Why Latin?

Today I want to address a question that comes up over and over again in Classical Schools:

Why in the world are you teaching Latin? Why teach that old, dead, impractical language.

...

First, let's talk about practicality. What does it mean for a topic to be "practical" and is that the determining factor in the selection of curriculum? I think that when someone says that something they or their child is learning is not practical, it's shorthand for this question: When am I ever going to use this? Or maybe it's another related question: How will this help me in my career?

Now, students say this about pretty much everything they study in school. It's not only Latin, but Math, Science, Grammar, History, and more. Students question the value of anything that they aren't immediately interested in.

But, to be honest, practicality is a really hard thing to pin down. Is it practical to know the difference between a rational and an irrational number? Is it practical to know the difference between a transitive and an intransitive sentence?  Maybe it depends on the career you choose. So should we only study those things that pertain to some future career we imagine we will have?

And then, what should we do with things like the arts? What practical benefit is there to studying and practicing sculpture, music, or painting? Being familiar with DaVinci's Mona Lisa or Michelangelo's David won't pay the bills. And only a tiny fraction of students will be able to make a career out of music or art. So should we just jettison the study of those "impractical" things from our curriculum?

I think most people would say, "no," you've got to study art and music. Because these are things that enrich our lives in a variety of ways, and studying and practicing them somehow deepens the joy of our humanity. 

And much the same thing could be said about the study of Latin and other classical languages. Language itself is a supremely human endeavor. Think about it: The study and use of language forms the basis of all education. Language is how we communicate. Without it, teaching and learning are practically impossible. And the study of Latin, in particular, opens to us a door to a whole realm of true, good and beautiful words and ideas from Western History.

So even if Latin was impractical, that does NOT mean that we shouldn't study it. But in fact, the study of Latin is not impractical. There are a large number of very practical benefits that come from learning any language, and learning Latin in particular.

What are these benefits? Well, Latin is a tremendous support in the learning and understanding of English grammar and vocabulary. My own experience is a common one. My first classical language was Greek, but I can say confidently that I didn't really understand English grammar until I studied Greek. Part of the reason that this is true is that both Greek and Latin are very precise languages with very clear grammatical rules. The process of seeing how Latin grammar and English grammar relate to one another helps clarify how English actually works. And that leads to true mastery of the English language.

In addition, a very large number of English words are related to Greek and Latin roots. Knowing these roots helps students in both spelling and in understanding the meanings and appropriate uses of these English words. Adding to that is the fact that several modern-day disciplines, including medicine, biology, and other sciences, still use Latin for terminology.

Finally, the process of learning another language is very beneficial to the brain. Langauge learning opens the brain to new way sof thinking and approaching problems. And children are especially adept at language learning due to their brain "plasticity." The older you are the harder it is to learn a new language. But the more languages you learn, and the earlier you learn them, the easier the whole process of language learning becomes. Perhaps in a mono-lingual society, language learning would have no practical value at all. And yet today we know that countless people long for the ability to communicate in languages that are not their native tongue. It is a desirable and useful skill to have experience in language learning. And profitable. I know of a number of people whose pay is higher, simply because they know a second language. 

And yet for me these practical arguments are secondary at best. What do I mean by that?

Well first let me say that it's really remarkable that the question of why we study Latin even comes up. It shows us just how far education has declined in the last 100 years. In the history of Western Education the value of Latin was almost never questioned. 

Even in the early to mid 20th Century, "Latin was commonly required for admission to college and was seen as the mark of an educated individual." In fact, many of our own grandparents, if they attended secondary school, had some basic Latin education, even in our local public schools. No one had to defend Latin. It was simply obvious that it was important and valuable.

Just a century ago it was common for even the moderately educated person to known basic Latin. Recently, I read the science fiction classic, The Island of Dr. Moreau, by H.G. Wells. The book, published in 1896, describes the frightening process by which the fictional Dr. Moreau attempts to make animals into "human creatures" through surgical alterations. 

At a key moment, the main character, Mr Prendick, who was abandoned on Moreau's island asks Moreau to explain the nature of the beasts found on the island: 

"Who are these creatures?"

Not wanting the "creatures" to know what he's saying, Moreau responds:

"Latin, Prendick! bad Latin, schoolboy Latin; but try and understand. Hi non sunt homines; sunt animalia qui nos habemus—vivisected. A humanising process.” - The Island of Dr. Moreau (Chapter XIII), H.G. Wells

What's striking here is that the text of Wells' novel never offers a translation of the Latin. It simply assumes that anyone with a basic, "schoolboy" education would be able to read and understand this "bad Latin." And beyond that there is another subtle suggestion here: the uneducated will not be able to understand.

