-the humanities in the widest and noblest sense, fragrant with heroic memories, with lofty ideals, with holy aspirations. The schools that leave this range of mind to choice or chance, to be taken or left at the pupil's whim or caprice, are false to the very idea of culture. And in the humanistic group Greek still holds the center. In the memorial of the Philosophical Faculty of Berlin asking the government to reconsider its action in opening the universities to graduates of the Realschulen, professors of mathematics, astronomy, chemistry, zoölogy, economics, philosophy, English, and German- each speaking from the standpoint of his own specialty — pronounced the non-classical men inferior to the classical when it came to university work in the very subjects emphasized in the Realschule training. And the judgment of the faculty is summed up by Rector Hofman (a chemist) in these strong words:

That all efforts to find a substitute for the classical languages, whether in mathematics, in the modern languages, or in the natural sciences, have been thus far unsuccessful; that after long and vain search we must always come back finally to the result of centuries of experience; that the surest instrument that can be used in the training of youth is given us in the study of the languages, the literature, and the works of art of classical antiquity.

In this verdict we may with full warrant read the specific vindication of Greek, for the Realschüler, as such, bring to the university a sevenyears' training in Latin.. But as an accomplished Latinist - Professor West, of Princeton-has recently urged (Atlantic Monthly, December, 1899, p. 827), Latin can never be taught in its full attractiveness without Greek.

It may be taught with advantage, with great advantage, but without Greek it cannot be taught to the best advantage, because it is cut off from a large range of important illustration and support. Classes studying Greek and Latin regularly surpass classes studying Latin alone.

And this for a very plain reason: Greek is in Latin, but Latin is not in Greek. And Palgrave's claim for the study of classical literature as the only road to mastery of English is yet more valid for Greek as the indispensable key to Latin. The young Grecian finds himself at home. with Cicero and Virgil; the young Roman has a world of things to learn before he can breathe the atmosphere of Plato and Sophocles. And so, as Mr. West tells us, to get the best Latin you must study Greek. And he adds:

....

The two are one study, after all, and the one is Greek. . . . . Greek is today the schoolmaster of studies as truly as ancient Greece was the teacher of the young western world.

As an ideal discipline, then, Greek holds a unique position; but we are told that as actually taught it is dust and ashes, dry bones, unrelated scraps, gerund-grinding, et id omne. And yet the great apostle of modern studies among us holds up "the training given by the classical sides of high schools in Latin and Greek" as the standard of merit to

be aimed at in the teaching of "modern languages, science, and history." (President Eliot in the Atlantic Monthly for October, 1899, p. 144.) And Dr. Andrews favors the teaching of Greek in the high schools because it is taught more fruitfully and economically than the sciences. But how stands the case in college? That there is unfruitful teaching in all lines goes without saying-Greek not excepted; but that Greek enjoys a bad pre-eminence in barrenness I cannot for a moment admit. On the contrary, even an average teacher is quite as likely to find inspiration in it, to say the least, as in any modern study; and, once inspired himself, he has the most inspiring of all subjects wherewith to work upon the mind of youth. Professor Münsterberg blesses the dispensation that steeped him in Greek as a German gymnasium boy, tho it brought him to his chair at Harvard without ever having spoken a word of English, because in Greek, he found his inspiration as a psychologist, and so had something worth saying in English when he got to it. And, on a rather large and varied experience in the calling, I make bold to say that Greek as taught in our colleges is as fruitful as any subject in the curriculum. Other things being equal, including that vital factor of the teacher's personality, I believe it the most fruitful study we have. It opens wider and higher horizons, it admits to nobler society, it yields a larger return in fresh ideas and grand ideals than any modern subject. The ethical value of Greek study has been called in question; but no open-minded student who approaches Greek literature in a teachable spirit can fail to find in it a means of grace as well as an instrument of culture. The great Greek writers are ethical to the core, as clean and wholesome in their tone and tendency as they are matchless in their art. As moral teachers the Greek tragedians are hardly second to the Hebrew prophets; and they appeal to us the more because they are our kinsmen. And what is Plato but a library of ethics-not simply in the abstract, but applied and hammered in? The platonic Socrates is a preacher of righteousness, who leaves us no ease in Zion, who strips us of the last rag of our conceit, and compels us to reckon squarely with reason and conscience. And he is still the best normal school we have.

Not only have we the original and inspiring sources, but they are practically inexhaustible. In range few teachers have the advantage of us. If we keep threshing over old straw, it is because the root of the matter is not in us. Even the secondary teacher may prepare eight successive classes in Homer without ever repeating a book. In the drama one may teach many years without repeating a play; so in Plato and Demosthenes. And, taking the extant classical Greek literature, one may teach a long lifetime without running short of fresh material. And now that long-lost authors are rising again from their tombs, we can set no limit to our potential resources in the literature alone, to say nothing of the history, archæology, and art.

The stock indictment against Greek has another count; not only is it useless, but it crowds out what is useful. It must lie over and make room. In fact, Greek is not exclusive of other subjects, but they of Greek. As Professor Clapp, of California, puts it:

The classical graduate may be an expert political economist, while the social science graduate knows nothing of Homer. The classical graduate may have had forty or fifty hours of natural science, but the science graduate has never read a page of Plato. He will have to go to the dictionary for the meaning of the scientific terms which he uses every day, for most of them are pure Greek, and his classical friend can interpret them at a glance. The classical graduate can get more mathematics than the average professor of mathematics will ever use, but the graduate in engineering will never understand the classical allusions in English literature. The classical course is the truly liberal course, because it is the broadest.

