History and Literature

The Ancient Language of Learning and Science

This article has been reviewed in accordance with our editorial policy.

Writ­ten by Hans Aili, Pro­fes­sor emer­i­tus of Latin, Stock­holm University.

Pos­sess­ing a com­pen­dious knowl­edge of the phys­i­cal world was eas­i­er in the old days than it is today. Not so very long ago, all human knowl­edge could be housed with­in the brain of one sin­gle human being. All this knowl­edge, more­over, was expressed in one sin­gle language. 

It is true that a great deal of this ancient fund of knowl­edge has since been proved faulty and that we have nowa­days pro­gressed much fur­ther along the path of sci­ence. This does not change the sim­ple fact that Sci­ence pos­sessed this sin­gle, all-embrac­ing lan­guage capa­ble of express­ing every­thing, in prose as well as in poet­ry, and that all bud­ding sci­en­tists learned this lan­guage from first grade at school, read it, wrote in it, gain­ing famil­iar­i­ty and flu­en­cy until they could use it in con­ver­sa­tion and cor­re­spon­dence with all the oth­ers who had pro­gressed along the same road – and that meant every man and woman of cul­ture and learn­ing from the whole of Europe and most of the world, irre­spec­tive of their nation­al­i­ty – Ger­man, Ital­ian, French­man, Eng­lish­man, Scot or Swede (and many others).

This lan­guage was Latin, which, besides its own vocab­u­lary, pos­sessed a rich hoard of words, culled from the Greek and trans­formed to fit their new environment.

A state­ment like this is true but restrict­ed by one impor­tant fac­tor: Latin was a lan­guage of writ­ing and lit­er­a­ture. When spo­ken and heard, it offered unex­pect­ed pit­falls. When the Swedish nat­u­ral­ist, Carl Lin­naeus, vis­it­ed Eng­land in the mid­dle of the 1730s, he met and con­versed with Sir Hans Sloane and oth­er illu­mi­nar­ies of the Roy­al Soci­ety, but com­plained after­wards that Sir Hans did not know Latin. Lin­naeus, for his part, had no Eng­lish. His reac­tion was almost cer­tain­ly wrong – it is not very like­ly that Sloane’s Latin was defi­cient. The real prob­lem prob­a­bly was that Latin is pro­nounced in one way in Eng­land and in quite a dif­fer­ent way in Swe­den. Every mod­ern nation has its own rules for pro­nounc­ing Latin, and when we speak Latin, each accord­ing to our own nation­al rules, we find every­body else impos­si­ble to under­stand, at the best, or incred­i­bly fun­ny, at the worst. And they, of course, think the same about us!

Lin­naeus, how­ev­er, lived dur­ing a peri­od that strad­dled a great divid­ing line in time: after the year 1750 the ver­nac­u­lar lan­guages (Eng­lish, French, Ger­man, Ital­ian, Por­tuguese, and Span­ish, and all oth­ers) start­ed an irrev­o­ca­ble process where­by they took over as the lan­guages of Sci­ence and Learn­ing. The med­ical pro­fes­sion resist­ed longest – it is easy to find dis­ser­ta­tions in Med­i­cine, writ­ten in Latin, and dat­ing from the mid­dle of the 1800s. For the med­ical pro­fes­sion, it was very impor­tant to pos­sess one, sin­gle, well-devel­oped and shared lan­guage, and to give up this pos­ses­sion and receive four or five still not ful­ly devel­oped lan­guages in its place was no very great improve­ment. But progress moves for­wards, as we say, and after a short bout in the 1950s, when Latin with­out Inflec­tions, gen­er­al­ly called Inter­lin­gua, was tried out as a lan­guage of con­fer­ences, Eng­lish stepped in to take over as the inter­na­tion­al lan­guage of Science.

But we are still fac­ing the fact that a very large pro­por­tion of the works of Sci­ence and Med­i­cine pub­lished before 1750 were writ­ten in Latin. Any­one wish­ing to study the his­to­ry of Sci­ence will find that year to be a lin­guis­tic divid­ing line, an iron cur­tain that only deter­mined stud­ies in Latin will help you to raise. We may add anoth­er com­pli­ca­tion: the sci­en­tists of that time wrote a Latin that had been devel­oped and brought to per­fec­tion in the last cen­tu­ry before Christ. The names of these cre­ative inno­va­tors and lit­er­ary genius­es are, Cae­sar, Cicero, Vergil, Horace, Livy, and many oth­ers. They did not write about sci­ence but about war, they made speech­es on pol­i­tics and legal mat­ters, wrote learned tomes on his­to­ry and poet­ry about Love or the great­ness of Rome. The sci­en­tists of the 16th, 17th, and 18th cen­turies imi­tat­ed their lan­guage, to the best of their abil­i­ty, but added new words and new thoughts. They still loved and imi­tat­ed the com­pli­cat­ed gram­mar and bril­liant style of the ancients, and this com­bined imi­ta­tion and inno­va­tion makes mod­ern Latin of Sci­ence both dif­fi­cult and charming.

