jaeger, werner_classical philology and humanism_tapha, 67_1936_363-374

8/9/2019 Jaeger, Werner_Classical Philology and Humanism_TAPhA, 67_1936_363-374

1/13

The Johns Hopkins University Press and American Philological Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association.

http://www.jstor.org

merican Philological ssociation

Classical Philology and HumanismAuthor(s): Werner JaegerSource: Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 67 (1936), pp.

363-374Published by: The Johns Hopkins University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/283246Accessed: 19-03-2015 21:47 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of contentin a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 132.248.9.8 on Thu, 19 Mar 2015 21:47:43 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/283246http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/283246http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/


2/13

Vol.

lxvii]

Classical

Philology

nd Humanism

363

XXV.-ClassicalPhilologyndHumanism1

WERNER

JAEGER

UNIVERSITY OF

CHICAGO

The

disruption

f Western ivilizationwhichwe are

witness-

ing,

with

the

rise of

the

doctrinethat

culture

and

knowledge

are

nationalistic

ossessions,

ividinggroup

from

roup,

rather

than expressionsof kinshipbindingthe heirs of a common

heritage

into closer

union, dismays

not

only

disinterested

philosophers nd

educators,

but

men of

foresight

nd

good

will

in

all walks

of

life.

It

is of

deep

concern o

classical

scholars,

for n

the

past

it has been

their

primary

unction o transmit

from eneration o

generation ne of

thegreat

unifying radi-

tions. This is the

heritage,

eceived from

he

ancient

world,

of classical humanism. What especially troublesthosewho

like myself till seek to

perform

his function s

a division

within

our

own

group

which

has

widened within

he last half-

century

s a

result

of the

application

of

scientific

methods to

the

study

of classical

iterature nd

archaeology.

Undoubtedly

these methodshave

in a

multitude f

ways

renewed he

vitality

of

our

subject,

and

have

increased

both our

knowledge nd

understanding f the ancientworld. But the extremecon-

centration

pon

them

n

our

day

and

the

narrow pecialization

which

they

have

produced threaten to

obscure

and

nullify

our main service

to

society,

never

moreneeded

than

today,

of

keeping alive and

developingthe

universal

tradition

of

humanism.

That a

reconciliation etween

the

older concep-

tion

of

humanistic

studies and

the

newer

type of

classical

scholarship s possibleand is indeed beingeffected believe.

But a

conflict etween them

in

varying

degrees of

acuteness

still

exists,which

must be

resolved f the

study of

antiquity

is

to performts

noblest

function n

themodern

world.

1

I am

greatly

indebted to

Professor G. L.

Hendrickson of

Yale

University

for

his

extraordinary

kindness

in

revising and

condensing

my

article

for

publication.

It

owes much of

its

present

form

to

his

generous

assistance.


http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/13

364

Werner

aeger

[1936

I recall very

vividly

how after

nineyears spent

n a classical

school of the

old type

I entered

the university,

nd

learned

as one of the achievementsof scientific cholarshipthat

humanism

was a

pseudo-Greekword

of recent

origin,

nd

that both the

word

and its

contentof meaning

were

under

strict

ban from he vocabulary

of classical

philology.

It was

a

painful

shock to the

tradition

and

creed in which

I had

been

brought

up, by teachers

who

had held

beforeme the

august

ideal

of humanism,

receiving

authority

fromsuch

venerable names as Humboldt,Winckelmann, nd Goethe.

At

first saw

no chanceof bridging

he

gap between

thisolder

tradition

of humanism

as a

cultural

ideal, and the

exact

scientific

cholarship

whichwas

offeredme by

my philological

and archaeological

teachers.

I

should indeed

have

been

tempted o abandon

altogether

my

classical studies

had I

not

observed that

in

the

best

of

my

teachers,

behind the

rigidity

and a certainbigotryof scientificmethod,there glowed an

ardor which gave to

the interpretation

f ancient literature

warmth nd vitality.

In

them discerned

conflict etween

the

rigorous

philologist

nd the

humanist,

n which

however

the

humanistwas

only

admitted

apologetically.

I

speak of

my ownexperience

ecause

it was typicalof

the

situation

n

Germany,

nd

it may

serve as

a

point

of

departure

forconsideringwhat reconciliations possiblebetween these

conflicting

onceptions

of classical

study.

It

is a

problem

which our

generation

has

inherited

from ts

immediate

pre-

decessors,

nd

I

have outlined

t

in this

personal

form

uspect-

ing

that my

own

case

is

not

isolated,

but

symptomatic

of

wider concern.

