Editing Neo-Latin (section)

===Height: 1500–1700===
The Protestant Reformation (1520–1580), though it removed Latin from the liturgies of the churches of Northern Europe, promoted the reform of the new secular Latin teaching.<ref>Black, Robert ''School'', pp. 228–9 in {{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015}}</ref>

The heyday of Neo-Latin was 1500–1700, when in the continuation of the Medieval Latin tradition, it served as the [[lingua franca]] of science, medicine, legal discourse, theology, education, and to some degree diplomacy in Europe. This coincided with the growth of printed literature; Latin dominated early publishing.{{sfn|Waquet|2001|pp=81–82}} Classic works such as [[Thomas More]]'s {{lang|la|[[Utopia (More book)|Utopia]]}} were published. Other prominent writers of this period include Dutchmen [[Hugo Grotius|Grotius]] and [[Johannes Secundus|Secundus]] and Scotsman [[George Buchanan]].<ref name=":0">''Neo-Latin literature'', in {{harvnb|Bergin|Law|Speake|2004|pp=338–9}}</ref> Women, while rarely published, also wrote and composed poetry in Latin, [[Elizabeth Jane Weston]] being the most well known example.<ref name=":0" />

====Latin in school education, 1500–1700====
Throughout this period, Latin was a universal school subject, and indeed, the pre-eminent subject for [[elementary education]] in most of Europe and other places of the world that shared its culture. Schools were variously known as [[grammar school]]s in Britain, [[Latin school]]s in France, Germany, the Netherlands and colonial North America, and also [[Gymnasium (school)|Gymnasia]] in Germany and many other countries.{{citation needed|date=June 2023}}

Latin was frequently the normal medium of education, both for teaching the Latin language, and for other subjects. Fluency in spoken Latin was an objective as well as the ability to read and write; evidence of this includes the emphasis on use of diacritics to maintain understanding of vowel quantity, which is important orally, and also on the use of {{lang|la|Colloquia}} for children's learning, which would help to equip the learner with spoken vocabulary for common topics, such as play and games, home work and describing travel. In short, Latin was taught as a "completely normal language",<ref>{{harvnb|Leonhardt|2009|pp=223}}</ref> to be used as any other. Colloquia would also contain moral education. At a higher level, Erasmus' Colloquia helped equip Latin speakers with urbane and polite phraseology, and means of discussing more philosophical topics.<ref>{{harvnb|Leonhardt|2009|pp=222–224}}</ref>

[[File:Colloquia Familiaria 18. Gratia. Giving Thanks..webm|thumb|left|One of the simpler sections from Erasmus' {{lang|la|[[Colloquies|Colloquia Familiaria]]}}, explaining how to say thank you in Latin.]] Changes to Latin teaching varied by region. In Italy, with more urbanised schools and Universities, and wider curricula aimed at professions rather than just theology, Latin teaching evolved more gradually, and earlier, in order to speed up the learning of Latin.<ref>{{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015|p=227}}</ref> For instance, initial learning of grammar in a basic Latin word order followed the practice of medieval schools. In both medieval and Renaissance schools, practice in Latin written skills would then extend to prose style composition, as part of 'rhetoric'. In Italy, for prose for instance, a pupil would typically be asked to convert a passage in {{lang|la|ordo naturalis}} to {{lang|la|ordo artificialis}}, that is from a natural to stylised word order.<ref>Black, Robert ''School'' in {{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015|pp=222–223}}</ref> Unlike medieval schools, however, Italian Renaissance methods focused on Classical models of Latin prose style, reviving texts from that period, such as Cicero's ''[[De Inventione]]'' or [[Quintilian]]'s {{lang|la|[[Institutio Oratoria]]}}.<ref name="Knight 2015 224" />

Teaching of specific, gradually harder Latin authors and texts followed rhetorical practice and learning.  In Italy, during the medieval period, at different periods, Classical and Christian authors competed for attention, but the Renaissance and Neo-Latin period saw a decisive move back to authors from the Classical period, and away from non-Classical 'minor' authors such as [[Boethius]], whose language was simpler.<ref>Black, Robert ''School'' in {{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015|p=225}}</ref>

