3
Background
The traditional date for the foundation of the city by Romulus was 753 BC; the Romans used that date, which was probably mythical, as the basis of their calendar. Rome was originally a farming community and this background was always an important aspect of Roman culture, but the prosperity of the city was the result of trade, especially with the Etruscans in the north and the Greek colonies in the South.
At first the Romans were ruled by kings, and at some stage, probably in the sixth century BC, the Etruscans occupied Rome. In 510 BC the Roman patricians or aristocrats organised a revolt against the Etruscan tyrants and succeeded in replacing the foreign kings with a republic. From that time the Roman preference for a republic to any kind of monarchy was a powerful aspect of their culture. By the third century BC, Rome had expanded gradually, eventually controlling the whole of Italy. This inevitably brought Rome into conflict with another expansionist society: Carthage, based in North Africa (modern Tunisia). After long periods of warfare (the Punic Wars of 264-241 and 218-202 BC), Rome was victorious and dominated the whole Mediterranean region. The Greek colonies and city states were no match for the well-organised Roman Army, but in time the Romans learned to admire many aspects of Greek culture.
By the first century BC, Rome had become extremely wealthy, but the Republic of what had been a city-state was not an efficient means of running a vast empire. Only powerful generals such as Sulla, Marius and finally Julius Caesar were able to control the empire, and even then there were frequent civil wars. Caesar was assassinated in 44 BC, not least because some republicans feared that he intended to become king in fact if not in name. However, Caesar's nephew, Octavius, took over and eventually became the Emperor Augustus (63 BC-14 AD). The Empire based on Rome lasted until the fourth century AD, spreading Graeco-Roman culture to most of Western Europe as well as North Africa and Asia Minor. In the east the Roman Empire based on Constantinople survived until 1453, but its culture was different from the Roman in many respects, and we will consider education separately in Chapter 4 under the heading of Byzantium.
Roman Education
The Romans were not great cultural innovators, hence the frequency of the term 'Graeco-Roman' to describe their cultural artefacts and ideas. However, cultural domination by Greece was never complete: from the sixth to the third century BC, Rome had established its own cultural traditions, based on a rural economy in which the Roman landed aristocracy were firmly in control. Although the Romans took over many Greek ideas on education, they never relinquished their Roman cultural heritage based on a rural economy. One famous Roman exemplifying these ideals was Cato (234-148 BC) who wrote a manual on farming, probably the earliest surviving work in Latin prose. Cato also had firm views on many social issues, including education, and his respect for the rural life made him disagree with those Greeks who thought that manual labour was unworthy. Cato claimed that he had personally taught his son to read, write, fence and swim. He would have also introduced him to some of the techniques of farming. E.B. Castle1 wrote:
The average Roman had none of the mental agility of the Athenian and no strong political sense. His political struggles had always been utilitarian, centred on some definite freedom, legal or economic. He was almost devoid of philosophical curiosity. On the other hand the Romans had very definite views and standards concerning legal obligations, and, more than any other people before or since, a respect for constituted authority and a capacity for accepting intelligent and courageous leadership, qualities which were to make them masters of the civilised western world. But the most significant characteristic of early Roman society... is the position of the family in Roman domestic and civil life. It is here that the student of Roman education must begin.
Education began at home - in the family - and the father was responsible. In the early days of the Republic he had been legally entitled to flog his wife and children, even to execute them. By the time of Augustus that right had been lost, but not forgotten. Education at home would include learning to read and write, but probably not much arithmetic. (Until Arabic numerals were acquired, ciphering using Greek or Roman letters was very cumbersome and limited.) History hardly existed, but some tales of Roman grandeur would have been transmitted orally. If the boy grew up in the country he would, early on, be introduced to farming and its market economy. Music was not regarded as necessary nor the gymnastics once so important to the Greeks. Cicero (106-43 BC), who thought that education should concentrate on rhetoric, was contemptuous of certain Greek traditions: music and gymnastics were no preparation for war or government. Above all, traditional Roman morality stressed the family and the importance of education within the family.
