§ 34. From the accounts we have of the teaching of the alphabet, as
implied in Plato’s “Cratylus,” and described by Dionysius (the rhetor)
in illustrating Demosthenes’ eloquence, it was not carried on in an
analytical, but a synthetical, way. Children were not taught words
first and then to analyze them, but started with individual letters,
then learned their simplest combinations, and so on. Nor is this method
ever likely to be supplanted by the other, at least in the case of
stupid children. But we do hear of one curious attempt to make the
alphabet an agreeable study in the so-called _grammatical tragedy_
of Callias, about 400 B.C. This was the time when (in the archonship
of Eucleides) the newer Ionic alphabet of twenty-four letters was
introduced, and apparently ordered to be used in schools. The work
of Callias was, accordingly, a poetical kind of A B C book, in which
the single letters in turn spoke the prologue. The choral parts seem
to have been refrains working out the simpler combinations of vowels
with each consonant. The seven vowels were also introduced before the
schoolmaster as female characters. But more we do not know, and it is
probable that the book was only called _tragedy_ from its external
form, not from any plot.[29] The use of mnemonic verses to help
children was, no doubt, as old as education; but we should have been
glad to know the divisions of letters followed by Callias; for up to
the times of the Sophists there was no proper analysis of the alphabet,
and it is to them that we owe such studies as Plato’s “Cratylus,”
which, though sound as to the alphabet, is wonderfully childish as to
etymology. Still, the popular knowledge of 400 B.C. must have been a
long way behind the “Cratylus.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account