[[File:John Calvin Museum Catharijneconvent RMCC s84 cropped.png|thumb|right|John Calvin was among the promoters of reform of Latin education, working with Corderius.]] The changes to schooling in Northern Europe were more profound, as methods had not evolved as quickly. Adopting Italian innovations, changes to the teaching of grammar and rhetoric were promoted by reformers including [[John Calvin|Calvin]], [[Philip Melanchthon|Melanchthon]] and [[Martin Luther|Luther]].<ref>{{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015|pp=228–9}}</ref> Protestants needed Latin to promote and disseminate their ideas, so were heavily involved with the reform of Latin teaching. Among the most influential of these reformers was Calvin's Latin teacher and educational collaborator [[Corderius]], whose bilingual colloquies were aimed at helping French-speaking children learn to speak Latin.<ref>Backus, Irena in {{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015|pp=336–337}}</ref>

Among Latin schools, the rapid growth of [[Jesuit]] schools made them known for their dedication to high attainment in written and spoken Latin to educate future priests. This took place after the Catholic church affirmed their commitment to Latin in the liturgy and as a working language within the hierarchy at the [[Council of Trent]] in 1545–63. Jesuit schools were particularly well known for their production of [[Jesuit drama|Latin plays]], exclusive use of spoken Latin and emphasis on classical written style.<ref>Black, Robert ''School'' in {{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015|pp=228–9}}</ref>

However, the standards ultimately achieved by the whole school system were uneven. Not all students would acquire Latin to a high standard. Even in this period, an excessive focus on grammar and poor teaching methods were seen by reformers as a barrier to the acquisition of Latin.{{sfn|Waquet|2001|pp=7–40}} [[Comenius]] for instance was credited with significant attempts to make Latin more accessible through use of parallel Latin and native language texts, and more interesting through acquisition of vocabulary and the use of modern and more relevant information in texts.{{sfn|Leonhardt|2009|pp=234–236}}  Others worried whether it was appropriate to put so much emphasis on abstract language skills such as Latin poetry composition. As time went on, the difficulties with Latin teaching began to lead to calls to move away from an emphasis on spoken Latin and the introduction of more native-language-medium teaching.{{sfn|Waquet|2001|pp=7–40}}

====Latin in university education====
[[File:Christophorus Stimmelius - Frantz Friderich.jpg|thumb|left|Christophorus Stimmelius, the German author of the first and highly successful comedy about student life]] At the beginning of the Renaissance, universities in northern Europe were still dominated by theology and related topics, while Italian universities were teaching a broader range of courses relating to urban professions such as law and medicine. All [[university|universities]] required Latin proficiency, obtained in local grammar schools, to obtain admittance as a student. Throughout the period, Latin was the dominant language of university education, where rules were enforced against the use of vernacular languages.<ref>Knight, Sarah ''University'', p. 236, in {{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015}}</ref> Lectures and debates took place in Latin, and writing was in Latin, across the curriculum.

Many universities hosted [[Academic drama|newly or recently-written Latin plays]], which formed a significant body of literature before 1650.{{sfn|Ford|Taylor|2013|pp=7–18}} Plays included satires on student life, such as the play ''[[Studentes]]'' (Students), which went through many reprints.

Enforcement of Latin-only rules tended to decline especially after 1650.

====Latin in academia, law, science and medicine====
[[File:Mediaeval lecture.jpg|thumb|A fifteenth century lecture]]
Latin dominated topics of international academic and scientific interest, especially at the level of abstract thought addressed to other specialists. To begin with, knowledge was already transmitted through Latin and it maintained specialised vocabularies not found in vernacular languages. This did not preclude scientific writings also existing in vernaculars; for example [[Galileo]], some of whose scientific writings were in Latin, while others were in Italian, the latter less academic and intended to reach a wider audience using the same ideas with more practical applications.{{sfn|Waquet|2001|p=91}}

Over time, the use of Latin continued where international communication with specialist audiences was paramount. Later, where some of the discourse moved to French, English or German, translations into Latin would allow texts to cross language boundaries, while authors in countries with much smaller language populations or less known languages would tend to continue to compose in Latin.<ref>See chapters on the Low Countries, Scandinavia and East-Central Europe in {{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015}}</ref>

Latin was of course the major language of Christian theology. Both Catholic and Protestant writers published in Latin. While Protestant writers would also write in vernaculars, Latin was important for the international dissemination of ideas.<ref>Backus, Irena, ''Protestantism'' p. 342 in {{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015}}</ref>

Legal discourse, medicine, philosophy and sciences started from a strong Latin tradition, and continued as such. This began to change in the late seventeenth century, as philosophers and others began to write in their native language first, and translate into Latin for international audiences.<ref>Guiglioni, Giudo, ''Philosophy'' p. 254–56 in {{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015}}</ref> Translations would tend to prioritise accuracy over style.

