LATIN

LATIN. Latin continued to be taught, studied, and even spoken in the early modern period. Knowledge of Latin was a sign of social prestige. It was the international language used to conduct the day-to-day business of church and state. It was, above all, the language of the educated and governing classes. University courses were taught in Latin, scholars wrote in Latin, and most official correspondence was conducted in Latin.

Latin remained a living language throughout the Middle Ages and into the early modern period. Medieval Latin, however, differed considerably from the language spoken within the Roman Empire. New words had filtered their way into the language to meet the needs of political, ecclesiastical, and academic institutions, which were almost entirely medieval products. Words had changed meaning over the centuries, some of the grammatical rules had been altered, vernacular words had crept in, and spelling and pronunciation were inconsistent. Efforts were made by humanist scholars to stress the importance of classical Roman authors, particularly Cicero, Virgil, and Horace, as models for their own writings. Medieval Latin was considered by many humanists to be barbarous in comparison with the elegance of classical Latin. Not all scholars agreed, however. Many expressed their concern that an emphasis on the beauty of pagan classical Latin would corrupt the church and its theology.

Lorenzo Valla's (1407–1457) ambitious Elegantiae linguae latinae libri sex (printed 1471; Six books of the elegances of the Latin language) was a widely circulated work that proposed such reforms. Valla, like Desiderius Erasmus (1466?–1536), never advocated a slavish imitation of the classical authors. Other humanists, however, were proponents of Ciceronianism, the view that Cicero, considered by many to be the best Latin author of the classical world, should be the model for contemporary Latin usage. This meant that Ciceronians would only use words and constructions found in Cicero's writings. This movement was especially popular in Rome since Ciceronian language lent the majesty and authority of imperial Rome to the ideology and theology of the Renaissance papacy.

New Latin grammars were written with the hope of replacing the popular medieval grammars, such as the Doctrinale (c. 1199) of Alexander de Villa Dei, but this did not achieve wide success until the second half of the sixteenth century. Likewise, medieval spellings of certain words continued to be used into the sixteenth century despite efforts to restore the classical spelling. Latin pronunciation, too, varied significantly from region to region, as speakers tended to follow the norms of their mother tongue. Therefore, when Englishmen, Germans, and Italians were in the same room, they spoke Latin to each other, but with such different pronunciations that they sometimes could not be understood. The Italian pronunciation was most widely accepted because many people studied Latin in Italy, where they acquired this pronunciation.

By the seventeenth century, however, the attempts by humanists to restore classical Latin became overshadowed by the rise of the vernacular languages and the discoveries of the scientific revolution. Many European vernacular languages, such as French, English, and Italian, were highly developed and had become classical languages in their own right by this time. Each could boast of their own great writers, such as Dante (1265–1321) and Shakespeare (1564–1616). Furthermore, people still had to come up with new words to describe the new discoveries in science and technology that surpassed those of the Romans. Although scholars of the scientific revolution were trained in classical Latin, the number of academic works written in the vernacular began to increase rapidly. For example, Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) published some of his scientific results in Italian, Isaac Newton (1642–1727) in English, and Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz (1646–1716) in French. It took a long time before Latin was altogether replaced by the vernacular languages. In the early modern period, the choice of Latin still offered a writer several advantages. First, a work in Latin reached a broader audience since Latin was an international language. Second, Latin offered a more stable and standardized medium, while the vernacular languages were in a state of flux and changing rapidly. As society changed, the need for knowing Latin declined, and by the nineteenth century the vernacular languages had all but taken over.

See also Classicism ; Erasmus, Desiderius ; Humanists and Humanism .

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Benner, Margareta, and Emin Tengström. On the Interpretation of Learned Neo-Latin. Göteborg, 1977.

Grafton, Anthony. "The New Science and the Traditions of Humanism." In The Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Humanism, edited by Jill Kraye, pp. 203–223. Cambridge, U.K., and New York, 1996.

Jensen, Kristian. "The Humanist Reform of Latin Teaching." In The Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Humanism, edited by Jill Kraye, pp. 63–81. Cambridge, U.K., and New York, 1996.

The Right Way of Speaking Latin and Greek: A Dialogue. In Collected Works of Erasmus, vol. 26. Edited by Maurice Pope. Toronto, 1985.

Tunberg, Terence. "Neo-Latin Literature and Language." In Encyclopedia of the Renaissance, edited by Paul F. Grendler et al. Vol. 4, pp. 289–294. New York, 1999.

Milton Kooistra