of doors, and to superintend those who have to work\nindoors, to receive whatever is brought in, to dispense whatever has to\nbe paid out, while the necessary surplus you must provide for, and take\ncare that the year's allowance be not spent in a month. When wool is\nbrought in to you, you must see that it is turned into cloth; and when\ndried grain comes, that it is properly prepared for food. There is,\nhowever, one of your duties, said I, that will perhaps seem somewhat\ndisagreeable to you. Whenever any one of the slaves is sick, you will\nhave to see that he is properly nursed, no matter who he is. Indeed,\nsaid my wife, that will be a most pleasant duty, if those who have been\ncarefully nursed are going to be grateful and kindlier than they were\nbefore. And I,' said Ischomachus, 'admiring her answer, continued: Don't\nyou suppose, my dear, that by such examples of care on the part of the\nqueen of the hive the bees are so disposed to her that, when she leaves,\nnone of them are willing to remain behind, but all follow her? And my\nwife replied: I should be surprised if the duties of headship did not\nfall to you rather than to me. For my guardianship and disposal of\nthings in the house would be ridiculous, unless you saw to it that\nsomething was brought in from without. And my bringing-in would be\nridiculous, said I, if there were no one to take care of what I brought?\nDon't you see, I said, how those who pour water into a leaky barrel, as\nthe expression is, are pitied, as wasting their labour? And indeed, said\nmy wife, they are to be pitied, if they do that. There are other\nspecial duties, said I, that are sure to become pleasant to you; for\nexample, when you take a raw hand at weaving and turn her into an adept,\nand so double her value to you, or when you take a raw hand at managing\nand waiting and make her capable, reliable, and serviceable, so that she\nacquires untold value, or when you have it in your power to reward those\nmale slaves that are dutiful and useful to your family, or to punish one\nwho proves the opposite of this. But the pleasantest thing of all will\nbe, if you prove superior to me, and make me your knight, and if you\nneed not fear that, as you advance in years, you will forfeit respect in\nthe house, but are sure that, as you grow older, the better a partner\nyou are to me, and the better a mother to the children, the more highly\nyou will be respected in the house. For all that is fair and good, said\nI, increases for men, as life advances, not through beauties, but\nthrough virtues. Such, Socrates, to the best of my recollection, was the\nfirst conversation I had with my wife.'\"\n\nIschomachus goes on and tells how, in subsequent conversations, he\ntaught his wife the value of order, \"how to have a place for everything,\nand everything in its place,\" how to train a servant, and how to make\nherself attractive without the use of cosmetics or fine clothes. But\nenough has been quoted to show what the ideal family relation among the\nAthenians was, and what education was thought fitting for girls and\nwomen. Just as the man was merged in the citizen, so the woman was\nmerged in the housewife, and they each received the education and\ntraining demanded by their respective duties. If Athenian husbands had\nall been like Ischomachus, it is clear that the lives of wives might\nhave been very happy and useful, and that harmony might have reigned in\nthe family. But, unfortunately, that was not very often the case. Wives,\nbeing neglected, became lazy, wasteful, self-indulgent, shrewish, and\nuseless, while their husbands, finding them so, sought in immoral\nrelations with brilliant and cultivated _het\u00e6r\u00e6_, or in worse relations\nstill, a coarse substitute for that satisfaction which they ought to\nhave sought and found in their own homes. Thus there grew up a condition\nof things which could not fail to sap the moral foundations of society,\nand which made thoughtful men turn their attention to the question of\nwoman's education and sphere of duty.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nPLATO\n\n All human laws are nourished by the one divine law; for it\n prevaileth as far as it listeth, and sufficeth for all and surviveth\n all.--Heraclitus\n\n Though reason is universal, the mass of men live as if they had each\n a private wisdom of his own.--_Id._\n\n ANTIGONE. ... But him will I inter;\n And sweet 'twill be to die in such a deed,\n And sweet will be my rest with him, the sweet,\n When I have righteously offended here.\n For longer time, methinks, have I to please\n The dwellers in yon world than those in this;\n For I shall rest forever there. But thou,\n Dishonor still what's honored of the gods.\n --Sophocles, _Antigone_.\n\n The circle that gathered round Isaiah and his household in these\n evil days, holding themselves apart from their countrymen,\n treasuring the word of revelation, and waiting for Jehovah, were\n indeed, as Isaiah describes them, \"signs and tokens in Israel from\n Jehovah of hosts that dwelleth in Mount Zion.\" The formation of this\n little community was a new thing in the history of religion. Till\n then no one had dreamed of a fellowship of faith dissociated from\n all national forms, maintained without the exercise of ritual\n services, bound together by faith in the divine word alone. It was\n the birth of a new era in the Old Testament religion, for it was the\n birth of the conception of the _Church_, the first step in the\n emancipation of spiritual religion from the forms of political\n life,--a step not less significant that all its consequences were\n not seen till centuries had passed away.--W. Robertson Smith,\n _Prophets of Israel_.\n\n Still at the prophets' feet the nations sit.--Lowell.\n\n That which is to be known I shall declare, knowing which a man\n attains immortality--the beginningless Supreme Brahma that is said\n to be neither Aught nor Naught.--_Bhagavad G\u00eet\u00e2._\n\n The only Metaphysics which really and immediately sustains Ethics is\n one which is itself primarily ethical, and made of the staff of\n Ethics.--Schopenhauer.\n\n\nIn answer to the burning question, How can Athens be brought back to\nmoral life and strength? Socrates had answered, \"By finding a new moral\nsanction.\" He had even gone further, and said: \"This sanction is to be\nfound in correct thinking, in thinking whole thoughts, which, because\nthey are whole, are absolutely true, being the very principles according\nto which God governs the world.\" This is, obviously, a mere formal\nanswer. If it was to be of any real service, three further questions had\nto be answered: (1) How can whole thoughts be reached? (2) What do they\nprove to be when they are reached? (3) How can they be applied to the\nmoral reorganization of human life? Plato's philosophy is but an attempt\nto answer these questions. It therefore naturally falls into three\ndivisions, (1) _Dialectics_, including Logic and Theory of Knowledge,\n(2) _Theoretics_, including Metaphysics and Physics, (3) _Practics_,\nincluding Ethics and Politics.\n\nIt is obvious that any attempt to reform society on Socratic principles\nmust proceed, not from society itself, but from some person or persons\nin whom these principles are realized, and who act upon it from without.\nThese persons will be the philosophers or, rather, the sages. Two\ndistinct questions, therefore, present themselves at the outset: (1) How\ndoes a man become a sage? (2) How can the sage organize human life, and\nsecure a succession of sages to continue his work after him? To the\nfirst of these questions, dialectics gives the answer; to the second,\npractics; while theoretics exhibits to us at once the origin and the\nend, that is, the meaning, of all existence, the human included. In the\nteaching of Plato we find, for the first time recognized and exhibited,\nthe extra-civic or super-civic man, the man who is not a mere fragment\nof a social whole, completely subordinated to it, but who, standing\nabove society, moulds it in accordance with ideas derived from a higher\nsource. Forecasts of this man, indeed, we find in all Greek literature\nfrom Homer down,--in Heraclitus, Sophocles, etc., and especially, as we\nhave seen, in Pythagoras;--but it is now for the first time that he\nfinds full expression, and tries to play a conscious part. In him we\nhave the promise of the future Church.\n\nBut to return to the first of our two questions, How does a man become a\nsage? We found the answer to be, By the dialectic method. Of this,\nhowever, not all men have the inclination to avail themselves, but only\na chosen few, to whom the gods have granted the inspiration of Love\n(\u1f14\u03c1\u03c9\u03c2)--a longing akin to madness (\u03bc\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b1), kindled by physical beauty,\nbut tending to the Supreme Good. This good, as we shall see, consists in\nthe vision (\u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03b1) of eternal truth, of being, as it is. The few men\nwho are blessed with this love are the divinely appointed reformers and\nguides of mankind, the well-being of which depends upon submission to\nthem. The dialectic method is the process by which the inspired mind\nrises from the beauty of physical things, which are always particulars,\nto the beauty of spiritual things, which are always universals, and\nfinally to the beauty of the Supreme Good, which is _The Universal_. The\nman who has reached this last, and who sees its relation to all other\nuniversals, so that they form together a correlated whole, sees all\ntruth, and is the sage. What we call universals Plato called \"ideas\"\n(\u1f30\u03b4\u03ad\u03b1\u03b9 = forms or species). These ideas he regards as genera, as\nnumbers, as active powers, and as substances, the highest of which is\nGod.\n\nTwo things are especially notable in connection with this theory: (1)\nthat it involves that Oriental ascetic view of life which makes men turn\naway from the sensible world, and seek their end and happiness in the\ncolorless world of thought; (2) that it suggests a view of the nature of\nGod which comes perilously near to Oriental pantheism. Plato, indeed,\nnowhere denies personality of God; but neither does he affirm it, and he\ncertainly leaves the impression that the Supreme Being is a force acting\naccording to a numerical ratio or law. It would be difficult to\noverestimate the influence of these two views upon the subsequent course\nof Greek education and life. The former suggested to the super-civic man\na sphere of activity which he could flatter himself was superior to the\ncivic, viz. a sphere of contemplation; while the second, by blurring, or\nrather ignoring, the essential elements of personality in God, viz.\nconsciousness, choice, and will, left no place for a truly religious or\nmoral life. This explains why Platonism, while it has inspired no great\ncivic movement, has played such a determining part in ecclesiasticism,\nand why, nevertheless, the Church for ages was compelled to fight the\ntendencies of it, which it did in great measure under the \u00e6gis of\nPlato's stern critic, Aristotle.\n\nWe are now ready to take up our second question: How can the sage\norganize human life, and secure a succession of sages to continue his\nwork after him? Plato has given two widely different answers to this\nquestion, in his two most extensive works, (1) the _Republic_, written\nin his earlier life, when he was under the influence of Heraclitus,\nParmenides, and Socrates, and stood in a negative attitude toward the\nreal world of history, (2) the _Laws_, written toward the end of his\nlife, when he became reconciled, in part at least, to the real world and\nits traditional beliefs, and found satisfaction and inspiration in the\nteachings of Pythagoras. His change of allegiance is shown by the fact\nthat in the _Laws_, and in them alone, Socrates does not appear as a\ncharacter. We shall speak first of the _Republic_, and then point out\nwherein the _Laws_ differs from it.\n\nWhen Plato wrote his _Republic_, he was deeply impressed with the evils\nand dangers of the social order in which he lived. This impression,\nwhich was that of every serious man of the time, had in his case\nprobably been deepened by the teaching and the tragic death of Socrates.\nThe dangers were, obviously, the demoralization of Athenian men and\nwomen, and the consequent weakening and dissolution of the social bonds.\nThe evils, as he saw them, were (1) the defective education of children,\n(2) the neglect of women, (3) the general disorganization of the State\nthrough individualism, which placed power in the hands of ignorance and\nrapacity, instead of in those of wisdom and worth. The _Republic_ is a\nscheme for removing these evils and averting the consequent dangers. It\nis the Platonic sage's recipe for the healing of society, and it is but\nfair to say that, of all the Utopian and \u00e6sthetic schemes ever proposed\nfor this end, it is incomparably the best. It proposes nothing less than\nthe complete transformation of society, without offering any hint as to\nhow a selfish and degraded people is to be induced to submit thereto. In\nthe transformed society, the State is all in all; the family is\nabolished; women are emancipated and share in the education and duties\nof men; the State attends to the procreation and education of children;\nprivate property is forbidden. The State is but the individual writ\nlarge, and the individual has three faculties, in the proper development\nand co\u00f6rdination of which consists his well-being: the same, therefore,\nmust be true of the State. These faculties are (1) intellect or reason,\n(\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd, \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2, etc.), (2) spirit or courage (\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03cc\u03c2,\n\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03bf\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03ad\u03c2), (3) desire or appetite (\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03af\u03b1, \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd,\n\u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd). The first resides in the head, the second in the heart,\nthe third in the abdomen. The first is peculiar to man, the second he\nshares with the animals, and the third with both animals and plants. The\nproper relation of these faculties exists when reason, with clear\ninsight, rules the whole man (Prudence); when spirit takes its\ndirections from reason in its attitude toward pleasure and pain\n(Fortitude); when spirit and appetite together come to an understanding\nwith reason as to when the one, and when the other, shall act\n(Temperance); and, finally, when each of the three strictly confines\nitself to its proper function (Justice). Thus we obtain the four\n\"cardinal virtues.\" As existing in the individual, they are relations\nbetween his own faculties. It is only in the State that they are\nrelations between the individual and his fellows. Rather we ought to\nsay, they are relations between different classes of society; for\nsociety is divided into three classes, marked by the predominance of one\nor other of the three faculties of the soul. _First_, there is the\nintelligent class,--the philosophers or sages; _second_, the spirited\nclass,--the military men or soldiers; _third_, the covetous class,--men\ndevoted to industry, trade, and money-making. The well-being of the\nState, as of the individual, is secure only when the relations between\nthese classes are the four cardinal virtues; when the sages rule, and\nthe soldiers and money-makers accept this rule, and when each class\nstrictly confines itself to its own function, so, for example, that the\nsages do not attempt to fight, the soldiers to make money, or the\nmoney-makers to fight or rule. In the Platonic ideal State, accordingly,\nthe three classes dwell apart and have distinct functions. All the power\nis in the hands of the philosophers, who dwell in lofty isolation,\ndevoted to the contemplation of divine ideas, and descending only\nthrough grace to mingle with human affairs, as teachers and absolute\nrulers, ruling without laws. Their will is enforced by the military\nclass, composed of both sexes, which lives outside the city, devoting\nitself to physical exercises and the defence of the State. These two\nclasses together constitute the guardians (\u03c6\u03cd\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03c2) of the State, and\nstand to each other in the relation of head and hand. They produce\nnothing, own nothing, live sparingly, and, indeed, cherish a sovereign\ncontempt for all producing and owning, as well as for those who produce\nand own. They find their satisfaction in the performance of their\nfunctions, and the maintenance of virtue in the State. What small amount\nof material good they require is supplied to them by the industrial\nclass, which they protect in the enjoyment of the only good it strives\nafter or can appreciate, the good of the appetites. This class, of\ncourse, has no power, either directive or executive, being incapable of\nany. It is, nevertheless, entirely happy in its condition of tutelage,\nand, as far as virtue can be predicated of sensuality, virtuous, the\nexcesses of sensuality being repressed by the other two classes. Indeed,\nthe great merit which Plato claims for his scheme is, that it secures\nharmony, and therefore happiness, for all, by placing every individual\ncitizen in the class to which by nature he belongs, that is, in which\nhis nature can find the fullest and fre\u00ebst expression compatible with\nthe well-being of the whole. Such is Plato's political scheme, marked by\nthe two notorious Greek characteristics, love of harmony and contempt\nfor labor. It is curious to think that it foreshadowed three modern\ninstitutions--the ecclesiastical hierarchy, the standing army, and the\nindustrial community, in which, however, the relations of power demanded\nby Plato are almost reversed, with (it is only fair to say) the result\nwhich he foresaw.\n\nIn trying to answer the question, By what means shall these classes be\nsundered? Plato calmly assumes that his scheme is already in full\noperation among grown people, so that the only difficulty remaining is\nwith regard to the children. And this is completely met by his scheme of\neducation. The State or, let us say at once, the philosophic class,\nhaving abolished the family, and assumed its functions, determines what\nnumber and kind of children it requires at any given time, and provides\nfor them as it would for sheep or kine. It brings together at festivals\nthe vigorous males and females, and allows them to choose their mates\nfor the occasion. As soon as the children are born, they are removed\nfrom their mothers and taken charge of in State institutions, where the\nfeeble and deformed are at once destroyed. Any children begotten without\nthe authority of the State share the same fate, either before or after\nbirth. Those whose birth is authorized, and who prove vigorous, are\nreared by the State, none of them knowing, or being known by, their\nparents. But they by no means suffer any diminution of parentage on that\naccount; for every mature man regards himself as the father, and every\nmature woman regards herself as the mother, of all the children born\nwithin a certain time, so that every child has thousands of fathers and\nmothers, all interested in his welfare; and the mothers, being relieved\nfrom nearly all the duties of maternity, share equally with the men in\nall the functions of the State.\n\nThe system of education to which the children of the State are subjected\nis, to a large extent, modelled after that of Sparta, especially in\nrespect to its rigor and its absolutely political character. It\ncontains, however, a strong Ionic or Athenian element, notably on the\nintellectual and \u00e6sthetic side. It may fairly claim to be intensely\nHellenic. It accepts the time-honored division of education into Music\nand Gymnastics, making no distinct place for Letters, but including them\nunder Music. It demands that these two branches shall be pursued as\nparts of a whole, calculated to develop, as far as may be, the\nharmonious human being, and fit him to become part of the harmonious\nState. I have said \"as far as may be,\" because Plato believes that only\na small number of persons at any given time can be reduced to complete\nharmony. These are the born philosophers, who, when their nature is\nfully realized, no longer require the State, but stand, as gods, above\nit. In truth, the State is needed just because the mass of mankind\ncannot attain inner harmony, but would perish, were it not for the outer\nharmony imposed by the philosophers. This is a sad fact, and would be\naltogether disheartening, were it not for the belief, which Plato seems\nto have derived from Pythagoras and the Egyptians, that those human\nbeings who fail to attain harmony in one life, will have opportunities\nto do so in other lives, so long as they do not, by some awful and\nmalignant crime or crimes, show that they are utterly incapable of\nharmony. Plato's scheme of political education, therefore, requires, as\nits complement, the doctrines of individual immortality, of probation\ncontinued through as many lives as may be necessary, and of the\npossibility of final and eternal blessedness or misery. In fact, Plato\nhas a fully-developed eschatology, with an \"other world,\" consisting of\nthree well-defined parts,--Elysium, Acheron, and\nTartarus,--corresponding to the Paradise, Purgatory, and Hell of\nCatholic Christianity; with one important difference, however, due to\nthe doctrine of metempsychosis. While the Christian purgatory is a place\nor state of purgation for souls whose probation is over forever, Acheron\nis merely a place where imperfect souls remain till the end of a\nworld-period, or \u00e6on, of ten thousand years, when they are again allowed\nto return to life and renew their struggle for that complete harmony\nwhich is the condition of admission to the society of the gods.\n\nIt is from this eschatology that Plato derives the moral sanctions which\nhe employs in his State. It is true that no one has insisted with\ngreater force than he upon the truth that virtue is, in and for itself,\nthe highest human good; he believed, however, that this could be\nappreciated only by the philosopher, who had experience of it, and that\nfor the lower orders of men a more powerful, though less noble, sanction\nwas necessary. Accordingly, he depicts the joys of Elysium in images\nthat could not but appeal to the Hellenic imagination, and paints\nTartarus in gruesome colors that would do honor to a St. Ignatius.\n\nIn order fully to understand the method of Plato's political education,\nwe must revert to Chapter III of Book I. There we saw that, according to\nthe Greeks, a complete education demanded three things, (1) a noble\nnature, (2) training through habit, (3) instruction. For the first Plato\nwould do what can be done by artificial selection of parents; for the\nsecond, he would depend upon music and gymnastics; for the third, upon\nphilosophy. In these last two divisions we have the root of the medi\u00e6val\n_trivium_ and _quadrivium_. The Platonic pedagogical system seeks to\nseparate the ignoble from the noble natures, and to place the former in\nthe lowest class. It then trains the noble natures in music and\ngymnastics, and, while this is going on, it tries to distinguish those\nnatures which are capable of rising above mere training to reflective or\nphilosophic thought, from those which are not. The latter it assigns to\nthe military class, which always remains at the stage of training, while\nthe former are instructed in philosophy, and, if they prove themselves\nadepts, are finally admitted to the ruling class, as sages. Any member\nof either of the higher classes who proves himself unworthy of that\nclass, may at any time be degraded into the next below.