====Latin and religious usage====
[[File:John Calvin- Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book I, chapter 1..webm|thumb|Reading from John Calvin's {{lang|la|[[Institutes of the Christian Religion|Institutio Christianae Religionis]]}} written in Latin]] The Catholic Church made exclusive use of Latin in the liturgy, resisting attempts even in the New World and China to diverge from it. As noted above, Jesuit schools fuelled a high standard of Latinity, and this was also supported by the growth of seminaries, as part of the [[Counter Reformation]]'s attempts to revitalise Catholic institutions.<ref>Harris, Jason, ''Catholicism'' p. 314-17 in {{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015}}</ref>

While in Protestant areas Latin was pushed out of the Church, this did not make Protestants hostile to Latin in education or universities. In fact, Latin remained a kind of bridge of communication across religious as well as linguistic divides in the {{lang|la|Res Publica Litterarum}}.<ref>Waquet, Francois, ''The Republic of Letters'', p. 68, in {{harvnb|Moul|2017}}</ref>

One exception to the general rule of vernacular services in Protestant countries can be observed in the [[Anglican Church]], where with the publication of the ''[[Book of Common Prayer]]'' of 1559, a Latin edition was published in 1560 for use in universities such as [[Oxford University|Oxford]] and the leading [[Grammar school|grammar]] and "[[Public school (United Kingdom)|public schools]]" (in the period, English schools established with charitable structures open to the general public; now a kind of private academy), where the liturgy was still permitted to be conducted in Latin.<ref>{{harvnb|Adams|1878|p=77}}.</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/Latin1560/BCP_Latin1560.htm |title=Liber Precum Publicarum, The Book of Common Prayer in Latin (1560). Society of Archbishop Justus, resources, Book of Common Prayer, Latin, 1560. Retrieved 22 May 2012 |publisher=Justus.anglican.org |access-date=9 August 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120612041548/https://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/Latin1560/BCP_Latin1560.htm |archive-date=12 June 2012 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

====Latin as a literary vehicle====
In this period, it was common for poets and authors to write in Latin, either in place of or in addition to their native language. Latin was a language for "high art" in an "eternal language", that authors supposed might outlast contemporary vernacular writings. It allowed for an international readership that shared the same Classical and recent Latin cultural reference points.

The literature did not stand apart from vernaculars, as naturally allusions and the same reference points could flow across language boundaries.<ref>Deniere, Tom, ''Neo-Latin literature and the Vernacular'' in {{harvnb|Moul|2017|pp=35–51}}</ref> However, these dynamics have become less well understood, as academics and other readers are not as familiar with the Latin works of the period, sometimes resulting in simplistic notions of competition and replacement of Latin over time. The actual processes were more complicated and are now a focus of Neo-Latin studies. For instance, stylistic borrowings flowed from Latin to the Dutch vernacular, where models were lacking in the latter.<ref>Thomas, Deneire '' Neo-Latin and Vernacular Poetics of Self-Fashioning in Dutch Occasional Poetry (1635–1640)'' in {{harvnb|Deneire|2014|pp=33–58}}</ref>

[[File:John Barclay (poet).jpg|thumb|The Scottish poet [[John Barclay (poet)|John Barclay]] is among the internationally influential Latin writers of the seventeenth century.]]

Outputs included novels, poems, plays and occasional pieces, stretching across genres analogous to those found in vernacular writings of the period, such as tragedy, comedy, satire, history and political advice.<ref>{{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015|pp=27–216}} See section one covering these and other genres</ref> [[Epistles|Epistolary]] (letter) writing containing poems and prose, designed for publication rather than purely receipt, had Classical antecedents and often contained strong elements of self-promotion.<ref>Papy, Jan, ''Leters'' in {{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015|pp=167–182}}</ref>

Some of these genres are harder for modern readers to evaluate; for instance many poems were written for specific occasions, such as appointments or institutional events. To modern audiences, such poetry appears contrived at its inception, so it is easy for the reader to assume a lack of pathos or skill.<ref>{{harvnb|Moul|2017|pp=7–8}}</ref>

At the time that many of these works were written, writers viewed their Latin output as perhaps we do high art; a particularly refined and lofty activity, for the most educated audiences. Moreover, there was a hope of greater, international recognition, and that the works written in the "Eternal language" of Latin would outlast writings in the vernacular.{{sfn|Riley|2016|pp=xii–xiii}}

