[a] Quintilian thinks the first elements of education so highly
material, that he has two long chapters on the subject. He requires,
in the first place, that the language of the nurses should be pure and
correct. Their manners are of great importance, but, he adds, let them
speak with propriety. It is to them that the infant first attends; he
listens, and endeavours to imitate them. The first colour, imbibed by
yarn or thread, is sure to last. What is bad, generally adheres
tenaciously. Let the child, therefore, not learn in his infancy, what
he must afterwards take pains to unlearn. _Ante omnia, ne sit vitiosus
sermo nutricibus. Et morum quidem in his haud dubiè prior ratio est;
rectè tamen etiam loquantur. Has primùm audiet puer; harum verba
effingere imitando conabitur. Et naturâ tenacissimi sumus eorum, quæ
rudibus annis percipimus; nec lanarum colores, quibus simplex ille
candor mutatus est, elui possunt. Et hæc ipsa magis pertinaciter
hærent, quæ deteriora sunt. Non assuescat ergo, ne dum infans quidem
est, sermoni, qui dediscendus est._ Quint. lib. i. cap. 1. Plutarch
has a long discourse on the breeding of children, in which all
mistakes are pointed out, and the best rules enforced with great
acuteness of observation.
[b] Juvenal has one entire satire on the subject of education:
Nil dictu fœdum visuque hæc limina tangat,
Intra quæ puer est. Procul hinc, procul inde puellæ
Lenonum, et cantus pernoctantis parasiti.
Maxima debetur puero reverentia.
SAT. xiv. ver. 44.
Suffer no lewdness, no indecent speech,
Th' apartment of the tender youth to reach.
Far be from thence the glutton parasite,
Who sings his drunken catches all the night.
Boys from their parents may this rev'rence claim.
DRYDEN'S JUVENAL.
[c] The rage of the Romans for the diversions of the theatre, and
public spectacles of every kind, is often mentioned by Horace,
Juvenal, and other writers under the emperors. Seneca says, that, at
one time, three ways were wanted to as many different theatres:
_tribus eodem tempore theatris viæ postulantur_. And again, the most
illustrious of the Roman youth are no better than slaves to the
pantomimic performers. _Ostendam nobilissimos juvenes mancipia
pantomimorum._ Epist. 47. It was for this reason that Petronius lays
it down as a rule to be observed by the young student, never to list
himself in the parties and factions of the theatre:
----Neve plausor in scenâ
Sedeat redemptus, histrioniæ addictus.
It is well known, that theatrical parties distracted the Roman
citizens, and rose almost to phrensy. They were distinguished by the
_green_ and the _blue_, Caligula, as we read in Suetonius, attached
himself to the former, and was so fond of the charioteers, who wore
green liveries, that he lived for a considerable time in the stables,
where their horses were kept. _Prasinæ factioni ita addictus et
deditus, ut cœnaret in stabulo assidue et maneret. Life of Caligula_,
s. 55. Montesquieu reckons such party-divisions among the causes that
wrought the downfall of the empire. Constantinople, he says, was split
into two factions, the _green_ and the _blue_, which owed their origin
to the inclination of the people to favour one set of charioteers in
the circus rather than another. These two parties raged in every city
throughout the empire, and their fury rose in proportion to the number
of inhabitants. Justinian favoured the _blues_, who became so elate
with pride, that they trampled on the laws. All ties of friendship,
all natural affection, and all relative duties, were extinguished.
Whole families were destroyed; and the empire was a scene of anarchy
and wild contention. He, who felt himself capable of the most
atrocious deeds, declared himself a BLUE, and the GREENS were
massacred with impunity. _Montesquieu, Grandeur et Décadence des
Romains_, chap. xx.
[d] Quintilian, in his tenth book, chap. 1. has given a full account
of the best Greek and Roman poets, orators, and historians; and in b.
ii. ch. 6, he draws up a regular scheme for the young student to
pursue in his course of reading. There are, he says, two rocks, on
which they may split. The first, by being led by some fond admirer of
antiquity to set too high a value on the manner of Cato and the
Gracchi; for, in that commerce, they will be in danger of growing dry,
harsh, and rugged. The strong conception of those men will be beyond
the reach of tender minds. Their style, indeed, may be copied; and the
youth may flatter himself, when he has contracted the rust of
antiquity, that he resembles the illustrious orators of a former age.
On the other hand, the florid decorations and false glitter of the
moderns may have a secret charm, the more dangerous, and seductive, as
the petty flourishes of our new way of writing may prove acceptable to
the youthful mind. _Duo autem genera maximè cavenda pueris puto: unum,
ne quis eos antiquitatis nimius admirator in Gracchorum, Catonisque,
et aliorum similium lectione durescere velit. Erunt enim horridi atque
jejuni. Nam neque vim eorum adhuc intellectu consequentur; et
elocutione, quæ tum sine dubio erat optima, sed nostris temporibus
aliena, contenti, quod est pessimum, similes sibi magnis viris
videbuntur. Alterum, quod huic diversum est, ne recentis hujus
lasciviæ flosculis capti, voluptate quâdam pravâ deliniantur, ut
prædulce illud genus, et puerilibus ingeniis hoc gratius, quo propius
est, adament._ Such was the doctrine of Quintilian. His practice, we
may be sure, was consonant to his own rules. Under such a master the
youth of Rome might be initiated in science, and formed to a just
taste for eloquence and legitimate composition; but one man was not
equal to the task. The rhetoricians and pedagogues of the age
preferred the novelty and meretricious ornaments of the style then in
vogue.