Only the learned read old books, and… now… they are of all men the least likely to acquire wisdom by doing so. …[G]reat scholars are now as little nourished by the past as the most ignorant mechanic who holds that “history is bunk…” [for] …when a learned man is presented with any statement in an ancient author, the one question he never asks is whether it is true. He asks who influenced the ancient writer, and how far the statement is consistent with what he said in other books, and what phase in the writer’s development, or in the general history of thought, it illustrates, and how it affected later writers, and how often it has been misunderstood (specially by the learned man’s colleagues) and what the general course of criticism on it has been for the last ten years, and what is the “present state of the question.” To regard the ancient writer as a possible source of knowledge-to anticipate that what he said could possibly modify your thoughts or your behavior-this would be rejected as unutterably simple-minded. … [Therefore, even though] learning makes a free commerce between the ages… every generation [is cut] off from all others… [and] …characteristic errors of one [are not] corrected by the characteristic truths of another.