John Henry Newman on Latin Prose Style:A Critical Edition of His Hints on Latin Composition Vincent Ferrer Blehl (bio) Good style, whether latin or english, remained a life-long concern for John Henry Newman. According to an article written for the Catholic University Gazette and reprinted in the latter part of the Idea of a University,1 Newman wished, from his earliest years, to write good Latin, but he was unable at first to grasp what was meant by a good Latin style. He read Cicero without learning what it was, but shortly before coming up to Oxford for his first full term, he came upon an article in the Quarterly Review,2 written, though Newman did not know it at the time, by Edward Copleston, Provost of Oriel. Studying this work, Newman began to note down idiomatic phrases and expressions, which lead him further into the mistake of thinking "that Latinity consisted in using good phrases." Consequently, despite repeated attempts to learn Latin, "when I was twenty I knew no more of Latin composition than I had known at fifteen."3 It was preparing for the Oriel fellowship in 1821–1822 that Newman came to realize that he should have started with the whole rather than the parts, and that "good Latinity lies in structure; that every word of sentence may be Latin, yet the whole sentence remain English; and that dictionaries do not teach composition."4 The occasion of this discovery, curiously enough, was another work of Copleston, Praelectiones Academicae, a series of lectures delivered terminally while he was Professor of Poetry at Oxford, a post held from 1802 until 1812. Of these lectures Newman later remarked: "As coming from a person of his high reputation for Latinity, they were displays of art: and, as addressed to persons who had to follow ex tempore the course of a discussion delivered in a foreign tongue, [End Page 37] they need a style as neat, pointed, lucid, and perspicuous as it was ornamental."5 Though the style of these lectures was less simple than Cicero's—more studied, more sparkling, still they were fitted to impress on a student what Latinity was. Newman began to write Latin in earnest as a preparation for the Oriel fellowship examination. He would set himself a subject and time himself in the execution of the composition. He also tried for the Latin essay prize, writing on the assigned topic: "An, re vera, praevaluerit apud eruditiores antiquorum poltheismus." Though Newman did not succeed in winning the prize, he succeeded in the very process of writing this essay, as he explained in a note appended to one of the two extant manuscripts of the essay, to grasp "the idea of Latin composition." When Newman had become a fellow of Oriel, Copleston very kindly corrected a copy of his essay. Perhaps encouraged by this assistance, Newman tried again for the Latin prize, in 1823, writing on the subject "Conditio servorum apud antiquos," but he was again unsuccessful. Having gained the idea of composition, Newman set himself to form from it rules and remarks for himself. "I could now turn Cicero to account, and I proceeded to make his writings the material of an induction, from which I drew out and threw into form what I have called a science of Latinity . . . or at least considerable specimens of such a science, the like of which I have not happened to see in print."6 Some of the examples used to illustrate the general rules were taken from Cicero and some from Copleston's Praelectiones. This work entitled in the first draft "Hints on Composition" and in the second, "Hints on Latin Composition," is printed here for the first time. Elementary and incomplete as it may seem to us now, accustomed to over a hundred years of scientific work on Latin composition, it seemed no less so to Newman in 1854, for he says: "considering, however, how much has been done for scholarship since the time I speak of, and especially how many German books have been translated, I doubt not I should now find my own poor investigations and discoveries anticipated and superseded by works which...
Read full abstract