This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
Fascinating to reflect on what is the same and different between this classic Authorized Grammar -- in theory the only legal one to use to teach grammar from Henry VIII's royal decree to the desuetude of the 1604 Canon Laws sometime in the 19th century -- and modern Latin teaching. We're still teaching the paradigms, though maybe not in the same order -- but rarely do we cover the "concordances" or principles of syntax as Lily does, and we leave students to memorize as they go or just figure out the principles of stem formation or determining noun gender that Lily teaches (occasionally imperfectly) in "Propria quae Maribus" or "As in Praesenti." Of course, another rather significant difference is that we do not write half of our grammars in Latin! (Though if you look at the pedagogy of modern languages this would not be considered anything unusual.) If you want some sense of how a skilled Renaissance pedagogue might have taught from this book, see John Brinsley's Ludus Literarius.
Read for a Shakespeare related course and in conjunction with my English History studies. Overall, I found this work of immense interest - a good work for the researcher and enthusiast also. This work may prove to be one of my future resources for ghost authoring novels for E.MH. Ratterman. I found this play's contents inspiring - number rating relates to the book's contribution to my needs.