Latin in Girls’ Education: some of our difficulties E. Ryle
“Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.”
Few, probably, of those who are engaged in the teaching of Latin in Girls’ Secondary
Schools, would claim that they are quite satisfied with the present conditions of their work,
or with the results they obtain. Few, probably, could altogether deny the charges often
brought against “girls’ Latin” to-day; that the subject is very inadequately mastered by the
majority of pupils; that it is often studied unintelligently, and with small enjoyment; that the
students are few who reach the point of being able to read a Latin author for pleasure; that
the actual reading of Latin authors in school is meagre; that inaccuracy is a common fault;
that even where the Direct Method of teaching is used, its success is hampered by selfconsciousness and a lack of initiative. What are the causes of our non-success, and how are
they to be met?
Certain conditions are essential to the success of Latin teaching, as of any other; that
the subjects be begun at the most suitable agae; that adequate time be devoted to its study
each week; that the course be long enough to allow of steady and even progress all round,
without undue haste or pressure; that the best text-books, and plenty of books of reference,
be at the disposal of the pupils; more than all, that the teacher be convinced of the principle
that each child must educate herself; and that she be not be prevented from working on this
principle, by the exigencies of examinations. With such conditions, the results for which one
might reasonably hope would be, in the class-room, an atmosphere of life and energy; in the
pupils themselves, an attitude of eagerness to meet and overcome difficulties, and evidence
of growing power; in their work, increased originality, intelligence, accuracy and scholarly
appreciation; and while enough reading of Latin books would be accomplished during the
school years to give some real insight into the value and beauty of Latin literature, the
desire for further reading would have been quickened rather than sated.
At present, the ideal conditions are far from being realised. In many girls’ schools
Latin is not begun till the age of 13 or 14 – psychologically perhaps the worst possible age at
which to begin; for the girl has left behind her that freedom from self-consciousness that
marked her earlier childhood, with its enjoyment of action and the dramatic element that is
so necessary to the early study of the language; she is beginning a subject which demands
great mental effort at the very age when nature asks to be allowed to “go slowly” for a
while, and when attention to details of accuracy is more difficult than it would have been
two years earlier, before the time of “broad and general surveys” began, or than it will be in
another two years, when the mental powers are making their great leap forward.
In the boys’ schools where the best results of the best Latin teaching are found, not
less than 6 periods a week are given to the subject; in girls’ schools, 3 or 4 periods are
usually the allowance. This, of course, means that at the end of two years a girl has only
really spent on her Latin the actual time that a boy has spent in one year or so.
A very few girls prolong their Latin course for more than four years. Many end it
with some examination for which it was needed, at the end of the third or fourth year; some
abandon it after two years, because they are leaving school, or because their time is needed
for other subjects. Nearly always the pressure of examinations is felt, demanding
concentration on the things which count in them, and prohibiting any digressions or
following of a natural bent. In some schools an added difficulty is found in the poverty of
the girls, which sometimes make it impossible for them to have the use of text-books which
would be educationally the best.
In fact, in various ways, education is forced to take a secondary place. We are
working with one eye on the examiner; and that being so, we are compelled either to work
at a higher pressure than is educationally right, or to cover the required course with less
thoroughness than honest language-study demands. The external standard is our guide,
rather than the needs of the individual pupil. Until we have waged a victorious crusade
against the whole examination system, with the false values and standards that it
introduces, we cannot rest satisfied; but meanwhile what can we do under our present
conditions to increase the educational worth of our Latin teaching? Here the united efforts
of the Association for the Reform of Latin Teaching will surely produce some result. A few
points may be suggested. Firstly, we need more definiteness of aim. Is our object to
introduce the learner as soon as possible to Latin literature, and to cover as much ground as
may be in the short time at our disposal; or do we aim rather at a careful preparation in the
language, with the hope that the power to read will itself lead the pupil to explore those
“aurea dicta, aurea, perpetua semper dignissima vita?”
In either case we shall find that a two year course of Direct Method is the best
possible introduction to Latin; after that, our method will need to be modified according to
our object. If an early introduction to Cicero, Livy, Virgil and Horace is our aim, while
appreciating the value of reading aloud, we shall need to see to it that the talking of Latin
does not become a fetish, or an end in itself. If, on the other hand we desire a fuller
preparation we shall probably find our best plan is to continue along the same lines as in the
earlier years, of course widening and developing our activities as we advance.
Secondly, we want to be clear for what literature we most wish to prepare our
pupils. Probably we shall, most of us, agree that Vergil is far and away the richest and best
write for a girl to know and appreciate; after him we should place Cicero, and parts of Livy,
Horace, and portions of the elegiac poets, in varying order. The circle of ideas in literature
differs, of course, from that of the pupils in their preparation stage. But the vocabulary used
in the class room and in the first reading books ought, as far as possible, be based upun the
authors which are afterwards to be read. We can afford to abandon Caesar and the
language of the camp, if we are directing our steps towards Mantua or Tusculum. Thirdly,
we badly need some elementary Latin books, especially adapted for pupils who are
beginning Latin later than the average boy – books in which the ideas are more mature,
even if the language is simple. The misdemeanours of somnolent Brutus, though heartily
appreciated by younger girls, are apt to be tedious to the girl of 15.
These suggestions are made in hopes of evoking others, or of arousing criticism; they
are also made in the belief that it is by facing our own shortcomings, and realising our
limitations, that we can best get light for further advance.
E. Ryle
May 1914