Norway, their calling being considered a high one, and great consideration is shown to governesses and tutors, who are highly educated, and are regarded as part of the family and treated with great respect. A teacher who has served thirty years in the public school receives a pension from the government.

In many of the towns there are industrial schools, where instruction in the different trades is given, and in those for girls there are regular lessons in needlework, etc. In some of the larger cities the girls learn the common household arts of baking, washing, ironing, mending, etc.

There are many technical elementary schools, where young men intending to learn a trade receive, without charge, a theoretical and practical education. Agricultural schools are found in almost every province, supported by the provincial authorities; while a higher agricultural school is supported in Aas, near Christiania, by the government. Beside these there is a military high school, a military and naval school, a drawing school, and six navigation schools, which necessarily occupy a prominent place in a country situated like Norway.

We have already heard of the great university which was founded in Christiania in 1811, and in 1887 had seventeen hundred students, many of whom are the sons of the peasant landholders, who can there receive a university education without intending to follow the learned profession.

Travellers say that what most forcibly attracts their attention in passing through Norway, is the number of fine school buildings scattered all over the country. They are almost invariably the most conspicuous structure in the town. And this seems all the more wonderful because we have not been accustomed to think of the people in that far away and barren corner of Europe, having such a great love for knowledge that they are determined to drive out ignorance from their land, and that the study of sciences and foreign languages is very common.

This general diffusion of education gives to the poorest Norwegians a sense of self-respect and self-reliance that distinguishes them favorably from those of the same class in other countries. Almost all the peasants possess a competent knowledge of reading, writing, arithmetic, and Bible history, to which some acquaintance with geography, grammar, and history is often added, and in society one meets many well educated, courteous ladies and gentlemen who are proficient in the use of foreign languages.

I

GREEK IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS.

BY ERNEST W. CLEMENT, M. A.

English Teacher in the High School, Mito, Japan.

HAVE no intention of reopening that trite question of the benefits of classical study. I am ready at the outset to admit the advantage and importance of the study of the Greek language to one who desires to obtain the full benefit of a college course. I write this as one who himself studied Greek, not because he was compelled, but because he liked to study it; as one who had the advantage inestimable of the personal instruction of Dr. James R. Boise, the Nestor of the Greek scholars and teachers of the United States; as one who found a real pleasure, not only in "digging" Greek roots, but also in teaching that same process to some few in preparatory schools; as one who, in attempting to gain a knowledge of an Oriental language entirely different in its vocabulary and grammatical structure from the tongue of Homer, Herodotus, and Demosthenes, must nevertheless acknowledge his indebtedness to a thorough classical drill. I appreciate perfectly the fact that a classical course with three or four years of Greek is an excellent training for a man who aspires to fame as a scholar. In view of these preliminary statements, I may fairly claim to speak without prejudice, when I affirm, as "the theme of my discourse," that the Greek language ought to have no place in the course of study of secondary education, — of high schools and academies, but ought to be relegated to the curriculum of higher education, of colleges and universities.

This contention means simply that Greek should not be required for admission into college. It goes without saying, that high schools and academies give instruction in the Greek language only in their capacity as fitting schools; and that, if an examination in Greek were not required to enter college, those preparatory institutions would drop that language from their courses of study. Ordinarily, only those who expect to enter college pursue Greek in the secondary institutions; and they constitute the small minority of all the pupils of such schools. Sometimes, it is true,

scholars who have no intention of pursuing a college course, take the preparatory Greek, and then drop it entirely, as they have no opportunity or occasion to continue it. I say emphatically, that to such the time spent on Greek, as it was not enough to benefit them permanently, was comparatively a waste. If they had devoted the same amount of time to science, history, literature, or even modern languages, they would have obtained much more lasting benefit. I understand, of course, that these are exceptional cases, and that the blame rests partly, if not wholly, on those who advised such a course. But I am willing to omit such, for they are few, from any further consideration in my argument. I am also willing to take no notice of such as, intending to enter college, study Greek, but are afterwards prevented from carrying out their plans. In arranging an educational curriculum, we cannot be expected to make allowance for all the unexpected exigencies. of life. Therefore, I base my contention on this ground, that, as only the few who intend to go to college really need Greek, it is foolish to devote valuable time to elementary instruction, and extravagant to pay a salary to an instructor in that language. It is, then, in the interests of both financial and educational economy, that I urge such a revision of curricula, as will remove Greek entirely from the secondary schools, and relegate it to the higher institutions of learning.

