The paper analyses pre-Christian views on education and pedagogics on the example of «Institutio oratoria» [1] by Marcus Fabius Quintilian and defines the degree of influence of ancient views on modern pedagogical approaches.
Keywords: Ancient Rome, parenting, approach, reasonable measure, ancient education, modern education.
Marcus Fabius Quintilian was born around 35 A.D. in Calagurris (now Calahorra) in Spain. He received a good education in Rome, where his father taught rhetoric, and then returned to his homeland. Quintilian himself later moved to Rome and continued his father's work, and moreover being the first to be paid at public expense. After losing his wife and two children, he stopped teaching and became tutor to the Emperor Domitian's great-nephews, dedicating the rest of his life to this.
His main work is the Institutio oratoria (Oratorical Instruction). The work is very wide-ranging and covers a variety of topics: stylistics of the text, the performing arts of the orator, elementary instruction and the education of children. Quintilian regarded Cicero as his role model in rhetoric, but he goes beyond the dry theory and often cites his own experience as an example. Indeed, in addition to teaching eloquence to young men, he himself appeared at court trials, unlike many other rhetors who often had no judicial practice.
The Romans in general paid a great deal of attention to the education of children. Quintilian, being himself an experienced educator, also pursued moral objectives in his education. In his opinion the moral orientation of education is also very important: rhetoric is put at the service of pedagogy.
The main points of the pedagogical approach of Quintilian
In the first book, Quintilian predominantly writes about the education of children. He himself, as has already been said, had a great deal of experience in pedagogy. His most important thesis is that «children seldom lack natural ability; more often they lack care». At the same time he gives detailed recommendations as to what exactly this care should be. A father should pay a lot of attention to his son from birth and «put his hope in him» (spem capiat). Quintilian, however, disputes the popular opinion that most people are not capable of learning. He concedes that people come in all sorts of intellectual capacities, but this simply means that one person may achieve more than another, but to find one who through hard work does not achieve anything is almost impossible. And that is precisely why parental care, and to some extent their faith (that very hope) in their children is important. Besides even in modern times it is one of the basic principles of education — a careful attitude towards children, which will certainly stimulate them to any activity, including learning.
Quintilian places no less importance on the child's environment. Nurse mothers should be well versed (of course the emphasis on 'reprimand' is due to the fact that education for Quintilian is primarily concerned with rhetoric); the freedmen appointed as tutors for children should preferably be knowledgeable people. It is also important that the parents are educated, not only the father, but also the mother of the pupil. Quintilian is probably one of the first to address the issue of women's education, which was of course sketchy at that time. Women in Rome were usually prepared for domestic life rather than political life, and of course this severely limited the level and variety of their education. He also points out the influence of the peers, about whom he writes as he does about the nurse.
From the first few chapters, one can see how thorough and comprehensive the author's approach to education is. He does not limit it to lessons and the selection of reading material, but pays attention even to secondary factors. For example, he writes about the age at which children should begin their education. Quintilian believes that it is not necessary to wait until the age of seven and education can begin even earlier (in his time in Rome education began at about age 7 under the supervision of the «magister ludi»). However, he urges caution against a child hating the process of learning without having time to love it. So he advises turning learning into fun, a game. This approach is very reminiscent of modern trends towards gamification in education. At the same time, he also points to a typically ancient worldview principle — the agonal spirit, i.e. the spirit of competition, as a way of encouraging learning. We cannot, of course, say that such an approach is present as a real method in modern times, but this kind of approach often arises among students, especially at the initial stages of education.
