(2) It is a familiar notion that the difficulty would diminish if the ancient languages were begun later, that then the ability to learn would prove greater. On the contrary, the older the pupil the stronger the tendency of his thought-mass toward exclusion. Memory work must be introduced early, especially where its usefulness depends wholly on the acquisition of facility. It is essential to begin early in order to make it possible to proceed slowly and to avoid unpedagogical pressure. Four hours a week of Latin do not hurt a healthy, bright boy, provided his other tasks are arranged with pedagogical correctness. To put modern languages first would be to put the cart before the horse. Useful enough, however, are single French and English expressions relating to everyday life. They will be of service in acquiring the pronunciation; but a few phrases do not constitute the teaching of a language. [37] Bennett and Bristol, “The Teaching of Latin and Greek,” Longmans, Green & Co., New York, 1900. 279. The manner of teaching the ancient languages, where they are regarded as a matter of necessity or conventionality, no account being taken of pedagogical considerations, need not be discussed here. It must rather be admitted at once that no pedagogical means whatever exist, whereby those who live with their interests strictly confined to the present could be brought to acquire, with genuine sympathy, the content of the works of antiquity. American teachers in estimating the value of Latin for the high school student lay more stress upon training in the mastery of the mother-tongue than upon the literary contents of the classical writings. Professor Bennett in his treatment of “The Teaching of Latin in the Secondary School,”[38] places in strong light the splendid linguistic training a youth undergoes when taught by a good teacher of this subject. In Germany, since Herbart’s time, Professor Russell tells us that the teaching of Latin has fluctuated between two aims--“between that view which makes the classics a purely formal discipline, and that other view which bases the worth of such a study on the acquisition of humanistic culture, in contact with ‘the best thoughts of the best men of antiquity.’ In the one case it is considered of equal value as a means of preparation for all trades and professions dependent on intellectual acumen; in the other case it is of worth only for those who can practically apply the technical knowledge thereby acquired, or may have sufficient leisure to enjoy its æsthetic qualities. It is a question of making the ancient literature a means to an end or an end in itself.”[39] The dogma of formal discipline as a leading aim in education has nowhere been more discredited than among Herbartian writers. A judicious estimate of its truth and error is made by Professor Hinsdale.[40] His main conclusions are as follows:--