The antagonism

between

the

newer

science of

antiquity

and theolderhumanismwas perhapsmost acute inGermany,

which

formed the

center

and

starting point

of that

exact

critical scholarship

which

had revolutionized

he humanistic

studies

of

earlier centuries.

But

German

example

spread

quickly

to the

whole

world and it trained

competitors

n

the

same avenues

of

approach

to

classical

study

and involved




4/13

Vol.

lxvii]

Classical

Philology

nd

Humanism

365

them

in

the

same

problem.

There

remained,

to be

sure, in

many

countries

n unbroken

humanistic radition

which

could

not be entirelyoverwhelmedby the new scholarship,but

broadly

speaking

ts effectwas to

create an

undecided

conflict

and a

feeling

f

uncertainty

bout the

legitimacy

f the

one

conception f

our function r of

the other.

It would

be

inter-

esting o

attempt

characterization f

the

classical

scholarship

of

the

different

ountries f

Europe

as

modified

y

the

impact

of

the

new

critical

tudy of

antiquity,

but

it

would

take us

too

farafield. Let it suffice o say thatAmerica,perhapsmore

than

any other

country,

has

inclined to the modern

German

type

of

classical

study,

although

individual Americans

have

criticised

t

sharply.

Thus,

speaking

generally,

n

the

university

world

of the

nineteenth

entury

he

old

humanism

had given

way

more nd

more to

scientific

esearch n

classical

philology

nd

archae-

ology, thoughnot withoutsome resistance. What was the

cause

of

this

change?

How

did

it

happen

that

philological

study,

the

child of

humanism,

had

turned

against it?

The

beginnings

of

this

development

go back

to

times

when

humanism

was

still

dominant.

Humanism,

which

was

in its

origins

the

creation

of

the

great

Italian

poets of

the

early

Renaissance

and of

the

neo-Latin

poets

and

prose

writers,

competingwiththeancients n their wnforms nd language,

had

by

the

end of

the

sixteenth

entury

narrowed

o

a sterile

erudition.

From

this

later

phase

of

humanism a

new

anti-

quarian

and

critical

tudy

of

the

ancient

world

developed,

no

longer

looking

to the

re-creation f

a

modern

literature

on

ancient

models,

but

to a

comprehensive

knowledgeof

the

ancient

world. The

cardinal

point

in

this

developmentwas

reached n thesecondhalfoftheeighteenth entury,whenfor

the

first

ime

the

historical

sense

awoke in

reaction

against

the

rationalism

of

the

age

of

reason.

The

German

neo-

humanism

of

Winckelmann

nd

Humboldt

and

Goethe

was

to

be

sure

in no

small

degree

determinedby

the

abstract

rationalism

of

the

earlier

time. It

sought

an

absolute

ideal




5/13

366

Werner aeger

[1936

of man,

and found

in

the Greeks

the one

revelationof

the

highestharmony

nd

completeness

f human

ife.

But the type of classical scholarshipwhich grew up in

Germany

at the

end of the

eighteenth

nd

in the

earlynine-

teenth century

was

animated

by

a new feeling,

a

newly

awakened

historical

sense.

Its goal

was

the knowledge

of

ancient ifeas a

whole.

The

spiritualvalues

of

iterature

till

held their

place

supreme,

but a new

element

ntered

ntothis

study,

an

impulse to

understand

them

not in

isolation,

but

againstthebackground f their ime. That meanttherecon-

struction

f the history

of their

time.

Not the

old

history,

whichwas a

mere re-telling

f the story

as recorded

by the

ancient historians,

ut

a history ut

together

rom

ourcesof

every

kind-inscriptions,

archaeological

monuments

nd

re-

mains,

papyri

from he

dry

sands of

Egypt,fragments

f lost

works

of

literature

alvaged

by

antiquarian

or grammatical

lore, nothing n shortoverlookedwhichmightserve to fill

a

gap of

knowledge

and complete

the reconstruction

f

the

past.

Great provinces

which

up

to that

time had

owed

scant

allegiance

to general

classical

scholarship such

as

Greek

philosophy

or

Roman

law-were

reclaimed

for

the classical

scholar

nd compelled

o pay

their ribute

o

the

central

whole.

In.place

of a

limited

number

of classical models,

to which

the old humanismhad paid homage,there was now set up

as the goal

of

study a panorama

of

historical

development

extending

hrough enturies.

