of Europe, who are accustomed to intellectual action, if they are not themselves scholars, frequent the fociety of fcholars, and thus become. familiar with ideas, the primary fource of which is only to be found in an acquaintance with the learned languages. If therefore we would make a just estimate of the lofs that would be incurred by the abolition of claffical learning, we must not build our estimate upon perfons of talent among ourselves who have been deprived of that benefit. We must suppose the indirect, as well as the direct improvement that arifes from this fpecies of ftudy, wholly banished from the face of the earth. Let it be taken for granted that the above ar guments fufficiently establish the utility of claffical learning; it remains to be determined whether it is neceffary that it should form a part of the education of youth. It may be alleged, that, if it be a defirable acquifition, it may with more propriety be made when a man is arrived at years of discretion, that it will then be made with lefs expence of labour and time, that the period of youth ought not to be burthened with fo vexatious a task, and that our early years may be more advantageously spent in acquiring the knowledge of things, than of words. In answer to these objections it may however be remarked, that it is not certain that, if the acquifition of the rudiments of claffical learning be deferred to our riper years, it will ever be made. It will require ftrong inclination and confiderable leifure. A few active and determined fpirits will furmount the difficulty; but many who would derive great benefit from. the acquifition, will certainly never arrive at it. Our early years, it is faid, may be more advantageously spent in acquiring the knowledge of things, than of words. But this is by no means fo certain as at firft fight it may appear. If you attempt to teach children fcience, commonly fo called, it will perhaps be found in the fequel that you have taught them nothing. You may teach them, like parrots, to repeat, but you can scarcely make them able to weigh the refpective merits of contending hypotheses. Many things that we go over in our youth, we find ourfelves, compelled to recommence in our riper years under peculiar difadvantages. The grace of novelty they have for ever loft. We are encumbered with prejudices with refpect to them; and, before we begin to learn, we muft fet ourselves with a determined mind to unlearn the crude mafs of opinions concerning them that were once laborioufly inculcated on us. But in the the rudiments of language, it can scarcely be supposed that we fhall have any thing that we fhall fee reafon to wifh obliterated from our minds. The age of youth feems particularly adapted to the learning of words. The judgment is then small; but the memory is retentive. In our riper years we remember paffions, facts and arguments; but it is for the most part in youth only that we retain the very words in which they are conveyed. Youth easily contents itself with this species of employment, especially where it is not inforced with particular feverity. Acquifitions, that are insupportably disgustful in riper years, are often found to afford to young perfons no contemptible amusement.. It is not perhaps true that, in teaching languages to youth, we are impofing on them an unneceffary burthen. If we would produce right habits in the mind, it must be employed. Our early years must not be spent in lethargic indolence. An active maturity must be preceded by a bufy childhood. Let us not from a miftaken compaffion to infant years, suffer the mind to grow up in habits of inattention and irrefolution. If the study of the claffics have the effect above afcribed to it of refining and multiplying the intellectual powers, it will have this effect in a greater degree, the earlier it is introduced, and the more pliable and ductile is the mind that is employed on it. After a certain time the mind that was neglected in the beginning, grows aukward and unwieldy. Its attempts at alertness and grace are abortive. There is a certain flowness and ftupidity that grows upon it. He therefore that would enlarge the mind and add to its quantity of existence, muft enter upon his task at an early period, The benefits of claffical learning would perhaps never have been controverted, if they had not been accompanied with unneceffary rigours. Children learn to dance and to fence, they learn French and Italian and mufic, without its being found neceffary to beat them for that purpose. A reasonable man will not eafily be perfuaded that there is fome mysterious quality in claffical learning that should make it an exception to all other inftances. There is one obfervation arifing from the view here taken on the fubject, that probably deferves to be ftated. It has often been faid that claffical learning is an excellent accomplishment in men devoted to letters, but that it is ridiculous, in parents whofe children are destined to more ordinary occupations, to defire to give them a fuperficial fuperficial acquaintance with Latin, which in the fequel will infallibly fall into neglect. A conclufion oppofite to this, is dictated by the preceding reflections. We can never certainly foresee the future destination and propenfities of our children. But let them be taken for granted in the present argument, yet, if there be any truth in the above reasonings, no portion of claffical inftruction, however fmall, need be wholly loft. Some refinement of mind and fome clearnefs of thinking will almost infallibly result from grammatical studies. Though the language itfelf fhould ever after be neglected, fome portion of a general science has thus been acquired, which can scarcely be forgotten. Though our children fhould be deftined to the humbleft occupation, that does not seem to be a fufficient reafon for our denying them the acquifition of fome of the moft fundamental documents of human understanding. |