The treatment and approach to teaching children
Quintilian indicates as a basic principle an individual approach to each pupil. «The good mentor should know the mind and disposition of the youngster he has been entrusted with». Hence the way and order of training should be formed for the best result. However, in his opinion, one should not exaggerate the importance of this approach, so he derives the concept of the general method. That is not necessary to go into full individualism and specialization of education, but to give all-round education, even if his student will have to work hard. «Why else should we study if only natural gifts would be enough for us? The more talented the pupil, the more he should be burdened with additional tasks. Quintilian, in other words, believes that talent is not narrow, but rather allows the individual to deepen his level of education in multiple areas. In general, his ideas are expressed in the phrase: «Not to make him do what he can't do; not to alienate him from what he can do well and not to force him to do what he can't do». In fact, the same kind of division into specialisation and generalism is present in contemporary education, and very often these different approaches are at the root of the dichotomy of learning. It seems to us that Quintilian strucks the perfect balance between the methods. Of course, it is worth noting that with the current development of the level of science, it is difficult to maintain this balance in a reasonable measure. It is impossible to get a good education, applicable in practice, in a large number of sciences and professions, so specialisation seems to be the most logical approach. However, a complete rejection of related or secondary subjects (of course, we are talking primarily about school, for universities specialisation is often necessary, but also to a reasonable extent) leads to the fact that a person not having the proper level of training does not critically perceive any information on a non-core subject. As an example, it is possible to give the big growth in Russia of quantity of «freaks» in history studies, since the end of 80th years. And for almost the past 40 years, not only has their community not diminished, but it is constantly replenished by new supporters of pseudo-scientific and anti-scientific concepts, just from completely different spheres of education. (The notorious Fomenko is, by profile education, quite far from historical science).
Although Quintilian often points out the need for constant and hard work during training, he understands the importance of rest and relaxation. «Not only because continuous work is unnatural, but also because diligence depends on goodwill which is impossible to produce by force. The mind, which is characterized by freedom, becomes livelier». Quintilian's approach in general is free of any compulsion. So, he was one of the first to completely renounce corporal punishment of students and vehemently opposed it (the same idea was expressed before him by Varron and Cicero, and more after his ideas adopted by Erasmus of Rotterdam). Thus he even lays down bases of pedagogical psychology: «Add as well that at beating, from fear or pain such obscenities happen about which one cannot speak: the child from such shame comes to despondency, misses and from company of others leaves».
Whom Quintilian considers a good teacher?
Quintilian is quite verbose in describing the image of a good teacher, but the main feature of this image is, of course, moderation. It should be evident both in the process of teaching and in communication with the pupils. Furthermore, he considers a good teacher to be an interested teacher who «willingly answers those who ask, and who does not ask, prompts those who do not ask with his own questions». Quintilian understands how human nature works, and therefore notes that the teacher should correct mistakes without pressure on the student and without irritation. «For many people there is a growing aversion to learning as corrections from some teachers' mouths look like outright hatred. (The «psychologism» of his methods is also evident in this.)
Quintilian is not a formalist. Rules (methodological) for him are only recommendations, so he himself, citing his own ideas, points out that they are not «immutable laws». He believes the situation needs to be taken into account and it «may be reasonable to step back a little from the usual way». Moreover, if the teacher does not cope well with the task, he «should not blame the rules, but himself». That is, Quintilian holds each teacher personally responsible for the learning process and this approach does not allow for hiding behind a bureaucratic or methodological framework.
Conclusion
Quintilian's influence on literary criticism and pedagogy was particularly great from the fifteenth to the seventeenth centuries. He was read and used by such famous figures of the Renaissance and Reformation as Lorenzo Vallat, Erasmus of Rotterdam, Martin Luther, Melanchthon and many others. Somewhat later it was also addressed by Goethe. The decline of Quintilian's influence is helped by his falling out of the reading canon of the Jesuit colleges and the contempt for rhetoric that became fashionable in the Romantic era.
Although in the twentieth century the works of Quintilian are not becoming popular anew, suggestions have sometimes been made, so to speak, to «remember the classics». For example, Luciano Albini (Pope John Paul I), in a message, expresses the wish that the Quintilian methods and contents should not be consigned to oblivion.
And yet Quintilian's methods cannot be fully borrowed into the modern educational system. After all, his approach primarily combines education and moral education, and this synthesis takes place within the framework of rhetoric. In antiquity, rhetoric played a crucial role as a political instrument as well as a cultural and educational one. The elements of rhetoric can be applied to modern education for developing the ability to expressively and clearly speak in public; however, the concept of rhetoric itself has irreversibly changed (because antique rhetoric is situated in the context of ancient languages, where the way of thinking differs considerably from modern). But some elements of Quintilian methodology, adopted primarily by humanists, are still used in modern times. We also can give one example of usin his methods in modern education (based on the experience of the Renaissance) — it is the Academia Vivarium Novum in Italy, where teaching is provided in classical languages. There, education is indeed based on moral principles, but it is Renaissance morality (the main principle — using the teachings of the ancients to know yourself and become better than you were).
References:
- M. Fabi Quintiliani Institutionis oratoriae libri duodecim. Lipsiae, Teubner, 1959.