\n\nAs soon as the children are accepted by the State, their education under\nState nurses begins. The chief efforts of these for some time are\ndirected to the bodies of the children, to seeing that they are healthy\nand strong. As soon as the young creatures can stand and walk, they are\ntaught to exert themselves in an orderly way and to play little games;\nand as soon as they understand what is said to them, they are told\nstories and sung to. Such is their first introduction to gymnastics and\nmusic. What games are to be taught, what stories told, and what airs\nsung to the children, the State determines, and indeed, since the\ncharacter of human beings depends, in great measure, upon the first\nimpression made upon them, this is one of its most sacred duties. Plato\naltogether disapproves of leaving children without guidance to seek\nexercise and amusement in their own way, and demands that their games\nshall be such as call forth, in a gentle and harmonious way, all the\nlatent powers of body and mind, and develop the sense of order, beauty,\nand fitness. He is still more earnest in insisting that the stories told\nto children shall be exemplifications of the loftiest morality, and the\nairs sung to them such as settle, strengthen, and solemnize the soul. He\nfollows Heraclitus in demanding that the Homeric poems, so long the\nstorehouse for children's stories, shall be entirely proscribed, on\naccount of the false ideals which they hold up both of gods and heroes,\nand the intimidating descriptions which they give of the other world.\nVirtue, he holds, cannot be furthered by fear, which is characteristic\nonly of slaves. He thinks that all early intellectual training should be\na sort of play. The truth is, the infant-school of Plato's _Republic_\ncomes as near as can well be imagined to the ideal of the modern\nkindergarten.\n\nWhile this elementary education is going on, the officers of the State\nhave abundant opportunity for observing the different characters of the\nchildren, and distinguishing the noble from the ignoble. As soon as a\nchild shows plainly that it belongs by nature to the lowest class, they\nconsign it to that class, and its education by the State practically\nceases. Of course these officers know from what class each child came,\nand they make use of this knowledge in determining its future destiny.\nAt the same time, they are not to be entirely guided by it, but to act\nimpartially. The education of the lowest class after childhood the\nState leaves to take care of itself, persuaded that appetite will always\nfind means for its own satisfaction. The nobler natures it continues to\neducate, without any break, until they reach the age of twenty. And this\neducation is distinctly a military training. As time goes on, the\ngymnastic exercises become more violent, more complex, and more\nsustained, but always have for their subject the soul, rather than the\nbody, and never degenerate into mere athletic brutality. Special\nattention is directed to the musical and literary exercises, as the\nmeans whereby the soul is directly trained and harmonized. Plato holds\nthat no change can be made in the \"music\" of a State, without a\ncorresponding change in the whole organization; in other words, that the\nsocial and political condition of a people is determined by the\nliterature and music which it produces and enjoys. He virtually says,\nLet me make the songs of a people, and he who will may make their laws.\nOf the character of the music which he recommends we have already\nspoken. From literature he would exclude all that we are in the habit of\ncalling by that name, all that is mimetic, poetic, or creative, and\nconfine the term to what is scientific, didactic, and edifying. He sends\nthe poets out of the State with mock-reverent politeness, as creatures\ntoo divine for human use. He is particularly severe upon the dramatists,\nnot sparing even the sublime \u00c6schylus. In fact, he would banish from his\nState all art not directly edifying. The literature which he recommends\nis plainly of the nature of \u00c6sop's _Fables_, the Pythagorean _Golden\nWords_, and the Parmenidean or Heraclitean work _On Nature_. If we\nwished to express his intent in strictly modern language, we should have\nto say that he desired to replace literary training by ethical and\nscientific, and the poetical mode of presenting ideals by the prosaic.\nThe true music, he held, is in the human being. \"If we find,\" he says,\n\"a man who perfectly combines gymnastics with music, and in exact\nproportion applies them to the soul, we shall be entirely justified in\ncalling him the perfect musician and the perfect trainer, far superior\nto the man who arranges strings alongside each other.\"\n\nThere are many matters of detail in Plato's scheme of military training\nthat well deserve consideration, but cannot be even touched upon here.\nBefore we leave it, however, we may give the dates at which the\ndifferent branches of education are to begin. Care of the body begins at\nbirth, story-telling with the third year, gymnastics with the seventh,\nwriting and reading with the tenth, letters and music with the\nfourteenth, mathematics with the sixteenth, military drill, which for\nthe time supplants all other training, with the eighteenth. When the\nyoung people reach the age of twenty, those who show no great capacity\nfor science, but are manly and courageous, are assigned to the soldier\nclass, and start on a course of higher education in military training,\nwhile those who evince great intellectual ability become novices in the\nruling class, and begin a curriculum in science, which lasts till the\nclose of their thirtieth year. This course includes arithmetic,\ngeometry, and astronomy, the only sciences at that time cultivated, and\naims at impressing upon the youthful mind the unity and harmony of the\nphysical or phenomenal universe. At the age of thirty, those students\nwho do not show any particular aptitude for higher studies are drafted\noff into the lower public offices, while those who do, pass five years\nin the study of dialectics, whereby they rise to pure ideas. They are\nthen, from their thirty-fifth to their fiftieth year, made to fill the\nhigher public offices, in which they take their orders directly from the\nsages. During this period they put their acquirements to a practical\ntest, and so come really and fully into possession of them. At the end\nof their fiftieth year, after half a century of continuous education of\nbody, mind, and will, they are reckoned to have reached the vision of\nthe supreme good, and therefore to be fit to enter the contemplative\nruling class. They are now free men; they have reached the goal of\nexistence; their life is hidden with God; they are free from the prison\nof the body, and only remain in it voluntarily, and out of gratitude to\nthe State which has educated them, in order to direct it, in accordance\nwith absolute truth and right, toward the Supreme Good.\n\nSuch, in its outlines, is Plato's theory of education, as set forth in\nthe _Republic_. It is easy to point out its defects and its errors,\nwhich are neither small nor few, but fundamental and all-pervasive. But\nit is equally easy to see how it came to have these defects and errors,\nsince they are simply those of every \u00e6sthetic social scheme which\nignores the nature of the material with which it presumes to deal, and\ntakes no account of the actual history of social institutions or of the\nforces by which they are evolved. It is emphatically the product of a\nyouthful intellect, carried away by an artistic ideal. It was, however,\nthe intellect of a Plato, who, when he became more mature, saw, without\n\"irreverence for the dreams of youth,\" the feebleness of ideas for the\nconflict with human frailties, and strove to correct his exaggerated\nestimate of their power.\n\nThis he did in the _Laws_, whose very title suggests, in a way almost\nobtrusive, the change of attitude and allegiance. While in the\n_Republic_ the State is governed by sages, almost entirely without laws,\nin the later work, the sages almost disappear and the laws assume an\nall-important place. In writing the _Laws_, moreover, he exchanges\nallegiance to Socrates and ideas for allegiance to Pythagoras and the\ngods. In saying this, I have marked the fundamental difference between\nthe _Republic_ and the _Laws_. While in the former Plato finds the moral\nsanctions, in the last resort, in the ideas of the pure intellect,\ntrained in mathematics, astronomy, and dialectics, in the latter he\nderives them from the content of the popular consciousness, with its\ngods, its ethical notions, its traditions. In these, as embodied in\ninstitutions, he finds the most serviceable, if not the most exalted,\nrevelation of divine truth. Trusting to this, he no longer seeks to\nabolish the family and private property, but merely to have them\nregulated; he no longer banishes strangers and poets from his State, but\nmerely subjects them to State supervision; he no longer demands a\nphilosophical training for the rulers, but only practical insight; he no\nlonger divides his citizens into sages, soldiers, and wealth-producers,\nbut into freemen (corresponding to his previous military class) and\nslaves. His government is no longer an aristocracy of intellect, but a\ncompound of aristocracy, oligarchy, and democracy, representing,\nrespectively, worth, wealth, and will. His plan of education is modified\nto suit these altered conditions. The children, as in Sparta, do not\nbegin the State course of education until about their seventh year,\nafter which their training is very much the same as that demanded in the\n_Republic_, with the omission, of course, of dialectics. Though women\nare no longer to be relieved of their home duties, they are still to\nshare in the education and occupations of men, an arrangement which is\nfacilitated by the law ordaining that both men and women shall eat at\npublic tables. In making these changes, Plato believed that he was\nfalling from a lofty, but unrealizable, ideal, and making concessions to\nhuman weakness; in reality, he was approaching truth and right.\n\n\n\n\nBOOK III\n\nARISTOTLE (B.C. 384-322)\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nARISTOTLE--LIFE AND WORKS\n\n Aristotle, in my opinion, stands almost alone in\n philosophy.--Cicero.\n\n Aristotle, Nature's private secretary, dipping his pen in\n intellect.--Eusebius.\n\n Wherever the divine wisdom of Aristotle has opened its mouth, the\n wisdom of others, it seems to me, is to be disregarded.--Dante.\n\n I could soon get over Aristotle's _prestige_, if I could only get\n over his reasons.--Lessing.\n\n If, now in my quiet days, I had youthful faculties at my command, I\n should devote myself to Greek, in spite of all the difficulties I\n know. Nature and Aristotle should be my sole study. It is beyond all\n conception what that man espied, saw, beheld, remarked, observed. To\n be sure he was sometimes hasty in his explanations; but are we not\n so, even to the present day?--Goethe (at 78).\n\n If the proper earnestness prevailed in philosophy, nothing would be\n more worthy of establishing than a foundation for a special\n lectureship on Aristotle; for he is, of all the ancients, the most\n worthy of study.--Hegel.\n\n Aristotle was one of the richest and most comprehensive geniuses\n that ever appeared--a man beside whom no age has an equal to\n place.--_Id._\n\n Physical philosophy occupies itself with the general qualities of\n matter. It is an abstraction from the dynamic manifestations of the\n different kinds of matter; and even where its foundations were first\n laid, in the eight books of Aristotle's _Physical Lectures_, all the\n phenomena of nature are represented as the motive vital activity of\n a universal world-force.--Alexander von Humboldt.\n\n It was characteristic of this extraordinary genius to work at both\n ends of the scientific process. He was alike a devotee to facts and\n a master of the highest abstractions.--Alexander Bain.\n\n Aristotle is the _Father of the Inductive Method_, and he is so for\n two reasons: First, he theoretically recognized its essential\n principles with a clearness, and exhibited them with a conviction,\n which strike the modern man with amazement; and then he made the\n first comprehensive attempt to apply them to all the science of the\n Greeks.--Wilhelm Oncken.\n\n Aristotle, for whose political philosophy our admiration rises, the\n more we consider the work of his successors, is less guided by\n imagination than Plato, examines reality more carefully, and\n recognizes more acutely, the needs of man.--Bluntschli.\n\n It appears to me that there can be no question, that Aristotle\n stands forth, not only as the greatest figure in antiquity, but as\n the greatest intellect that has ever appeared upon the face of this\n earth.--George J. Romanes.\n\n Aristotle, with all the wisdom of Plato before him, which he was\n well able to appropriate, could find no better definition of the\n true good of man than the full exercise or realization of the soul's\n faculties in accordance with its proper excellence, which was\n excellence of thought, speculative and practical.--Thomas Hill\n Green.\n\n\nIt is pretty definitely settled, among men competent to form a judgment,\nthat Aristotle was the best educated man that ever walked on the surface\nof this earth. He is still, as he was in Dante's time, the \"master of\nthose that know.\" It is, therefore, not without reason that we look to\nhim, not only as the best exponent of ancient education, but as one of\nthe worthiest guides and ensamples in education generally. That we may\nnot lose the advantage of his example, it will be well, before we\nconsider his educational theories, to cast a glance at his life, the\nprocess of his development, and his work.\n\nAristotle was born about B.C. 384, in the Greek colony of Stagira in\nThrace, near the borders of Macedonia. His father, Nicomachus, was a\nphysician of good standing, the author of several medical works, and the\ntrusted friend of Amyntas, the Macedonian King. His mother, Ph\u00e6stis, was\ndescended from the early settlers of the place. It was doubtless under\nhis father's guidance that the boy Aristotle first became interested in\nthose physical studies in which he was destined to do such wonderful\nwork. Losing, however, both his parents at an early age, he came under\nthe charge of Proxenus, of Atarneus, who appears to have done his duty\nby him. At the age of eighteen he came to Athens for his higher\neducation, and entered the school of Plato in the Academy. Here he\nremained for nearly twenty years, listening to Plato, and acquiring\nthose vast stores of information which in later life he worked up into\nlectures and scientific treatises. Nothing escaped him, neither art,\nscience, religion, philosophy, nor politics. He seems, being well off,\nto have begun early to collect a library, and to aim at encyclop\u00e6dic\nknowledge. About his methods of study we know very little; but we hear\nthat at times he assisted Plato in his work and was very careful of his\nown attire. It is clear that, in course of time, he rose in thought\nabove the teachings of his master, and even rejected the most\nfundamental of them, the doctrine of self-existent ideas. But he never\nlost respect for that master, and when the latter died, he retired with\nXenocrates, son of the new head of the Academy, to Atarneus, the home\nof his old guardian Proxenus, and of his fellow-Academic, Hermias, now\nking or tyrant of the place. Here he remained for three years, in the\nclosest intimacy with his friend, until the latter was treacherously\nmurdered by the Persians. He then crossed over to Mytilene, taking with\nhim Pythias, Hermias' sister or niece, whom he had married, and to whom\nhe was deeply devoted. He erected in Delphi a statue to his dead friend,\nand dedicated to him a poem, of which we shall hear more in the sequel.\nAbout B.C. 343, when he was over forty years old, he was called to\nMacedonia, as tutor to Alexander, the thirteen-year-old son of King\nPhilip, and grandson of his own father's old patron, Amyntas. This\noffice he filled for about three years with distinguished success, and\nit may be safely said that never had so great a tutor so great a pupil.\nDuring the latter part of the time, at least, Aristotle and Alexander\nseem to have lived at Stagira. This town had been captured and destroyed\nby Philip, and its inhabitants scattered. With the permission of the\nconqueror, Aristotle reassembled the inhabitants, rebuilt the town, drew\nup its laws, and laid out near it, at Mieza, in imitation of the\nAcademy, a gymnasium and park, which he called the _Nymph\u00e6um_. Hither he\nappears to have retired with his royal pupil and several other youths\nwho were receiving education along with him, among them Theophrastus and\nthe ill-fated Callisthenes. It was probably here that Aristotle adopted\nthe habit of walking while imparting instruction, a habit which\nafterwards gave the name to his school. When Alexander, at sixteen,\nentered his father's army, Aristotle still continued to teach in the\nNymph\u00e6um, which existed even in Plutarch's time, more than four hundred\nyears afterwards. But this lasted only for about five years; for in 335,\nwhen Alexander, who in the previous year had succeeded his murdered\nfather, was preparing to invade Persia, Aristotle moved to Athens.\nFinding that his old friend, Xenocrates, was director of the school in\nthe Academy, he established himself, as a public teacher or professor,\nin the Lyceum, the Periclean gymnasium, used chiefly, it should seem, by\nthe lower classes and by foreign residents, of whom he himself was one.\nAs an alien, as the friend of the victorious Macedonians, who three\nyears before had broken the power of Greece at Ch\u00e6ronea, and taken away\nher autonomy forever, as a rival of the Platonists, and as a wealthy,\nwell-dressed gentleman, he had many enemies and detractors; but his\nconduct seems to have been so unobjectionable that no formal charge\ncould be brought against him. His very numerous pupils were mostly\nforeigners, a fact not without its influence on the subsequent course of\nthought. He divided his days between writing and teaching, taking his\nphysical exercise while engaged in the latter occupation. In the\nmornings he gave lectures to a narrow circle, in a strictly formal and\nscientific way, upon the higher branches of science; while in the\nafternoons he conducted conversations upon more popular themes with a\nless select audience. The former were called his esoteric, the latter\nhis exoteric, discourses.\n\nIt was during his second residence in Athens, in the twelve years from\nB.C. 335 to 323, that Aristotle composed most of those great works in\nwhich he sought to sum up, in an encyclop\u00e6dic way, the results of a\nlife of all-embracing study and thought. He had been in no haste to put\nhimself on record, and it was not until he had reached a consistent view\nof the world that he ventured to treat, in a definitive way, any aspect\nof it. Thus it was that each of his treatises formed part of one great\nwhole of thought. Had he succeeded in completing his plan, he would have\nleft to the world a body of science such as, even in our own day, would\nlook in vain for a peer among the works of any one man. Unfortunately,\nhis plan was not completed, and even of the works which he did write\nonly a portion has come down to us. But that portion is sufficient to\nplace their author at the head of all scientific men. Some of his works,\nfor example, his _Logic_, _Metaphysics_, _Ethics_, and _Politics_, still\noccupy the first place in the literature of these subjects. How a single\nman could have done all that he did, and in so many different\ndepartments, is almost inconceivable. No doubt he had helpers, in the\nshape of secretaries, learned slaves, and disciples; and it is certain\nthat he received from his royal pupil munificent aid, which enabled him\nto do much, especially in the directions of physical and political\nresearch, that would have been impossible for a poor man; but, after all\nallowances have been made, his achievement still seems almost\nmiraculous.\n\nDuring all the years in which Aristotle was thus engaged, his position\nat Athens was becoming more and more insecure. The anti-Macedonian party\nwere waiting for the first opportunity to rid the city of him, and were\nprevented from open attempts at this only by dread of Alexander's\ndispleasure. Even when it was known that Aristotle had incurred disfavor\nwith his old pupil, they did not venture to attack him; but in 323, when\nthe news of Alexander's sudden death made all Greece feel that now the\ntime had come to get rid forever of the hated Macedonians, and recover\nits liberty, they at once gave vent to their long-cherished hatred. How\nhard it was to find matter for an accusation against him, is shown by\nthe fact that they had to go back to his old poem on _Worth_, written in\nmemory of Hermias (see p. 4), and to base thereon a charge of impiety--a\ncharge always easily made, and always sure to arouse strong popular\nprejudice. According to Athenian law, the defendant in any such case\nmight, if he chose, escape punishment by leaving the city any time\nbefore the trial; and Aristotle, not being, like Socrates, a citizen,\ncould have no ground for refusing to take advantage of this liberty.\nAccordingly, with the remark that he would not voluntarily allow the\nAthenians to sin a second time against philosophy, he withdrew to his\ncountry residence at Chalcis in Eub\u0153a, the old home of his mother's\nfamily, to wait till affairs should take another turn, as, indeed, they\nsoon afterwards did, when Athens had to open her gates to Antipater.\nBut, ere that happened, Aristotle was in his grave, having died in 322,\nshortly before Demosthenes, of disease of the stomach, from which he had\nlong suffered. His remains are said to have been carried to Stagira,\nwhere the grateful inhabitants erected an altar over them and paid\ndivine honors to his memory. His library and the manuscripts of his\nworks he left in the hands of Theophrastus, who succeeded him in the\nLyceum. His will, the text of which has come down to us, bears\ntestimony, along with all else that we know of him, to the nobility,\nkindliness, and justice of his nature.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nARISTOTLE'S PHILOSOPHY\n\n Platon r\u00eavait; Aristote pensait.--Alfred de Musset.\n\n Are God and Nature then at strife\n That Nature lends such evil dreams?\n --Tennyson.\n\n There are three Essences. Two of these are sensible; one being\n eternal, and the other perishable. The latter is admitted by all, in\n the form, for example, of plants and animals; in regard to the\n former, or eternal one, we shall have to consider its elements, and\n see whether they be one or many. The third is immutable [and,\n therefore, inaccessible to sense], and this some thinkers hold to be\n transcendent.--Aristotle.\n\n The vision of the divine is what is sweetest and best; and if God\n always enjoys that vision as we sometimes do, it is wonderful, and\n if he does so in a yet higher degree, it is more wonderful still.\n And so even it is. And life belongs to him; for the\n self-determination of thought is life, and he is self-determination.\n And his absolute self-determination is the supreme and eternal life.\n And we call God a living being, eternal, best; so that life and\n duration, uniform and eternal, belong to God; for this is\n God.--_Id._\n\n We must consider in what way the system of the universe contains the\n good and the best, whether as something transcendent and\n self-determined, or as order. Surely in both ways at once, as in any\n army, for which the good is in order, and is the general, and the\n latter more than the former. For the general is not due to the\n order, but the order to the general.--_Id._\n\n\nThe thought of Aristotle differs from that of Plato both in its method\nand in its results. Plato, reared in the school of Pythagoras,\nParmenides, Heraclitus, and Socrates, had, naturally enough, come to\nlook for truth in the supersensual region of mind, and thought he found\nit in ideas attainable by a process of dialectic within the individual\nconsciousness. He thus came to put forward a doctrine which, despite its\nostensible purpose to cement the bonds of society, in reality tended to\nwithdraw men from society altogether and increase the very individualism\nit was intended to cure. Aristotle, while still in Plato's school, had\nturned away from this doctrine, and in after-life he never lost an\nopportunity of combating it. He could point to Plato's _Republic_ as a\nwarning example of its logical consequences. But, in doing this, he was\nprepared to put another doctrine in its place, and he did so on the\nbasis of a profound study of the whole course of Greek thought,\nmythological and philosophical.