Educating for Gravitas and Pietas
The qualities that Romans admired most were gravitas and pietas, both closely connected with respect for family. Gravitas means possessing qualities of seriousness, earnestness, responsibility and probably a certain rigidity and distrust of innovation. Pietas was a devoted loyalty to family, nation and the gods. Bearing in mind those values and the possibility of their disappearance, Tacitus (55-120 AD), described traditional education in the following way:
In the good old days, every man's son, born in wedlock, was brought up not in the chamber of some hireling nurse, but in his mother's lap, and at her knee. And that mother could have no higher praise than that she managed the house and gave herself to her children. Again, some elderly relative would be selected in order that to her, as a person who had been tried and never found wanting, might be entrusted the care of all the youthful scions of the same house; in the presence of such a one no base word could be uttered without grave offence, and no wrong deed done. Religiously and with the utmost delicacy she regulated not only the serious tasks of her youthful charges, but their recreations and their games,2
The French scholar, Carcopino, however, tells us that the practice of hiring a nurse (often Greek) to care for and educate young children became more and more common, a practice deplored by Cato and others.3 At the age of seven the child's education passed from mother to father who would be particularly concerned with values: as well as gravitas and pietas, he would seek to inculcate justitia (love of justice and moderation), fortitudo (manliness), constantia (steadfastness or constancy) and prudentict (practical judgement). As with the Greeks, academic studies would be a much lower priority than what we might now call social and moral education. At about the age of 16, the boy's name would be placed on the list of citizens, he would be allowed to wear the adult toga, and would become available for military service. He would probably be placed under the tutelage of a respected man outside the family, a custom that survived into the middle ages as the squire-knight relationship.
Schools in Rome
The earliest schools in Rome began around 200 BC when there was some reference to Spurius Cavilius, an ex-slave who was the first teacher on record in Rome to charge fees. Schools, as in Greece, were for seven-year-old boys and girls, and the curriculum was very basic, concentrating on reading, writing and simple calculations, as well as the elementary values of pietas and gravitas. This kind of regime lasted until the child was aged about 12. For the more affluent it was followed by a grammar school where the curriculum included Greek and Latin grammar, and later on literature: FSorner, the fables of Aesop, in Greek, plus some Latin authors such as Horace, Virgil and Livy. Memorisation was the standard teaching method. Some practical geometry and simple ciphering would also be included.
At around the age of 16 the major subject became rhetoric, either with a private tutor or in a school of some kind. At this point Roman education was much indebted to Greek tradition and also to teachers who were often Greek and taught in Greek, despite the protests of conservative Romans such as Cato who objected to that kind of foreign influence. In 161 AD the Senate even attempted to ban foreign philosophers and rhetoricians but not for very long. The later emperors, Hadrian, for example, set up scholarships to encourage the teaching of rhetoric. It was not uncommon for the sons of the rich to go overseas to attend a famous school: Caesar went to Rhodes, Brutus to Athens; Cicero, perhaps the greatest of the Roman orators, went to both. Such education, at home or abroad, was very much an experience reserved for a wealthy elite.
Cicero (106-43 BC) on Education
Cicero wrote extensively on education. His major work was De Oratore (On Oratory or Rhetoric) written in 55 BC. The title may give a misleading impression of the book which concerned the ideal upbringing of a young man, destined to play a part in government. Cicero emphasised the importance of the family and early child-rearing as well as the kind of education required to produce an orator who was imbued with the traditional values of a Roman statesman. Despite his emphasis on Roman traditions, it is clear that Cicero was greatly influenced by some of the Greek philosophers, particularly Isocrates (436-338 BC), a leading Athenian teacher of rhetoric. Cicero advocated the imitation of traditional Roman virtues as well as the acquisition of the best of Greek literature and philosophy. The key word in the text was humanitas which conveyed more to the Romans than the English word 'humanity': humanitas signified all the best qualities of civilised and well-educated men courtesy, unselfishness and generosity as well as pietas and gravitas. De Oratore was a philosophical text, setting out a prescription for a good, worthy life in an almost ideal society. It was left to Quintilian about 150 years later to translate that philosophy into a teaching programme.
