{"word_count": 149, "character_count": 1017}
This paper will show how the posthumous work of Luis de Mata i Araujo, his Guía del perfecto latino (1848), was written in order to provide an alternative viewpoint to the Manual histórico-crítico de la literatura latina, written by Ángel María Terradillos in 1846. Both scholars –the former, the Chair of Latin language in the Universidad Central; the latter, a lecturer in this same university- represent two different ways of understanding the emerging teaching of Latin literature. Mata i Araujo follows the patterns established during the Spanish Enlightenment, whereas Terradillos abides by the new liberal education, led by Antonio Gil de Zárate. This kind of education preferred providing the new citizens with a thin veneer of classical culture, rather than a deep knowledge of Latin. This divorce between the teaching of a classical literature and the language itself probably stands for the final defeat of Humanism in contemporary Spain.http://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/CFCL/article/view/42761/40631&#160;