order　to　see　clearly　what　we　are　about。　Moreover；　in　the　third　place；　we　must　first　take　a　general
  survey　before　we　descend　to　particulars；　else　the　whole　is　not　seen　for　the　mere　details…the　wood
  is　not　seen　for　the　trees；　nor　Philosophy　for　mere　philosophies。　We　require　to　have　a　general　idea
  of　the　nature　and　aim　of　the　whole　in　order　to　know　what　to　look　for。　Just　as　we　first　desire　to
  obtain　a　general　idea　of　a　country；　which　we　should　no　longer　see　in　going　into　detail；　so　we　desire
  to　see　the　relation　which　single　philosophies　bear　to　the　whole；　for　in　reality；　the　high　value　of　the
  detail　lies　in　its　relation　to　the　whole。　This　is　nowhere　more　the　case　than　with　Philosophy；　and　also
  with　its　history。　In　the　case　of　a　history；　indeed；　the　establishment　of　the　Universal　seems　to　be　less
  needful　than　in　that　of　one　of　the　sciences　proper。　For　history　seems　at　first　to　be　a　succession　of
  chance　events；　in　which　each　fact　stands　isolated　by　itself；　which　has　Time　alone　as　a
  connecting…link。　But　even　in　political　history　we　are　not　satisfied　with　this。　We　see；　or　at　least
  divine　in　it；　that　essential　connection　in　which　the　individual　events　have　their　place　and　relation　to
  an　end　or　aim；　and　in　this　way　obtain　significance。　For　the　significant　in　history　is　such　only　through
  its　relation　to　and　connection　with　a　Universal。　To　perceive　this　Universal　is　thus　to　apprehend　the
  significance。
  There　are；　therefore；　the　following　points　with　which　I　wish　to　deal　in　this　introduction。
  The　first　of　these　will　be　to　investigate　the　character　of　the　history　of　Philosophy；　its　significance；　its
  nature；　and　its　aim；　from　which　will　follow　inferences　as　to　its　treatment。　In　particular；　we　shall　get
  an　insight　into　the　relation　of　the　history　of　Philosophy　to　the　science　of　Philosophy；　and　this　will　be
  the　most　interesting　point　of　all。　That　is　to　say；　this　history　represents；　not　merely　the　external；
  accidental；　events　contained　within　it；　but　it　shows　how　the　content；　or　that　which　appears　to
  belong　to　mere　history；　really　belongs　to　the　science　of　Philosophy。　The　history　of　Philosophy　is
  itself　scientific；　and　thus　essentially　becomes　the　science　of　Philosophy。
  In　the　second　place；　the　Notion　of　Philosophy　must　be　more　adequately　determined；　and　from　it
  must　be　deduced　what　should　be　excluded　from　the　history　of　Philosophy　out　of　the　infinite
  material　and　the　manifold　aspects　of　the　intellectual　culture　of　the　nations。　Religion；　certainly；　and
  the　thoughts　contained　in　and　regarding　it；　particularly　when　these　are　in　the　form　of　mythology；
  are；　on　account　of　their　matter；　and　the　sciences　with　their　ideas　on　the　state；　duties　and　laws；　on
  account　of　their　form；　so　near　Philosophy　that　the　history　of　the　science　of　Philosophy　threatens　to
  become　quite　indefinite　in　extent。　It　might　be　supposed　that　the　history　of　Philosophy　should　take
  account　of　all　these　ideas。　Has　not　everything　been　called　Philosophy　and　philosophising？　On　the
  one　hand；　the　close　connection　has　to　be　further　considered　in　which　Philosophy　stands　with　its
  allied　subjects；　religion；　art；　the　other　sciences；　and　likewise　with　political　history。　On　the　other
  hand；　when　the　province　of　Philosophy　has　been　correctly　defined；　we　reach；　with　the
  determination　of　what　Philosophy　is　and　what　pertains　to　it；　the　starting…point　of　its　history；　which
  must　be　distinguished　from　the　commencements　of　religious　ideas　and　mere　thoughtful　conjectures。
  From　the　idea　of　the　subject　which　is　contained　in　these　first　two　points　of　view；　it　is　necessary　to
  pass　on　to　the　consideration　of　the　third　point；　to　the　general　review　of　this　history　and　to　the
  division　of　its　progress　into　natural　periods…such　an　arrangement　to　exhibit　it　as　an　organic；
  progressive　whole；　as　a　rational　connection　through　which　this　history　attains　the　dignity　of　a
  science。　And　I　will　not　occupy　further　space　with　reflections　on　the　use　of　the　history　of
  Philosophy；　and　other　methods　of　treating　it。　The　use　is　evident。　But；　in　conclusion；　I　wish　to
  consider　the　sources　of　the　history　of　Philosophy；　for　this　is　customary。
  Introduction
  A。　　The　Notion　of　the　History　of　Philosophy。
  THE　thought　which　may　first　occur　to　us　in　the　history　of　Philosophy；　is　that　the　subject　itself
  contains　an　inner　contradiction。　For　Philosophy　aims　at　understanding　what　is　unchangeable；
  eternal；　in　and　for　itself：　its　end　is　Truth。　But　history　tells　us　of　that　which　has　at　one　time　existed；　at
  another　time　has　vanished；　having　been　expelled　by　something　else。　Truth　is　eternal；　it　does　not　fall
