Refer to pp. 102-104 and 113-115 in Ecce Romani II as you answer these questions.
Match the age of the child to his (or perhaps her) teacher.
| Stavka koja se može prevući | arrow_right_alt | Odgovarajuća stavka |
|---|---|---|
age 16+ | arrow_right_alt | mother (or perhaps slave) |
ages 12-16 | arrow_right_alt | magister lūdī or litterātor |
ages 0-6 | arrow_right_alt | grammāticus |
ages 7-11 | arrow_right_alt | rhētor |
Match the age of the child to the subject he (or perhaps she) studied in school.
| Stavka koja se može prevući | arrow_right_alt | Odgovarajuća stavka |
|---|---|---|
ages 7-11 | arrow_right_alt | training in basic manners and behavior |
age 16+ | arrow_right_alt | reading, writing, arithmetic |
ages 0-7 | arrow_right_alt | literature and other subjects necessary for understanding and interpreting literature |
ages 12-16 | arrow_right_alt | rhetoric (Greek term) or oratory (Latin term) |
In addition to Latin and Latin literature, Roman young men (and sometimes young women) also studied the ____________________ language and literature.
Briefly explain what rhetoric (Greek term: rhetoric; Latin term: oratory) was, and why it was so important for young Roman men.
Compare and contrast Roman education with your own education. Include at least two similarities and two differences.
You may wish to consider such topics as:
who received an education,
how education was paid for,
the student-teacher relationship,
teaching style or classroom activities,
subjects studied,
the goals of education,
et cetera.
Why did young women NOT study rhetoric or oratory? What were they expected to do instead?
Explain the role of the paedagōgus.