THE SCHOOL:
In the last chapter we stated that the aim of the monastic school was frankly religious. In our next chapter we hope to prove that in practice this did not necessarily mean a narrow curriculum. Here we shall briefly state that the particulars we have been able to glean on a miscellaneous collection of topics are of some interest to the educationist. The data are so few on each topic that the treatment is necessarily somewhat disconnected. In general these topics refer to school age, accommodation of students, school buildings, methods of teaching and pedagogical principles so far as they are revealed in the meagre materials to hand.
Seven years was the age at which it was thought schooling should begin.[259] We do not know exactly what provision was made for young boys of this tender age, but we know that in case of the older students a few resided in the school itself, so it is possible that the younger children also resided in the school or in the houses of the teachers. Many of the students lived in the houses of people in the neighbourhood of the school, but the majority lived in huts which they built for themselves near the school. Where the school was a large one these huts were arranged in streets.[260] The poorer students lived in houses with the richer ones whom they waited upon and served, receiving in return food, clothing, and other necessities. Some even chose to live in this matter, not through poverty but through a self-imposed penance.[261]
There were no spacious lecture halls; the master taught and lectured and the pupils studied very much in the open air, when weather permitted.[262] Judging by the large number of monks in every monastery and recalling the fact that teaching was regarded as a most meritorious form of labour, we are inclined to think that there was a great deal of individual teaching, or at least teaching in small groups, especially when the weather was unfavourable for outdoor lectures. This conjecture derives some support from Bede, who informs us that of the Anglo-Saxons who went to Ireland many of them passed from one master’s cell to another for instruction.[263]
METHODS OF TEACHING:
In teaching reading it was usual to begin with the Alphabet. St. Columba’s first alphabet was written or impressed upon a cake which he afterwards ate as he played by the side of a stream near his tutor’s home.[264] Sometimes the alphabet was engraved upon a large stone.[265] The Psalms in Latin seem to have been the earliest subject of instruction.[266] As we have seen these were learned by rote, but judging by the numerous glosses and annotations[267] thereon it is almost certain that the teachers were not satisfied with mere repetition but explained the meaning thoroughly.
It may seem strange that the reading of Latin should be taught before the reading of the vernacular. The explanation is simple. The Irish alphabet is based on the Latin (as are the alphabets of most European languages) and consequently suits the phonetic system of the Irish language less perfectly than it does the Latin. Having learned the alphabet the reading of Latin is comparatively easy even for young students. At a later stage when the reading of the vernacular was introduced progress was no doubt rapid since the student had merely to associate the written symbols with sounds that were familiar to him.
The next stage was to teach writing. The letters were formed on a waxen tablet (polaire in Irish) with a pointed metal style (graib).[268] One of these old-time tablets is now in the National Museum, Dublin.[269] The writing on it is in Latin, apparently a pupil’s class notes.
Joyce thinks that there were no elementary books for teaching Latin and that the pupil had to face the difficulties of the language in a rough and ready manner, beginning right away at the author.[270] With this view we do not agree. There are still extant numerous vocabularies, paradigms, treatises on declensions, and several copies of Priscian’s grammatical tract all in the style of writing practised by Irish scribes. In such works we have clear evidence of preparations made to smooth the path for beginners. Our view is in harmony with the maxim laid down in the eighth century gloss: “It is the custom with good teachers (dagforcitlidib) to praise the understanding of their pupils that they may love what they hear.”[271] There is a similar reminder in another eighth century gloss.[272] This quotation is interesting as showing that oral teaching was practised, that good teaching was appreciated, that the methods of good teachers were commended for imitation and further that the learning process was to be as pleasant as possible. It would be a mistake to imagine that the desire to make learning attractive began and ended with the carving of alphabets on cakes. In the same connection we may refer to the practice of many eminent teachers who were wont to compose educational poems embodying the leading facts of history and other branches of instruction. A considerable number of compositions in old Irish MSS. are of this class. These poems were explained and commented upon by their authors and learned by rote by the pupils. Flann of Monasterboice followed this plan and we still have several of his educational poems on historical subjects.[273]