\n\nInstead of appealing, like Plato, to the individual consciousness, and\ntrying to discover ultimate truth by bringing its data into harmony\namong themselves, Aristotle appeals to the historic consciousness, and\nendeavors to find truth by harmonizing and complementing its data\nthrough a further appeal to the outer world, in which these data are\nrealized. He maintains that the truths reached by the dialectic process\nare merely formal, and therefore empty,--useless in practice, until they\nhave been filled by experience from the storehouse of nature. In\nconsequence of this changed attitude, he sets aside the dialectic\nprocess, and substitutes for it the _Method of Induction_, which he was\nthe first man in the world to comprehend, expound, and apply, becoming\nthus the father of all true science. And he makes a more extensive use\nof induction than any other man since his time, applying it in a field\nin which even now it is hardly supposed to yield any results, the field\nof the common consciousness. Indeed, he everywhere begins his search for\nconcrete truth by examining the historic consciousness, and, having, by\na process of induction, discovered and generalized its contents, he\nturns with these to nature and, by a second induction, corrects,\ncompletes, and harmonizes them. We might express this in modern\nlanguage, by saying that his whole endeavor is to correct and supplement\nthe imperfect human consciousness by a continual appeal to the divine\nconsciousness, _as manifested in the world_. It is the error of modern\ninvestigators that they employ only one-half of the inductive method,\nthe objective, and either omit altogether the subjective, or else, like\nPlato, apply it only to the individual consciousness. Hence come the\nwidely divergent results which still meet us in so many of the sciences,\nin Politics, Psychology, etc., hence the fact that a great deal of\nscience, instead of correcting, widening, and harmonizing the common\nconsciousness, stands altogether apart from it, or even in direct\nopposition to it. The man who writes a treatise on Psychology, or on the\nSoul, without troubling himself to discover what \"Soul\" means in the\ngeneral consciousness of mankind, and perhaps setting out with an\naltogether individual notion of it, can hardly look for any other\nresult. Aristotle, true to his method of induction, devotes one entire\nbook of his _Psychology_ to finding out what \"Soul\" means in the\nhistoric consciousness, unreflective as well as reflective. Then, with\nthis meaning, he goes to nature, seeks by induction to discover what\nshe has to say about it, and abides by her reply. Hence it is that his\nthought has laid hold upon the world, and influenced it in practical\nways, as no other man's thought has ever done. Hence it is that, of all\nancient men, he is the one before whom the modern scientist bows with\nrespect.\n\nIf we now ask ourselves what was the underlying thought that shaped\nAristotle's theory of induction, what was his _Weltanschauung_, we shall\nfind it to be this: The divine intelligence reveals itself subjectively\nin an historic process in the human consciousness, and objectively[4] in\na natural process in the outer world. Truth for man is the harmony of\nthe two revelations. It follows directly from this that the scientist\nmust take impartial account of both. So, for example, if he finds gods\nin the historical consciousness, and laws or forces in nature, he has no\nright, like the theologian, to merge the latter in the former, or, like\nthe physicist, to replace the former by the latter. He must retain both\ntill he can bring them into harmony. Only then does he know either.\n\nSuch a philosophy as this, instead of drawing men away from the world of\nnature and history, and confining them to the narrow circle of their own\nconsciousness, of necessity sent them back to that world, as the only\nmeans by which any human well-being could be reached. It is for this\nreason that it has so powerfully affected both social life and science.\nNevertheless, we should err greatly, if we supposed that, in\nAristotle's view, the divine is nothing more than an immanent idea,\nworking as a force-form in nature, and as a thought-form in mind. He\ndoes, indeed, believe that the divine is all this, but not that this is\nall the divine there is. Over and above the divine which is determined\nin nature and in man, there is the transcendent Mind, or God,\ndetermining himself through himself, and bearing the same relation to\nthe divine that the sun bears to light, the human mind to human thought,\nthe general to the order of his army. Here we are far away from\nPantheism, and, though we have not yet risen to a clear conception of\npersonality, we have at the \"helm of the universe\" a conscious being,\nthe source of law and order. And man, rising above the thought whereby\nhe knows himself through nature, and nature through himself, may enter\ninto the consciousness of God and become a partaker in that life which\nis \"sweetest and best.\" These are the features of Aristotle's thought\nwhich in the thirteenth century made it acceptable to the Christian\nChurch in her struggle against Pantheism, and which paved the way for\nthat higher mysticism of which Thomas Aquinas is the most distinguished\nexponent--a mysticism which does not, like that of the Neoplatonists and\nBuddhists, dispense with thought to lose itself in vacancy, but which,\nrising upon a broad basis of knowledge, pierces the clouds of sense, to\nfind itself in the presence of the most concrete Reality, the\ninexhaustible source of all thought and all things.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nARISTOTLE'S THEORY OF THE STATE\n\n First, then, let us try to enumerate whatever worthy utterances have\n proceeded from men of the past upon any aspect of the subject, and\n then, referring to our collections of _Constitutional Histories_,\n let us seek to arrive at a theory as to what sorts of things\n preserve and destroy each particular form of government, and see for\n what reasons some are well, some ill, managed. Succeeding in this,\n we may, perhaps, the better learn both what is the best form of\n government, and what arrangements, laws, and customs are best suited\n to each form.--Aristotle.\n\n Man is a political animal.--_Id._\n\n The State is prior to the individual.--_Id._\n\n Without friends no one would choose to live, although he possessed\n all other blessings.--_Id._\n\n If happiness be self-determination in accordance with worth, we must\n conclude that it will be in accordance with the supreme worth, which\n will be the worth of the noblest part of us. This part, whatever it\n may be, whether intellect (\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2) or something else, that which by\n nature evidently rules and guides us and has insight into things\n beautiful and divine, whether it be itself divine, or the divinest\n part of us, is that whose self-determination, in accordance with its\n proper worth, will be the perfect happiness. That this consists in\n the vision of divine things has already been said.... This, indeed,\n is the supreme self-determination, for the reason that intellect is\n the highest part of us, and that with which it deals is the highest\n of the knowable.... But a life of this sort would be something\n higher than the human; for he who lived it would not be living as\n man, but as the subject of something divine.... If, then, intellect\n is something divine in relation to man, the life lived according to\n it must be divine in relation to human life. Instead, then, of\n following those who advise us, as being human, to set our thoughts\n upon human things, and, as being mortals, to set them on mortal\n things, it is our duty, as far as may be, to act as immortal beings,\n and do all we can to live in accordance with the supreme part of\n us.--Aristotle.\n\n Man alone, among all beings, occupies a middle place between things\n corruptible and things incorruptible.... Two ends, therefore,\n Ineffable Providence has ordained for man: Blessedness in this life,\n which consists in the exercise of native faculty, and is figured by\n the Earthly Paradise, and blessedness in the eternal life, which\n consists in the enjoyment of the vision of God, a thing not to be\n achieved by any native faculty, unless aided by divine light, and\n which is to be understood by the Heavenly Paradise.... These ends\n and means would be disregarded by human passion, if men were not\n restrained in their course by bit and bridle.... For this reason man\n required a double directive, corresponding to this double end. He\n required the Supreme Pontiff to guide the human race to life\n eternal, and the Emperor to guide the human race to temporal\n felicity, in accordance with the teachings of philosophy.... The\n truth with regard to the question whether the authority of the\n Emperor is derived directly from God or from another, must not be\n taken so strictly as to mean that the Roman Prince is not, in some\n respects, subject to the Roman Pontiff, the fact being that this\n mortal felicity of ours is, in some sense, ordained with a view to\n immortal felicity. Let C\u00e6sar, therefore, display that reverence for\n Peter which the first-born son ought to display for his father, so\n that, being illuminated by his father's grace, he may with greater\n virtue enlighten the world, which he has been called to govern by\n Him who is governor of all things, spiritual and temporal.--Dante.\n\n O Grace abounding, whence I did presume\n To fix my gaze upon the eternal light\n So far that I consumed my sight therein!\n Within its deeps I saw internalized\n Into one volume, bound with love,\n That which is outered in the universe;--\n Substance and accident, and all their modes,\n As 'twere, together merged in such a sort\n That what I mean is but a simple light.\n The universal form of this same knot\n I think I saw, because, when thus I speak,\n I feel that I rejoice with larger joy.--_Id._\n\n Man's chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him\n forever.--_Westminster Shorter Catechism_.\n\n\nPlato's chief purpose, in writing upon education, had been to suggest a\nremedy for the social and moral conditions of his native Athens.\nAristotle has no such purpose. He is, in a very deep sense, a\ncosmopolitan, and writes in the interest of science and universal\nutility. His range of vision is not confined to Athens, or even to\nGreece (though he is very proud of being a Greek), but ranges over the\nwhole known world in time and space. Unlike Plato, too, who had been\nfamiliar mainly with institutions of the past in Egypt and Greece,\nAristotle is deeply affected by the tendencies of the future, and,\nthough no one lays greater stress than he upon the necessity of a\nknowledge of the past for him who would construct a sound social theory,\nhe nevertheless declares that the whole of the past is shaped by\nsomething which is in the future, by the ultimate realization. This view\ncomes out in a paradoxical way in his famous saying that \"the State is\nprior to the individual,\" by which he means that it is man's political\nnature working in him that makes him an individual, and at the same time\nrealizes itself in a State. And this brings us to Aristotle's conception\nof the State, which we must consider before taking up his theory of\neducation, for the reason that to him, as to all the ancient world,\neducation is a function of the State, and is conducted, primarily at\nleast, for the ends of the State.\n\nBefore venturing upon a theory of the State, Aristotle, true to his\ninductive principles, wrote the Constitutional Histories of over two\nhundred and fifty different states. One of these, the _Constitutional\nHistory of Athens_, has recently been discovered and published (see p.\n96). He held that it was only by means of a broad induction, thus\nrendered possible, that he could discover the idea of the State, that\nis, its self-realizing form. Employing this method, then, he came to the\nconclusion that the State is that highest social institution which\nsecures the highest good or happiness of man. Having, in a previous\ntreatise, satisfied himself that this good is Worth (\u1f00\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03ae), and worth\nbeing in every case the full exercise of characteristic or\ndifferentiating faculty, he concludes that, since man's distinguishing\nfaculty is reason, the State is the institution which secures to man the\nfullest and fre\u00ebst exercise of this. It follows directly that the State\nis, simply and solely, the supreme educational institution, the\nuniversity to which all other institutions are but preparatory. And two\nmore conclusions follow: (1) that states will differ in constitution\nwith the different educational needs of the peoples among whom they\nexist, and (2) that, since all education is but a preparation for some\nworthy activity, political education, the life of man as a citizen, is\nbut a preparation for the highest activity, which, because it is\nhighest, must necessarily be an end in itself. This activity, Aristotle\nargues, can be none other than contemplation, the Vision of the Divine\n(\u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03b1).\n\nResults which have moved the world followed logically from this\ndoctrine. Whereas Plato had made provision for a small and select body\nof super-civic men, and so paved the way for religious monasticism and\nasceticism, Aristotle maintains that in every civilized man, as such,\nthere is a super-civic part, in fact, a superhuman and divine part, for\nthe complete realization of which all the other parts, and the State\nwherein they find expression, are but means. Here we have, in embryo,\nthe whole of Dante's theory of the relation of Church and State, a\ntheory which lies at the basis of all modern political effort, however\nlittle the fact may be recognized. Here, indeed, we have the whole\nframework of the _Divine Comedy_; here too we have the doctrine of the\nBeatific Vision, which for ages shaped and, to a large extent, still\nshapes, the life of Christendom. Well might Dante claim Aristotle as his\nmaster (see p. 153)! Well might the great doctors of the Church speak of\nhim as \"_The_ Philosopher,\" and as the \"Forerunner of Christ in Things\nNatural.\" In vain did Peter Ramus and Luther and Bruno and Bacon\ndepreciate or anathematize him! He is more powerful to-day in thought\nand life than at any time for the last twenty-two centuries.\n\nIt may be asked how far, and in what form, Aristotle conceives the\ndivine life to be possible for man on earth. He answers that, though it\ncannot be perfectly or continuously realized here, it is in some degree\nand for certain times attainable (see p. 161). In so far as it is a\nsocial life, it is the life of friendship or spiritual love (\u03c6\u03b9\u03bb\u03af\u03b1), to\nwhich he has devoted almost two books of his _Ethics_, books which give\nus a loftier idea of his personal purity and worth than any other of his\nextant writings. He insists that friendship is the supreme blessing (see\np. 166), and that \"whatever a man's being is, or whatever he chooses to\nlive for, in that he wishes to spend his life in the company of his\nfriends.\" It is even said that Aristotle, while teaching in the Lyceum,\ngathered about him a knot of noble youths and earnest students, and\nformed them into a kind of community, with a view to leading a truly\nspiritual social life.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nARISTOTLE'S PEDAGOGICAL STATE\n\n Nature is the beginning of everything.--Aristotle.\n\n Life is more than meat, and the body than raiment.--Jesus.\n\n The forces of the human passions in us, when completely repressed,\n become more vehement; but when they are called into action for short\n time and in the right degree, they enjoy a measured delight, are\n soothed, and, thence being purged away, cease in a kindly, instead\n of a violent, way. For this reason, in tragedy and comedy, through\n being spectators of the passions of others, we still our own\n passions, render them more moderate, and purge them away; and so,\n likewise, in the temples, by seeing and hearing base things, we are\n freed from the injury that would come from the actual practice of\n them.--Jamblichus.\n\n Care for the body must precede care for the soul; next to care for\n the body must come care for the appetites; and, last of all, care\n for the intelligence. We train the appetites for the sake of the\n intelligence, and the body for the sake of the soul.--Aristotle.\n\n The practice of abortion was one to which few persons in antiquity\n attached any deep feeling of condemnation.... The physiological\n theory that the f\u0153tus did not become a living creature till the hour\n of birth had some influence on the judgments passed upon this\n practice. The death of an unborn child does not appeal very\n powerfully to the feeling of compassion, and men who had not yet\n attained any strong sense of the sanctity of human life, who\n believed that they might regulate their conduct on these matters by\n utilitarian views, according to the general interest of the\n community, might very readily conclude that prevention of birth was\n in many cases an act of mercy. In Greece, Aristotle not only\n countenanced the practice, but even desired that it should be\n enforced by law, when population had exceeded certain assigned\n limits. No law in Greece, or in the Roman Republic, or during the\n greater part of the Empire, condemned it.... The language of the\n Christians from the very beginning was very different. With\n unwavering consistency and with the strongest emphasis, they\n denounced the practice, not simply as inhuman, but as definitely\n murder.--Lecky, _European Morals_.\n\n Aristotle clearly saw that the strong tendency of the human race to\n increase, unless corrected by strict and positive laws, was\n absolutely fatal to every system founded on equality of property;\n and there cannot surely be a stronger argument against any system of\n this kind than the necessity of such laws as Aristotle himself\n proposes.... He seems to be fully aware that to encourage the birth\n of children, without providing properly for their support, is to\n obtain a very small accession to the population of a country, at the\n expense of a very great accession of misery.--Malthus, _Essay on\n Population_.\n\n\nConsidering Aristotle's views with regard to man, his end, and the\nfunction of the State, we can have little difficulty in divining the\ncharacter and method of his educational system. Man is a being endowed\nwith reason; his end is the full realization of this, his sovereign and\ndistinguishing faculty; the State is the means whereby this is\naccomplished.\n\nReaders of Goethe's _Wilhelm Meister_ will remember the description, in\nthe second part, of the Pedagogical Province. Now, Aristotle's State\nmight with entire propriety be called a Pedagogical Province. In trying\nto describe this State, and the manner in which it discharges its\nfunction, it is difficult to know where to begin, for the reason that,\ntaken as a whole, the State is both teacher and pupil. It arranges the\nwhole scheme of education, and is therefore related to it as cause; it\nis built up by this scheme, and is therefore related to it as effect. It\ncomes, accordingly, both at the beginning and at the end. It is a\nuniversity which arranges the entire scheme of education, and is itself\nits highest grade. I shall try to surmount this difficulty by\ndistinguishing what the State is from what it does, beginning with the\nformer, and ending with the latter.\n\nWith regard to what the State is, we have to consider (1) its natural,\n(2) its social, conditions. The former are climate, and extent, nature,\nand situation of territory; the latter, number and character of\ninhabitants, property regulations, distinction of classes, city\narchitecture, mode of life, government, and relations to other states.\n\nAristotle demands for his State a temperate climate, on the ground that\na cold one renders men strong and bold, but dull and stupid, while a hot\none renders them intellectual but effeminate. The best climate is one\nthat makes them at once brave and intelligent. The territory must be\nextensive enough, and fertile enough, to supply its inhabitants with all\nthe material conditions of life in answer to labor which shall rouse,\nwithout exhausting, their energies. It must face east or south, and be\nhealthy, well-watered, accessible from land and sea, and easily\ndefensible.\n\nAs to the social conditions, Aristotle finds the most important to be\nthe number of citizens. And here two things must be carefully borne in\nmind. (1) He means by \"State\" a city with a small territory. This is\nnot, as has been erroneously supposed, his highest social unity. He\nrecognizes clearly the nation (\u1f14\u03b8\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2) and the confederacy (\u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c7\u03af\u03b1);\nbut he holds that they exist merely for material ends, whereas the end\nof the State is spiritual. (2) He means by \"citizen\" a politician. A man\nis a citizen, not because he is born or domiciled in a State, but\nbecause he is a sharer in its functions. A State made up of mechanics,\nno matter how great their number, would be a small State, and one\ncomposed of slaves would be no State at all. Thus, in estimating the\nsize of a State, we are to consider the character of its inhabitants,\ntheir fitness for political functions, rather than their number. Little\nAthens was a much larger State than gigantic Persia on the field of\nMarathon. Aristotle lays down that the number of citizens must be large\nenough to insure independence, this being essential to a Culture-State,\nand not too large to be manageable. Besides the citizens, there will\nnecessarily be in the State a very large number of other human beings,\nslaves, agriculturists, mechanics, sailors--for all these he excludes\nfrom citizenship on the ground that they do not make virtue, that is,\nthe realization of reason, the end of their lives. Women, in a sense,\nare citizens, if they belong to the families of citizens; but their\nsphere is the family.\n\nWith regard to property, Aristotle begins by considering what things it\nis necessary for. These he finds to be six, three private and three\npublic. The former are food (including clothing and shelter),\ninstruments of production, and arms; the latter are public enterprises\n(civil and military), religion, and law. These are the \"necessaries\"\n(\u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03af\u03b1) of a State, for which it must duly provide. The most\nimportant of all is religion, on which he everywhere lays great stress.\nAs to the distribution of property, he propounds a scheme which is half\nsocialistic. All the land is to belong to the State, that is, to the\nbody of the free citizens. It is to be divided into two equal portions,\nand one set apart for public, the other for private, uses. The revenue\nfrom the public part is to go for the support of religion (and law?) and\nof the public tables, from which no citizen is excluded by poverty. The\nprivate part is to be so divided that each citizen shall have one lot\nnear the city, and one near the frontier. This will give him an interest\nin defending the whole territory. Both parts are to be cultivated by\nserfs or slaves, part of whom will necessarily belong to the State, and\npart to private individuals. Land-owning is to be a condition of\ncitizenship, and all citizens are to be forbidden to exercise any form\nof productive industry. This last rule, it is hoped, will prevent\ngrievous inequalities of wealth, and the evils that flow from them. A\nmodest competency, derived from his estate, is all that any citizen\nshould aim at. Only degraded people, incapable of virtue, will crave for\nmore.\n\nUpon the distinction of classes some light has been already thrown. They\nare two; the ruling and the ruled. Aristotle holds that this distinction\nruns through the whole of nature and spirit, that it is fundamental in\nbeing itself. It holds between God and the universe, form and matter,\nsoul and body, object and subject, husband and wife, parent and child,\nmaster and slave, etc., etc. The ruling class again is sub-divided into\ntwo parts, one that thinks and determines (legislators and judges), and\none that executes (officials, officers, soldiers); while the ruled is\nsub-divided into husbandmen, mechanics, and seamen (sailors, fishermen,\netc.). All the members of the ruled class are serfs or public slaves,\nworking, not for themselves, but for their masters. Aristotle holds that\nthey ought to be barbarians of different races, and not Greeks.