The human condition, defined by Karl Mannheim, is that human beings cannot think or live without their history and society into which they are born: Seinsgebudenheit des Gedenks. It is taken for granted that poets are also confined into such a human condition. T. S. Eliot and Robert Lowell are deeply concerned with history. But their attitudes toward history are far different from each other. T. S. Eliot expressed a quite negative view of western history in his early poetry. After his conversion, T. S. Eliot’s view of history became optimistic. He finds that history will progress; the future will be better. His fusion of different zeitheits shows that he strongly believed in the existence of the world after death. That is to say, his concept of history and time is not linear, but circular. Unlike that of T. S. Eliot, Lowell’s view of history is consistent: history is not progressive at all; more or less, it has grown worse. The evaluation of his ancestors is caustic and rigid. He even underestimates their contribution to the foundation of American civilization and culture. The two poets were almost contemporaries, and their recognition of the age was almost the same at the start of their careers. But their recognition of history developed in different directions, which, I believe, result from their distinctive attitudes toward Christianity.