The Spenglerian vision of “civilization” as the final stage of a culture did not stop Toynbee (23) from taking civilization as the unit of research. In fact, in the introduction to his Study of History Toynbee discusses the problem of the minimum historical unit, discarding “national history” as isolated and unreal because history in fact corresponds to multiple entities that embrace a more extended region. What is important to him above all is the comparative study of civilizations, a concept that we often find replaced by that of “society.” Of greatest interest (for our purposes) is Toynbee’s interpretation of the historical process. No longer is the subject of history a biological being marked by destiny, but rather an entity that, between the open and the closed, is guided by impulses or circumspection in facing obstacles.
We must also take note of Toynbee’s explanation of social movement as involving challenge and response. He does not, however, use the term “impulse” in a strictly Bergsonian sense, nor is his use of the idea of challenge-response a simple transplanting of stimulus-response or Pavlovian reflex. Finally, what is of most interest to us is his understanding that the great religions transcend the disintegration of civilizations, and that they are what allows us to have the intuition of a “plan” and a “purpose” in history. In any event, the accommodation of his model to a particular historical form kept him from an understanding of temporality.
In: Historiological Discussions
Silo, Chapter 2: The Past Seen as Without Temporal Foundation 2.2 History as Form
Cultural theorist and philosopher of history.
1889 Born on 14 April in London
1907-11 Studied Classics (Balliol College) and graduated in 1911 with a degree in Literae Humaniores (classical literature and philosophy).
1912-15 Lecturer in Classics at the University of Oxford.
1915-19 Worked in the British Foreign Office, particularly during the First World War, and was involved in the Paris Peace Conference.
1921-22 Professor of Byzantine and Modern Greek Language, Literature and History at King's College, London.
1925-55 Director of the Department of International Affairs at the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House). During the Second World War: Worked for the British government, in particular for the Ministry of Information.
1946 Publication of the first six volumes of ‘A Study of History’, which attracted international attention.
1961 Publication of ‘The Reconsiderations’, a critical reflection on his earlier works.
1975 Died on 22 October in York (Yorkshire)
Topics
Universal history and cultural comparison
Toynbee's magnum opus ‘A Study of History’ (1934-1961) was a monumental universal history in which he comparatively examined 21 different civilisations/cultures across space and time. This interdisciplinary approach, which was intended to overcome a Eurocentric view, was groundbreaking.
The role of humans in history
In contrast to Oswald Spengler's deterministic view, Toynbee emphasised the freedom and agency of humans in the face of historical ‘challenges’. He saw history not as a cyclical process, but as an open-ended one.
Unity of humanity and overcoming nationalism/racism
Toynbee was a harsh critic of nationalism and racism and advocated the unity of humanity beyond ethnic boundaries. He called for ‘racial mixing’ and the overcoming of puritanical-nationalist thinking, for example in the USA.
Religious comparison and mysticism
Toynbee compared different religions and mystical traditions and invoked their unity, for example by equating Christ with the gods of other religions. His world view had strong religious and mystical traits.
Vision of a world government
In his later works, Toynbee developed the utopian vision of a future world government based on humility, philanthropy and a love of nature. This was his meta-historical ‘message’. Toynbee's work aimed at a holistic, comparative view of human history, overcoming national and racial boundaries. His visionary and sometimes mystical ideas about the unity of humanity were central to this.
Major works
‘A Study of History’ (1934-1961)
This is Toynbee's monumental 12-volume magnum opus, in which he compares 21 different civilisations/cultures across space and time. It earned him worldwide fame and is considered a groundbreaking work of universal history.
‘Der Gang der Weltgeschichte’
This is a summary and a summary of his main work ‘A Study of History’ in German.
Books about German atrocities in the First World War
Before his main work, Toynbee, as an agent of the British Foreign Office, wrote two books in which he denounced atrocities committed by German troops in the First World War. He hardly mentions these early works himself later.
Late work with utopian vision of a world government
In his later works, Toynbee developed the vision of a future world government based on humility, philanthropy and a love of nature. This visionary work is described as his ‘meta-historical message’.
Comparative religion writings
Toynbee compared various religions and mystical traditions and invoked their unity, for example by equating Christ with the gods of other religions. These comparative religious writings are scattered throughout his works.
The 12-volume ‘A Study of History’ with its interdisciplinary cultural comparison is clearly considered Toynbee's central life's work. In addition, his visionary late writings and early works on the atrocities of war and comparative religion are also important.
Influence
Toynbee's magnum opus, ‘A Study of History’ (1934-1961), was a monumental and pioneering universal history that had a lasting impact on the study of history due to its interdisciplinary cultural comparison and rejection of Eurocentric perspectives. Although criticised by his peers for his sometimes speculative and mystical approach, Toynbee's vision of a world community united by love of humanity and humility had a major influence on the philosophy of history and the peace movements of the 20th century. His ideas on the unity of humanity beyond national and cultural borders are still relevant today.
Why is he mentioned by Silo in ‘Historiological Discussions’?
Silo himself explains Toynbee's significance in the following paragraph (see above):
‘What is significant for our purposes lies in his interpretation of the historical process. Namely, the subject of history is no longer a biological being determined by fate, but an entity that is led back and forth between the open and the closed by impulses or inhibiting influences.’
And even if Silo maintains that Toynbee's considerations show an intuition of a ‘plan’ or ‘intention’ in the historical process, he also argues against him in the same breath that he fundamentally questions temporality (why do things happen? How can it be that events occur outside of consciousness? What degree of connection exists between the experienced temporality and the temporality of the world about which we express our opinions and hold our views? Why is time not reversible?).