\n\nThe architecture of the city will in some degree correspond to this\nsocial division. It will naturally fall into three divisions, military,\nreligious, and civil. First of all, a city must have walls. These should\nhave towers and bastions at proper distances, and be made as attractive\nas possible. The temples of the gods and the offices of the chief\nmagistrates should, if possible, stand together on a fortified citadel,\nconspicuously dominating the entire city. Adjoining this ought to be the\nFreemen's Square, reserved entirely for the ruling class, and\nunencumbered by business or wares of any sort. Here ought to stand the\ngymnasium for the older citizens, who will thus be brought into contact\nwith the magistrates and inspired with \"true reverence and freemen's\nfear.\" The market-square must be placed so as to be convenient for the\nreception of goods both from sea and land. This comprehends all the\ncivil architecture except the mess-halls, of which we shall better speak\nin the next paragraph.\n\nThe mode of life of the ruling class will necessarily differ widely from\nthat of the ruled. About the latter Aristotle has nothing to say. He\nhopes for little from that class beyond the possibility of being held in\ncontented subordination. As it has no political life, all that is left\nto it is the life of the family. The ruling class, on the contrary,\nlive to a large extent in public, and on public funds. They exercise in\npublic gymnasia and eat at public tables. The chief magistrates have\ntheir mess-hall in the citadel; the priests have theirs close to the\ntemples; the magistrates, who preside over business matters, streets,\nand markets, have theirs near the market-square, while those who attend\nto the defences of the city have tables in the towers. When not engaged\nin public business, the citizens may meet in the Freemen's Square and\nenjoy an open-air _conversazione_, with music, poetry, and philosophy,\nin a word, \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae, for which our language has no even approximate\nequivalent (see p. 33). In proportion as they advance in years, the\ncitizens enjoy more and more \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae, which, indeed, is regarded as the\nend of life, here and hereafter.\n\nThe government is entirely in the hands of the free citizens, the\nlegislative and deliberative power being in those of the elders; the\nexecutive power, civil and military, in those of the younger portion. It\nis curious that, though Aristotle regards this as the best possible\narrangement under ordinary circumstances, he nevertheless believes that\nthe happiest condition for a State would be to be governed by some\ndivine or heroic man, far superior to all the others in wisdom and\ngoodness. He plainly considers Pisistratus to have been one such man,\nand he perhaps hoped that Alexander might be another.\n\nThe relations of the pedagogical State to other States are, as far as\npossible, to be peaceful. Just as all labor is for the sake of rest and\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae, so all war is for the sake of peace; and that State is to be\nenvied which can maintain an honorable independence without war. A\ncultured State will eschew all attempts at conquest, and be as unwilling\nto tyrannize over another State as to be tyrannized over by one. At the\nsame time, it will always be prepared for war, possessing an army of\nwell-trained, well-armed soldiers, and a well-manned, well-equipped\nfleet.\n\nSuch are the chief features of Aristotle's ideal State, based, as he\nbelieves, on man's political nature and the history of the past. Like\nall social ideals, like heaven itself, as ordinarily conceived, it is a\nstatic condition. Its institutions are fixed once for all, and every\neffort is made to preserve them. It is curious to note in how many\npoints it coincides with Xenophon's ideal.\n\nThe purpose of the State is to educate its citizens, to make them\nvirtuous. Virtue is the very life-principle of the State, and it does\nnot depend, as other conditions do, upon nature or chance, but upon free\nwill. The ideal State, like every other, must educate with a view to its\nown institutions, since only in this way can these be preserved. \"And,\nsince the State, as a whole, has but one aim, it is evident that the\npolitical education of all the citizens ought to be the same, and that\nthis is a matter for the State to attend to, and not one to be left to\nindividual caprice, as is now almost universally done, when every parent\nattends to the education of his own children, and gives them whatever\nschooling suits his own fancy.\" For the education of those members of\nthe State who are not citizens the State makes no provision. They learn\ntheir practical duties by performing them, and are completely under the\ncontrol of the citizens. Aristotle makes the most vigorous efforts to\nprove that slavery has its justification in nature, which has\nestablished between Greek and barbarian the relation of master and slave\n(see p. 12). As woman belongs to the family, and is only indirectly a\ncitizen of the State, her education is entrusted to the former\ninstitution. The daughter is to be educated by the parents, and the wife\nby the husband, exactly as recommended by Xenophon.\n\nHaving concluded that education ought to be a matter of State\nlegislation, and the same for all the citizens, he continues: \"It\nremains to inquire what shall be the nature of the education, and the\nmethod of imparting it.... The present state of education leaves this\nquestion in a perfect muddle, no one seeming to know whether we ought to\nteach those subjects which enable people to make a living, or those\nwhich foster worth, or, finally, accomplishments. All have had their\nadvocates. In regard to those studies which have worth for their aim,\nthere is no general agreement, owing to the fact that different people\nhave different views as to what kinds of worth are admirable, and\nconsequently differ in regard to the means to be employed for the\ncultivation of them. One point, however, is perfectly clear, viz. that\nthose useful things which are necessary ought to be taught. But it is\nequally clear that a distinction ought to be made between liberal and\nilliberal studies, and that only those useful subjects ought to be\ntaught which do not turn those learning them into craftsmen. We ought\nto look upon every employment, art, or study which contributes to render\nthe bodies, souls, or intellects of free men unfit for the uses and\npractices of virtue, as a craft. For this reason it is that we call all\nthose arts which lower the condition of the body crafts, and extend the\nterm to the money-making trades, because they preoccupy and degrade the\nintelligence. As to the liberal arts, to cultivate an acquaintance with\nthem up to a certain point is not illiberal; but any over-devotion to\nthem, with a view to attaining professional skill, is liable to the\nobjections mentioned. It also makes a great difference for what purpose\nwe do or learn a thing. If a man does a thing for his own, for his\nfriends', or for worth's sake, it is not illiberal, whereas if he does\nit often for the sake of anybody else, he will be held to be doing\nsomething mercenary or slavish.\"\n\nThe next and all-important question is, For what end shall the State\neducate,--for business or for leisure? In answering this, Aristotle\nbreaks entirely away from the old Greek traditions, as well as from\nPlato, and maintains that, while it must educate for both, yet education\nfor leisure is far more important than education for business, and cites\nNature as his authority. \"Nature itself demands,\" he says, \"not only\nthat we should pursue business properly, but that we should be able to\nemploy our leisure elegantly. If we must have both, we must; but leisure\nis preferable to business, and our final inquiry must be, in what sort\nof employment we shall spend our leisure. It is useless to say that we\nare to spend it in play, and that play is the end and aim of our life.\nIf this is impossible, and the truth is that the proper place for play\nis in the midst of business (it is the man who is toiling that requires\nrecreation, which is the aim of play, business being accompanied with\nexertion and tension), then, in having recourse to play, we must select\nthe proper seasons for administering it, just as if it were a medicine.\nIndeed, all such movement of the soul is relaxation, and becomes\nrecreation on account of the pleasure which it affords. Leisure, on the\ncontrary, is considered, in and by itself, to involve pleasure,\nhappiness, and a blessed life. These fall to the lot of those who have\nleisure, not of those who are engaged in business. Those who engage in\nbusiness do so for some ulterior end not realized in it, whereas\nhappiness is itself an end and, according to universal belief, brings,\nnot pain but pleasure. Of course, as to the nature of this pleasure,\nthere is at present a variety of opinions, every one having his own\npreferences due to his character and habits, and the highest type of man\npreferring the highest type of pleasure and that which arises from the\nnoblest things. We need no further argument to show that we should\nreceive instruction and education in certain things with a view to\n_otium cum dignitate_ (or cultured leisure), and that these should be\nends in themselves, in contradistinction to the instruction given for\nbusiness, which is necessary and has an ulterior aim.\"\n\nThree principles Aristotle lays down as valid for all education: (1)\nthat the training of the body ought to take precedence in time over that\nof the mind; (2) that pupils should be taught to do things before they\nare taught the reasons and principles of them; (3) that learning is\nnever playing, or for the sake of playing.\n\nThe periods of education distinguished by Aristotle are: (1) Childhood,\nextending from birth to the end of the seventh year, and spent in\nhealthy growing and, latterly, in preparation for discipline; (2)\nBoyhood, from the beginning of the eighth year to the advent of puberty,\ndevoted to the lighter forms of discipline, bodily and mental; (3)\nYouth, from the age of puberty to the end of the twenty-first year,\noccupied with the severer forms of discipline; (4) Manhood, devoted to\nState duties. All these are but preparations for the divine life of the\nsoul. We shall treat these in order, including the second and third\nunder one head.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V\n\nEDUCATION DURING THE FIRST SEVEN YEARS\n\n Suffer no lewdness or indecent speech\n The apartment of tender youth to reach.--Juvenal.\n\n Le c\u0153ur d'un homme vierge est un vase profond--\n Lorsque la premi\u00e8re eau qu'on y verse est impure,\n La mer y passerait sans laver la souillure;\n Car l'ab\u00eeme est immense, et la tache est au fond.\n --Alfred de Musset.\n\n\nThe State must begin the education of children before their birth;\nindeed, before the marriage of their parents. It must see that only\npersons of robust constitutions marry. Athletes are not suited for\nmarriage, neither are weaklings. The best age for marriage is\nthirty-seven for a man, and eighteen for a woman. During their pregnancy\nwomen must take special care of their health, living on light food, and\ntaking short walks. The State should make a law that they visit the\ntemples of certain gods every day, and offer up a prayer of thanksgiving\nfor the honor conferred upon them. They must carefully avoid all forms\nof emotional excitement. When defective children are born, they must be\nexposed or destroyed. The State must determine what number of children\neach married couple may have, and, if more than this number are\nbegotten, they must be destroyed either before or after birth. \"As soon\nas children are born, it ought to be remembered that their future\nstrength will depend greatly upon the nourishment supplied to them.\" A\nmilk diet is best, and wine must be avoided. \"It is likewise of great\nimportance that children should make those motions that are appropriate\nto their stage of development.... Whatever it is possible to inure\nchildren to, they ought to be subjected to from the very outset, and\ngradual progress to be made. Children, on account of their high natural\nwarmth, are the proper subjects for inurement to cold. These and other\npoints of the same nature are what ought to be attended to in the first\nyears of the child's life. In the following years, up to the age of\nfive, while children ought not to be subjected to any instruction or\nsevere discipline, for fear of impeding their growth, they ought to take\nsuch exercises as shall guard their bodies from sluggishness. This may\nbe secured by other forms of activity as well as by play. Care must be\ntaken that their games shall be neither unrefined, laborious, nor\nlanguid. As to the conversation and stories which children are to hear,\nthat is a matter for the attention of those officers called Guardians of\nPublic Instruction. It ought to be seen to that all such things tend to\npave the way for future avocations. Hence all games ought to be types of\nfuture studies. As to the screaming and crying of children, they are\nthings that ought not to be prohibited, as they are in some places. They\ncontribute to the growth of the body, by acting as a sort of gymnastics.\nJust as persons engaged in hard work increase their strength by holding\ntheir breath, so children increase theirs by screaming. It is the\nbusiness of the Guardians of Public Instruction to provide for their\namusement generally, as well as to see that these bring them as little\nas possible in contact with slaves. It is, of course, natural that at\nthis age they should learn improprieties of speech and manner from what\nthey hear and see. As to foul language, it ought, of course, like\neverything else that is foul, to be prohibited in all society (for\nfrivolous impurity of talk easily leads to impurity of action), but\nabove all, in the society of the young, so that they may neither hear\nnor utter any such thing. If any child be caught uttering or doing\nanything that is forbidden, if he be freeborn and under the age when\nchildren are allowed to come to the public table, he ought to be\ndisgraced and subjected to corporal punishment; if he be older, it will\nbe sufficient to punish him with disgrace, like a slave, for having\nbehaved like one. And if we thus prohibit all mention of improper\nthings, with stronger reason shall we prohibit all looking at improper\npictures and listening to improper narratives. It ought to be made the\nbusiness of the Guardians of Public Instruction to see that there does\nnot exist a statue or a picture representing any such thing anywhere in\nthe State, except in the temples of those gods to whom ordinary belief\nascribes a certain wantonness.... There ought to be a regulation\nforbidding young persons to be present at lampoons or comedies before\nthey reach the age when they are allowed to come to the public table and\npartake of wine, and when education has fortified them against all\npossible danger from them.... We all have a preference for what we first\nknow; for this reason everything that savors of meanness or ignobility\nought to be made alien to children. From the completion of their fifth\nyear to that of their seventh, children ought to be present at the\ngiving of the various kinds of instruction which they will afterwards\nhave to acquire.\"\n\nIn this brief sketch of primary education we see that Aristotle does not\ndepart far from the notions of Plato. It contains even the revolting\nfeatures of his scheme. It assumes that the citizens--men, women, and,\nafter a certain age, children--eat at public tables, and that education\nis entirely managed by the State,--the family, in this respect, being\nmerely its agent. Some of its features, including the Guardians of\nPublic Instruction (\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9, child-herds) are plainly borrowed from\nSparta.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI\n\nTHE YEARS FROM SEVEN TO TWENTY-ONE\n\n The natures that give evidence of being the noblest are just those\n that most require education.--Socrates.\n\n We found ourselves beneath a noble castle\n Encompassed seven times with lofty walls,\n Defended round by a fair rivulet.\n O'er this we passed as upon solid earth:\n Through seven gates I entered with these sages.\n We came upon a meadow of fresh green.--Dante.\n\n\nFor this period, which Aristotle divides into two (see p. 183) by the\nadvent of puberty, he, in the main, accepts the course of study\ncustomary in his time. It consists, he says, of four\nbranches,--\"Letters, Gymnastics, Music, and Drawing, the last not being\nuniversal. Letters and Drawing are taught because they are useful in the\nordinary business of life and for a variety of purposes, and Gymnastics\nbecause they foster manliness, whereas the purpose of Music is\ndoubtful.\"\n\nOf LETTERS Aristotle has not much to say, beyond the fact that they are\nnecessary in the common affairs of life. He champions Homer against\nPlato, and goes into a long discussion to show the value of the drama.\nInstead of believing, with Plato, that children should see and hear\nnothing that would excite their emotions, he maintains that it is only\nby being properly excited and \"purged\" that these can be trained and\nmade subordinate to the reason. Among the passions that obstruct the\nexercise of reason are fear and pity. Tragedy rouses these and then\ndrains them off in a pleasant and harmless way. Comedy does the same\nthing for pleasure and laughter. In fact, he maintains that the special\nfunction of the fine arts is to act as cathartics for the different\npassions. Art is ideal experience. Aristotle has left us a work on\ntragedy that holds the place of honor in the literature of that subject\neven at the present day.\n\nDRAWING Aristotle recommends as a branch of study which develops taste\nand judgment in regard to the products of industrial art; but he says it\nshould not be studied merely for its use in enabling us to choose these,\nor even works of fine art, correctly, but rather because it enables us\nto appreciate beauty of form. He adds: \"The perpetual demand for what is\nmerely useful is anything but a mark of breadth or liberality.\"\n\nAfter thus briefly dismissing Letters and Drawing, Aristotle passes on\nto Gymnastics and Music, and devotes considerable space to each.\n\nAlongside GYMNASTICS, but distinguished from them, he names PHYSICAL\nCULTURE (\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03b9\u03ba\u03ae), saying that, while the former gives character to\nthe acts of the body, the latter gives character to the body itself. The\naim of gymnastic training should be neither athleticism nor ferocity,\nsuch as the Laced\u00e6monians cultivate in their children in the hope of\nmaking them courageous. The former is detrimental to the beauty and\ngrowth of the body; the latter misses its aim (see p. 41). \"Hence\nnobility, and not ferocity, ought to play the principal part among our\naims in physical education. For neither a wolf nor any other wild beast\never braved a noble danger. To do that takes a noble man; and those who\nallow their children to go too deep into such wild exercises, and so\nleave them uninstructed in the necessary branches, make them, in point\nof fact, mere professionals, useful for the ends of the State only in a\nsingle requisite, and, as we have shown, inferior to others even in\nthat.\n\n\"There is a general agreement, then, as to the utility of Gymnastics and\nto the manner in which they ought to be conducted. Up to the age of\npuberty, children ought to be subjected only to the lighter exercises,\nand all forced dieting and violent exertions eschewed, so that no\nobstacle may be put to the growth of the body. It is no slight evidence\nof the fact that violent exercise impedes growth, that there are not\nmore than two or three examples on record of persons' having been\nvictorious at the Olympic games both as boys and men. The explanation of\nthis is, that the others were robbed of their strength in their boyhood\nby the training they had to undergo.\" After the advent of puberty, for a\nperiod of three years, the young men are apparently to have very little\ngymnastics, and to devote themselves assiduously to letters, music, and\ndrawing. The period following this is to be devoted to severe exercise\nand strict dieting, mental exertion being reduced to a minimum; \"for the\ntwo kinds of exertion naturally work against each other, bodily exertion\nimpeding the intellect, and intellectual exertion the body.\"\n\nOn MUSIC, as a branch of study, we have almost a disquisition from the\npen of Aristotle. The question that first occupies him is, What is the\nuse of music? Is it a recreation, an occupation for cultured leisure, or\na gymnastic for the soul? It is all three, he replies, and would deserve\nstudy for the sake of any one of them. At the same time, its chief value\nin education lies in its third use. Music imparts a mental habit; about\nthat there can be no doubt. For example, the songs of Olympus \"render\nthe soul enthusiastic, and enthusiasm is an affection of the soul's\nhabit.\" Aristotle reasons in this way: Music is capable of affecting us\nwith all kinds of pleasures and pains. But moral worth at bottom\nconsists in finding pleasure in what is noble, and pain in what is\nignoble, that is, in a correct distribution of affection. But in good\nmusic the strains that give pleasure are attached to the ideas that are\nnoble, and the strains that give pain to the ideas that are ignoble;\nhence, by a natural association, the pleasures and pains which we find\nin the music attach themselves to the ideas which it accompanies. \"There\nis nothing that we ought to learn and practice so assiduously as the art\nof judging correctly and of taking delight in gentlemanly bearing and\nnoble deeds. And apart from the natural manifestations of the passions\nthemselves, there is nothing in which we can find anger, gentleness,\ncourage, self-control, and their opposites, as well as the other moods,\nso well represented as in rhythms and songs. This we all know by\nexperience; for the moods of our souls change when we listen to such\nstrains. But the practice which we thus receive from rhythms and songs,\nin rejoicing and suffering properly, brings us very near being affected\nin the same way by the realities themselves.\" Here Aristotle draws a\ndistinction between music, which appeals to the ear, and the arts that\nappeal to the other senses, or rather to sight; for no art appeals to\ntouch, taste, or smell. In the objects of art that appeal to the eye, we\nhave expressions of passions only in so far as they affect the body,\nwhereas in music we have their direct expression passing from soul to\nsoul. Yet persons are deeply moved by statuary and painting, so much so\nthat young people ought not to be allowed to see such works as those of\nPauson. How much more then must they be moved by music! \"That they are\nso is quite plain; for there is such an obvious difference of nature\nbetween harmonies that the listeners are affected in entirely different\nways by them. By some they are thrown into a kind of mournful or grave\nmood, _e.g._, by what is known as the mixed Lydian; by others a\nsentimental turn is given to their thoughts, for example, by languid\nharmonies; while there is another kind that especially produces balance\nof feeling and collectedness. This effect is confined to the Doric\nharmonies. The Phrygian harmonies rouse enthusiasm. These are correct\nresults arrived at by those thinkers who have devoted their attention to\nthis branch of education,--results based upon actual experience. What is\ntrue of harmonies is true also of rhythms. Some of these have a steady,\nothers a mobile, character; of the latter, again, some have coarse,\nothers refined, movements. From all these considerations, it is obvious\nthat music is calculated to impart a certain character to the habit of\nthe soul, whence it follows that it ought to be brought to bear upon\nchildren, and instruction given them in it. Musical instruction, indeed,\nis admirably adapted to their stage of development; for young people,\njust because they are young, are not fond of persisting in anything that\ndoes not give them pleasure, and music is one of the pleasant things.