Quintilian (35-96 AD)
The most famous teacher and educational theorist of Roman times was Marcus Fabius Quintilianus (Quintilian). He was the son of a teacher of rhetoric and not only followed his father's profession but established a very successful school. Little is known of his own education, except that he made some reference in his writing to his good teachers. Although he was in many respects very Roman, he was steeped in Greek literature, and was particularly influenced by Aristotle.
Quintilian was not simply a teacher but a practising rhetorician - he pleaded professionally in the courts in Rome. After some time in Spain where he had been born, he was summoned to Rome in 68 AD by the Emperor Galba. He then established his own school, receiving an imperial salary. He continued pleading in the courts, and was apparently successful in both careers. He attempted to retire from teaching in 88 AD, and on the strength of 20 years experience he wrote The Institutes of the Orator. While writing this major work he was recalled to teaching and given the task of tutoring two of the Emperor Domitian's great-nephews. He nevertheless managed to complete his book, which was published in 96 AD shortly before his death. It was based partly on the pedagogical ideas of Domitius Afer of Nimes, and partly on the philosophical writings of Cicero. The result was much more than a treatise on the training of orators; it has been regarded by successive generations as a classic text on early education theory. Quintilian's successful rhetorician was not simply a skilful orator but a wise man. The book is about education for wisdom rather than training for verbal skills. According to Quintilian, the perfect orator would be a man of integrity - a good man as well as a clever pleader. To achieve this end, Quintilian postulated three stages of training: up to the age of seven at home; general education at grammar school up to the age of around 16; finally, specific instruction in the art of rhetoric for several years.
For the first stage, Quintilian recommended that both parents should be 'cultured' and the nurse should speak well. Boyhood companions should be chosen carefully with a view to the development of good language habits. If any of these factors were in doubt, Quintilian recommended hiring a good 'master of language' to correct any faults. Quintilian believed strongly in developing good habits, especially in language, at an early age, however, little formal instruction was envisaged before the age of seven, just the correction of errors and bad habits of speech. Quintilian was anxious that if formal instruction started too soon it would be counterproductive. The repetition of rhymes and even the beginnings of reading and writing might start before the age of seven, but in the form of a kind of game. He was clearly operating with an early version of a 'stages of development' theory which cautioned against making difficult demands before the child was ready.
For the second stage, Quintilian favoured education at home with a tutor rather than what was beginning to be provided by the State in schools. The reason for this preference appears to be moral as well as pedagogical: at the time Roman schools were generally of doubtful quality and lacked adequate supervision, both in terms of behaviour and learning. Quintilian was unhappy about large classes and other aspects of public schools, although he also pointed out the limitations of a boy learning alone with a tutor. At school a boy could learn from what others were taught. Quintilian had a good deal to say about the grammar school: he subdivided his advice under two headings, moral and intellectual. At a time when corporal punishment was common, Quintilian strongly expressed his dislike of 'the whipping of children'. It was also counter-productive educationally: children should be encouraged to learn because learning was useful and enjoyable, not for fear of punishment. If children lacked interest that was at least partly the fault of the teacher. He did not use a word for 'motivation' but he had a good intuitive feel for the concept. He also understood the need to be aware of individual differences and aptitudes.
Quintilian's curriculum emphasised language: both Latin and Greek were essential; poetry was a high priority, as well as clear speaking and arguing. Children should be exposed only to material that was beautiful as well as eloquent: Homer and Virgil came first, then others who were considered to encourage the habit of reading. Music was also strongly recommended, partly because it was associated with poetry and therefore reinforced the teaching of language. Geometry too was essential. Physical education would have received separate attention in a specialist school for physical culture, where deportment and possibly dancing would be taught. As for converting this curriculum into a timetable, Quintilian favoured switching from subject to subject during the course of a day, partly to provide variety and partly to enable the co-ordination of learning.
