The San Francisco call., 1895-11-17


ripides. In fact, it is no exaggeration to
say that any writer, any literary student
or critic who is ignorant of Greek litera-
ture is so seriously handicapped that
nothing but unusual genius can overcome
the disadvantage under which he labors.
John Stuart Mill declared that the battle
of Marathon was more important event
in the history of England than the battle
of Hastings. 1t is certainly true that to
the student of English literature Homer is
more important than BeowuIf. Moreover,
it is quite unnecessary to remind COM
pany of scholars that our beloved mother
tongue itself is largely made up of Greek
and Latin elements. Though Bunyan wrote
his immortal work with little knowledge
of the ancient tongues, yet there are few
Bunyans, and the ordinary man will find
that the sure and instructive feeling for
the meaning of English words which he
gains from his study of Greek and Latin
| is fully worth all the labor which it
has cost him. l am happy to say
that my colleagues in English at Berkeley
are unanimous in their testimony on this
point and agree in thinking that some ac-
| uuaintance with Greek is practically es-
| sential to the Thorough study of English
But these facts are too familiar to call
for more than passing notice. l am not so
much interested in presenting to you the
strongest arguments to prove that men need
to study Greek as in trying to interpret the
feeling of the Greek student himself
| toward his work. We are not devoting
ourselves to this ancient literature because
| we ought to; because we think we derive
| from it better mental training than could
| be gained from any other form of disci-
| pline, or because we regard 1t essential to
| the omprehension of the masterpieces of
our own and other modern languages We
study it because we like it. We find in it
| charm of restrained and ordered beauty
| which we do not find elsewhere. And
| though NAV not be able fully to account
| for this fascination, yet no man of average
| intelligence can seriously devote himself to
| the study of Greek without feeling the
attraction.
There are those who would place Greek
| in the same category as Sanskrit, admitting
! for it certain historical and pathological
| importance, but denying its claim upon
| the attention of the ordinary student.
But this opinion is quite inconsistent
| with certain well-knOwn facts. We find
few persons studying Sanskrit except pro-
| fessional scholars. But the world is full of
men like the lamented Judge Reardon
of your own city, who delighted to spend
the scanty leisure Of busy life in loving
absorption in the precious fragments of
Sappho; or like that distinguished lawyer
of Baltimore who, at his recent death,
| left as his most urgent request to his
| lish the results of his lifelong study of
| EschyIus. What is it that attracted
| these men, and attracts US, to the Greek
writers? 1t is plain that there is some
magic in the Greek mind and character
which has not yet lost its potency. The
| language itself is indescribably beautiful
and perfect, but that is not all. The his
| tory of that heroic people is a story which
still thrills the most thoughtless reader.
| 1t was the Greeks who first showed the
world what civic freedom is, and on q
single day, at Salamis and Himera, they
proved it's power by hurting back the
shattered hosts of the two mightiest bar
baric despotisms from the free soil of
Attica and Sicily.
| But beyond all this it is the unequaled
genius and creative power of the Greek
| mind which attract and hold the interest
of the student. And on this point in spite
of all that has been said by many eloquent
writers, doubt if we realize fraction of
the truth. Let us suppose that in the
course of the next century the half-civ-
ilized people of Lapland should develop
for themselves, without following foreign
models, a national literature of uneouaJed
| hao,1 md <bo{ !
large number of entirely new literary
forms which should cast in the shade our
epic and drama and lyric. our novel and
Grafton and philosophic treatise, and that
these forms should become the standard of
taste for the whole world through all its
progress in culture and refinement for the
next twenty-five hundred years. Suppose
that, furthermore, they should originate
an architecture and sculpture which
should be the despair of imtators for CEN
turies to come; and finally that they should
produce new views of politics, of morals
and of philosophy which should serve as
an inspira ton for the profoundest think
ers of ages and nations yet unborn.
If any nation should do all this in the
space of the next one hundred years, what
opinion should we form of its genius?
And yet this is precisely what was accom-
plished long ago by the people OF sterile
peninsula in Southeastern Europe, for the
most part in one short century. Athens,
at the height of her glory, was a smaller
city than San Francisco, but she num-
bered among her citizens within a single
century Eschylus and Sophocles, Herodo-
tus and Thucydides, Plato and Aristotle
and Demosthenes: Phidias, the greatest
sculptor of all time, and Ictinus, the
architect of the Parthenon. And these
names are but the beginning of the list.
All this in one hundred years. Since then
the world has moved onward more than
two millenniums. Education has in
creased, universities have multiplied, and
myriads of men have written and specu-
lated and carved and built.
And what have we Accomplished In
epic poetry the ages have produced in
Dante one man. and but one. who may
perhaps oe ranked with Homer, although
Dante himself was proud to call himself
the humble disciple of that lesser ancient
bard whose poetic light was but rehec-
ton of Homer's greater splendor. Shakes
peare and Goethe may compete on equal
terms with Sophocles, but we look in vain
for another. No philosopher can dispute
{hn Ok of p