Alden, Timothy. Seven forensic disputations on the question whether the time usually spent in learning the Latin, Greek, & Oriental languages be usefully occupied : by Timothy Alden, Samuel Dana, Jotham Bender, James Kendall, David Kendall, William Wells,

1

An

Inquiry

"Whether the time usually spent in the study of the dead languages be usefully occupied."

To ascertain the best use of our time is the most important, and perhaps the most difficult of all our inquiries. It embraces the whole scene of the present life, and contemplates eternity. But in order to determine with respect to any particular portion of time, how it may be employed in the most useful manner, we must compare the merits of the several objects of pursuit, which present themselves for our choice. And that, which promises the most advantage to ourselves, and the greatest benefits to society, we may safely conclude to be the most worthy to occupy our time.

2

The question before us regards that portion of time, which is allotted for the attainment of a liberal education. The several objects of pursuit are the arts and the sciences. The first inquiry therefore, which claims our notice, is to estimate their value, and compare their merits. Then, by apportioning time to each in the exact nature ratio of its importance, we can at once determine, whether any department of sciences receives more than its proper share of attention.

Under the present system of instruction, it is well known that the antient languages occupy nearly one half the time, appropriated to academical studies. If, then, those languages be as important in themselves, and as beneficial to society, as all the other arts and sciences put together; we may suppose, they do not occupy more than their just proportion of time. But if the sciences are of greater consequence than the dead languages, if they are more useful in the various affairs of active and social life; it will evidently appear that the languages engross more time and

3

attention that they ought to receive.

The linguist takes a concise method for deciding questions of this nature. He exults with raptures in praise of the ancients; he ascribes to them genius, taste, and knowledge; and then concludes that their languages ought to constitute a principal part of a modern education.

If language and knowledge be the same thing, or if the veil of the antient tongues conceal from the moderns the sources of knowledge, or the means of improvement; this laconic argument will, indeed, operate with no inconsiderable validity. But if Nature's works are invisible to us as they were to antients, and if we prossess the arts and sciences not only in as high perfection as they did, but have moreover many improvements and discoveries unknown to them, it must be acknowledged that their languages, so far from being useful to us, are in fact very injurious; because, they consume much of our time, which, otherwise, might be improved to some valuable purpose.

4

Can it be judicious to waste time in learning alphabets, and loading the memory with a thousand irregular inflections of verbs and declensions of nouns, when the mind ought to be engaged in manly and philosophical studies? After destroying more than double the time, requisite for the attainment of all the valuable part of oriental philosophy, the linguist, at the present day, has the mortification to find himself as far from the temple of science, as when he commenced the circuit of the languages. And having lost so much time and attention, he returns to his vernacular tongue, as the most expeditious way to become acquainted with both antients and moderns.

With what face, then, can it be pretended, that the time, devoted to the oriental tongues, is usefully occupied?

Since the memory of the antients is so universally revered, their authority so highly esteemed, and their patronage so generally courted by candidates for places in the republic of letters, the prospect of success is not very promising for him,

5

who attempts and innovation in the present system of instruction. Custom and prejudice have often superseded the clearest deductions of reason. The united experience of different ages can testify, that the most useful innovations have met with violent opposition. But truth, in the end, has generally triumphed over bigotry and error. Science, in her different stages, has felt the oppressive hand of tyranny, has burst the letters of authority, disentangled herself from the perplexed mazes of scholastic subtility and, rising superior to them all, has attained her present state of glory and eminence. And we hope erelong to see her freed from every chain, that would embarrass her progress.

In deviating from the beaten track of adulation, and asserting the freedom of science and the rights of modern genius, it is far from our design to depreciate the merit of the antients. Tha cause we have espoused disclaims the idea of rising on the ruins of others. It is capable of standing by its own strength, and shines with unborrowed lustre. It does not require us to refute, even, the most exagerated commendations, which have flowed from the