\nThere seems even to be a certain kinship between harmonies and rhythms\n[and the soul]; whence many philosophers hold that the soul is a\nharmony, or that it has harmony.\"\n\nAristotle, having thus shown that music is a proper subject of\ninstruction, goes on to inquire \"whether children ought, or ought not,\nto be taught music, by being taught to sing and play themselves?\" His\nanswer is well worth quoting at full length. \"It is quite evident,\" he\nsays, \"that music will have a very much greater effect in moulding\npeople, if they take part in the performance themselves. Indeed, it is\ndifficult, or even impossible, for those who do not learn to do things\nthemselves to be good judges of them when they are done. At the same\ntime, children must have some amusement, and we may look upon Archytas'\nrattle, which they give to children to spend their energies upon, and to\nprevent them from breaking things about the house, as a good invention.\nIt is useless to try to keep a young creature quiet, and, just as the\nrattle is the proper thing for babies, so musical instruction is the\nproper rattle for older children. It follows that children ought to be\ntaught music by being made to produce it themselves, and it is not\ndifficult to determine either what is suitable and unsuitable for\ndifferent ages, or to answer those people who pretend that the study of\nmusic is something ungentlemanly. In the first place, since people must,\nto some extent, learn things themselves, in order to form a correct\njudgment about them, they ought to learn the practice of them while they\nare young, so that, when they grow up, they may be able to dispense with\nit, and yet, through their early studies, be able to judge of them\ncorrectly and take the proper delight in them. To the objections which\nsome people raise, that music turns people into craftsmen, it is not\nhard to find an answer, if we consider to what extent the practice of\nmusic ought to be required of children who are being reared in the civic\nvirtues, what songs and rhythms they ought to learn, and what\ninstruments they ought to use--for this makes a difference. Herein lies\nthe solution of the difficulty. The fact is, there is nothing to prevent\ncertain kinds of music from accomplishing the end proposed.\n\n\"It is, of course, obvious that the acquisition of music ought not to be\nallowed to interfere with future usefulness, to impart an ignoble habit\nto the body, or render it unfit for civic duties,--either for the\nimmediate learning, or the subsequent exercise, of them. All the\nbeneficial results of musical education would be attained, if, instead\nof going into a laborious practice, such as is required to prepare\npeople for public exhibitions, if instead of trying to perform those\nmarvellous feats and _tours de force_ which have lately become popular\nat public exhibitions, and passed from them into education, the children\nwere to learn just enough to enable them to take delight in noble songs\nand rhythms, instead of finding a mere undiscriminating pleasure in\nanything that calls itself music, as some of the lower animals and the\nbulk of slaves and children do. If so much be admitted, we need be in no\ndoubt respecting our choice of instruments.\" Aristotle specially\ncondemns the flute, and tells how it came into use, and how it was\nafterwards discarded, as exerting an immoral influence. \"In the same way\nwere condemned many of the older instruments, as the pectis, the\nbarbitus, and those which tended to produce sensual pleasure in the\nhearers--also the septangle, the triangle, the sambuca, and all those\nrequiring scientific manipulation.\" ... \"We would, then, condemn all\nprofessional instruction in the nature and use of these instruments.\n'Professional' we call all instruction that looks toward public\nexhibitions. The person who receives this pursues his art, not with a\nview to his own culture, but to afford a pleasure, and that a vulgar\none, to other people. For this reason we hold that such practice is not\nproper for free men, but savors of meniality and handicraft. The aim,\nindeed, for which they undertake this task is an ignoble one. For\naudiences, being vulgar, are wont to change their music, and so react\nupon the character of the professionals who cater to their tastes, and\nthis again has its influence upon their bodies, on account of the\nmotions which they are obliged to go through.\"\n\nSince different kinds of music have different effects upon the habit of\nthe soul, Aristotle next inquires what kinds are suitable for education.\n\"We accept,\" he says, \"the classification made by certain philosophers,\nwho divide songs into ethical, practical, and enthusiastic, assigning to\nthem the different harmonies respectively, and we affirm that music is\nto be employed, not for one useful purpose alone, but for several;\n_first_, for instruction; _second_, for purgation; and _third_, for\ncultured leisure, for relaxation, and for recreation. It is obvious that\nall harmonies ought to be employed, though not all in the same way. The\nmost ethical (_i.e._ those that most affect the _ethos_ or habit of the\nsoul) must be employed for instruction; the practical and enthusiastic\nfor entertainments by professional performers. For those emotions which\nmanifest themselves powerfully in some souls are potentially present in\nall, with a difference in degree merely, _e.g._, pity, fear, and also\nenthusiasm, a form of excitement by which certain persons are very\nliable to be possessed. If we watch the effects of the sacred songs, we\nshall see that those persons are restored to a normal condition under\nthe influence of those that solemnize the soul, just as if they had\nundergone medical treatment and purgation. The same thing must happen to\nall persons predisposed to pity, fear, or emotion generally, as well as\nto others in so far as they allow themselves to come within the reach of\nany of these; for them all there must exist some form or another of\npurgation and relief accompanied with pleasure. In this way those\n'purgative' songs afford a harmless pleasure, and it is for this reason\nthat there ought to be a legal enactment to the effect that performers\ngiving public concerts should employ such harmonies and such songs. The\nfact is, since there are two kinds of public, the one free and\ncultivated, the other rude and vulgar, composed of mechanics, laborers,\nand the like, there must be entertainments and exhibitions to afford\npastime to the latter as well as the former. As the souls of these\npeople are, so to speak, perverted from the normal habit, so also among\nthe harmonies there are abnormities, and among songs there are the\nstrained and discolored; and each individual derives pleasure from that\nwhich is germane to his nature. For this reason performers must be\nallowed to produce this kind of music, for the benefit of this portion\nof the public.\n\n\"For the purposes of instruction, as has been said, we must employ\nethical songs and the corresponding harmonies. Such a harmony is the\nDoric, as has already been remarked. We must likewise admit any other\nspecies of music that may have approved itself to such persons as have\ndevoted attention to philosophic discussion and musical education.... In\nrespect to the Doric harmony, it is universally admitted to be, of all\nharmonies, the most sedate, expressive of the most manly character.\nMoreover, since our principle is, that the mean between extremes is\ndesirable and ought to be pursued, and the Doric harmony holds this\nrelation to other harmonies, it follows that Doric songs should be\ntaught to young people in preference to any other. Two things, however,\nmust be kept in view, the practicable and the befitting. I mean that we\nmust discuss what is specially practicable for different people, as well\nas what is befitting. This, indeed, will depend upon the different\nperiods of life. For example, it would not be easy for persons in the\ndecline of life to sing the intense harmonies; for them nature suggests\nthe languid kinds. For this reason those musicians are right who blame\nSocrates for having condemned the languid harmonies, as subjects of\ninstruction, on the ground that they were intoxicating. (By this term he\ndid not mean inebriating, in the sense that wine is inebriating,--for\nwine renders boisterous rather than anything else,--but languid.) The\ntruth is, with an eye to the future, to old age, instruction ought to be\ngiven in harmonies and songs of this sort. Moreover, if there is any\nharmony suitable for youth, as tending to refine as well as to instruct,\nas is the case notably with the Lydian, it, of course, ought to be\nadopted. It is clear, then, that there are three distinct things to be\nconsidered in reference to education, avoidance of extremes,\npracticability, and appropriateness.\"\n\nSo much for the four branches of study which, according to Aristotle,\nought to compose the curriculum of youth. We have noticed that, in his\nextant works, he says little about Letters and Drawing. Just what\nbranches the former was supposed to include, he has nowhere told us\ndirectly; but I think there can be little doubt that he gave a place to\nGrammar, Rhetoric (including Poetics), Dialectic, Arithmetic, Geometry,\nand Astronomy, which, along with Music, make up the Seven Liberal Arts,\nthe _Trivium_ and _Quadrivium_ of the Middle Ages. This curriculum\nunderwent considerable changes at different times, as we can see from\nPhilo, Teles, Sextus Empiricus, St. Augustine, and others; but in\nMartianus Capella it returned to its original form, and in this\ndominated education for a thousand years. We might perhaps draw out\nAristotle's programme of secondary education thus:--\n\n { {Physical {Dancing (see p. 82) }Before\n { { Training {Deportment } puberty.\n { {\n { { {Running }\n { { {Leaping }Before\n {_Practical_ { {Javelin-casting } puberty.\n { { {Discus-throwing }\n { { {\n { {Gymnastics {Wrestling }\n { { {Shooting }After\nSTUDIES: { {Marching } puberty.\n {_Creative_ {Music {Drilling }\n { {Drawing {Riding }\n {\n { {Grammar }\n { {Rhetoric }Before puberty.\n {_Theoretic_ {Dialectic }\n { {\n { {Arithmetic }\n { {Geometry }After puberty.\n { {Astronomy }\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII\n\nEDUCATION AFTER TWENTY-ONE\n\n Be assured that happiness has its source, not in extensive\n possessions, but in a right disposition of the soul. Even in the\n case of the body, no one would call it fortunate for being arrayed\n in splendid garments; but one would do so, if it had health, and\n were nobly developed, even without such appendages. In the same\n manner, we ought to ascribe happiness to the soul only when it is\n cultivated, and to call a man happy only if he possesses such a\n soul, not if he is splendidly attired outwardly, but has no worth of\n his own.... For those whose souls are ill-conditioned, neither\n wealth, nor power, nor beauty is a blessing; on the contrary, the\n more excessive these conditions are, the more widely and deeply do\n they injure their possessors, being unaccompanied with\n right-mindedness.--Aristotle.\n\n Zeno used to tell a story about Crates, to this effect: One day\n Crates was sitting in a shoemaker's shop, reading aloud Aristotle's\n _Exhortation_ (to Philosophy), addressed to Themison, king of the\n Cyprians, in which the king is reminded that he possesses, in an\n exceptional degree, all the conditions of philosophy, superabundant\n wealth, and high position. As he was reading, the shoemaker, without\n interrupting his sewing, listened to him, until at last Crates said:\n \"Philiscus, I think I will write an _Exhortation_ for you; for I see\n you have more of the conditions of philosophy than Aristotle has\n enumerated.\"--Teles.\n\n\nAt the age of twenty-one, those young men who have successfully\ncompleted the State system of training become citizens or politicians,\nand begin to exercise the functions of such. These are of two kinds, (1)\nactive, practical, or executive, and (2) deliberative, theoretical, or\nlegislative. As action must, on the one hand, be vigorous, and, on the\nother, guided by deliberation, which requires large experience, the\nfunctions of the State must be so arranged that the active duties fall\nto the young and robust, the deliberative to the elderly and mature. The\ndistinguishing virtue of the former is fortitude, with endurance or\npatience; that of the latter philosophy. Both equally have self-control\nand justice. In this way does Aristotle distribute Plato's four cardinal\nvirtues.\n\nWhen young men first become citizens, they are assigned to posts of\nactive service, civil and military, and thus study practical\nphilosophy--Ethics and Politics--in a practical way. As they grow older,\nthey gradually rise to posts demanding less practice and more thought,\nuntil at last they are admitted to the deliberative body, or council,\nwhen their active duties cease, and they are able to devote themselves\nto Speculative Philosophy or Theoretics. These men have now reached the\nend of life, as far as this world is concerned. They spend their days in\ncultured leisure, and the contemplation of divine things (\u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03b1). The\nvery oldest of them, those who are most conversant with divine things,\nare chosen as priests, so that they may, as it were, live with the gods,\nand these be worthily served. Thus gradually, almost insensibly, they\npass from the world of time to that of eternity; from the imperfect\nactivity of practice, whose end is beyond itself, to the perfect energy\nof contemplation, which is self-sufficient and the life of God. In this\nway Aristotle settles the vexed question with regard to the\ncompatibility and relative value of the practical and the contemplative\nlife. They are necessary complements of each other. Practice is the\nrealization of what contemplation discovers in the pure energy of God,\nrevealing itself in the world. Thus the practical life of man glides\ngradually into the contemplative life of God.\n\nSuch is the highest view of man's destiny, and the way thither, that the\nGreeks ever reached, and it is in many ways a most attractive and\ninspiring one. Its defects are the defects of all that is Greek. They\nare two: (1) its ideal is intellectual and \u00e6sthetic,--a co\u00f6rdinated,\nharmonious whole, whereof the individual is but a part: not moral or\nreligious--a self-surrender of the individual to the supreme will;\nconsequently, (2) it does not provide for every human being, as such,\nbut only for a small, select number, the fruit of the whole. Its ethics\nare institutional not personal, and, indeed, the Greek never arrived at\na distant conception of personality, that being possible only through\nthe moral consciousness, which is its core. It seeks to find happiness\nin a correlation and balancing of individual selves, not in the\nindependent conformity of each self to a supreme self. Hence it was\nthat, with all its marvellous grasp and manly prudence, the ideal of\nAristotle proved powerless to restore the moral unity of man, until it\nwas absorbed in a higher.\n\n\n\n\nBOOK IV\n\nTHE HELLENISTIC PERIOD\n\n(B.C. 338-A.D. 313)\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\nFROM ETHNIC TO COSMOPOLITAN LIFE\n\n 'Tis Greece, but living Greece no more.--Byron.\n\n Most glorious of all the Undying, many-named, girt round with awe!\n Jove, author of Nature, applying to all things the rudder of law--\n Hail! Hail! for it justly rejoices the races whose life is a span\n To lift unto Thee their voices--the Author and Framer of Man.\n For we are Thy sons; Thou didst give us the symbols of speech at our\n birth,\n Alone of the things that live, and mortal move upon earth.\n Wherefore Thou shalt find me extolling and ever singing Thy praise;\n Since Thee the great Universe, rolling on its path round the world,\n obeys:--\n Obeys Thee, wherever Thou guidest, and gladly is bound in Thy bands,\n So great is the power Thou confidest, with strong, invincible hands,\n To Thy mighty, ministering servant, the bolt of the thunder, that\n flies,\n Two-edged, like a sword and fervent, that is living and never dies.\n All nature, in fear and dismay, doth quake in the path of its stroke,\n What time Thou preparest the way for the one Word Thy lips have spoke,\n Which blends with lights smaller and greater, which pervadeth and\n thrilleth all things,\n So great is Thy power and Thy nature--in the Universe Highest of Kings!\n On earth, of all deeds that are done, O God! there is none without\n Thee.\n In the holy \u00e6ther not one, nor one on the face of the sea;\n Save the deeds that evil men, driven by their own blind folly, have\n planned;\n But things that have grown uneven are made even again by Thy hand;\n And things unseemly grow seemly, the unfriendly are friendly to Thee;\n For so good and evil supremely Thou hast blended in one by decree.\n For all Thy decree is one ever--a Word that endureth for aye,\n Which mortals, rebellious, endeavor to flee from and shun to obey--\n Ill-fated, that, worn with proneness for the lordship of goodly things,\n Neither hear nor behold, in its Oneness, the law that divinity brings;\n Which men with reason obeying, might attain unto glorious life,\n No longer aimlessly straying in the paths of ignoble strife.\n There are men with a zeal unblest, that are wearied with following of\n fame,\n And men, with a baser quest, that are turned to lucre and shame.\n There are men, too, that pamper and pleasure the flesh with delicate\n stings:\n All these desire beyond measure to be other than all these things.\n Great Jove, all-giver, dark-clouded, great Lord of the thunderbolt's\n breath!\n Deliver the men that are shrouded in ignorance, dismal as death.\n O Father! dispel from their souls the darkness, and grant them the\n light\n Of Reason, Thy stay, when the whole wide world Thou rulest with might,\n That we, being honored, may honor Thy name with the music of hymns,\n Extolling the deeds of the Donor, unceasing, as rightly beseems\n Mankind; for no worthier trust is awarded to God or to man\n Than forever to glory with justice in the law that endures and is\n One.--Cleanthes.\n\n\nThe distinguishing characteristics of Hellenic education were unity,\ncomprehensiveness, proportion, and aimfulness. It extended to the whole\nhuman being, striving to bring the various elements of his nature into\ncomplete harmony in view of an end. This end was the State, in which the\nindividual citizen was expected to find a field for all his activities.\nWe have seen how, while conservative Sparta clung to this ideal to the\nlast, and rigorously excluded those influences which tended to undermine\nit, Athens, by freely admitting these, gradually broke down the fair\nproportion between bodily and mental education, in an excessive devotion\nto the latter, and so came to make a distinction between the man and the\ncitizen. The result was an epidemic of individualism which threatened\nthe existence of all that was Hellenic. Against this destructive power\nthe noblest men in the nation, an \u00c6schylus, an Aristophanes, a Pericles,\na Socrates, a Xenophon, a Plato, an Aristotle, fought with all the might\nof worth and intellect. Some of them sought once more to remerge the man\nin the citizen by means of a despotism and the suppression of all\nintellectual pursuits; others, seeing clearly the impossibility of this,\ntried so to define the sphere of the individual that it should not\nencroach upon that of the citizen, but stand in harmonious relation to\nit. They did this by placing the sphere of the individual above that of\nthe State, and, inasmuch as the former was a purely intellectual sphere,\nthey found themselves driven to conclude, and to lay down, that the\ncontemplative life is the end and consummation of the practical, that\nthe citizen and the State exist only for the sake of the individual.\nThey were very far indeed from seeing all the implications of this\nconclusion: these showed themselves only in the sequel; but the fact is,\nthat the principle of the separation between the man and the citizen,\nand the assignment of the place of honor to the former, proved at once\nthe destroying angel of Hellenism and the animating spirit of the\ncivilization which took its place. If we look closely at the schemes of\nPlato and Aristotle, we shall see that they try to render innocuous the\nspirit of individualism by exhausting its activities in intellectual\nrelations to the divine, offering it heaven, if it will only consent to\nrelinquish to the political spirit its earthly claims. They practically\nsaid: Man, in all his relations to his fellow-men here below, is a\ncitizen; only in relation to God is he an individual. The history of the\nlast two thousand years is but a commentary on this text. From the day\nwhen the master-mind of the Greek world credited man's nature with a\ndivine element having a supreme activity of its own, European thought\nand life have been agitated by three questions, and largely shaped by\nthe answers given to them: (1) What is the nature of the divine element\nin man? (2) In what form or institution shall that element find\nexpression and realization? (3) How shall that institution relate itself\nto the State? And they have not yet been definitely answered.\n\nPrinciples that are to move the world are never the result of mere\nabstract thought, but always of a crisis or epoch in human affairs. And\nso it was in the present case. The separation between the man and the\ncitizen was accomplished in fact, before it was formulated in theory. On\nthe other hand, the theory received emphasis from the events which\naccompanied and followed its promulgation. The battle of Ch\u00e6ronea, which\ntook place sixteen years before Aristotle's death, by putting an end\nforever to the free civic life of Greece, removed the very conditions\nunder which the old ideal could realize itself, and forced men to seek\na sphere of activity, and to form associations, outside of the State.\nThe State, indeed, still maintained a semblance of life, and the old\neducation, with its literature, gymnastics, and music still continued;\nbut the spirit of both was gone. The State was gradually replaced by the\nphilosophic schools, while intellectual training tended more and more to\nconcentrate itself upon rhetoric, that art which enables the individual\nto shine before his fellows, and to gain wealth or public preferment.\nFrom this time on, the spiritual life of Greece found expression in the\npretentious, empty individualism of the rhetorician, the lineal\ndescendant of the sophists, and in the philosophical sects, which\nembodied the spirit of Socrates, their opponent.\n\nThe founder of the rhetorical schools may be said to have been\nIsocrates, who, after being a pupil of Socrates', turned against the\nphilosophic tendency, and championed elegant philistinism. The aim of\nthese schools was to turn out clever men of the world, thoroughly\nacquainted with popular opinions and motives, and capable of expressing\nthemselves glibly, sententiously, and persuasively on any and every\nsubject. They usually made no profession of imparting profound learning\nor eliciting philosophic thought: indeed, they despised both; but they\ndid seek to impart such an amount of ordinary knowledge as to place\ntheir pupils in the chief current of the popular thought of their time.\nThey thus became the bearers of practical education among a people who,\nhaving lost their political life without finding any higher, sought to\nobtain satisfaction in social intercourse. For hundreds of years they\nexerted an enormous influence, and, indeed, at certain times and places\nwere formidable rivals of the philosophic schools.