[1]A. N. Whitehead, _Adventures of Ideas_ (New York, 1933), pp. 13, 14. [2]O. Spengler, _Der Untergang des Abendlandes_ (München, 1920). [3]“Der Aufbau der europäischen Kulturgeschichte,” in Schmoller’s _Jahrbuch für Gesetzgebung, Verwaltung und Volkswirtschaft im Deutschen Reiche_, XLIV (1920), 633 ff. [4]O. Spengler, _op. cit._, I, 153. [5]O. Spengler, _op. cit._, I, 29. [6]Spengler’s position is invalidated in his own terms by Bergson’s criticism of a deterministic view of life in nature. [7]O. Spengler, _ibid._ Leopold von Ranke has expressed a similar idea in the splendid and simple phrase, “Alle Epochen sind unmittelbar zu Gott.” [8]_History_, II, 35. [9]O. Spengler, _op. cit._, I, 15. Incidentally, this quotation illustrates the very point at issue by emphasizing the almost insuperable difficulty of formulating an alien mode of thought. In transposing the words of a German contemporary I have been obliged to blur his thoughts and lose shades of meaning at almost every step: _Seele_, _eminent historisch veranlagt_, _urweltliche Leidenschaft_, _Sorge_, derive their overtones and deepest meaning from a world of thought which includes, at the very least, German literature of the romantic period; these terms, therefore, hardly bear translating. It is obvious that the disparity of terms and concepts is immeasurably greater where an ancient civilization is concerned. [10]See my _Ancient Egyptian Religion_, New York, 1948, and _Kingship and the Gods_, Chicago, 1948. [11]O. Spengler, _op. cit._, I, 224 f. [12]Ruth Benedict, _Patterns of Culture_ (New York, 1934), 23-4. [13]_Ibid._, 250. [14]_Ibid._, 46. [15]_Ibid._, 254. [16]_Horizon_, Vol. XV, No. 85 (London, January 1947), 25-6. [17]_A Study of History_, I, 176. [18]_Op. cit._, I, 193. [19]_Op. cit._, IV, 130. [20]R. G. Collingwood, _The Idea of History_ (Oxford, 1946), 328-30, especially 328-9. The whole section should be read, since our quotations give but an inadequate impression of its cogency. [21]R. G. Collingwood, _The Idea of History_ (Oxford, 1946), 328-30, especially 328-9. “There is only one genuine meaning for this question. If thought in its first phase, after solving the initial problems of that phase, is then, through solving these, brought up against others which defeat it; and if the second solves these further problems without losing its hold on the solution of the first, so that there is gain without any corresponding loss, then there is progress. And there can be progress on no other terms. If there is any loss, the problem of setting loss against gain is insoluble.” [22]_A Study of History_, III, 216. [23]_Op. cit._, I, 159. [24]_Op. cit._, III, 381. [25]_Ibid. et passim._