Some very influential works written in Latin are not always commonly remembered, despite their ground-breaking nature. For example, ''[[Argenis]]'', by [[John Barclay (poet)|John Barclay]] was perhaps the first modern historical novel, and was popular across Europe.<ref>Riley, Mark, ''Fiction'' in {{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015|pp=183–198}}</ref>

Opinions vary about the achievements of this literary movement, and also the extent to which it reached its goal of being "classical" in style. Modern critics sometimes claim that the output of Neo-Latinists was largely derivative and imitative of Classical authors.  Latin authors themselves could recognise the dangers of imitation caused by the long training they were given in ingesting compositional techniques of Classical writers, and could struggle against it.<ref>See Haskell, Yasmin, ''Conjuring with the Classics: Neo Latin Poets and their familiars'', pp. 17–19 for an overview of these points and some arguments for and against originality in {{harvnb|Moul|2017|pp=17–34}}</ref> From another perspective, the "learned artifice" of Neo-Latin writing styles requires that we understand that "one of the most fundamental aspects of this artifice is imitation".<ref>[[Terence Tunberg|Tunberg, Terence]], in {{harvnb|Moul|2017|p=237}}</ref> Different approaches to imitation can be discerned, from attempting to adopt the style and manner of a specific author, especially of [[Cicero]], through to syntheses of Latin from good authors, as suggested by [[Poliziano|Angelo Poliziano]], taking elements from a range, to provide what Tunberg calls an "eclectic" style that was "new from the perspective of the whole creation".<ref>[[Terence Tunberg|Tunberg, Terence]], ''Approaching Neo-Latin Prose as Literature'' in {{harvnb|Moul|2017|pp=237–254}}</ref> The use of Latin exclusively as used by Cicero was [[Ciceronianus|heavily satirised by Erasmus]] who proposed a more flexible approach to Latin as a medium.<ref>Baker, Patrick, ''Historiography'' in {{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015|p=161}}</ref><ref>Sidwell, Keith ''Classical Latin-Medieval Latin-Neo Latin'' in {{harvnb|Knight|Tilg|2015|pp=20–21}}</ref>

Other critics have claimed that the expressive abilities of writers could not truly reach the same heights as in their native language; such concerns were sometimes expressed by contemporaries especially as time went on and vernaculars became more established. On the other hand, this criticism at the very least ignores the early age and intensity with which Latin was acquired.{{citation needed|date=June 2023}}

====Standards of written Latin====
Not all Latin aspired to be high literature, and whether it did or not, standards varied. Standards were most classical and writing more fluid in France and Italy.  In England, among typically unpublished scholarly works such as dissertations through the sixteenth century, written Latin improved in morphological accuracy, but sentence construction and idiom often reflected the vernacular. Similar patterns have been found in Sweden, where academic Latin tended to be very accurate in terms of morphology, but less Classical in its sentence patterns. In vocabulary and spelling, usage tend to be quite eclectic, using medieval forms and re-using Classical terms with modern meanings. In any case, it was accepted that technical terms would require neologisms.<ref name="Waquet 2001 124–127"/>

There are occasional differences between Classical and Neo-Latin, which can sometimes be assumed to be mistakes of the authors. However, careful analysis of available grammars often shows these differences to be based on the understanding of the grammar rules at the time. For instance, many grammarians believed that ''all'' names of rivers were masculine, even those ending in ''-a''.<ref>{{harvnb|Helander|2001|pp=29–32}}</ref>

Additionally, Neo-Latin authors tended to form new unattested words, such as {{lang|la|abductor}}<ref>{{harvnb|Helander|2001|p=33}} See [[:wiktionary:abductor|Abductor: Wiktionary)]]</ref> or {{lang|la|fulminatrix}},<ref>{{harvnb|Helander|2001|p=33}} See [[:wiktionary:Fulminatrix|Fulminatrix: Wiktionary)]]</ref> by using Classical rules. Helander says:

<blockquote>Apparently the authors did not care whether these words existed in the preserved Latin literature, as long as they were regularly formed. As a rule, their judgement was very sound, and in most cases we will not as readers realize that we are dealing with neologisms ... A large number of them were probably on the lips of the ancient Romans, although they have not survived in the texts preserved to us. One might wonder whether we are right in calling such words "neologisms".<ref name=":1">{{harvnb|Helander|2001|p=33}}</ref></blockquote>

The words used derived from a wider set of authors than just the "classical" period, especially among authors aiming at a higher level of style.<ref name=":1" /> Similarly, some Classical words which were uncommonly used were in much greater currency, such as {{lang|la|adorea}} (glory).<ref>{{harvnb|Helander|2001|p=32}}</ref>

The Latin used in scientific publications can be perceived as tending towards a simpler modern idiom, perhaps following the language patters of the writers' native language. Often it served a clear, less literary purpose, however, of providing an accurate international Latin text or translation.