A

particular

curiosity

nd

in-

terest ttached

to

all that

was new,

to the discovery

of facts

or

materials,

literary

or archaeological,

which were before

unknown. The great

culminating

points

of

antiquity

lost

favor

n

comparison

withthe

early

and the ate.

The

example

ofMommsen'spenetratingtudiesof Rome kindled heyouth-

ful Wilamowitz to

a

similar

breadth

of view in his studies

of

the classical

and Hellenistic

periods

of

Greece. He was

eager

to

know all

that

had

existed

from

the

earliest

times to

late

antiquity.

When

asked

what

his research

had to

offer

n

place

of

the

old

classical

ideal

for

the education

of

youth,

his




6/13

Vol.

lxvii]

Classical

Philology

nd Humanism

367

answer

was: a

survey

of

the

whole

development

of one

of

the

highest

civilizations n all

the

stages

of

its

history.

The

dominating pirit f this formulationfpurposewas historical

and

scientific,

ot humanistic.

Other scholars went

further

and

declared that the

function

f classical

scholarship

was

to

serve as

a

tool

for

the

historian,

r

again,

that

precise

knowl-

edge

of ancient diom

n

language

or in art was

only

a

pathway

leading

to

'higher' historical

onclusions.

It was accounted

heresy

and

bumptiousness

when as a

youngman, in my inauguraladdress as professor t Bale, I

protested

gainst

such

views and

their

cceptance

as

axioms,

and defended

the

contemplation

and

understanding

f

the

immortal

masterpieces

f ancient art

and

literature s an

aim

in

itself.

I

went even further nd

contended that

the r6le

of

history

nd all its

apparatus

of research

was

rather

o

give

them

background

and

setting.

That which

led even

so

sympathetic scholar as Wilamowitz to

protest

repeatedly

against the

old classicism

was the

fact

that the

picture

of

the

ancient

world,

as

conceived of

and as

represented

by the

humanists,

was

grossly

dealized and

simplified.

They did

not

in

truth

aim

to

understand

the real

life of

the

classical

world at

all.

Their

only

care was

for

types

and

ideals

which

theyfound

in

certain

works of

the

great

authors,

and

these

they

took over

without further

nquiry

as

pertinent

o

their

own lives and times. In

historical

evolution

they

had

no

interest

nd

indeed no

conception

of

it.

Obviously

no

one

with

a

developed

historical

feeling

could

contemplate

with

complacency

he

notionthat even

the

greatestworks

f

ancient

art and

literature

epresented inal

nd

absolute

standardsof

human

perfection.

History goes on and

must

go

on.

Thus

the

road back

to the

old

humanism

ould

notbe

retraced.

The

question

of

humanism

however

arose again

when

the

position

of the

classics

in

education

and in

general public

esteem

began

to

be

menaced. In

some

instanceseven

before

the

World

War,

but

especially

since

then, in

almost

every

Western

country

manifestations

f

a

revival of

this

question




7/13

368

Werner

aeger

[1936

have been

seen.

In Germany

the periodical

Die

Antikehas

for the past

dozen years

presented

in non-technical

and

attractiveform he results of philologicaland archaeological

research.

In

the

English speaking

countries

and in France

this revival

has been

markedbythe great

series

of translations

with original

texts,such

as the Loeb Classical

Library,

and

the Collection

es

Universites

e France. Their extraordinary

success

is a

symptom

of

an

unsuspected

interest.

At

the

congress

of

the AssociationBude

in

Nice

in

1935

the whole

problemof humanismplayed a leading part; and impulse

was

given

to make of the next meeting a

world

congress

dealing

with

this

theme,

ontemplating

n

international

rgan-

ization

of the

friends f humanism.

As has been said,

some

of

these

movementsgo

back to

a

time shortly

before

the World War. It was not until then

that

we

had faced

the

consequences

of

the

great

spiritual

nd

social

revolution

which,

lmost

mperceptibly,

ad come

about

during

the

nineteenth

century.

One

manifestation f this

revolution

was the

decline

of

classical

studies

in

the

schools.

The rising

masses of

the

population

were without

an

intel-

lectual

tradition,

while

on the

other

hand the

class

which

had

enjoyed

a classical education

and

maintained

its

traditions

was either

n

decline

or no

longer

ure

of its own ideals.

The

classical scholarship

f

the

universities,

rained n the

modern

school

of

philological

nd

archaeological

research,

had at its

disposal

undreamed-of

reasures

f

knowledge

nd

illustration,

but

it looked

at

esthetic

and ethical

humanism,

which

had

earlier

been

the

driving

force

of

classical

education,

as

the

lost

faith

of its childhood.