\n\nThe first man of Greek race who attempted to found a sect or school\noutside the State was Pythagoras, and there can be no doubt that all\nsubsequent schools were in some degree modelled upon his. It is true\nthat the Pythagorean school had been broken up and dispersed long before\nthe days of Plato and Aristotle (see p. 54); nevertheless, his\nfollowers, scattered over Greece, had carried with them the ideas and\nprinciples of their master, and now that Athens had fallen into the\ncondition against which the Pythagorean discipline had been a protest,\nthese ideas found a ready response in the hearts of those men whom the\nsocial life of the time could not satisfy. Hence the schools of Plato\nand Aristotle, which had originally been mere educational institutions,\nturned, even during the lifetime of the latter, into sects (\u03b1\u1f31\u03c1\u03ad\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2,\nheresies, as they were called later on), with definite sets of\nnon-political principles, in accordance with which their members tried\nto shape their lives. It cannot be said that these two schools were in\nany high degree successful, and the reasons were that they were too\npurely intellectual, that they made no striking revolt against political\nlife, and that they called for a type of man not easy to find. But,\nshortly after the death of Aristotle, there arose, almost\ncontemporaneously, two other schools, which exerted an influence, deep\nand wide, for over six hundred years. These were the Epicurean and the\nStoic. Widely as these differed in respect to means, they sought the\nsame end, namely, personal independence, and they sought it by\nconformity to laws imposed by no human legislator, but by nature. The\nformer took the law of the senses, the latter the law of the spirit, for\nits guide; and, by a strange contradiction, while the former championed\nfree will, the latter professed fatalism. These four schools were the\nonly ones that ever met with extensive patronage in Athens, and with the\nexception of the Academic, they never diverged far from the principles\nof their founders. In the time of Marcus Aurelius, after Athens had been\nfor ages a mere Roman university, they were placed under State\npatronage, and supported by public funds, and there is no record to show\nthat this was discontinued until they were finally closed by the Emperor\nJustinian in A.D. 529.\n\nNot long after the death of Aristotle, Athens was supplanted by\nAlexandria, as the centre of Greek influence. Here the rhetorical and\nphilosophic schools established themselves, and could soon boast a\nnumerous discipleship. This, however, was no longer exclusively, or even\nmainly, Greek, but was recruited from all the nations of the known\nworld, more especially those of the East. Ph\u0153nicians, Syrians, Jews,\nPersians, etc., not to speak of Egyptians, now became students of Greek\nphilosophy, and members of philosophic sects, whose members not only\nstudied together, but often, to a large extent, lived together in\ncommunities. About the year B.C. 300 were founded the famous Museum and\nLibrary of Alexandria--the first university and the first public library\nin the world. Round these the various sects gathered, to study, to\ndiscuss, and to exchange opinions. Nor was it Greek thought alone that\nengaged their attention. The opinions and beliefs of Egypt and the East\ncame in for a share, and, in the end, for the largest share. Nor is this\nwonderful, when we consider the direction that thought and life were\nthen taking.\n\nWe have already seen that, as Greek civic life lost the conditions of\nits existence, the thoughtful portion of the people came more and more\nto seek for life-principles in the supersensible world of intellect. The\nnature of this world Plato and Aristotle had done their best to reveal.\nBut the event proved that neither an ordered host of ideas commanded by\nthe Good, nor a Supreme Intelligence served by a host of lower\nintelligences, could yield the principles which the life of the time\ndemanded; and thus we find the philosophers of Alexandria striving to\npeople their intelligible world with forms drawn from all the religions\nof the East, including Judaism. Thus there grew up the various forms of\nAlexandrine philosophy, compounds of Greek thought and Oriental\nreligion. On the basis of these again were organized, at the same time,\nvarious forms of social life, all tending more or less to religious\ncommunism. Hence came the Essenes (see p. 59), the Therapeuts, the\nNeopythagoreans, and the Neoplatonists, all of whom, notwithstanding\ncertain shortcomings, did much to purify life, and to pave the way for a\nhigher civilization.\n\nIn B.C. 146, Greece, and, in B.C. 30, Egypt, fell into the hands of the\nRomans and thenceforth formed provinces of their empire. Athens and\nAlexandria were now Roman university-towns, while Rome became more and\nmore the diffusing centre of Greek and Oriental influence. It would be\nimpossible, in a work like the present, to give even a sketch of the\nforms which education assumed in these three great centres, or in the\nworld that revolved round them, in the six hundred and more years that\npassed between the loss of Greek autonomy and the triumph of\nChristianity. We shall merely endeavor to give a general notion of its\ntwo chief tendencies, which, as we saw, were towards rhetoric and\nphilosophy; and we shall do this in connection with the names of two\nmen, who may be regarded as respectively typical of the two tendencies,\nQuintilian the rhetorician, and Plotinus the philosopher. By doing so we\nshall pave the way for the consideration of the Rise of the Christian\nSchools.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\nQUINTILIAN AND RHETORICAL EDUCATION\n\n Rhetoric is the counterpart of Dialectic. Both have for their\n subjects those things which, in a certain way, are matters of common\n knowledge, and belong to no definite science. Hence everybody, in\n some degree, is gifted with them; for everybody, to some extent,\n tries to examine and sustain an argument, to defend himself, and to\n accuse others.--Aristotle.\n\n There is a certain political theory which is made up of many great\n things. A large and important part of it is artificial eloquence,\n which they call rhetoric.--Cicero.\n\n Every duty which tends to preserve human relations and human society\n must be assigned a higher place than any that stops short with\n knowledge and science.--_Id._\n\n Zeno, having pressed his fingers together and closed his fist, said\n that was like Dialectic; having spread them out and opened his hand,\n he said Eloquence was like his palm there.--_Id._\n\n To act considerately is of more moment than to think wisely.--_Id._\n\n I pass to the pleasure of oratorical eloquence, the delight of which\n one enjoys not at any one moment, but almost every day and every\n hour.--Tacitus.\n\n Grammar is an experimental knowledge of the usages of language as\n generally current among poets and prose writers. It is divided into\n six parts, (1) trained reading with due regard to prosody [_i.e._\n aspiration, accentuation, quantity, emphasis, metre, etc.], (2)\n exposition according to poetic figures [literary criticism], (3)\n ready statement of dialectical peculiarities and allusions\n [philology, geography, history, mythology], (4) discovery of\n etymologies, (5) accurate account of analogies [accidence and\n syntax], (6) criticism of poetical productions, which is the noblest\n part of the grammatic art [ethics, politics, strategy,\n etc.].--Dionysius Thrax.\n\n Reading is the rendering of poetic or prose productions without\n stumbling or hesitancy. It must be done with due regard to\n expression, prosody, and pauses. From the expression we learn the\n merit of the piece, from the prosody the art of the reader, and from\n the pauses the meaning intended to be conveyed. In this way we read\n tragedy heroically, comedy conversationally, elegiacs thrillingly,\n epics sustainedly, lyrics musically, and dirges softly and\n plaintively. Any reading done without due observance of these rules\n degrades the merits of the poets and makes the habits of readers\n ridiculous.--_Id._\n\n Some arts are common, others liberal.... The liberal arts, which\n some call the logical arts, are astronomy, geometry, music,\n philosophy, medicine, grammar, rhetoric.--_Scholia to Dionysius\n Thrax._\n\n It is obvious that man excels the other animals in worth and speech:\n Why may we not hold that his worth consists as much in eloquence as\n in reason?--Quintilian.\n\n The civil man, and he who is truly wise, who does not devote himself\n to idle disputes, but to the administration of the commonwealth\n (from which those folks who are called philosophers have farthest\n withdrawn themselves), will be glad to employ every available\n oratorical means to reach his ends, having previously settled in his\n own mind what ends are honorable.--_Id._\n\n If we count over all the epochs of life, we shall find its pains far\n more numerous than its pleasures.... The first, that of babyhood, is\n trying. The baby is hungry; the nurse sends it to sleep: it is\n thirsty; she washes it: it wants to go to sleep; she takes a rattle\n and makes a noise. When the child has escaped from the nurse, it is\n taken hold of by the pedagogue, the physical trainer, the\n grammar-master, the music-master, the drawing-master. In process of\n time, there are added the arithmetic-master, the geometer, the\n horse-breaker; he rises early; he has no chance for leisure. He\n becomes a cadet; again he has to fear the drill-master, the physical\n trainer, the fencing-master, the gymnasiarch. By all these he is\n whipt, watched, throttled. He graduates from the cadets at twenty;\n again he dreads and watches captain and general, etc.--Teles the\n Stoic (B.C. 260).\n\n The palmy period in the history of Rome is the period when she had\n no literature. It was only when the Roman nationality began to\n break up, and cosmopolitan Greek tendencies to lay hold upon the\n people, that a literature began to appear. For this reason, Roman\n literature from its very inception is, from absolute necessity,\n filled with the Greek spirit, and stands in the most direct\n opposition to the national spirit of the people.--Mommsen.\n\n Quintiliane, vag\u00e6 moderator summe juvent\u00e6,\n Gloria Roman\u00e6, Quintiliane, tog\u00e6.--Martial.\n\n\nUp to the time when Rome began to decline, the school education of her\nyouth was meagre in the extreme, consisting of reading, writing, and a\nlittle law. All later education that was more than this was borrowed\nfrom the Greeks. It was about the year 200 B.C., at the close of the\nSecond Punic War, that their influence began clearly to show itself. The\nsevere Cato, who so cordially despised rhetoricians and philosophers,\nlearnt Greek in his old age and wrote, for the use of his son, a series\nof manuals on ethics, rhetoric, medicine, military science, farming, and\nlaw. At the same time Scipio Africanus spent his leisure hours in\npractising gymnastics. From this time on, and just in proportion as Rome\nlost her national character and became cosmopolitan, she more and more\nadopted Greek manners, Greek religion (or irreligion), and Greek\neducation. When, finally, in B.C. 146, Greece became a Roman dependency,\nit was strictly true that \"Captive Greece took captive her rude\nconqueror.\" Thousands of Greek schoolmasters, rhetoricians,\nphilosophers, etc., flocked to Rome, and, though attempts were made to\nexpel or suppress them, they held their place, for the simple reason\nthat the education they offered was a necessity of the time. Rome, the\nmistress of the world, had either to become cosmopolitan or perish, and\nshe preferred the former alternative. She now, for the first time, began\nto have a literature and to cultivate her own language. The studies\nwhich she specially affected were (1) grammar, that is, literature, (2)\nrhetoric, (3) philosophy, which corresponded to school, college, and\nuniversity education. The last, like music and geometry, was, for the\nmost part, an elegant accomplishment, rather than a serious study. The\nphysical sciences found little favor.\n\nSo long as Roman education was in the hands of Greeks, it was conducted\nin the Greek language, and the authors read and discussed were Greek.\nBut the Romans, though willing enough to borrow Greek culture, were\nunwilling to remain permanently in intellectual dependence upon a\nconquered people, which in many respects they despised. Strong efforts,\ntherefore, were made to develop a national literature and a national\neducation. About the year B.C. 100, Lucius \u00c6lius Pr\u00e6coninus Stilo, a\nworthy and conservative Roman knight, opened a private class in Latin\ngrammar and rhetoric for young men of the upper classes, and from this\ntime on the direct influence of the Greeks, except in philosophy,\ndeclined. Greek, indeed, continued to be spoken by all persons making\nany pretensions to culture; but Latin became the language of Roman\nliterature. Among the pupils of Stilo were Varro and Cicero, who, along\nwith Julius C\u00e6sar, may be called the parents of the classical Latin\nlanguage, literature, and eloquence. Both Varro and C\u00e6sar wrote works on\ngrammar. A certain Cornificius (generally known as _Auctor ad\nHerennium_) about this time wrote the first Latin treatise on Rhetoric;\nbut the great authority on the subject, in practice as well as theory,\nwas Cicero, who wrote no fewer than seven works on it. With Cicero's\ndeath, and the transformation of the republic into an empire, eloquence\nlost its noblest use, the defence of liberty. Rhetoric, nevertheless,\ncontinued to be cultivated as a fine art and for forensic use, and,\nindeed, was made to cover the whole of the higher education of youth. Of\nthis art the most celebrated teacher was Quintilian, \"the supreme\ndirector of giddy youth, the glory of the Roman toga\" (_i.e._ civil\nmanhood).\n\nQuintilian was born about A.D. 35 in the Spanish city of Calagurris\n(Calahorra), where, later, St. Dominic first saw the light. He was\neducated in Rome, but afterwards returned to his native place and\nestablished himself as a teacher of rhetoric. About A.D. 68, he was\ninvited by the Emperor Galba to settle in Rome, which he did, giving\ninstruction in rhetoric with unparalleled success for twenty years, and\ndrawing a salary from the government. At the end of that time, he\nretired, rich and honored, into private life. It was after this that he\nwrote the work which carried his fame down to posterity, his _Institutio\nOratorica_, or Education of the Orator. In the first book of this he\ndraws out a scheme of preparatory education for the family and the\nschool; the succeeding ten are devoted to rhetoric, and the last to the\ncharacter of the orator, whom he regards as identical with the\ncultivated gentleman. It is only the first book that concerns the modern\nstudent of education, and of this I shall now give a brief summary.\n\nThe first care of the parent, after the birth of a child, should be to\nprocure for it a nurse of good moral character and of cultivated speech.\nA child that early learns bad habits in acting and speaking, rarely, if\never, gets cured of them afterwards. Great care ought to be taken with\nregard to the child's youthful companions, and to his pedagogue, who\nought to be of good character and well-informed. Its first language\nought to be Greek; but Latin ought to be begun early, and both to be\ncarefully cultivated. There is no need to follow the ordinary custom of\nnot allowing the child to learn to read or write before the close of its\nseventh year. Much can very profitably be done by play long before that.\nIt is a mistake to teach children to repeat the alphabet before they\nknow the forms of the letters. These they may learn from tablets or\nblocks. As soon as the letters are recognized, they ought to be written.\nFollowing with a pen the forms of letters engraved on ivory tablets is a\ngood thing. After letters, syllables must be learnt--all the possible\nsyllables in both languages. After syllables come words, and after\nwords, sentences. In all this process, it is of the utmost importance to\nsecure thoroughness by avoiding haste. The child must not attempt words\ntill he can read and write all the syllables, nor sentences till he is\nperfectly familiar with words. In reading sentences, he must learn to\nrun ahead, so that, while he is pronouncing one word with his lips, he\nis recognizing others with his eye. The writing lesson should be\nutilized in order to make the child acquainted with rare words and good\npoetry. At this stage, his memory ought to be well exercised, and made\nto lay up large stores of good literature for future use. At the same\ntime, his organs of speech should be well trained, by being made to\npronounce rapidly verses containing difficult combinations of sound.[5]\n\nAs soon as he is able, the child should go to school. Home education is\nobjectionable on many accounts, especially for boys intended for\norators. These, above all others, must learn sociability, tact, and\n_esprit de corps_, and form school-friendships. Many moral lessons can\nbe learnt, and many motives employed, in the school, that are not\npossible in the family. Among the latter is ambition, which \"though\nitself a vice, is the parent of many virtues,\" and therefore ought to be\nfreely used. Hardly any motive is so powerful.\n\nWhen a boy is sent to school, his teacher's first business is to\ninvestigate his character and capacity. The chief marks of ability are\nmemory and power of imitation. Imitation is not mimicry, which is always\na sign of low nature. Slowness, though objectionable, is better than\nprecocity, which should be discouraged in every way. Different treatment\nis required for different boys: some need the bit, some the spur. The\nbest boy is the one \"whom praise excites, whom glory pleases, who cries\nwhen he is beaten. Such a one may be nourished with emulation; reproach\nwill sting him; honor will rouse him.\" Boys ought to have seasons of\nrest and play, neither too short to afford recreation, nor too long to\nencourage idleness. Games of question and answer are good for\nsharpening the wits. In play an excellent opportunity is offered to the\nteacher for learning the character of his pupils. Corporal punishment is\naltogether to be deprecated, and, indeed, is unneeded when the teacher\ndoes his duty.\n\nWhat boys learn in school is grammar; but this must be supplemented by\nmusic and astronomy. Without the former it will be impossible to scan\nverse; without the latter, to understand certain allusions and modes of\nfixing dates in the poets. A little philosophy is necessary for the sake\nof understanding such poets as Empedocles and Lucretius; geometry, in\norder to give practice in apodictic reasoning, as well as for practical\nuses. Thus the curriculum of school education will consist of Grammar,\nMusic, Astronomy, Philosophy, and Geometry.\n\nGrammar consists of two parts, (1) _Methodics_, or the art of correct\nspeaking, (2) _Historics_ (German _Realien_), the interpretation of\npoets, historians, philosophers, etc. _Methodics_--grammar in the modern\nsense--should aim at enabling a boy to speak and write with correctness,\nclearness, and elegance. All barbarisms (_i.e._ foreign words and\nidioms), solecisms, affectations, and careless pronunciations are to be\navoided. In the use of language, four things are to be taken into\naccount, (1) reason, (2) antiquity, (3) authority, (4) custom. In\nreading, the boy must be taught \"where to draw his breath, where to\ndivide a verse, where the sense is complete, where it begins, where the\nvoice is to be raised, where lowered, what inflections to use, what is\nto be uttered slowly, what rapidly, what forcibly, what gently.\" \"That\nhe may be able to do all this, he must _understand_. Reading must above\nall be manly and grave, with a certain sweetness.\" Poetry must not be\nread either as prose, nor yet in a sing-song way. All theatrical\npersonification, and all gesticulation smacking of the comedian, are to\nbe avoided.\n\nFor _Histories_ the teacher must be very careful in his selection of\ntexts. Homer and Virgil are best to begin with. Though their full import\ncannot be understood by youth, they awake enthusiasm for what is noble\nand spirited, and will often be read in later life. \"Tragedies are\nuseful. There is nourishment in the lyric poets\"; but they must be used\nwith caution and in selections, from which everything relating to love\nmust be excluded. Even Horace must be expurgated. Satire and comedy,\nthough of the utmost value for the orator, must be deferred till the\nmoral character is sufficiently established not to be injured by them.\nPassages from the poets ought to be committed to memory. In all reading,\nthe utmost care ought to be taken to promote purity and manliness\n(_sanctitas et virilitas_).\n\nAfter reading a piece of poetry, boys must be made to analyze and scan\nit, to point out peculiarities of language and rhythm, to enumerate the\ndifferent meanings of words, to name and explain the various figures of\nspeech. But far more important than all this it is, that the teacher\nshould impress on their minds the importance of systematic arrangement\nand propriety of description, \"showing what is suitable for each r\u00f4le,\nwhat is commendable in thought, what in expression, where diffuseness\nis proper, and where brevity.\" In giving collateral information, whether\nin history, mythology, or geography, he should keep within bounds,\ngiving only what is necessary and rests on respectable authority. \"It is\none of the virtues of a schoolmaster to be ignorant of some things.\"\n\nAs regards lessons in composition, the teacher should begin by making\nhis pupils write out from memory the _Fables_ of \u00c6sop, in pure, simple,\ndirect, and unadorned language. He should then call upon them to turn\npoetry into prose, and to paraphrase it, either briefly or diffusely. He\nshould then make them write out proverbs, apophthegms, aphorisms, short,\nbrilliant anecdotes, etc. Famous stories related by the poets may be\nused as subjects for composition, but chiefly for the sake of\ninformation. Beyond this the schoolmaster should not go in the matter of\ncomposition. The rest should be left to the rhetorician.\n\nIt is of great importance in youthful education that several subjects\nshould be studied at the same time. Boys like and need variety, and,\nwhen they get it, it is truly astonishing how much they can accomplish.\n\"There is not the slightest reason for fearing that boys will shrink\nfrom the labor of study. No age is less easily fatigued.\" ... \"Boys are\nnaturally more inclined to hard work than young men.\"\n\nSuch, in brief, is Quintilian's school-programme. It has no place for\nphysical science (except Astronomy), for manual training, or for\nphysical exercise. Play is, indeed, permitted as a necessary recreation,\nand gymnastics and physical training (\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1) are recommended in\nso far as they are necessary to enable the budding orator to move and\nto gesticulate gracefully; but that is all. \"Nothing can please that is\nnot becoming.\"\n\nAs soon as he is ready, the young aspirant for oratorical fame passes\ninto the hands of the rhetorician, under whom he learns all the arts,\nand acquires all that knowledge, necessary to fit him for his\nprofession. No kind of knowledge, and no moral excellence ought to be\nforeign to the orator. Quintilian is very severe upon the philosophers\nfor claiming, in their title, to be, in an exceptional way, lovers of\nwisdom, and maintains that the true orator is the truly wise and good\nman. He is surely superior to the philosopher, who turns his back upon\nthe world and manifests no interest in human affairs. Moreover,\n\"philosophy may be simulated; eloquence cannot.\"\n\nThe closing chapter of the last book of Quintilian's work treats of the\norator after his retirement from public life. He is to devote himself to\nwriting and to the study of art, science, and philosophy. The picture is\ncharming; but it ends with death, and there is nothing beyond. God may\nbe defined for oratorical purposes; but his existence is a matter of\nconjecture.\n\nIn Quintilian we have the highest type of the civic man living under a\ncosmopolitan despotism. His defects--his pedantry, his servility, his\nexternality, his worldliness--are only such as are natural to a good man\nplaced in this position, without any outlook upon a higher existence.