We should pause here to offer a caution. The knowledge of Latin or any other particular discipline or area of study is never to be the litmus test of our humanity. No one is a better person or worthy of more dignity because they learned Latin. Nor is anyone a lesser human because they have not. But the capacity for this kind of education is certainly a treasure that sets humans, made in the image of God, apart from and above the animals. And we ought not to discard this treasure.

Which makes me wonder what Wells would think of a culture that has, since his day, almost entirely abandoned the study of Latin, and other similarly impractical disciplines.

Actually, we don't need to wonder. In another of his famous works, The Time Machine, Wells tells of the experience of the time traveller who visits the humanity of the distant future:

"A [strange] thing I soon discovered about [the people from the future] was their lack of interest...They would come to me with eager cries of astonishment, like children, but, like children they would soon stop examining me, and wander away after some other toy...As I walked I was watching for every impression that could possibly help to explain the condition of ruinous splendour in which I found the world—for ruinous it was....It seemed to me that I had happened upon humanity upon the wane. The ruddy sunset set me thinking of the sunset of mankind....I thought of the physical slightness of the people, their lack of intelligence, and those big abundant ruins, and it strengthened my belief..." - The Time Machine (Chapter VI), H.G. Wells

The Time Traveler is not speaking about Latin per se, but about the general state of a culture which has lost its will to work hard, its curiosity to learn, and its ambition to grow and improve; and which instead is focused on toys and other childish amusements. Such a culture, the Time Traveler believes, is a culture coming to an end, whose people are weak, lacking intelligence, and willing to let the achievements and knowledge of the past fall into ruins. 

H.G. Wells' assumption that the knowledge of Classical Languages is a mark of one who is educated is not exceptional. Over and over again, as we read the old books that form our Western Heritage we find references to and quotations from great Latin and Greek texts, and it is simply assumed that we, who are educated, will be able to decode and understand these and other old, "dead" languages. How shocked would their authors be to find that this is not the case?

It was only in the early to mid 20th century, that things began to move so decidedly in this direction. After the Great Wars, education shifted away from a focus on the culture, history, achievements and values of Western Civilization. The old, dead languages were among the many treasures that were abandoned as too difficult and too impractical for the modern industrial and technological society.

But the loss of Latin (and Greek), has been accompanied by a slow and steady decline of our knowledge and connection with the history, culture, literature, and values of our great Western Christian civilization. And this disconnection has proven in many ways to be a slippery slope. The more we abandon of our cultural heritage, the more of it we are willing to abandon, until we are left with only a few scraps of it. And the worse and more ignorant we are for it.

The damage is already done. Few of today's parents know any Latin or Greek. Most feel ill-equipped to teach their children even the most basic of subjects, let alone those that are marks of a truly classical education. Over the last few generations, a new and self-imposed Dark Ages has descended on us, so that now subjects like Latin seem to us, too  difficult, too distant, and too impractical for our attention. We believe this even though the dimmest schoolboy of the late 1800s could have grasped them.

Don't get me wrong, Latin is difficult. Learning it requires hard work. Learning math, science, grammar, and history are also difficult, if they are truly to be mastered. But sadly our appetite for hard work is today at an all-time low. This is evident not only in our resistance to studying Latin, but also in our fearful or even suspicious stance toward the great old books and original sources of our Western Heritage. And as further evidence of our decline, there is little interest among most students in doing anything more than getting their education "over with," so that they can move on with life.

All of this is a tremendous loss.

Ultimately that's why classical schools want to go backward, in order to recapture whatever we can of the old curriculum and the old ways. We want to read old books and study old languages, because they, in fact, are not dead, but alive. And they have tremendous gifts to give us: gifts that our forefathers cherished and that we ought not to simply throw away as though they were useless relics; gifts that will help us truly understand and live out our purpose in this world. 

So instead of only doing the bare minimum and onlyl focusing on what our culture today deems, "practical," we hope to claim and receive the gifts given to us by past generations, through diligent study and hard work. Because they are the gifts that have formed our history and culture and made us who we are. And these days it seems like we really desperately need a deeper connection with our great history and identity.

Without a doubt this is why the great C.S. Lewis remarked about his study of the classical languages that

"Hardly any lawful price would seem to me too high for what I have gained by being made to learn Latin and Greek.” - C.S. Lewis

Far from being dead or impractical, the Latin and Greek languages are a key part of the rich heritage of Western Culture entrusted to us by our ancestors, and that's why Classical schools have always embraced them.