To make my meaning as clear as possible, let me specify a little more particularly on the subject of "educational economy." I am not ready to state positively, that it would be possible to have too many institutions of learning in any country, because I desire, of course, to spread among the people the advantages of school training. But I do think, that under some circumstances, in some localities, due regard is not paid to economic considerations in the establishment of schools. For instance, in some places there may be both a high school and an academy which the people of that place are called to supply with pupils, and to support either directly or indirectly. Now, if the main difference between these schools, as is often the case, lies in the fact that in one Greek is taught, and in the other not taught, this seems like a comparatively insignificant difference to call for two such institutions. Of course, if the number of pupils is so great that one school cannot fill the demand; or if one is a day-school, and the other is a boarding-school; or if there are other great differences in the

curricula, or in the objects of the schools, then there is good economical reason for their existence. But in any case it seems to me that Greek has no claim; if it constitutes the main difference between such schools, it is extravagant; if it is only one among more important differences, it is superfluous.

Such a revision of the curriculum of secondary institutions would thus have the effect of cutting off superfluous schools, if there are any, and of bringing all secondary institutions into closer relations to each other. If there were valid reasons for two or more in the same place, they could both be supported; but, if only one was necessary, it would be false economy to try to support more than that one. The curricula of all secondary schools would then be essentially the same. The new curriculum might contain elementary science, mathematics, history, literature, for all students, with divergencies on Latin or German for distinct courses. Thus, one "course" would be economized by dropping Greek ; and only one dead language, the Latin, which is surely more important than Greek to the average student, would be taught in secondary schools. It seems to me, that a high school or an academy is not the place to begin specializing in study to any great extent. It would be much better for the pupils in such schools to get a general, but broad and thorough training in science, mathematics, history, and literature; and to leave the special work in each of these lines of study for college and university. By such curricula those who can pursue only a high school or an academic course, would obtain thorough elementary instruction in the most important branches, and would thereby receive an impetus in the right direction. And those who are so fortunate as to be able to pursue also a college course, could obtain a more extended and specialized drill in all branches.

But I do not think that the advantages of the proposed change are limited to the secondary schools. I wish also to make a plea in behalf of the banished language, that Greek would be studied to much greater profit in the college and the university. Students would approach that language at a more advanced age, and with maturer minds; consequently their progress would be comparatively much more rapid and more solid. I venture to assert, that during only three years of a college course as much would be accomplished in Greek as by the present arrangement. I have no catalogues at hand to enable me to make an exact statement;

but I think, that ordinarily the required Greek of the preparatory and the college courses together amounts to less than the equivalent of one hour per day for four years. If Greek should be relegated to the college course, I am sure that the same amount of work could be accomplished in less time, or that in the same time more of that marvelous language and literature would become a permanent element of the scholar's intellectual equipment. On this point the instructor in Greek at the Iowa State University can give positive testimony. In that institution no Greek is required for admission to the classical course; and the language is taught for three years as a required study, and as an elective in Senior Year. I call her to the witness stand in this matter.

I have written briefly and imperfectly; I have not been able to elaborate my views, as I might have done, if I had the proper data at hand. I have written without prejudice, and only to give expression to my sincere opinion. Classical study, especially the study of Greek, has much criticism from men who look only for the immediate and direct effects, expressed in a cash value. With such I have no sympathy; for I would say of Greek what Cicero so beautifully said of friendship: "Hoc quidem est nimis exigue et exiliter ad calenlos vocare amicitiam." If an education is to be obtained merely for its market value, then we may as well do away with all colleges and universities, and establish nothing but special and technical schools, where only one line of studies is taught. The study of Greek may not make one a whit better merely as a professional or a business man; but it shows itself in making broadminded "men of the world," who are not circumscribed by business or profession. There may be no money-making power, but there is a mind-developing force, in the digging of Greek roots. However, seeing the drift of "practical" criticism, I have had it in mind to suggest one way of disarming it ; — by removing Greek from a place where it is comparatively unnecessary, and gives force to such attacks, and by putting it in a place where the study of it would be more permanently useful. With this purpose, I submit these arguments, through the medium of this magazine, to the consideration of lovers of Greek classics. Have I failed to establish my contention; or have I suggested a plan which is worthy of practical adoption? Please give your candid and unprejudiced opinions.