====Latin as a spoken language====
[[File:Queen Elizabeth I's Reprimand of an Insolent Polish Ambassador..webm|thumb|An account of [[Queen Elizabeth I]]'s response in Latin to a representation from the Polish ambassador, showing her rhetorical ability in spoken Latin]] As a learnt language, levels of fluency would have varied. Discussions in specialised topics between specialists, or between educated people from different native language backgrounds would be preferred. Even among highly proficient Latin writers, sometimes spoken skills could be much lower, reflecting reticence for making mistakes in public, or simple lack of oral practice.

As noted below, an important feature of Latin in this period was that pronunciation tended to national or even local practice. This could make especially initial spoken communication difficult between Latinists from different backgrounds, English and French pronunciation being notably odd.<ref name=":2">{{harvnb|Waquet|2001|pp=160–163}}</ref> In terms of status, the Italian pronunciation tended to have higher status and acceptability.

From some time in the seventeenth century, Latin oral skills began to decline. Complaints about standards of oral Latin can be increasingly found from this time onwards.<ref name=":2" />

====Latin as an official and diplomatic language====
[[File:Traité de paix de Münster 1 sur 97 - Archives Nationales - AE-I-1-11.jpg|thumb|Treaty of Münster, part of the [[Peace of Westphalia]], negotiated and written in Latin]] Official and diplomatic settings are specific cases where the use of oral and conversational Latin would have taken place, in legal settings, in Parliaments, or between negotiators. The use of Latin would extend of course also to set speeches and texts such as treaties, but would also be the medium in which details would be discussed and problems resolved.

Latin was an official language of Poland, recognised and widely used.{{efn|"Who only knows Latin can go across the whole Poland from one side to the other one just like he was at his own home, just like he was born there. So great happiness! I wish a traveler in England could travel without knowing any other language than Latin!" Daniel Defoe, 1728}}<ref>Anatol Lieven, ''The Baltic Revolution: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and the Path to Independence'', Yale University Press, 1994, {{ISBN|0300060785}}, Google Print, p.48</ref><ref>Kevin O'Connor, Culture And Customs of the Baltic States, Greenwood Press, 2006, {{ISBN|0-313-33125-1}}, Google Print, p.115</ref><ref>Karin Friedrich et al., ''The Other Prussia: Royal Prussia, Poland and Liberty, 1569–1772'', Cambridge University Press, 2000, {{ISBN|0521583357}}, Google Print, p.88</ref> Between the 9th and 18th centuries, commonly used in foreign relations and popular as a second language among some of the nobility.<ref name="Friedrich" >Karin Friedrich et al., ''The Other Prussia: Royal Prussia, Poland and Liberty, 1569–1772'', Cambridge University Press, 2000, {{ISBN|0521583357}}, [https://books.google.com/books?id=qsBco40rMPcC&dq=Latin+language+szlachta&pg=PA88 Google Print, p. 88] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150915150106/https://books.google.com/books?id=qsBco40rMPcC&pg=PA88&dq=Latin+language+szlachta&as_brr=3&ei=J44rR5_XFZXC7AK4xeGVBQ&sig=3ecP0DjPuCLnTaEdVI76Ck8xSE8 |date=15 September 2015 }}</ref>

Through most of the 17th century, Latin was also supreme as an international language of diplomatic correspondence, used in negotiations between nations and the writing of treaties, e.g. the peace treaties of [[Peace of Westphalia|Osnabrück and Münster]] (1648). As an auxiliary language to the local vernaculars, Latin appeared in a wide variety of documents. The need to read such documents continued to be important for diplomats.<ref>{{harvnb|Waquet|2001|pp=97–99}}</ref>

The use of Latin in diplomatic contexts was especially important for smaller nations which maintained Latin for a variety of international purposes, who therefore pressed for it even as French established itself as a more common medium for diplomacy.<ref>{{harvnb|Ostler|2009|pp=295-6}}</ref>