And now how are we to shape our Greek program to the new conditions? With all protection broken down, and with every Philistine hand against it, Greek must depend for its survival (1) on its own inherent and inexhaustible vitality; (2) on a just social recognition of its unique. culture value; and (3) on the wisdom of teachers in planning courses and their power in vitalizing them. On the first head, I have said enough. On the second, I may quote two of the seven "admonitions" with which Dr. Andrews closes the paper already referred to:

All believers in a rich and rounded social education should feel, think, and act appreciatively toward Greek study.

Colleges and high schools with reasonably ample facilities should be encouraged to continue teaching Greek if already doing so; if not, to begin.

So far so good. Society owes it to itself to give Greek a living chance in the academy, the high school, and the old-fashioned college, as well as to make adequate provision for it in the University. And we who teach Greek owe it to society to make our teaching fresh and vital and inspiring; to be ourselves true interpreters of antiquity in terms of modern life and thought; in short, to keep the living waters of old Greece flowing fresh in the currents of young America.

To accomplish this our studies must contemplate discipline, enlightenment, and inspiration. As I conceive, these ends may best be met by a program ranging somewhat as follows:

1. Careful foundation work in the language. We must master the vehicle, which is itself among the marvelous achievements of the Greeks and our key to all the rest.

2. Critical reading, never remitted but never exclusive, of masterpieces.

3. Free reading for literature only-e. g., all Homer; all Herodotus ; much of Plato.

4. Still wider reading of Greek authors in English, where adequate versions exist, or rapid interpretation by the teacher, combined with literary history and criticism.

5. The study of Greek history as written by the Greeks and illuminated by archæological discovery. This should make the student at home under Greek skies and in the Greek atmosphere.

6. The study of Greek life, public and private, in the light of the literature and monuments, to put the student in touch with the men and women of Homer, with the contemporaries of Pericles, with the Athenians of today.

7. The study of archæology and art—a subject of the highest culture value, and one whose material is increasing every hour.

This is but a tentative program, admitting of indefinite variation and expansion, and to be divided between the secondary school and the college, as occasion requires.

To speak of the future of Greek studies may seem to some to savor of irony; but, as an optimist, who believes that on the whole humanity is moving forward and not backward, and that it cannot and will not "afford to lose out of its inheritance any part of the best work that has been done for it in the past," I confidently expect Greek to outride the storm now blowing as she has weathered many a gale already. More than that, I hope to see her emerge from the present tribulation in newness of life and plentitude of power.

EDUCATION IN THE APPRECIATION OF ART CHANCELLOR WILLIAM BAYARD CRAIG, DRAKE UNIVERSITY, DES MOINES, IA. In our young and vigorous country we are great in science, respectable in religion, and weaklings in art. We have been too busy with the useful and practical in the material development of our new country to know or care much about art.

In the matter of government we have discovered foundation principles, and know how to talk about the rights of man and the functions of the state. An average American citizen feels himself competent to appraise the values of the various elements that enter into the ceremonial and pageantry of the coronation of a king. He is no longer overawed by the traditions and claims of hereditary monarchs. He is a fearless critic in political science.

It is a different matter, however, when the same average American citizen is asked to give his opinion of a work of art, a painting by Corot or Millet; a figure by French or St. Gaudens; or a building by Richardson or Mayer. All self-reliance and boldness are gone. He will probably utter a phrase of fashionable criticism, or, if he ventures an original remark, will pass on with a horrible feeling of uncertainty, fearing lest he has said something flat, ridiculous, or both.

The fact is that in art matters the American people are in the provincial period; they depend on Europe for their ideas and doctrine in art,

as our fathers depended on England for ideas of government in the old colonial days. We are not appreciative students of art production and values, and will not have opinions of our own until we are delivered from slavery to conventional traditions, by learning and applying for ourselves the first principles of art.

We must be able to write a declaration of independence in the realm of art, as we have in the realm of politics. This is the essential beginning for a great national art that shall be the expression of the larger life, the new conditions, and modern ideals of our American civilization. The art of Europe expresses the life of Europe for a thousand years and more. We can make it ours for purposes of study, but it can never be our national art the expression of our own life; that we must create for ourselves from the ground up.

In art development, as in everything else of a broad national character, we must lay the foundation in the hearts and minds of the common people. It is not true that our meager development in art is a racial defect. Art is not the birthright alone of the Latin peoples. It may be granted that the Italians, French, and Spaniards are more emotional in temperament, more sensitive to the appeal of beauty, more responsive to the efforts of their artists, and thus more easily stimulated to the point where art production begins; but the English speaking race are also, in their own characteristic manner, profoundly artistic. Chaucer sang of the common life of a practical people in a way that leaves no doubt as to the art impulse in the English heart. The English blood was warmed by intermixture with the original Celts in the island of Great Britain, by the later invasion of Celts from the continent, and by the conquest of England by the Latinized Normans. This intermingling produced a new and powerful race, that gave the world, not only the splendid pages of achievement and conquest in the times of Elizabeth, but also that unequaled chorus of singers and writers who group around the peerless Shakespeare. As the race of English-speaking people have spread out to the east in Australia, and to the west in America, their power and artistic genius have become more and more conspicuous. There is no room to doubt their capacity for art appreciation and production.

In our own land, the poets of New England, the novelists of the South, the sculptors of the West, the painters of New York, the White City on the inland sea, that arose as by enchantment, more beautiful than a dream, are all sure prophecies of the coming glory of American art.

How can it be otherwise? We are young and enthusiastic. Our ideals are high, our love of the beauty of nature profound and sincere, our feeling deep and strong. When we turn our attention seriously to the study and production of art, we shall greatly excel.

The purpose of this paper is to call the attention of college men to the need of education in the appreciation of art.