In recent discussions among classical teachers about the advisability of alterations in the ‘O’ level Latin syllabus the deepest division of opinion seemed to be on the comparative value of set books and unseen translation. Many are reluctant to abandon set books, declaring that, even for those pupils who make a poor examination showing, the careful attempt to master some portion of Latin literature has been of value. On the other hand, it is said that set books may lead to parrot-like memorizing of inferior translations and that the direct experience of Latin literature which they give is generally very limited. It is possible to exaggerate the danger from poor translations. It can be assumed nowadays that boys and girls approaching an examination will use some translation or other; time might usefully be spent in the classroom comparing their accuracy and quality. Versions of a passage of Virgil by Conington, Day Lewis, Jackson Knight, and the modern equivalent of Kelly's Key might at any rate set a standard.