Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

and calamities of their age and country. But, who made them? They who taught them. Education left out its essence. It gave them knowledge, but it left them immorality."1

To this Dr. Barrow adds,

During the whole process of education, the attention of the young should be directed to the fundamental principles which Christianity teaches, the divine attributes which she unfolds, the rules of moral action which she enforces, the strict scrutiny which she announces, as awaiting us at the final judgment, and the eternal world, with its awards of endless bliss or woe, to which she points. These are subjects which ought never to be lost sight of for a single day. They should be interwoven with every department and with every part of literary and scientific instruction. "For my own part," observes Addison, "I think the being of a God so little to be doubted, that it is almost the only truth we are sure of." as little more than the fair and natural inference, that the doctrines and the duties of religion are almost the only study, which we are not at liberty to cultivate or neglect. "They constitute," he says, "the only science, which is equally and indispensably necessary to men of every rank, every age, and every profession. Admit the authenticity of the Bible, and the principal object of education becomes at once as obvious, as it is important; to regulate the sentiments and form the habits of beings, degenerate, indeed, and corrupt by their own fault; but made by their Creator rational in their faculties, and responsible for their conduct. If it be the business of education to prepare us for our situation in life, and the business of life to prepare us for the happiness of eternity; then do we perceive a system of perfect order and beauty in itself; and equally consistent with what we observe in the world, and with the wisdom and goodness of its Almighty Author. Science immediately finds its proper level, and its due estimation." Access to the tree of knowledge, was once purchased by exclusion from the tree of life. Be it our endeavor, surely not an impracticable one, to commingle, in loving embrace, the foliage, flowers, and fruits of these twin sisters of Paradise. The true dignity of man consists in a severe morality, in self-control, in humility and moderation, and in the voluntary performance of all his duties to God and his neighbor. Religious education is, consequently, the first want of a people. "The end of learning," says Milton, "is to repair the ruin of our first parents, by requiring to know God aright, and out of that knowledge, to love him, and to imitate him." But what a mass of false perceptions, false judgments and false

1 Hon. Mr. Wyse, M. P.

1851.]

Value of the Bible in Education.

765

principles in morals is exhibited in many of our schools! It would be a curious research, as Dr. Arnold suggests, to gather up the several points in a character, which boys respect and admire, in order to show what a crooked rule they walk by. In the true scale of excellence, the order is, moral perfection, force of understanding, physical strength and dexterity. At school this order is reversed. The most active and expert player is the best fellow; the cleverest scholar comes next in the scale; while the best boy, with nothing but goodness to recommend him, rises but little above contempt. The habitual breach of duty even is countenanced and upheld. Everywhere else, but in schools, it is but a natural feeling that it is disgraceful to do our business ill; that it is contemptible either to have no employment, or, having one to neglect it. Not so in these communities. Here the contrary often happens; idleness is a glory, industry a reproach. We have heard of a college student, who, from an affectation of genius, would ask what the exercise of the hour was in the recitation-room, after having spent the day in idleness, and toiled at his lesson much of the preceding night under his bed, with the light behind the covers, lest it should be known that he sat up at night! Such a man, one would think, must despise himself for the rest of his natural life. But the most fearful laxity in the code of school morals is the estimation in which falsehood is held. Lying is far from being considered as hateful a vice as the Holy Ghost teaches us to regard it. But little disgrace is attached to it. It is fearful to contemplate the amount of direct falsehood, of artful equivocation, of unfair concealment, of deceitful representation, and the long train of similar wickedness, practised, without compunction or shame, often with exultation even, by school-children.

Nothing but the simple, plain, earnest, devout teaching of the word of God, can change this sad state of things to a better. That divine word is quick and powerful. Its influence upon the understanding is as healthful and invigorating as it is upon the heart; its quickening energy as great upon the intellectual as upon the moral perceptions. It is the controlling agency to be employed in the production of a better public opinion, a sounder public conscience, a higher standard of public morals, a purer and healthier action of the public heart. In the accomplishment of so desirable and excellent a result, religious education, founded upon the Bible, is the one thing needful. Other measures may change and subside, as the national mind changes and subsides beneath them. But this is a measure which creates the national mind; and which insures, by its firm and broad substructions,

the solidity, harmony and durability of the whole social structure. It is the bond of our union; the charter of our liberties; the ward and keeper of our Constitution; the palladium of our happiness, our safety, and our rights. It seems to us, that there is urgent need of a reform in this matter. We want a stronger infusion of godliness into the sources of public sentiment; a greater use of direct, plain and earnest Bible teaching, both in the family and in the school.