Thus that

which

had

constituted

the

inner

force

nd

inspiration

f these studiesin school

and

college,

was

now without

upport

from ts

recognized

eaders.

The

decline went

on.

There

were

experiments

without

end

and

a

hundred

recipes

were

tried,

but

therewas lack of

faith.

When

the

teacher

n the school

sought

id

from he

scholarship

of the

university

e

was told that faith

was a

private

affair;

that

it

was

not the

business

of

scholarship

o establish

values,




8/13

Vol.

lxvii]

Classical

Philology

nd

Humanism

369

but to

investigate

nd discover

truth.

But in

fact,

s we

have

seen,

scholars were unable to

justify

humanistic ducation

in

terms of the older faith. The defense took on an organized

form;

societies were

formed,

groups

of

alumni,

influential

personages

n social and

political

ife,

ll

were nvoked

to

stem

the

adverse

tide;

but

no better

rguments

wereadvanced

than

the

incomparable

formal

training

afforded

by

the

ancient

languages,

and the

great

importance

of

knowing

thoroughly

the

history

f Greece and Rome. But

the

truthwas

that

the

unique position of the so-called 'ancient world' had been

shaken

by the

disclosure

of ancient

civilizations

which

had

long

preceded it.

Thousands

of

years

had

been

added to

'ancient'

history,

nd

(as

in

philosophy)

historical

elativism

seemed

to

be the

inescapable

consequence

of

new

perspectives

in

the

long

history

of

mankind.

Thus

the old

hierarchy

f

values

had

disappeared;

and

from the

first

place

in

the an-

nouncements of universitycourses classical philology was

compelled

to

assume

a

modest

or

even

minor

place

among its

alphabetical

sisters.

The war

revolutionized

verything

here as

elsewhere.

It

threw

us

back to the

very

foundations

f

our

existence-to

a

consciousness nd

realization that

classical

antiquity was

one

of

those

foundations,

n

something

more

than

the

sense of a

merehistoricalnfluence. It was a crisisthatservedto

reveal

the

true

position of the

ancient

world in

the

scheme

of

our

present

time.

It is a

lasting law of

the

human

spirit

that

whenever

one of its

fundamental

values

seems

to

have

lost

meaning nd

significance,

t

must be

traced

back

to

its

origins

for

re-assessment.

This

is

the law

of

renaissance,

since

'

renaissance' s

not

merely

he

name of

a

particular

ventand

time. It is a rhythmn the spiritual

movementof

history,

recurring

rom

ime

to

time,a

concomitant f

the

pressure

f

the

spiritual

atmosphere.

Confidence

nd

self-assertion

re

promoted

by

a

return o

the

culminating

oints

of

life,

nd a

revival of

inner

values

modifies

ur

conceptionof

history

nd

sets

it

in

a

new

light.




9/13

370

Werner aeger

[1936

The values

of life

are

historical

values,

which means

that

life in

the

past

has shaped

their

form.

The

mind

is not

a

white paper, receivingonly the immediate impressionsof

surrounding

nature

and

social

environment.

It

is a living

thing,

taking

shape

continually

from

the

record

of past

ex-

perience.

History

s morethan

a record

of external

emporal

facts;

t is

a repository

n which

abidingvalues

are

constantly

accumulating.

It

is

more than

the

memory

f the past;

it

is

the spiritual

presence

of

the imperishable.

The historian

n

the usual senseoftheword s therecorder f eventsas events;

but behind

him stands

thesympathetic

cholar,

versed

n the

mediumof

a

work

of literature

r art,

guardian

of

tradition,

able to

interpret

o

us the

abiding

values

whichhave

had

and

continue

o

have meaning

forour life.

The newer

historical

tudy

of the

classics

of

ancient

litera-

ture

and art

interprets

heir values

and

measures them

by

standardsdifferingrom those which the old humanism n-

voked.

But

this

newer type

of

study

exists and

should

continue

to

exist only

on

the

assumption

that

these

values

exist.

It cannot

in the long

run maintain

ife

f

t

sinks to

a

mere

technique

nd

method,

ndifferent

o

its

subject

matter.