  within　the　sphere　of　the　transient；　and　has　no　history。　But　if　it　has　a　history；　and　as　this　history　is
  only　the　representation　of　a　succession　of　past　forms　of　knowledge；　the　truth　is　not　to　be　found　in
  it；　for　the　truth　cannot　be　what　has　passed　away。
  It　might　be　said　that　all　this　argument　would　affect　not　only　the　other　sciences；　but　in　like　decree
  the　Christian　religion；　and　it　might　be　found　inconsistent　that　a　history　of　this　religion　and　of　the
  other　sciences　should　exist；　but　it　would　be　superfluous　further　to　examine　this　argument；　for　it　is
  immediately　contradicted　by　the　very　fact　that　there　are　such　histories。　But　in　order　to　get　a　better
  understanding　of　this　apparent　contradiction；　we　must　distinguish　between　the　outward　history　of　a
  religion　or　a　science　and　the　history　of　the　subject　itself。　And　then　we　must　take　into　account　that
  the　history　of　Philosophy　because　of　the　special　nature　of　its　subject…matter；　is　different　from　other
  histories。　It　is　at　once　evident　that　the　contradiction　in　question　could　not　refer　to　the　outward
  history；　but　merely　to　the　inward；　or　that　of　the　content　itself。　There　is　a　history　of　the　spread　of
  Christianity　and　of　the　lives　of　those　who　have　avowed　it；　and　its　existence　has　formed　itself　into
  that　of　a　Church。　This　in　itself　constitutes　an　external　existence　such　that　being　brought　into　contact
  with　temporal　affairs　of　the　most　diverse　kind；　its　lot　is　a　varied　one；　and　it　essentially　possesses　a
  history。　And　of　the　Christian　doctrine　it　is　true　that　it；　too；　has　its　history；　but　it　necessarily　soon
  reached　its　full　development　and　attained　to　its　appointed　powers。　And　this　old　creed　has　been　an
  acknowledged　influence　to　every　age；　and　will　still　be　acknowledged　unchanged　as　the　Truth；　even
  though　this　acknowledgment　were　become　no　more　than　a　pretence；　and　the　words　an　empty
  form。　But　the　history　of　this　doctrine　in　its　wider　sense　includes　two　elements：　first　the　various
  additions　to　and　deviations　from　the　truth　formerly　established；　and　secondly　the　combating　of
  these　errors；　the　purification　of　the　principles　that　remain　from　such　additions；　and　a　consequent
  return　to　their　first　simplicity。
  The　other　sciences；　including　Philosophy；　have　also　an　external　history　like　Religion。　Philosophy
  has　a　history　of　its　origin；　diffusion；　maturity；　decay；　revival；　a　history　of　its　teachers；　promoters；
  and　of　its　opponents…often　too；　of　an　outward　relation　to　religion　and　occasionally　to　the　State。
  This　side　of　its　history　likewise　gives　occasion　to　interesting　questions。　Amongst　other　such；　it　is
  asked　why　Philosophy；　the　doctrine　of　absolute　Truth；　seems　to　have　revealed　itself　on　the　whole
  to　a　small　number　of　individuals；　to　special　nations；　and　how　it　has　limited　itself　to　particular
  periods　of　time。　Similarly　with　respect　to　Christianity；　to　the　Truth　in　a　much　more　universal　form
  than　the　philosophical；　a　difficulty　has　been　encountered　in　respect　to　the　question　whether　there　is
  a　contradiction　in　the　fact　that　this　religion　should　have　appeared　so　late　in　time；　and　that　it　should
  have　remained　so　long　and　should　still　remain　limited　to　special　races　of　men。　But　these　and　other
  similar　questions　are　too　much　a　matter　of　detail　to　depend　merely　on　the　general　conflict　referred
  to；　and　when　we　have　further　touched　upon　the　peculiar　character　of　philosophic　knowledge；　we
  may　go　more　specially　into　the　aspects　which　relate　to　the　external　existence　and　external　history
  of　Philosophy。
  But　as　regards　the　comparison　between　the　history　of　Religion　and　that　of　Philosophy　as　to　inner
  content；　there　is　not　in　the　latter　as　there　is　in　Religion　a　fixed　and　fundamental　truth　which；　as
  unchangeable；　is　apart　from　history。　The　content　of　Christianity；　which　is　Truth；　has；　however；
  remained　unaltered　as　such；　and　has　therefore　little　history　or　as　good　as　none。　（2）　Hence　in
  Religion；　on　account　of　its　very　nature　as　Christianity；　the　conflict　referred　to　disappears。　The
  errors　and　additions　constitute　no　difficulty。　They　are　transitory　and　altogether　historical　in
  character。
  The　other　sciences；　indeed；　have　also　according　to　their　content　a　History；　a　part　of　which　relates
  to　alterations；　and　the　renunciation　of　tenets　which　were　formerly　current。　But　a　great；　perhaps　the
  greater；　part　of　the　history　relates　to　what　has　proved　permanent；　so　that　what　was　new；　was　not
  an　alteration　on　earlier　acquisitions；　but　an　addition　to　them。　These　sciences　progress　through　a
  process　of　juxtaposition。　It　is　true　that　in　Botany；　Mineralogy；　and　so　on；　much　is　dependent　on
  what　was　previously　known；　but　by　far　th