Should I do a PhD in Classics?

 

Should Latin and Greek Be Compulsory?

In my conversations with fellow Classicists, I often hear people say that the discipline's privileging of Latin and Greek was an old issue which isn’t relevant anymore. As they say, it's true that Latin and Greek used to be given preference by people in positions of power back in the old days, but now we have Classical Civilisation, Ancient History, and Classical Studies. The field is more diverse in today's age and we’ve moved on. I'm sure you have all heard similar statements. I think this perspective has developed partially because many Classicists like to think the discipline is on a trajectory of constant improvement and really dislike hearing any criticism which is too negative. It's nice to think the world of Classics has moved on. It probably is true that Classicists are more open-minded about teaching literature in translation now than they were decades ago. However, has the privileging of Latin and Greek completely gone away?

From personal experience, I believe that several people in Classics still privilege Latin and Greek over other methodologies, even if it’s not discussed openly because of the perceived backlash it would cause. I've heard many Classicists say that Latin and Greek should be mandatory but imply that if they were to say so, they would get rebuked by others. I've even heard some claim that philology is under threat because it’s seen as too exclusionary by most people in Classics nowadays.  I’ve read these kind of statements on Twitter every now and then. I’m sure you know exactly what I’m talking about.

Why does all of this matter? Who cares if some Classicists are old-fashioned? There's an undeniable socio-political undercurrent to this discourse. Latin and Greek are taught far more often in grammar and private schools than they are in state comprehensives. Most non-Russel Group Universities which offer Classics programmes usually opt for Classical Civilisation. Classical Studies, or other subjects because they take more working-class students who are unfamiliar with the languages than the Russel Group do. Classics PGCEs in the UK are sometimes locked behind very difficult Latin exams and the programmes usually require Latin. There are no Classical Civilisation PGCEs. Classics teaching and lecturing in the UK typically expect Latin and/or Greek. Latin and Greek is the domain of the elite, even if some ‘ordinary’ students do manage to break into it, which is a problem when careers in Classics predominantly require the languages. Insisting that any study of the Classics must require Latin and Greek is supporting this deeply unfair system. We do have some impressive figures like Arlene Holmes-Henderson working to improve the state of Classics, but it's going to be a long and difficult battle,.

I've spoken about the hierarchy of Classics many times and I'm far from the first person to do so. But I thought of writing this blog post after a recent controversy on Classics Twitter over Latin and Greek (Classics Twitter has had controversies seemingly every day over the last few months). I do not want to link the tweets and start calling people out, so I'll only comment on it briefly. It was a pretty major event at the time and I'm sure you'll remember it and know what I'm talking about anyway. But as a reminder, some individuals had clearly expressed the superiority of Latin and Greek over other methodologies on Twitter, or at the very least, anxiety about the future of Latin and Greek in the new liberal attitude to Classics. I’m not speaking here about boring and banal talking points from conservative politicians and spokespeople, but from those within the Classics community. This event urged me to revisit this topic. How common are such views nowadays?

So I thought of doing a poll on Twitter asking people if they would make Latin and Greek compulsory:

Based on conversations which I've had with fellow Classicists, these were figures which I expected, give or take a few. I think most Classicists no longer think Latin and Greek should be compulsory but there are clearly a sizable number of people who still want the languages to be mandatory. 33% is not a huge number but it’s not negligible either – that’s 44 of the 134 people who voted. We should also keep in mind that most of the people who follow and engage with me on Twitter are overwhelmingly in the liberal side of the Classics field. The number of people who who would vote yes in our community more widely could be larger than this poll suggests. In fact, I suspect that’s the case. There definitely some people, then, who want Latin and Greek to be mandatory. This is not a dead issue.

            Now to be fair, a Twitter Poll isn't perfect. I said "Classics (in any form)" to specify that if you voted yes, you think that Latin and Greek should be taught in any Classics-based programme. I think that wasn't clearly communicated to everyone. There are other obvious problems with using Twitter polls (to put it mildly). But it certainly at least suggests that this issue hasn't been settled as some think.

              We should also be fair. Thinking that Latin and Greek should be mandatory does not mean that you think Classical Civilisation and similar degrees have no value. I can show through a poll that most of the people in my Twitter sphere do not have an agenda against Classical Civilisation:

Yes, it’s disappointing that just over 10% of people think that Classics is inherently superior to Classical Civilisation. But these numbers are relatively low – 17 out of 155 is not very large in the scale of things. It does point to an extreme position in our discipline which has not entirely died out and which may be more commonly held outside of Classics Twitter. I'm sure that you, like I, have run into people who hold this view. I'll pull no punches here, I think this opinion is unhelpful and needs to go. But we should be fair to those who think Latin and Greek should be mandatory. Those people most probably think Classical Civilisation is a good subject in itself but would just prefer Latin and Greek to be mandatory. That does go against the spirit of Classical Civilisation in a way, but it doesn't necessarily mean that they think Classical Civilisation students are studying a dumb subject or anything.

                The question emerges then: why should Latin and Greek be mandatory? Philology is undoubtedly a useful skill and reading texts in the original languages fundamentally changes the way you read them. No one would deny that fact and definitely not me. I love reading in Latin, do so for my PhD, and will be teaching the language next year. But what about other methodologies? Should all Classicists be forced to learn the ins and outs of historiography? Should they be forced to learn a scope of philosophical theorems and hot to implement them properly? You could go on and on. Is specialising in so many methodologies even possible? It undoubtedly isn't, so what makes studying the Classics through close engagement with the languages more important than other approaches, to such an extent that it must be mandatory? Wouldn't it be better to encourage everyone to study the world of Classics in the way they want? In my opinion, it would be better for students and the discipline as a whole.

                Whatever you think, this is clearly not an outdated issue!

I would like to thank everyone who voted in both polls for their honesty. I have critiqued some of your views in this blog-post but I couldn't have done so without your help!