The

very standards

of exactness

which

it

vaunts have

de-

veloped

from he

belief

hat

it was

dealing

with

the

fragments

of a worldwhichwas believedto be ofunlimited alue. The

older

classicists' conception

of the

significance

f

ancient

literature

nd

art

rested

upon

a

dogmatic

assumption

hat

its

monuments

were

to

be

regarded

s

setting

bsolute

standards

of

excellence,

imeless

nd

perfect.

It

was derived

immedi-

ately

from ater

Greek

and Roman

writers,

ho canonized

the

masterpieces

f

earlier centuries

s a

gallery

of models

to

be

forever

mitated. Each authorand each workhad its place

in

a

fixed

anon

which

admitted

no

newcomers,

nd

to

each

was attached

a

carefully

weighedpredication

of

attributes

r

qualities.

When

with

awakening

historical

sense this whole

unreal

and

abstract

structurecollapsed,

the

monuments

of

Greek




10/13

Vol.

lxvii] Classical

Philology

nd Humanism

371

and

Roman

literature tood

forth

resh nd

new,

n

the

fullness

of

their

iving form nd

content,

he

expression

f

individual

men and times. They were freeto be read and understood

as

they

were,

without

thought

of

furnishing

models of

excel-

lence or of

having any

relationto

educational ends.

But

though they

were

released from a

role

which

their

authors

can

neverhave

contemplated,

there emanates

from

them

nevertheless n

emotion

and spiritual

elevation,

educa-

tive in

the

highest ense,

which

no one can fail

to

experience

who approaches them with earnest purpose to understand.

Even

the

strict

mastery

which

scholars

seek

is

most rewarded

where

this spiritual

nfluence

s

most

deeply

felt.

Apprecia-

tion

will

have

different

egrees

of

clarity,

from

he

vague stir

of

enthusiasm,

nd realization

that

one's

own life s

involved

in

the

poet's

words, to

the sharp

and

distinct

perception

of

exact

meanings.

There is no

limit

to'the ntensificationf our

understanding fthespiritualworld. An estheticnature will

perhaps

respond

more

mmediately o the fascination

f

form.

But the

works of

the

ancients

represent o

us

something till

more

comprehensive-a

world

of

the

highest

human

values.

The

best

way to

explain

this

is

perhaps to

go

back

to the

views which

the

Greeks

themselves

held of

poetry

and

of

spiritual

creation.

To themtheworkofartwas never a mereobject ofesthetic

pleasure.

It was

the

bearer ofan

ethos,

feeling r

intention

of

the artist

which

has sought

deal

expression,

nd

found

t.

It

was

true

to life,

not

realistic n the

narrow

sense of

mere

verisimilitude,

ut

true in

the

perfection

r

excellence

arete)

of

the

object

represented.

The

subject

of

their

rt is

always

man in

all

the

essential

relationsof his

existence to life,

to

nature, nd to destiny. Wherepoetry eases

and the

content

of

thoughtcalls for

prose-oratory,

history,

hilosophy-the

same

rule

holds.

The

literature f

the

Greeks

offers

hus a

splendid

spectacle:

the

strivingof

the

human spirit

for

the

abiding

expression of

its

ideals, the

moulding

of

human

excellence

its

arete) from

he

heroic

stage of

the epic

to

the




11/13

372

Werner aeger

[1936

laterphases

of the

tragic, he

political,the

philosophical

man.

The

embodiment

of these

values

in art

was to be sure

only

what the Greek could create out of his Greek environment,

and

we have

learned

not to

separateworks

of the

spirit

from

their proper

environment,

s the

older

humanistsdid.

We

have learned

to feel

themmore

vividly

and individually

by

referringhem

to the

time

and place and

atmosphere

f

their

origins. This

does

not

mean however

that we

should

see

these

works

resolved

nto thehistory

f their

ime

and become

merely ourcesforour knowledgeof a bygoneage. On the

contrary

he effort

o grasp

them n their

first etting

causes

us

to

understandbetter

how and

whythey had

the strength

to rise above their

time

into the

regions

of permanence

nd

timelessness.

It

is precisely

histimelessness

which

history ecords.

The

revelation

of heroichumanity

n

Homer

did not seem

anti-

quated to the Greeksof a laterand morerational period. It

maintained

its validity

far beyond

a thousand

years, and

remained

the foundation

of culture

through uccessive

cen-

turiesof

Greek life.

In

a similarway

each new

period

made

its

contributiono

that which

the

Greeksat the

culminating

point

of theirconsciousness,

n

the fifth

nd fourth enturies

before

Christ,

called their teaching,

their lesson

(paideia).