It is easy to illus­trate this. Maps offer excel­lent exam­ples. The geo­g­ra­phers of the ear­ly mod­ern world found the shape of the plan­et Earth an intrigu­ing sub­ject for study, and they formed many con­flict­ing the­o­ries. Abra­ham Ortelius (1527–1598) was a Flem­ish car­tog­ra­ph­er who pro­duced a line of maps of the world, among which we note one that he called Typus orbis ter­rarum (Image of the World):

This map rep­re­sents his the­o­ry on the shapes of the con­ti­nents and the names and loca­tions of oceans, land mass­es, rivers, and towns. Its cap­tions form a mix­ture of dif­fer­ent lan­guages: the large for­ma­tions have Latin names, small­er items bear names giv­en by the explor­ers, who were most­ly Span­ish and Por­tuguese. Adi­tion­al­ly, he offers more spe­cif­ic infor­ma­tion, and this is always in Latin. He recog­nis­es his debt to the ancient mas­ters by adding at the bot­tom a quote from one of them:

Quid ei potest videri mag­num in rebus huma­n­is, cui aeter­ni­tas omnis totiusque mun­di nota sit mag­ni­tu­do (”What, among things human, might appear large to one who knows the whole of eter­ni­ty and the size of the whole world”), a bon mot by Cicero, Tus­cu­lanae dis­pu­ta­tiones 4,37 – Ortelius is not word per­fect but the sense is the same as Cicero’s; I use a Latin spelling that is nor­mal today).

In the mid­dle of the Amer­i­can con­ti­nent Ortelieus puts a note: AMERICA SIVE INDIA NOVA. Anno 1492 a Christophoro Colom­bo nomine reg­is Castel­lae pri­mum detec­ta (Amer­i­ca, or New India. First dis­cov­ered in the year 1492 by Christo­pher Colum­bus in the name of the King of Castilia).

One geo­graph­i­cal point, still unde­cid­ed at that time, is not­ed: Nova Guinea nuper inven­ta, quae an sit insu­la an pars con­ti­nen­tis Aus­tralis incer­tum est (New Guinea, recent­ly dis­cov­ered; whether this is an island or a part of the South­ern con­ti­nent is not cer­tain). Along the length of this entire con­ti­nent he com­ments: Ter­ra Aus­tralis non­dum cog­ni­ta (The South­ern Land, not yet known).

A ques­tion of name is intro­duced: Hanc con­ti­nen­tem Aus­tralem, non­nul­li Mag­el­lani­cam regionem ab eius inven­tore nun­cu­pant (This South­ern con­ti­nent is called by some, The Mag­el­lan Region, after its discoverer).

He also offers a zoo­log­i­cal obser­va­tion on ani­mals in the Antarc­tic: Psit­ta­co­rum regio, sic a Lusi­ta­nis appel­la­ta ob incred­i­bile earum avi­um ibi­dem mag­ni­tudinem (The region of the Par­rots, thus named by the Por­tuguese because of the incred­i­ble size of these birds there). 

At the extreme right-hand low­er cor­ner the con­ti­nent bor­der­ing on the South Pole is award­ed a com­ment: Vastis­si­mas hic esse regiones ex M. Pauli Veneti et Lud. Var­toman­ni scrip­tis pere­gri­na­tion­ibus con­stat (That these lands are enor­mous­ly large is known thanks to the wan­der­ings of Mar­co Polo of Venice and Lodovi­co de Varthemas).

These pieces of infor­ma­tion are, per­haps, not so very deep, but rather charm­ing – not least the fact that the Por­tuguese con­sid­ered the pen­guins to be vari­ants of the par­rots. But unless you know Latin, this infor­ma­tion will escape your atten­tion entirely.

A per­son­al note might be of inter­est here: my inter­est in Latin as a source lan­guage for the his­to­ry of Sci­ence was aroused by the request of a col­league, who had no Latin, but wished me to take a look at two 17th cen­tu­ry aca­d­e­m­ic trea­tis­es pub­lished at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Upp­sala, Swe­den: Jonas Loc­naeus, Murus Sinen­sis (The Chi­nese Wall) of 1694 and Eric Roland, De mag­no Sinarum impe­rio (On the Great Empire of the Chi­nese) of 1697. I was award­ed the chance of pre­sent­ing this work at two con­fer­ences held at Fudan Uni­ver­si­ty of Shang­hai. The theme of the sec­ond con­fer­ence, held in 2008, was The His­to­ry of Geog­ra­phy. The organ­is­ers, wish­ing to illus­trate the his­tor­i­cal and inter­na­tion­al aspect of this sub­ject had tak­en an old map of South-East Asia and repro­duced it in two ways, as a back­drop to the pan­el and as a dec­o­ra­tion on the tote bags giv­en to the par­tic­i­pants. The map is drawn in a fash­ion that puts North point­ing to the left, and the East point­ing upwards. 

Just as Ortelius’s map, this one offers us names of geo­graph­i­cal fea­tures and points of inter­est , all in Latin. 

