peculiar value, because it is combined with an intimate knowledge of things that a Spaniard in Spain would not know. The standard of values prevalent throughout the modern world, but worst of all in America, is challenged from two sides: by the revolutionaries, who wish to introduce a new constructive era by means of a new discipline, and by the mediaevalists, who wish to revive the discipline of the Catholic Church. It is singular how much these two parties have in common. Much of Mr Santayana's indictment of liberalism might have been written by a Russian Bolshevik—perhaps because in Russia the influence of the church is still as strong as in Spain, even over those who reject its dogmas and rebel against its political domination.
It is superfluous to praise the style of Mr Santayana, which must delight every lover of good English; or the genuinely philosophic outlook of the soliloquies, which will be familiar to all his admirers. Most English-speaking readers, even when they admire most, will feel something which they cannot share in this outlook—something which is probably attributable to the difference between a Protestant and a Catholic civilization, for even Catholics in England and America are always Protestant in their mentality. This is a barrier to sympathy rather than to understanding; but it enhances the value of the book, by making it more distinctive and challenging. Indeed, few people were better employed during the years 1914-1918 than Mr Santayana, who built this memorial of the beauties that were perishing while he wrote.