Since theysoughtto mould the universal n the individual,

in literatures well

as

in

the

plastic

arts,

their reative

hought

transcended

he bounds of

their

own

national

existence,

nd

in missionary

piritthey early

strove

to extend

their culture

to other

people.

Thus

Isocrates

attributes to this

Greek

paideia

an educational

function

for the

whole

of

humanity.

The

Romans

in

Cicero's

time

proved

the best

interpreters

f

this

continuing

unction f theGreek

spirit,

nd expressed t

by

their

rendering

of

the

Greek

paideia

with

the Latin

humanitas,

he ideal

manifestation

f

man. It is

fromthis

meaning

of the Latin

word,

as

the

spiritual

development

of

man

through

rt

and

thought

nd

literature,

hat

our

concept

of humanism

nd

its name

has

come.




12/13

Vol.

lxvii]

Classical

Philology

nd Humanism

373

Thus

even in

antiquity

the

problem

was

propounded:

to

explain the

mysterious

ircumstance hat deals and

standards

ofexcellence haped underparticularhistorical onditionsby

a

particular

people

could

maintain their

validity

and

their

inspiration

or

other

times

and

other

peoples,

and

become

in

fact human

culture

n a

universal ense.

Efforts

will

be

made

again and

again

to

explain

this

quality

of Greek

culture

and

its

Roman

derivative.

For

us it is

enough to

know

that

it

is

so,

and its

truth s

proven

by the

experience

of the

centuries

sinceitsorigin.

I

have

attempted to show that

the

nature and

the tasks

of

modern

classical

study

need

not

stand in

any

antithesis o

the

older

humanism.

They

are rather

he form

f

humanism

suited to

our

times and to the

modern

habit

of

scientific

thought

nd

inquiry.

We must

not abandon

nor

fail to use

any

of

the

achievements

f

the

exact

scholarship f

our

day.

On the other hand I maintain and champion the essential

truth

f the

older humanism:

that

knowledge nd

studyof

the

ancientworld

s a

unique

civilizing nd

creative

power

n

the

life

of

nations

and of

individuals.

The

forms

nd

mouldswhich

the

ancient

world

created

as

the

expression f

theirhighest

ultureare not

for

us

ultimate

ends

to attain

and

to

reproduce, ut

they

remain

the

founda-

tion stones upon which is built our occidental civilization.

This

civilization

s a

product

of

repeated

recurrence o

the

ancient

tradition,

romwhich n

turn

t has

drawn

mpulseto

new

creation.

One

'renaissance'

has

succeeded

another-

from

the

Carolingian

time,

through

the

great

Renaissance,

down

to

the

neo-Hellenism

f

the

early

nineteenth

entury-

marking

periodic

returnsto

the

regenerating

ower

of the

common source. The reciprocalinfluences f the classical

inheritance

and of

original

creation, each

upon

the

other,

constitute

the

underlyingunity

of

the

spiritual

life of

the

Western

world.

Humanism

itself

s an

expanding

term, nd

what

was once

applied

only to

the

study of

the

Greco-Roman

worldhas

its




13/13

374 Werner aeger [1936

application

to all literatures

nd

languagesand

art

which

are

capable

of making

contribution

o the human spirit. The

study of peoples and tongueswhichlie outside the circleof

Greek and Roman

origins

furnishes

windows,

so

to speak,

through

which

the

Western pirit

s able

to contemplate ther

races

and alien

ideals,

to contrast

hem

with tself,

nd

to learn

from them.

It is

the open-minded

receptivity

of Greek

curiosity nd

inquiry-

historia

n the

proper

meaning),

still

living n

modernresearch,

which

mpelsus to

enrich urselves

in thisway withwhat the Greekscalled the wisdomof the

barbarians.

The nations

ofthemodern

world, evered by

boundaries

of

space

and language

and

national usage,

understand

one

another

only

to the

degree

in

which

they

understand

the

spiritual

anguage

which

is

the common

hereditary

diom

of

our being. In

so far

as

we live for the

task

of

shaping

and

developingmankindaccordingto the laws and potentialities

of

man's

nature,we

live in

a worldwhich

I

venture

to

call

hellenocentric-a

spiritual

world

revolving

bout

the

sun

of

Hellenic

wisdom.

The planets

of this

worldwill

not

fade

nto

darkness

o

long

as this central

un does not lose its splendor.

Thi d l d d f 132 248 9 8 Th 19 M 2015 21 47 43 UTC
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

jaeger, werner_classical philology and humanism_tapha, 67_1936_363-374

Documents