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\nPLOTINUS AND PHILOSOPHIC EDUCATION\n\n The material body, which is subject to motion, change, dissolution,\n and division, requires an immaterial principle to hold and bind it\n together in unity. This principle of unity is the soul. If it were\n material, it would require another principle of unity, and so on _ad\n infinitum_, till an immaterial first were reached, which would then\n be the true soul.--Ammonius Saccas.\n\n Intelligible things, when they are united with other things, are not\n changed, as corporeal things are when they are united with each\n other, but remain as they are, and what they are. Soul and body are\n intimately united, but not mixed. The soul can separate and withdraw\n itself from the body, not only in sleep, but also in thought. As the\n sun illuminates and yet remains itself a separate light, so is the\n soul in its relation to the body. It is not in the body as in place;\n rather the body is in it and of it.--_Id._\n\n One's duty is to become first man, then God.--Hierocles.\n\n Neither Schelling nor Baader nor Hegel has refuted Plotinus: in many\n ways he soars above them.--Arthur Richter.\n\n What is loved by us here is mortal and hurtful. Our love is love for\n an image, that often turns into its opposite, because what we loved\n was not truly worthy of love, nor the good which we sought. God\n alone is the true object of our love.--Plotinus.\n\n\nThe practical and the contemplative lives, which Plato and Aristotle had\nlabored so hard to combine and correlate, in order to save human worth\nand Greek civilization, fell asunder, despite all their\nefforts--greatly, of course, to the detriment of both. In the terrible\npicture which Quintilian draws of Roman life in the first century of\nour era, we see one side of the result of this divorce: in the cruel\nsatires of Lucian, written less than a century later, we may find\ndepicted the other. But, just as, in the midst of the moral corruption\nand brutality, there arose from time to time worthy men like Quintilian\nand Tacitus, so amid the philosophical charlatanry and pretence, there\nstill survived a few earnest thinkers, who aspired with all the power\nthat was in them to divine truth, and strove to find in the eternal\nworld that reality which was so miserably wanting in this. By far the\ngreater number of these men were neither Greeks nor Romans, but\nOrientals, men whose thinking combined Greek philosophy with some\nearnest form of Eastern mysticism. To such men this life was merely an\nopportunity of preparing for a higher, in which lay all beauty, all\ngood, and all blessedness. It is not difficult to see what sort of\neducation would follow from this view of life. It may best be\ncharacterized by the one word \"ascetic.\" It no longer seeks to train\nharmoniously all the faculties of body and mind with a view to a worthy\nsocial life, but to enable the soul to die to the body and to social\nlife, and so rise to union and consubstantiality with God. In no sect\nwas this tendency more marked than in the Neoplatonic, or, as it might\nequally well be called, the Neoaristotelian or Neopythagorean, the\ngreatest name in which is Plotinus.\n\nPlotinus was born in Egypt about A.D. 205. His nationality is unknown.\nHe received his education in Alexandria--grammar, rhetoric, and\nphilosophy,--and adopted the teaching of the last as a profession. He\nsought in vain, however, for a system that could satisfy him, till he\nmet with Ammonius \"the Sack-bearer,\" whom he at once recognized as his\nmaster. This Ammonius had been reared as a Christian, but had\napostatized on becoming acquainted with philosophy. His Christian\neducation, however, had not been altogether lost on him; for he had\ncarried over into philosophy a religious spirit, and not a few of the\nesoteric ideas then current in certain Christian sects. It was this,\napparently, that enabled him to give a new direction to philosophy, and\nto found a new school, whose influence upon subsequent, even Christian,\nthought, it would be difficult to overestimate. His school was the\nNeoplatonic, which, more than any other, united profound thought with\nmystic theosophy (\u03b8\u03b5\u03c9\u03c1\u03af\u03b1).\n\nPlotinus listened to Ammonius for eleven years, and, on the death of the\nlatter, paid a visit to Persia, with the view of studying the religion\nof that country. He shortly returned, however, and, after a brief\nsojourn at Antioch, betook himself, in his fortieth year (A.D. 244), to\nRome, where he spent the remainder of his life as a teacher of\nphilosophy. His saintly character and his deep, religious thought drew\nround him a considerable number of earnest men and women, including even\nmembers of the imperial family. He made some attempt to found in\nCampania a Platonopolis, so that his principles might be realized in a\nsocial life, in a theosophic community; but this was never carried out.\nHe died in A.D. 270. Plotinus was the only truly great, original ancient\nthinker after Aristotle.\n\nWhile Plato and Aristotle had sought to rise to the intelligible world\nfrom, and by means of, the sensible, Plotinus, believing that he has\nattained a direct, intuitional knowledge of the former, sets out from it\nand thence tries to reach the other. At the summit of being he finds the\nsupreme Platonic principle, the One or the Good, absolutely transcendent\nand self-sufficient; next below this, the supreme Aristotelian\nprinciple, Intelligence or Absolute Knowing, the _locus_ of all ideas;\nand third, the supreme principle of the Stoics, Soul, Life, or Zeus, the\nanimating principle of the world. Good, Intelligence, Life--these are\nPlotinus' divine trinity, evolved by a process of abstraction from the\n_Nous_ of Aristotle (see p. 161). The members of this trinity are\nneither personal, conscious, nor equal. Each lower is caused by, but\ndoes not emanate from, the next above it; and this causation is due, not\nto any act of free will, but to an inner necessity. Thus the trinity of\nPlotinus is a mere energy, acting according to necessary laws. The third\nmember of it turns toward matter, which is mere poverty and hunger for\nbeing, and, in so doing, produces a world of gods, d\u00e6mons, and mundane\nbeings, the highest of which last is man. All that has matter has\nmultiplicity.\n\nIt is easy enough to see what kind of ethics and education will spring\nfrom such a system as this. Inasmuch as the good means self-sufficiency,\nfreedom from multiplicity and matter, evil means dependence,\nmultiplicity, materiality. Whatever evil there is in man is due to his\nconnection with matter, for which he is in no sense responsible. His\nsole business, if he desires blessedness, is to free himself from\nmatter and multiplicity, and return to the unity of the Supreme Good.\nThe steps by which this may be accomplished are, (1) Music or Art, (2)\nLove, (3) Philosophy or Dialectic: through all these he rises above\nmultiplicity into unity. In all this there is, obviously, neither moral\nevil nor moral good, and, indeed, the world of Plotinus contains no\nmoral element, for the simple reason that it contains nothing personal,\neither in God or man. Evil is the product of necessity, and\nconsciousness, implying as it does, multiplicity, is part of it. The\nunethical character of Plotinus' teaching comes out very clearly in his\nreversal of the positions of instruction and purgation in the scheme of\neducation. According to the old view, purgation was a mere medical\nprocess, preparatory to ethical training (see p. 7). According to the\nNeoplatonic view, ethical training and the \"political virtues\" are a\nmere preparation for purgation and the intellectual virtues. And this is\nperfectly logical; for evil, being physical, must be cured by physical\nmeans. And the means which Plotinus recommends are magical, rather than\nmoral; rites and prayers, rather than heroic deeds; the suppression of\nthe will, rather than its exercise.\n\nPlotinus is too much of a Greek to accept, or even see, all the\nconsequences of his own theory, which makes moral life consist in an\nattempt to escape from the world and to quench consciousness and\npersonality. Accordingly, though he has a poor opinion of civic life (a\nthing excusable enough in those days), he believes that the civic\nvirtues ought to be cultivated, as a means toward the higher, and has\napparently nothing to say against the ordinary grammatical, rhetorical,\nand musical education of his time. He has a good deal to say in favor of\nMathematics, as a preparation for what to him is the supreme branch of\neducation, Dialectics. But the tendency of his teaching is only too\nobvious, and the conclusions which he did not draw, time and succeeding\ngenerations drew for him. The effect of Neoplatonism was, in the long\nrun, to make the super-civic part of man the whole man, to discredit\npolitical life and political effort, and to pave the way for the mystic,\nthe ascetic, and the hermit. Nor were the tendencies of the other\nphilosophical schools in any marked degree different. Thus philosophy,\ninstead of contributing to harmonize man and society, and to restore\nmoral life, came to be one of the strongest agencies in bringing about\nconfusion and dissolution, by ignoring moral life altogether, embracing\nsuperstition, and turning man into a mere plaything of blind necessity\nand magical forces. And thus ancient civilization fell to pieces,\nbecause man himself had fallen to pieces, and each piece tried to set\nitself up for the whole. The civic fragment finds its highest expression\nin Quintilian, the super-civic in Plotinus. Ere the fragments can be\nunited into a truly moral being, a member of a truly moral society, a\nnew combining force, unknown to either rhetorician or philosopher, must\narise.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\nCONCLUSION\n\n Truly it was an old world, and even C\u00e6sar's patriotic genius was not\n enough to make it young again. The dawn does not return till the\n night has fully set in.--Mommsen.\n\n My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,\n saith the Lord.--Isaiah.\n\n Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all\n thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the great and first\n commandment. And a second like unto it is this, Thou shalt love thy\n neighbor as thyself.--Jesus.\n\n Render unto C\u00e6sar the things that are C\u00e6sar's, and to God the things\n that are God's.--_Id._\n\n Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings? and not one of them is\n forgotten in the sight of God. But the very hairs of your head are\n all numbered.--_Id._\n\n We love because he first loved us. If a man say, I love God, and\n hateth his brother, he is a liar.--John.\n\n By one intelligible form, which is the divine Essence, and one\n conscious intention, which is the divine Word, things may be known\n in their multiplicity by God.--Thomas Aquinas.\n\n If God acts in all things, and such action in no way derogates from\n his dignity, but even belongs to his universal and supreme power, he\n cannot consider it below him, nor does it stain his dignity, if he\n extend his providence to the individual things of this world.--_Id._\n\n Une immense esp\u00e9rance a pass\u00e9 sur la terre.--Alfred de Musset.\n\n\nWe have seen that the Greek ideal of life rested upon the complete\nidentification of the man with the citizen. We have seen also how this\nideal was paralyzed by the growth of individualism; how the wisest men\nthought to render this innocuous and even beneficent, by providing for\nit a sphere of contemplation, superior to that of practice, but\norganically related to it, and, finally how, with the failure of this\nattempt, the two sides of human nature, divorced from each other,\ndegenerated, the one into selfish worldliness, the other into equally\nselfish other-worldliness, both conditions equally destitute of moral\nsignificance.\n\nThis sad result was mainly due to three causes, (1) that the remedies\nproposed for individualism were not sufficient, (2) that the best remedy\nwas set aside, (3) that the conditions for which the remedies were\noffered soon ceased to exist. Both Plato and Aristotle wrote for the\nsmall Greek polities, which lost their autonomy through the Macedonian\nconquest. If it may be doubted whether even the proposals of the latter\nwould have redeemed these polities, had they continued free, it is\ncertain that they would have been ineffective under the changed\ncircumstances. At all events, they were never adopted, and even for the\nsuper-civic man the teaching of Plato was preferred to his.\n\nAs the new cosmopolitanism deepened the gulf between the citizen and the\nindividual, and immeasurably widened the sphere of the latter, in the\nsame proportion did the teaching of Plato fail to bridge over that gulf,\nand provide activity for that sphere. To tell the super-civic man now\nthat his function was to contemplate divine things and oracularly\ndeliver laws for the guidance of the world, would have argued an absence\nof humor not common in those days. Besides, those persons who claimed\nto have contemplated divine things showed no such fitness for\nlegislation as to induce practical men to accept their guidance. The\nsober fact was, that the contemplation of divine things, which more and\nmore absorbed the energy of Greek thought, was, except for Aristotle, a\nmere vague asperation without moral value, and became ever more a sort\nof mystic ecstasy, in which the individual, instead of acquiring insight\nand power to live worthily and beneficently in the world, was thrown\nback upon himself, with his will paralyzed. Nor could this be otherwise,\nseeing the nature of the divine things, the contemplation of which was\nreckoned so important. Instead of being personal attributes, or a person\nimposing a moral law seen to be binding, they were mere abstractions,\nincreasing in emptiness the higher they were in the series, the highest\nbeing absolute vacancy. In vain had Aristotle protested that all reality\nis individual: the Platonic theory, that all knowledge is of ideas or\nuniversals, prevailed, with the result that the highest knowledge was\nheld to be knowledge of that which is absolutely universal, viz.\nindeterminate being or, as Plotinus held, something lacking even the\ndetermination of being--the Supreme Good. That the super-civic man\nshould find satisfaction in gazing into vacancy, or be any more valuable\nin the world after he had done so, no matter how spotless his life and\necstatic his look, is inconceivable.\n\nBut while, in the Greek world, the sphere of activity of the super-civic\nman was vanishing into nothingness, among a small and obscure band of\nrestored exiles of Semitic race, that sphere had come to claim the\nentire man and all his relations, practical and spiritual. Isaiah's\nlittle band of faithful followers (see p. 133) had grown into a nation,\nliving by no law save that of Jehovah, a very real, very awful, and very\nholy personality, whom the heaven of heavens could not contain, but who\nyet watched the rising up and the sitting down of every son of man. Long\nbefore Quintilian wrote his elegant treatise on rhetoric, or Plotinus\nhis pantheistic Enneads, there had sprung from the bosom of this people\na man who, bursting, at the expense of his life, the narrow bounds of\nhis nationally, elevated the theocracy of his people into a Kingdom of\nHeaven, which he had bade proclaim to all the world. It was proclaimed,\nand then (though to some it seemed a stumbling-block, and to others\nfoolishness) the super-civic man, who for hundreds of years had been\nwandering in darkness, in search of his fatherland, suddenly became\naware that he had found it in the Church of Christ. He now no longer\ntries to escape from the visible world into the emptiness of an abstract\nfirst principle; but, in the service of a First Principle who is the\nmost concrete of realities, and who numbers the very hairs of his head,\nhe goes down into the most loathsome depths of the material world to\nelevate and redeem the meanest of the sons of men. There is no question\nof bond or free, ruler or ruled, now. In the Kingdom of Heaven there are\nno such relations. The only greatness recognized there is greatness in\nservice; the only law, the Law of Love. Love! yes, the whole secret is\nin that one word. By adding love to the conception of the God of his\npeople, by exemplifying it in his own life, and demanding it of his\nfollowers, Jesus accomplished what had baffled all the wisdom of the\nGreek sages. He restored the moral unity of man, abolished the old\nworld, and made a new heaven and a new earth. In vain have the advocates\nof an indeterminate, self-evolving first principle, whether calling\nthemselves Neoplatonists, mystics, materialists, evolutionists,\nHegelians, or Theosophists, striven to bring back the old world with its\nclass distinctions and institutional ethics; in vain have they sought to\nsink the individual God and man of reality in the universal ideas of\nthought. The Law of Love, which is the ground of individuality, as well\nas of true society, has bidden, and will bid them, defiance.\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX\n\nTHE SEVEN LIBERAL ARTS\n\n\nThe Greeks originally recognized two branches of liberal education[6]\n(1) Gymnastics, for the body, and (2) Music, for the soul. Out of music\ngrew, in process of time, not only the so-called Liberal Arts, that is,\nthe arts that go to constitute the education of every freeman, but also\nwhat was regarded as a superfluous luxury (\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03c4\u03ae), Philosophy. It is\nthe purpose of this appendix to trace, as far as possible, this gradual\ndevelopment.\n\nIn doing so, one must bear in mind that originally the term \"Music\"\ncovered, not only what we call music, but also poetry, and that poetry\nwas the vehicle of all the science that then was. The Homeric _aoidos_\nknows the \"works of gods and men.\" Strictly speaking, therefore, it was\nout of music and poetry that all the arts and sciences grew. The first\nstep in this direction was taken when Letters were introduced, that is,\nabout the first Olympiad.[7] But it was long before Letters were\nregarded as a separate branch of education; they were simply a means of\nrecording poetry. Even as late as the time of Plato, Letters are still\nusually included under Music. In Aristotle, they are recognized as a\nseparate branch. It follows from this that, when we find Greek writers\nconfining soul-education to Music, or Music and Letters, we must not\nconclude that these signify only playing and singing, reading and\nwriting. Socrates was saying nothing new or paradoxical, when he\naffirmed that Philosophy was the \"highest music.\" The Pythagoreans had\nsaid the same thing before him, and there can be no doubt that\nPythagoras himself included under Music (1) Letters, (2) Arithmetic, (3)\nGeometry, (4) Astronomy, (5) Music, in our sense, and (6) Philosophy (a\nterm invented by him). Plato did the same thing. He speaks of \"the true\nMuse that is accompanied with truth (\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd) and philosophy.\" But in his\ntime \"Music\" was used in two senses, a broad one, in which it included\nthe whole of intellectual education, and a narrow one, in which it is\nconfined to music in the modern sense. It is in this latter sense that\nit is used by Aristotle, when he makes the intellectual branches of\nschool education (1) Letters, (2) Music, and (3) Drawing. Philosophy he\nplaces in a higher grade. Having distinguished Letters from Music, it is\nnatural enough that he should assign to the former the branches which\nPythagoras had included under the latter. His literary scheme appears to\nbe (1) Grammar, (2) Rhetoric, (3) Dialectic, (4) Arithmetic, (5)\nGeometry, (6) Astronomy. Add Music, and we have exactly the Seven\nLiberal Arts; but, as Drawing must also be added, it is clear that there\nwas, as yet, no thought of fixing definitely the number seven. That\nDrawing was for a long time part of the school curriculum, is rendered\nclear by a passage in a work of Teles (B.C. 260) quoted by Stob\u00e6us\n(xcviii, 72), in which it is said that boys study (1) Letters, (2)\nMusic, (3) Drawing; young men, (4) Arithmetic, and (5) Geometry. The\nlast two branches are here already distinguished from Letters; but we\ncannot be sure that the list is intended to be exhaustive. What is\nespecially noticeable in the list of Teles is, that it draws a clear\ndistinction between the lower and higher studies, a distinction which\nforeshadows the _Trivium_ and _Quadrivium_ of later times.[8]\n\nPhilosophy, or the highest education, Aristotle divided into (1) Theory\nand (2) Practice. Theory he subdivided into (a) Theology, First\nPhilosophy, or Wisdom, called later Metaphysics, the science of the\nUnchangeable, and (b) Physics, the science of the Changeable; Practice\ninto (a) Ethics, including Politics and \u0152conomics, and (b) Poetics or\n\u00c6sthetics.\n\nAfter Teles we hear little of the Greek school-curriculum until about\nthe Christian era. Meanwhile, the Romans, having acquired a smattering\nof Greek learning, began to draw up a scheme of studies suitable for\nthemselves. It is noticeable that in this scheme there is no such\ndistinction as the Greeks drew between liberal (\u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03ad\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03b9, \u1f10\u03b3\u03ba\u03cd\u03ba\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03b9,\n\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03af) and illiberal (\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c5\u03c3\u03bf\u03b9) arts.[9] As early as the first half of\nthe second century B.C., Cato the Censor wrote a series of manuals for\nhis son on (1) Ethics, (2) Rhetoric, (3) Medicine, (4) Military Science,\n(5) Farming, (6) Law. It is very significant that the only Greek\nschool-study which appears here is Rhetoric; this the Romans, and\nnotably Cato himself, always studied with great care for practical\npurposes. It seems that Cato, in order to resist the inroads of Greek\neducation and manners, which he felt to be demoralizing, tried to draw\nup a characteristically Roman curriculum. Greece, however, in great\nmeasure, prevailed, and half a century later we find Varro writing upon\nmost of the subjects in the Greek curriculum: Grammar, Rhetoric,\nDialectic, Arithmetic, Geometry, Astronomy, Music, Philosophy, besides\nmany others. He wrote a treatise in nine books, called _Disciplinarum\nLibri_. Ritschl, in his _Qu\u00e6stiones Varronian\u00e6_,[10] tried to show that\nthese \"Disciplin\u00e6\" were the Seven Liberal Arts, _plus_ Architecture and\nMedicine, and Mommsen, in his _Roman History_, has followed him; but\nRitschl himself later changed his opinion. There seems no doubt that (1)\nGrammar, (2) Rhetoric, (3) Dialectic, (4) Music, (5) Geometry, and (6)\nArchitecture were treated in the work: what the rest were we can only\nguess.[11] There is no ground for the assertion that the Seven Liberal\nArts were obtained by dropping Architecture and Medicine from Varro's\nlist. It must have been about the time of Varro, if not earlier, that\nRoman education came to be divided into three grades, called\nrespectively (1) Grammar, (2) Rhetoric, and (3) Philosophy, the last\nfalling to the lot of but few persons. Of course \"Grammar\" now came to\nhave a very extensive meaning, as we can see from the definition of it\ngiven by Dionysius Thrax, in his grammar, prepared apparently for Roman\nuse (B.C. 90). In the Scholia to that work (I am unable to fix their\ndate), we find the Liberal Arts enumerated as (1) Astronomy, (2)\nGeometry, (3) Music, (4) Philosophy, (5) Medicine, (6) Grammar, (7)\nRhetoric.[12]\n\nBut to return to the Greeks. In the works of Philo Jud\u00e6us, a\ncontemporary of Jesus, we find the Encyclic Arts frequently referred to,\nand distinguished from Philosophy. The former, he says, are represented\nby the Egyptian slave Hagar, the latter by Sarah, the lawful wife. One\nmust associate with the Arts before he can find Philosophy fruitful. In\nno one passage does Philo give a list of the Encyclic Arts. In one place\nwe find enumerated (1) Grammar, (2) Geometry, (3) Music, (4) Rhetoric\n(_De Cherub._, \u00a7 30); in another (1) Grammar, (2) Geometry, (3) \"the\nentire music of encyclic instruction\" (_De Agricult._, \u00a7 4); in another\n(1) Grammar, (2) Music, (3) Geometry, (4) Rhetoric, (5) Dialectic (_De\nCongressu Qu\u00e6r. Erud. Grat._, \u00a7 5); in another, (1) Grammar, (2)\nArithmetic, (3) Geometry, (4) Music, (5) Rhetoric (_De Somniis_, \u00a7 35),\netc.