Finally, the boy proceeded from the grammar school to the school of rhetoric. Once again, the character of the master was all-important. This was much more important to Quintilian than the quality of the facilities in the school. Quintilian listed the qualities of a good teacher: severe but not harsh; affable but not lax (familiarity breeds contempt); moderate in both criticism and praise, but prompt in responding to questions. He thought that the plainest methods were always the best. The final sections of the Institutes dealt in detail with the technicalities of rhetoric.
How influential was Quintilian? Pliny, Juvenal and Suetonius all referred to his work with respect, but his writings may not have been widely read in the Roman Empire itself. In 1416 a complete manuscript was discovered by the Italian humanist Gian Poggio at St Gall, Switzerland and became a classic text on education during the Renaissance. In 1512 Erasmus even apologised for mentioning teaching methods because he thought Quintilian had settled such questions long before.
Marcus Aurelius (121-180 AD) and the Stoic Philosophers
Marcus Aurelius was influenced by the Stoic philosophy of Zeno (335-262 BC) of Citium in Cyprus, and closer to his own time, by Seneca and Epictetus (55-138 AD) who wrote nothing, but whose discourses were recorded by his admiring pupil, Flavius Arrian. The ideals of Epictetus have been compared with those of Christ although at this time Christianity was still forbidden in Rome and Christians were from time to time persecuted. A central theme was the brotherhood of man which included slaves. Pleasure was not a worthy aim in life: the Stoic ideal was to achieve happiness even when immediate pleasures were lacking.
As emperor, Marcus Aurelius led a life that avoided luxury and pleasure-seeking, performing his duties conscientiously. He reflected on his life in the Meditations, written in Greek. Stoic philosophy was fashionable among a minority of Romans before and after Aurelius but, unlike Christianity, had little appeal as a mass movement among the poor.
Conclusion
It would seem that popular education was not a great success in Rome. Recently, Carcopino has criticised the schools for failing to educate the young in a way that might have enabled them to save society, but was it fair to expect teachers to salvage a society in decline? Was the problem that Roman society had generally lost any sense of purpose? It may also have been the case that rhetoric became debased: instead of being a philosophy of life based on high principles and ideals, it became a game to be played and won, judged in terms of criteria concerned with verbal trickery, rhetorical devices and superficial debating skills rather than sound philosophical ideas. Seneca may have struck the right note when he criticised teachers for concentrating on the classroom rather than on life, but there were certainly very deep-rooted problems in society itself which schools and teachers could not be expected to solve. The poor quality of schools may have been a symptom rather than a cause of the decline of Roman standards.
Rome must take some of the credit - or the blame - for the spreading of the notion of the school. The Emperor Agricola (AD 37-93) exported the idea of the school to Britain, and it is very probable that by then it was general policy to introduce schooling into conquered regions in order to Romanise the population. In later years, the Emperor Diocletian wanted the State to take complete control of schools, and by the time of Theodosius, in 425 AD, all education was supervised by the State and teachers were only permitted to teach if licensed. This was another idea which was to spread throughout Western Europe. The Roman 'grammar' schools did not survive the Barbarian invasions but the model was remembered and revived in the eighth and ninth centuries AD, particularly at the time when Charlemaigne wanted to revive learning and improve the quality of the clergy.
References
1. E.B. Castle, Ancient Education and Today (Penguin, 1961), p. 108.
2. Quoted by Castle, p. 112.
3. J. Carcopino, Daily Life in Ancient Rome (Penguin, 1962), p. 119.
Further Reading
Boardman, J., Griffin, J. and Murray, O. (eds), The Roman World (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1986).
Carcopino, J., Daily Life in Ancient Rome (Penguin, 1962).
Castle, E.B., Ancient Education and Today (Penguin, 1961).