What, now, is the practical lesson of this subject? Development, progress, improvement, perfection, in our systems of common school Education, by every agency suited to attain these objects. Among such agencies may be enumerated the excitation and enlightening of the public mind, improved schoolhouses, the establishment of district libraries, the formation of Teachers' Institutes, and other kindred measures. But the essential complement of every system of public instruction, without which it must ever be like the play of Hamlet with the part of Hamlet omitted, are Teachers' Seminaries, or Normal Schools. We have never been able to comprehend how it should happen, that a statuary, who has only to carve the block of marble, or mould the mass of bronze, into the forms of material beauty, should find years of patient study and practice necessary to qualify him for his work; while no such preparatory discipline is required in him, whose harder, as well as higher office is, to give form and symmetry to the rude, chaotic faculties of a child, and to cause him to stand up a man, erect in the conscious dignity of his nature, with a culture worthy of his high powers and his immortal destiny. Is a Greek Slave a harder thing to make than an American freeman?

From the solemn duty which it has been the aim of this discussion to enforce, the friends of education in America may not shrink without a fearful responsibility. The intelligent and conscientious discharge of this duty, is a debt, which we owe to our children and to posterity. Let the Education of the people, then, in Christian knowledge and Christian virtue, receive, as it deserves, our earliest, deepest, most unremitted attention. Crown the honor of the nation. Let us do what in us lies, by our counsels, our labors, our example and our votes, to stimulate and perfect the common school—the People's College, the great fountain of popular light, the mighty bulwark of constitutional liberty. Let us multiply and purify the sources of knowledge. Deep, and broad, and indestructible be the foundations of that moral edifice surpassing, in symmetry and beauty, the proudest structures of granite and of marble-which our wisdom and our energy shall help to rear. Let us do this in the humble but

1851.]

History of Latin Lexicography.

767

courageous faith, that He, whose sunshine makes the flowers to unfold their beauties, and the corn to give back its golden increase, will not deny his blessing to the better seeds of knowledge and virtue. Is it asked what return may be expected for labors so patriotic? We answer -the consciousness of duty performed, of benefits conferred; the noblest reward that a noble nature can receive.

ARTICLE V.

HISTORY OF LATIN LEXICOGRAPHY.

[THE following historical statements in regard to the early history of Latin lexicography are from the pen of an eminent classical scholar in the vicinity of Boston, and, at our request, are given to the readers of this work. They will be read with interest in connection with the Lexicon of Dr. Andrews, and of others, which are appearing from time to time. ED.]

WHENEVER an important addition is made to a branch of learning, we naturally look back upon what has previously been done in that department in order to form a correct opinion and a complete and just estimate of the merits or demerits of the new production. The translation of Freund's Latin Lexicon by Dr. Andrews is such a work. It has furnished us with an occasion of arranging and digesting the materials, previously collected, of a sketch or brief history of Latin lexicography from its earliest beginning to the present time. We intend to lay before our readers, at the present time, a small portion of this sketch relating to the lexicographical labors of the Romans themselves and the earliest attempts at Latin lexicography during the middle ages previous to the labors of Robert Stephanus.

It is in the nature of the case that lexicography belongs to the last stage of the literary development of a nation. The language must have fully unfolded itself, and a literature must have grown up, the meanings of words must have multiplied, some of them must have become obsolete, obscure or less intelligible, and only retained in the older portion of the literature, before the words of the language can become the subject of reflection, examination and research. Lexicography presupposes, not only the existence of words, but that they

should have undergone changes. And not only is it necessary that the language should have fully unfolded itself and that a literature should have grown up, but the intellectual development of the nation must have far advanced before the single words of the language can become the subject of examination and research. It indicates considerable intellectual progress when a man makes himself the subject of his reflection; and still greater, when he subjects the very instrument, language, by which he carries on and communicates this mental operation, to the same process.

As the history of philology commences with the first traces of a scientific and systematic consideration of the existing monuments of language and art, so the history of lexicography, which is a branch of philology, begins with the first attempts at examining into the origin, etymology, meaning and use of single words. Such attempts we can trace as far back as the time of the Sophists, of Socrates, and Plato. Both the Sophists, as teachers of eloquence, and the philosophers were fond of occupying themselves with the contemplation of single words both as to their meaning and form. This led naturally to etymological investigations, single instances of which are found, even earlier, in poets. The etymological inquiries were not confined to tracing a word to its root, but some attempted to point out how the root itself, or rather its sound, agreed with the object designated. It requires no great penetration to see how hazardous such a proceeding is and how easily it may degenerate into idle speculations. Whatever the success with which such speculations were indulged in, they naturally led to the question concerning the origin of language itself, whether it was the product of nature, or the result of convention and usage, whether it was quoa or έou, natura or usu; a question which occupied the philosophers a good deal. It is known that Aristotle entertained the latter, Plato the former opinion. As we see from Cic. Partitione 5 and Lucret. 5, 1027, this subject was discussed by the Romans as well as the Greeks.

The first lexicographical attempts, among the Greeks as well as Romans, did not embrace the whole department of lexicography but were contributions to its several branches, etymology, synonymy, and dialectology. It is a familiar fact that the Stoics were particularly fond of etymological inquiries and, as we can judge from many instances quoted, for instance, in Cicero, frequently guilty of the most ridiculous and absurd derivations. Ignorance, or imperfect knowledge, of other languages and, consequently, the absence of that invaluable assistance which comparative philology affords, formed undoubtedly

« ZurückWeiter »