\n\nIt would seem that the Encyclic Arts, according to Philo, were (1)\nGrammar, (2) Rhetoric, (3) Dialectic, (4) Arithmetic, (5) Geometry, (6)\nMusic. Astronomy appears in none of the lists. Philosophy is divided\ninto (1) Physics, (2) Logic, (3) Ethics (_De Mutat. Nom._, \u00a7 10), a\ndivision that was long current.\n\nFrom what has been adduced, I think we may fairly conclude that at the\nChristian era no definite number had been fixed for the liberal arts\neither at Athens, Alexandria, or Rome. The list apparently differed in\ndifferent places. Clearly the Roman programme was quite different from\nthe Greek. Shortly after this era, we find Seneca (who died A.D. 65)\ngiving the liberal arts, _liberalia studia_, as (1) Grammar, (2) Music,\n(3) Geometry, (4) Arithmetic, (5) Astronomy (_Epist._, 88). He divides\nPhilosophy into (1) Moral, (2) Natural, (3) Rational, and the last he\nsubdivides into (a) Dialectic and (b) Rhetoric. Above all he places\nWisdom, \"_Sapientia perfectum bonum est mentis human\u00e6_\" (_Epist._, 89).\nHere we see that two of the Seven Liberal Arts are classed under\nPhilosophy. A little later, Quintilian divides all education into (1)\nGrammar, and (2) Rhetoric, but condescends to allow his young orator to\nstudy a little Music, Geometry, and Astronomy.\n\nTurning to the Greeks, we find Sextus Empiricus, who seems to have\nflourished in Athens and Alexandria toward the end of the second\ncentury, writing a great work against the dogmatists or\n\"mathematicians,\" of whom he finds nine classes, corresponding to six\narts, and three sciences of philosophy. The arts are (1) Grammar, (2)\nRhetoric, (3) Geometry, (4) Arithmetic, (5) Astronomy, (6) Music: the\nsciences, (1) Logic, (2) Physics, (3) Ethics. We are now not far from\nthe Seven Liberal Arts; still we have not reached them.\n\nThere is not, I think, any noteworthy list of the liberal arts to be\nfound in any ancient author after Sextus, till we come to St. Augustine.\nIn his _Retractiones_, written about 425, he tells us (I, 6) that in his\nyouth he undertook to write _Disciplinarum Libri_ (the exact title of\nVarro's work!), that he finished the book on (1) Grammar, wrote six\nvolumes on (2) Music, and made a beginning with _other five_\ndisciplines, (3) Dialectic, (4) Rhetoric, (5) Geometry, (6) Arithmetic,\n(7) Philosophy. It has frequently been assumed that we have here, for\nthe first time, the Seven Liberal Arts definitely fixed; but there is\nnothing whatever in the passage to justify this assumption. The author\ndoes not say \"_the_ other five disciplines,\" but merely \"other five.\"\nAmong these five, moreover, is named Philosophy, which, though certainly\na \"discipline,\" was never, so far as I can discover, called an art,\nliberal or otherwise. There is not the smallest reason for tracing back\nthe Seven Liberal Arts to St. Augustine, who surely was incapable of any\nsuch playing with numbers. He does not, indeed, recognize the \"Seven.\"\n\nIt is in the fantastic and superficial work of Martianus Capella, a\nheathen contemporary of Augustine's, that they first make their\nappearance, and even there no stress is laid upon their number. They are\n(1) Grammar, (2) Dialectic, (3) Rhetoric, (4) Geometry, (5) Arithmetic,\n(6) Astronomy, (7) Music. These, no doubt, were the branches taught in\nthe better schools of the Roman Empire in the fourth and fifth\ncenturies, when, on the whole, the Greek liberal curriculum had\nsupplanted the Roman rhetorical one. There is not the slightest ground\nfor supposing that Capella had anything to do with fixing the curriculum\nwhich he celebrates. His work is a wretched production, sufficiently\ncharacterized by its title, _The Wedding of Mercury and Philology_. He\nwrote about seven arts because he found seven to write about. Attention\nwas first called to the _number_ of the arts, and a mystical meaning\nattached to it, by the Christian senator, Cassiodorus (480-575) in his\n_De Artibus et Disciplinis Liberalium Litterarum_. He finds it written\nin Prov. ix, 1, that \"Wisdom hath builded her house. She hath hewn out\nher seven pillars.\" He concludes that the Seven Liberal Arts are the\nseven pillars of the house of Wisdom. They correspond also to the days\nof the week, which are also seven. It is to be observed that he\ndistinguishes the \"Arts\" from the \"Disciplines,\" or, as they said later,\nthe _Trivium_ from the _Quadrivium_. The pious notion of Cassiodorus was\nworked out by Isidore of Seville (died 636) in his _Etymologi\u00e6_, and by\nAlcuin (died 804) in his _Grammatica_. Of course, as soon as the number\nof the arts came to be regarded as fixed by Scripture authority, it\nbecame as familiar a fact as the number of the planets or of the days of\nthe week, or indeed, as the number of the elements. About A.D. 820\nHrabanus Maurus (776-856), a pupil of Alcuin's, wrote a work, _De\nClericorum Institutione_, in which the phrase _Septem Liberales Artes_\nis said to occur for the first time. About the same date Theodulfus\nwrote his allegorical poem _De Septem Liberalibus in quadam Pictura\nDescriptis_.[13]\n\nThe Liberal Studies after St. Augustine did not include Philosophy,\nwhich rested upon the Seven Arts, as upon \"seven pillars,\" and was\nusually divided into (1) Physical, (2) Logical, (3) Ethical.[14] After a\ntime Philosophy came to be an all-embracing term. In a commentary on the\n_Tim\u00e6us_ of Plato, assigned by Cousin to the twelfth century, we find\nthe following scheme:--\n\n { Ethics.\n { Practical { Economics.\n { { Politics.\n {\n { { Theology.\nPHILOSOPHY { { { Arithmetic }\n { { Mathematics. { Music }\n { Theoretical { { Geometry } = Quadrivium.\n { { { Astronomy }\n { { Physics.\n\nThe author expressly says that \"Mathematica quadrivium continet\"; but he\nplainly does not include the _Trivium_ under Philosophy. This, however,\nwas done the following century. In the _Itinerarium Mentis in Deum_ of\nSt. Bonaventura (1221-74) we find the following arrangements:--\n\n { { Metaphysics--essence: leads to First\n { { Principle = Father.\n { Natural { Mathematics--numbers, figures: leads\n { { to Image = Son.\n { { Physics--natures, powers, diffusions:\n { { leads to Gift of Holy Spirit.\n {\nPHILOSOPHY { { Grammar--power of expression = Father.\n { Rational { Logic--perspicuity in argument = Son.\n { { Rhetoric--skill in persuading = Holy\n { { Spirit.\n {\n { { Monastics--innascibility of Father.\n { Moral { \u0152conomics--familiarity of Son.\n { { Politics--liberality of Holy Spirit.\n\nHere we have the _Trivium_, under the division \"Rational,\" while the\n_Quadrivium_ must still be included under \"Mathematics.\" In both cases\nwe get nine sciences or disciplines, and the number was apparently\nchosen, because it is the square of three, the number of the Holy\nTrinity. In the latter case this was certainly true. Speaking of the\nprimary divisions of Philosophy, the Saint says: \"The first treats of\nthe cause of being, and therefore leads to the Power of the Father; the\nsecond of the ground of understanding, and therefore leads to the Wisdom\nof the Word; the third of the order of living, and therefore leads to\nthe goodness of the Holy Spirit.\"\n\nDante, in his _Convivio_ (II, 14, 15), gives the following scheme, based\nupon the \"ten heavens,\" nine of which are moved by angels or\nintelligences, while the last rests in God.\n\n { { Grammar Moon Angels.\n { Trivium { Dialectic Mercury Archangels.\n { { Rhetoric Venus Thrones.\nLIBERAL ARTS {\n { { Arithmetic Sun Dominions.\n { Quadrivium { Music Mars Virtues.\n { { Geometry Jupiter Principalities.\n { { Astrology Saturn Powers.\n\n { Physics and } Starry Heaven Cherubim.\n { Metaphysics }\n {\n { Moral Science { Crystalline } Seraphim.[15]\nPHILOSOPHY { { Heaven }\n {\n { Theology Empyrean God.\n\nIn Dante are summed up the ancient and medi\u00e6val systems of education.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHY\n\n\nIt is not intended here to give a complete Bibliography of Greek\nEducation, but merely to point the readers of this book, who may desire\nto pursue the subject further, to the chief sources of information.\n\n\n1. ANCIENT WORKS\n\nFor the first part of the Hellenic Period, that of the \"Old Education,\"\nour authorities are fragmentary, and often vague. They are the _Iliad_\nand _Odyssey_ of Homer, the _Works and Days_ of Hesiod, the fragments of\nthe pre-Socratic philosophers (collected by Mullach, in his _Fragmenta\nPhilosophorum Gr\u00e6corum_, Paris, Didot, 1860-81, 3 vols. 4to), and the\ncomedies of Aristophanes, especially the _Clouds_. For the second part\nof the same period, that of the \"New Education,\" the chief authorities\nare the tragedies of Euripides, the _Clouds_ of Aristophanes, the\ndialogues of Plato, especially the _Protagoras_, _Lysis_, _Republic_,\nand _Laws_, and the _Cyrop\u00e6dia_, _\u0152conomics_, and _Constitution of\nLaced\u00e6mon_ of Xenophon.\n\nFor Aristotle's educational doctrines, we are confined for information\nto his own works, and, among these, to the _Ethics_ and _Politics_. Of\nthe latter, the closing chapters of the seventh, and the whole of the\neighth, book deal professedly with education. Some information may also\nbe gleaned from the recently discovered _Constitution of Athens_.\n\nFor the Hellenistic Period, our information is derived chiefly from\ninscriptions, from the writings of Philo Jud\u00e6us, Sextus Empiricus,\nPlutarch (_On the Nurture of Children_), \u00c6lian (_Miscellanies_), Lucian\n(_Anacharsis_ chiefly), Stob\u00e6us, Plotinus, Varro, Cicero, Seneca,\nQuintilian (_Education of the Orator_), Martianus Capella (_Nuptials of\nMercury and Philology_), and Cassiodorus, and from stray notices in\nother poets, historians, and philosophers.\n\nOf the works referred to, these deserve special mention:--\n\n 1. Aristophanes, _Clouds_. Translations by John Hookham Frere,\n Thomas Mitchell, and W.J. Hickie (in Bohn's Library).\n\n 2. Xenophon, _Cyrop\u00e6dia_. Translation, in _Whole Works translated by\n Ashley Cooper and Others_, Philadelphia, 1842, and by J.S. Watson\n and H. Dale (in Bohn's Library).\n\n 3. Plato, _Republic_. Translations by J. Ll. Davies and D.J.\n Vaughan, by B. Jowett, and by Henry Davis (in Bohn's Library).\n\n 4. Plato, _Laws_. Translations by B. Jowett, and by G. Burges (in\n Bohn's Library).\n\n 5. Aristotle, _Politics_ (Books VII, VIII). Translations by B.\n Jowett, J.E.C. Weldon, and E. Walford (in Bohn's Library).\n\n 6. Plutarch, _On the Nurture of Children_. Translation in _Morals_,\n translated from the Greek by several hands, corrected and revised by\n W.W. Goodwin, Boston, 1878.\n\n 7. Quintilian, _Education of an Orator_. Translation by J.S. Watson\n (in Bohn's Library).\n\n\n2. MODERN WORKS\n\nThese are very numerous; but the most comprehensive is Lorenz\nGrasberger's _Erziehung und Unterricht im klassischen Alterthum, mit\nbesonderer R\u00fccksicht auf die Bed\u00fcrfnisse der Gegenwart_, W\u00fcrzburg,\n1864-81, 3 vols. The first volume deals with the physical training of\nboys, the second with their intellectual training, and the third with\nthe education imparted by the State to young men (\u1f14\u03c6\u03b7\u03b2\u03bf\u03b9). A volume of\nplates is promised. The work is badly constructed, but is a mine of\ninformation and of references.\n\nAlong with this may be named O.H. J\u00e4ger, _Die Gymnastik der Hellenen, in\nihrem Einfluss auf's gesammte Alterthum und ihrer Bedeutung f\u00fcr die\ndeutsche Gegenwart_, Esslingen, 1850; Fournier, _Sur l'Education et\nl'Instruction Publiques chez les Grecs_, Berlin, 1833; Becq de\nFouqui\u00e8re, _Les Jeux des Anciens_, Paris, 1869; De Pauw, _Recherches\nPhilosophiques sur les Grecs_; Fr. Jacobs, _Ueber die Erziehung der\nHellenen zur Sittlichkeit_, Vermischte Schr. Pt. III.; Albert Dumont,\n_Essai sur l'Eph\u00e9bie Attique_, Paris, 1876-6; Dittenberger, _De Ephebis\nAtticis_; Chr. Petersen, _Das Gymnasium der Griechen nach seiner\nbaulichen Einrichtung beschrieben_, Hamburg, 1858; Alexander Kapp,\n_Platon's Erziehungslehre_, Minden, 1833, and _Aristotle's\nStaatsp\u00e6dagogik_, Hamm, 1837; J.H. Krause, _Geschichte der Erziehung des\nUnterrichts und der Bildung bei den Griechen, Etruskern und R\u00f6mern_,\nHalle, 1851.\n\nChapters on Greek Education may be found in W.A. Becker's _Charicles_\nand _Gallus_; in Guhl and Koner's _Life of the Greeks and Romans_--all\nthree translated into English. In _Hellenica_ is an essay, by R.S.\nNettleship, on the _Theory of Education in the Republic of Plato_,\nRivington, 1880, and in Edwin Hatch's _Influence of Greek Ideas upon the\nChristian Church_ (Hibbert Lectures) is a chapter on Greek Education\n(Lecture II).\n\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[1] It is worth while to note that it was a passage from Philolaus that\nsuggested to Copernicus the revolution of the earth round a centre.\n\n[2] This is represented in the charming Apoxyomenos of the Vatican.\n\n[3] So says Aristotle, who tells us further that in his time on this\noccasion they were presented with spear and shield _by the people_ (see\np. 97).\n\n[4] I am here using the terms \"objective\" and \"subjective\" in their\nmodern acceptation, which almost exactly inverts the ancient usage. See\nMartineau, _Study of Religion_, vol. i, p. 385, n. 2.\n\n[5] Like \"Peter Piper,\" etc., and the German \"Messwechsel Wachsmaske.\"\n\n[6] It must be borne in mind that the Greek \u03c4\u03ad\u03c7\u03bd\u03b7, art, corresponds\nalmost exactly to what we mean by \"science.\" It is defined by Aristotle,\n_Metaph._, A. 1; 981 a 5 sqq. Schwegler, in his translation of the\n_Metaphysics_, renders it by _Wissenschaft_. \u1f18\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ae\u03bc\u03b7 is our\n\"philosophy.\"\n\n[7] See Jebb, _Homer_, pp. 110 sqq.\n\n[8] It is a pity that we cannot fix the date of the so-called _Picture_\nof Cebes (\u039a\u03ad\u03b2\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03a0\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03be). In this we find enumerated the votaries of\nFalse Learning, (1) Poets, (2) Rhetoricians, (3) Dialecticians, (4)\nMusicians, (5) Arithmeticians, (6) Geometricians, (7) Astrologers (if we\ncount Poets = Grammarians, we have exactly the Seven Liberal Arts), (8)\nHedonists, (9) Peripatetics, (10) Critics, \"and such others as are like\nto these.\" The \"Hedonists\" (\u1f21\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03af) are the Cyrenaics; the \"Critics\"\n(\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03af) can hardly be the grammarians, though that is usually the\nmeaning of the term in later times. Should we not read \u03ba\u03c5\u03bd\u03b9\u03ba\u03bf\u03af?\n\n[9] \"Liberal\" means fit, \"illiberal\" unfit, for freemen. The sum of the\nliberal arts was called \u1f18\u03b3\u03ba\u03c5\u03ba\u03bb\u03b9\u03bf\u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03b1, which we have corrupted into\n_Encyclop\u00e6dia_.\n\n[10] Bonn, 1845.\n\n[11] See Boissier, _\u00c9tude sur la Vie et les Ouvrages de M.T. Varron_,\npp. 332, sqq.\n\n[12] See Bekker's _Anecdota Gr\u00e6ca_, ii., 655.\n\n[13] I am indebted for a number of these facts to an article by\nProfessor A.F. West, in the _Princeton College Bulletin_, November,\n1890.\n\n[14] These terms, which we still find in Isidore and Hrabanus Maurus,\nare afterwards, in the thirteenth century, replaced by their Latin\nequivalents: Natural, Rational, and Moral. In the case of the second,\nthis caused considerable confusion, inasmuch as when it ceased to be\nused as \"rational,\" it took the place of \"dialectic.\"\n\n[15] In the XXVIIIth Canto of the Paradise, these angelic powers are\narranged somewhat differently, in deference to Dionysius Areopagita and\nSt. Bernard.\n\n\n\nINDEX\n\n\nA\n\nAcademics, 112, 210.\n\nAcademy, 86, 112.\n\nAchilles, 6.\n\n\u00c6olian Education, 38 _sqq._\n\n\u00c6olians, 35.\n\n\u00c6schylus, 104 _sqq._\n\n\u00c6sop's _Fables_, 146, 223.\n\n\u1f08\u0390\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2, 47.\n\nAlexander the Great, 40, 156 _sq._, 178.\n\nAlexandria, 211.\n\nAmmonius Saccas, 225, 227.\n\nAmphidromia, 65.\n\nAmyntas, 156.\n\nAnaxagoras, 24, 99 _sq._\n\nAntisthenes, 112.\n\nApoxyomenos, the, 82 _n._\n\nArchytas, 55, 193.\n\nAristocracy in Athens, 98.\n\nAristophanes, 105.\n\nAristotle, Life, 29, 153 _sqq._\n\n \" Death, 159.\n\n \" Philosophy, 161.\n\n \" Theology, 165.\n\n \" Theory of the State, 166 _sqq._\n\n \" Pedagogical State, 172 _sqq._\n\n \" Scheme of Secondary Education, 199.\n\nArithmetic, how Taught, 77.\n\nArtemis Orthia, 50.\n\nArts, Origin of, in Greece, 20.\n\nAthenian Education, 60.\n\nAthenian Ideal of the State, 63.\n\nAthletes, 78, 184.\n\nAthletics, 190.\n\n\nB\n\nBarbarians _vs._ Greeks, 12.\n\nBodily Training, 77.\n\nBranches of Greek Education, 6.\n\n\nC\n\nC\u00e6sar, 217.\n\nCato Major, 216.\n\nCh\u00e6ronea, Battle of, 157.\n\nCharacter of the Greeks (Zeller), 18.\n\nChildren, Defective, 185.\n\nChildren, Treatment of, 185.\n\nChristianity, 233 _sqq._\n\nCicero, 217.\n\nCitharist, his Functions, 77.\n\nCitizen, Meaning of, 175.\n\nClisthenes, 98.\n\nCollege Education, 85.\n\nCommerce, Effect of, 21, 99 _sq._\n\nCompetition in Education, 71.\n\nConditions of Education, 9.\n\nContemplation, 201.\n\nCopernicus, 39.\n\nCornificius (_Auctor ad Herennium_), 217.\n\nCretan Education, 42.\n\nCulture-State, 90, 175.\n\nCynosarges (Gymnasium), 86, 112.\n\nCyrus, his Education, 115 _sqq._\n\n\nD\n\nDancing, 82 _sqq._\n\nDemocracy in Athens, 92, 99.\n\nDiagog\u0113 (\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b3\u03c9\u03b3\u03ae), 33, 178.\n\nDionysiac Chorus, 85.\n\nDip\u0153nis and Scyllis, 21.\n\nDiscus-throwing, 80.\n\nDorian Education, 41 _sqq._\n\nDoric Harmonies, 197.\n\nDraco, 98.\n\nDrawing, 189.\n\n\nE\n\nEducation, \"Old,\" 27, 33, 61 _sqq._\n\n \" \"New\" 27, 93 _sqq._\n\n \" Higher, 108.\n\n\n\u0395\u1f30\u03c3\u03c0\u03bd\u03ae\u03bb\u03b1\u03c2 (Inspirer), 47.\n\nEpaminondas, 40, 55.\n\nEpheboi (Cadets), 49, 89, 90, 116, 118.\n\nEpheboi, Oath of, 61, 89.\n\nEpicureans, 210.\n\nEpochs in Education, 26.\n\nEssenism, 59, 212.\n\nEthnic and Cosmopolitan Life, 205.\n\nExaminations, 64, 90.\n\n\nF\n\nFamily Education in Athens, 64.\n\nFreedom, Greek Tendency to, 19.\n\nFreeman's Square, 116, 177.\n\nFriendship, Aristotle on, 170.\n\n\nG\n\nGames, 66.\n\n_Golden Words_, 57 _sqq._, 146.\n\nGrading in Schools, 85.\n\nGrammar, 214, 221.\n\nGreeks a Mixed Race, 20.\n\nGreeks _vs._ Barbarians, 12.\n\nGuardians of Public Instruction, 185 _sqq._\n\nGymnasia at Athens, 86, 105.\n\nGymnastics, 7, 77, 189.\n\n\nH\n\nHarmony, 55, 56, 76.\n\n \" Doric, Lydian, etc. 192.\n\n \" in Music, Unknown to Greeks, 73.\n\nHellenic Period of Education, 26, 32 _sqq._\n\nHellenistic Period of Education, 27, 203 _sqq._\n\nHelots, 44 _sq._\n\nHerm\u00e6a, 79, 85.\n\nHermias, 155.\n\nHesiod, 22.\n\nHet\u00e6r\u00e6, 132.\n\nHolidays, 85.\n\nHomeric Education, 6, 17.\n\n \" Society and Kings, 16.\n\n \" Poems collected, 35.\n\nHomerid\u00e6, 21.\n\n\nI\n\nIdeal of Greek Education, 3, 206.\n\nIndividualism and Philosophy, 93 _sqq._, 207.\n\nInduction, Method of, 162.\n\nIonian Education, 60 _sqq._\n\nIsaiah, 53, 133, 234.\n\nIschomachus, 124 _sqq._\n\nIsocrates, 209.\n\n\nJ\n\nJavelin-casting, 81.\n\nJumping, 80.\n\nJustinian, 211.\n\n\nK\n\nKalokagathia, 8, 12, 15, 86.\n\nKatharsis (purgation), 7, 76, 229.\n\nKindergarten, 66, 145.\n\nKingdom of Heaven, 234.\n\n\"Know Thyself,\" 108.\n\n\nL\n\nLarceny, Instruction in, 48.\n\nLeaping, 80.\n\nLearning, how viewed in Greece, 72.\n\nLeisure, Education for, 33, 179.\n\nLetters, 22, 188.\n\nLetters, Introduction and Uses of, 21.\n\nLiberal Arts, 180 _sqq._, 198.\n\nLibrary of Alexandria, 211.\n\nLife the Original School, 6.\n\nLiterary Education, 72.\n\nLove, as a Power in Life, 234.\n\nLyceum, 105, 171.\n\nLycurgus, 42, 43.\n\nLysis, 39.\n\n\nM\n\nMacedonian Period in Education, 13.\n\nMarriage, 10, 127.\n\nMelleirenes, 49.\n\nMilo, the Wrestler, 55.\n\nMoney-making Classes, 13.\n\nMusic, 22, 34, 72 _sqq._, 188, 191.\n\nMusic, Greek Feeling for, 76, 146.\n\nMuseum at Alexandria, 211.\n\n\nN\n\nNymph\u00e6um at Stagira, 156.\n\nNeoplatonism, 212, 227.\n\n\nO\n\n\u0152conomy, 13.\n\nOlympic Games, 78.\n\n\nP\n\n\u03a0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9, 46, 185, 187.\n\nPal\u00e6stra, 69 _sq._, 78 _sq._\n\nPantheism, 136.\n\nParmenides, 24.\n\nParthenon, 24, 106.\n\nPedagogical State, 172 _sqq._\n\nPedagogue, 68.\n\nPeleus, 7.\n\nPentathlon, 88.\n\nPericles, 105 _sqq._\n\nPerioikoi, 44.\n\nPeriods of Greek Education, 26 _sqq._\n\nPersian Education, 115 _sqq._\n\nPersonality, 202.\n\nPherecydes, 53.\n\nPhiditia, 44.\n\nPhilolaus, 39.\n\nPhilosophy, Rise of, 22.\n\nPhilosophy and Individualism, 93 _sqq._\n\nPhysical Culture, 189.\n\nPhysicians in Homer, 17.\n\nPindar, 39.\n\nPisistratus, 35, 98, 178.\n\nPlato, 29, 112, 133 _sqq._, 134, 136, 137, 142.\n\nPlay, 66, 181 _sqq._\n\nPlotinus, 29, 225 _sqq._, 228 _sqq._\n\nPoetesses, 21.\n\nPoetry, Value of, for Education, 73 _sqq._\n\n\"Professional,\" Meaning of, 195.\n\n_Prometheia_, 24.\n\nProxenus of Atarneus, 155.\n\nPurgation, 7, 76.\n\nPythagoras, 29, 52 _sqq._, 149.\n\nPythias, 156.\n\n\nQ\n\nQuadrivium, 144, 198.\n\nQuintilian, 29, 214 _sqq._\n\n\nR\n\nReading, 75.\n\nRhapsodes, 23.\n\nRhetorical Schools, 209, 217.\n\nRoman Education, 216 _sqq._\n\nRoman Period, 27.\n\nRuling and Ruled, 176.\n\nRunning, 79.\n\n\nS\n\nSchool Education in Athens, 67.\n\n \" Buildings \" \" 69.\n\n \" Rooms \" \" 77.\n\nScipio Africanus, 216.\n\nSinging, 75.\n\nSlaves, 12.\n\nSocial Life in Greece, 18.\n\nSocrates, 24, 107 _sqq._\n\nSocratic Method, 109.\n\nSolon, and his Laws, 68, 98.\n\nSoothsayers in Homer, 17.\n\nSophists, 23, 100 _sq._\n\nSpartan Education, 41, 43 _sqq._\n\nSpartan Girls, 49.\n\n \" Government, 44.\n\n \" Ideal, 42.\n\n \" Mercilessness, 45, 50.\n\n \" Women, 44.\n\nStagira, 155 _sq._\n\nState, Meaning of Term, 174.\n\nState as a School, 91.\n\nStilo, Lucius \u00c6lius Pr\u00e6coninus, 217.\n\nStoics, 210.\n\nSupercivic Man, 136, 234.\n\n\nT\n\nTheban Education, 28.\n\nThemistes, 17.\n\nTheories of Education, 28.\n\nTherapeuts, 212.\n\nThomas Aquinas, 165.\n\nThucydides' Daughter, 37.\n\nTragedy, 84.\n\nTrivium, 144, 198.\n\n\nU\n\nUniversity Education, 90.\n\n \" of Alexandria, 212.\n\n \" of Athens, 211.\n\n\nW\n\n_Wilhelm Meister_, 173.\n\nWingless Victory, 63.\n\nWisdom, the Ideal of Athens, 63.\n\nWomen, Education of, 49, 124.\n\nWorth, 16, 48.\n\nWorth, Aristotle's P\u00e6an to, 4.\n\nWrestling, 81 _sqq._\n\nWriting, 75.\n\n\nX\n\nXenophon, 29, 113, 114 _sqq._\n\n \" _Memoirs of Socrates_, 123.\n\n \" _\u0152conomics_, 124.\n\n \" on Female Education, 124 _sqq._\n\n\nTypography by J.S. Cushing & Co., Boston, U.S.A.\n\nPresswork by Berwick & Smith, Boston, U.S.A.\n\n\n * * * * *\n\n\nTRANSCRIBER'S NOTES\n\nCorrections from the errata list on p. 2 have been incorporated into the\ntext.\n\nWords in italics are indicated by underscores, _like this_.\n\nThe variant spellings \"freeborn\" and \"free-born\", \"Staatsp\u00e6dagogik\" and\n\"Staatspaedagogik\", \"subdivided\" and \"sub-divided\" are used in this text.\n\nThe abbreviations B.C. and A.D. sometimes precede their date, sometimes\nfollow it.\n\n\nAmendments to the text have been made as follows:\n\np. 21: \"Spata\" amended to \"Sparta\".\n\np. 63: \"civilizaton\" amended to \"civilization\".\n\np. 74: \"partiotism\" amended to \"patriotism\".\n\np. 78: \"neans\" amended to \"means\".\n\np. 78: \"humane\" amended to \"human\".\n\np. 85: \"pantomine\" amended to \"pantomime\".\n\np. 186: \"sufficent\" amended to \"sufficient\".\n\np. 188: quotation mark deleted after \"not being universal.\"\n\np. 218: B.C. amended to A.D.\n\np. 227: \"fourtieth\" amended to \"fortieth\".\n\np. 243: \"Grammer\" amended to \"Grammar\".\n\np. 246: full stop added after \"Mathematics\".\n\np. 246: extra \"the\" deleted from \"the following century\".\n\n\nGreek:\n\nOn p. 22 \u03b1\u1f34\u03c4\u03b9\u03b1 has not been changed to \u03b1\u1f30\u03c4\u03af\u03b1 (as in LSJ) as it may be an\nacceptable alternative form.\n\nSimilarly on p. 223 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b2\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 has not been changed to \u03c0\u03b1\u03b9\u03b4\u03bf\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b2\u03af\u03b1 (as\nin LSJ).","title":"Aristotle and Ancient Educational Ideals","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":66381}