QUESTIONS

1. Give an account of the tribal migrations out of which the Hellenes or Greeks presently emerged triumphant and of the origin of Hellenic tribes.

2. What was the peril to which the Persian War exposed Greek development? Explain the course of events and the issue. 3. Sketch briefly the golden age of Athens, her terrible fall, and the end of Greek independence.

4. Show that the same individualism present in Greek wars and supremacies was the dominating thing in Greek religion.

5. Give an account of the Greek gods and the weak moral guarantees of Greek ideas about the "future state."

6. Discuss the Greek oracles, together with the temples and priests.

7. Describe the sacred games of the Greeks, and show how they served as a means in the development of the Greeks.

8. Account for the character of education in the Homeric age. 9. What was the origin of Sparta? For what social system does this origin account? How did Lycurgus organize Sparta for her destiny?

10. Explain the detailed fitness of means and ends in the Lycurgian scheme of Spartan education. Judge the system in detail.

11. Greek individualism is seen to the best advantage in Ionian Athens. The story of transition from monarchy to democracy is conspicuously the story of individualism. Tell this story.

12. What were the distinctive ideals of Athenian education? 13. Explain the system of means and ends in Athenian education, going into full details. Judge the system by its results to history and in the light of psychology, sociology, etc.

14. Account for the distinction between the "new" and the "old" in Greek education.

15. Who were the Greek Sophists? What produced them? Describe their work of "adjustment" in detail and explain why the conservatives opposed the Sophists.

16. Account for the rise of Greek philosophy.

17. How may we account for the high purpose of Pythagoras and for the impress which he left on education?

18. Describe his work at Crotona, going into the details of curriculum and method. Judge his pedagogy by modern standards.

19. What can you find in the making of Socrates to help us account for his ideas and for the force which he gave his ideas? 20. Explain the philosophic position of Socrates over against that of Protagoras.

21. Distinguish the methods by which Socrates hoped to make men think for themselves, and choose between them.

22. Whom do we usually associate most intimately with Socrates in the list of his disciples? What did Xenophon contribute to education?

23. Use "the making of Plato" to account as fully as possible for the loftiness of his ideals and for the immortal force which he gave these ideals.

24. Describe the services which Plato rendered the cause of education through his "Academy" and his "Republic."

25. Examine the fitness of means to ends as set forth in Plato's "Republic."

26. Why can the twentieth century not accept Plato's "Republic" outright?

27. To what extent do the influences which helped to make Aristotle account for the views which he held and for the place which he holds to-day?

28. Explain the services which Aristotle rendered the cause of education through his "Lyceum" and his books. Compare his "Politics" with Plato's "Republic." Estimate the worth of Aristotle in the light of modern standards.

29. Account for the philosophical schools, the later schools of rhetoric, and the Greek universities. Examine them, going into the details.

CHAPTER VIII

EDUCATION OF THE ANCIENT ROMANS

ROME

The "Latins" of Alba Longa, who founded Rome 753 B. C., if tradition holds, were Aryans, like the Greeks, and a part of the same great migration. But the Etruscans, whose presence north of the Tiber induced the Latins to found Rome, were, if we mistake not, identical with the Pelasgians noticed in Chapter VII, and therefore a Turano-Semitic people. The conquest of the Etruscan Veii (396 B. C.) by the Latins was the beginning of Aryan supremacy; but the usual amalgamation of stocks produced the compositeness of Roman ideals and Roman history as known to later centuries. "The Turanians contributed the bulk of the religious notions and rites; the Semites the prosaic practicality and thirst for power; the Aryans, with their language, their political forms." *

Ambition. The origin of Rome, and the perils to which hostile neighbors afterward exposed her very existence, soon produced the co-operative ambition which finally gave her a world-empire. The first task to which this co-operative ambition of composite Rome applied herself was the conquest of all Italy. This task had been all but accomplished when Pyrrhus, cousin of Alexander the Great, had been forced to * Davidson's "History of Education,” p. 107.

abandon Tarentum, the heart of Magna Græcia (272 B. C.). But Rome, now master of Italy, coveted the supremacy to which Phoenician Carthage had attained on sea, and thus came the three Punic wars, stretching over more than a century, Rome finally conquering Carthage (146 B. C.). In the meantime ambitious Rome had conquered almost all the lands that touch the sea, including not only northern Africa but parts of Spain, Asia Minor, and Greece.

During all these centuries, reaching from 509 B. C. to 146 B. C., Roman ambition had not ceased to be co-operative, and Rome had continued to be a republic, but out of the wars and turmoils that followed the conquests for a century emerged the fateful Triumvirates. Another step-and co-operative ambition had succumbed to personal ambition-the republic was dead-empire was born. The story of the twelve Cæsars and their successors, together with the gradual decay and final fall of Rome (476 A. D.), is too well known to require repetition.

Individuality. The co-operative ambition of Rome grew out of the common peril to which both patrician and plebeian were exposed, and gave rise first to the Laws of the Twelve Tables (451 B. C.) and later to the Laws of Licinius (367 B. C.). While, therefore, in Rome as in Sparta, war became the business of the state, the Roman state as a social whole saved herself -and individuality-from caste limitations, and honored all human relations that served both the individual and the state. This reconciliation between the Roman social whole and individuality explains the well-known reverence for home ties and useful occupations. Thus the "sense" of justice for which Greek

individuality kept striving was concretely realized in Roman life. While, as a consequence, the Roman people as a whole were sedate, serious, and self-controlled, they were also proud and satisfied. "To be a Roman was to be greater than a king."

Religion. "The prosaic practicality and thirst for power" the Semitic trait so conspicuous in Roman ambition and Roman vocations-appears as a utilitarian, or practical, tendency in their religion. For, although the Romans, as we should expect, held fundamentally to the same nature-worship as their Greek cousins, they did not clothe their gods in beautiful human shapes, and worship them in joyous play, but rather felt their presence as moral forces with whom serious bargains must be made, and to whom placating sacrifices must be offered. This feeling is seen especially in the reverence paid to the household "Lares and Penates," and the guardian "Vestal Virgins." To the former, which typified family unity, frequent sacrifices were made by the father at shrines within the home itself; and to the latter, which typified the larger family, or state, the Vestal Virgins as state guardians sacrificed at public shrines or temples.* Originally the king was the chief priest, and the pontifex maximus of the republic was a civil functionary.

The more serious and dignified aspect of Roman religion held fast even when conquering Rome in her new intellectualism and æsthetic hunger took the Greek gods bodily into her heart. It was only when Rome in her later general decay made place in her "Pantheon" for the gods of all nations that religion lost its power as a moral sanction.

* Graves' "History of Education," vol. I, p. 240.