One small notice inter­est­ed me par­tic­u­lar­ly. It tells the his­to­ry of a lake, some­where on the bor­der between Bur­ma and Siam. It appears on the close-up pic­ture above:

Lacus hic rotun­dus in San­cij provin­cia, fac­tus fuit inun­da­tione Anno 1557, in qua sub­m­er­sae sunt civ­i­tates septem, praeter oppidu­la et pagos, et mor­tal­i­um ingen­tem numerum uno tan­tum puero in trun­co arboris ser­va­to (This round lake in the province of Guanxi was cre­at­ed by an inun­da­tion in the year 1557, and there sev­en cities were drowned besides towns and vil­lages, includ­ing an enor­mous num­ber of humans, the one sin­gle sur­vivor being a boy rid­ing on a tree-trunk).

The par­tic­i­pants were Chi­nese almost to a man, and none of them had any Latin. Inter­pret­ing this map with­out this knowl­edge must have been very frustrating…

To con­clude – being able to read Latin will help you dif­fuse the fog that start­ed to sep­a­rate the sci­en­tists of the late 18th cen­tu­ry from those of the 17th cen­tu­ry and earlier.

You do not require a per­fect knowl­edge of the Latin word end­ings and the rules of Latin syn­tax in order to enjoy the mean­ing of its vocab­u­lary. This is par­tic­u­lar­ly true when it comes to the Latin used by the med­ical pro­fes­sion. They some­times use sin­gle words to cov­er up uncom­fort­able state­ments: ”The prog­no­sis is infaust” – a phrase I observed in a hand­book of the 1930s – means that the patient’s fam­i­ly might as well order a cof­fin at once. This usage of Latin, as the secret lan­guage of a pro­fes­sion­al group, was well estab­lished even in the Mid­dle Ages, when priests could talk to each oth­er on things like the prob­lems of faith and dog­ma or sex, that they thought too sen­si­tive for laymen.

The med­ical pro­fes­sion has, indeed, a great respect for Latin­ists, see­ing that their entire vocab­u­lary of tech­ni­cal terms is built on this foun­da­tion. But Med­ical Latin is in real­i­ty two lan­guages: the words nam­ing body parts and organs (Anato­my) is in Latin, those nam­ing dis­eases (Pathol­o­gy) are in ori­gin Greek words that have been giv­en a Latin spelling.

In Clas­si­cal Antiq­ui­ty, the med­ical men knew and named a lot of human organs, but these were main­ly those you can see with­out dis­sect­ing a body. These well-known organs had every­day names of very ancient ori­gins, such as caput (head), auris (ear), nasus (nose), os (mouth). When anatomists start­ed open­ing up the human body, they found lots of new things to name. In order to facil­i­tate learn­ing, they adopt­ed a tech­nique of equat­ing the organ they saw with things they knew from nature. Look­ing at an arm (or open­ing up an arm) they saw, for instance,  things that looked like lit­tle mice, writhing under the skin, and called them mus­cu­lus (lit­tle mouse); open­ing the skull, they saw fea­tures look­ing like the fur­rows of a plough, call­ing them sul­cus; an open­ing that looked like a drill hole was a fora­men. These names are thus metaphors and describe by com­par­i­son instead of just point­ing out with an indi­vid­ual name (deic­tic words).

The Latin used by sci­en­tists and med­ical peo­ple is best described by a metaphor: it is a high wall hid­ing a secret gar­den. Unless sci­en­tists have stud­ied Latin, they have no good way of look­ing into this enchant­ed world, for sur­pris­ing­ly few of the cen­tral sci­en­tif­ic works have been trans­lat­ed into the ver­nac­u­lar. William Har­vey (1578–1657) in 1653 pub­lished a work enti­tled Guiliel­mi Harveii Exerci­ta­tiones anatom­i­cae de motu cordis et san­gui­nis cir­cu­la­tione (William Harvey’s Anatom­i­cal Trea­tise on the Move­ment of the Heart and the Cir­cu­la­tion of Blood). It offers proof, for the first time, that the blood does, indeed, cir­cu­late in the body, hav­ing been set in motion by the heart. It was trans­lat­ed into Eng­lish only in 1957!

The Latin­ists, hav­ing learnt to climb the wall hid­ing this enchant­ed gar­den, are in the oppo­site posi­tion: they are able to look into the gar­den but are sur­pris­ing­ly indif­fer­ent to the won­ders con­tained therein.

This is a sit­u­a­tion that mer­its a new way of thinking!

Hans Aili

Hans Aili

Hans Aili is Professor Emeritus of Latin (Stockholm University, Sweden). His research has focused on three principal areas: stylistics of Classical Latin Prose (The Prose Rhythm of Sallust and Livy (1979)), Swedish medieval Latin (Sanctae Birgittae Revelationes (IV 1992, VIII 2002)), and Swedish Neo-Latin literature, especially war-time propaganda poetry and, scientific writings.
Written by Hans Aili

Written by Hans Aili

Related articles

The Latin of Saxo Grammaticus

The Latin of Saxo Grammaticus

The Hunt for Saxo  Shortly after the year 1208, Saxo Grammaticus put the finishing touches to his great ...