A Study of History. XII. Reconsiderations by Arnold Toynbee (review)

Reviews European A Studyof History.XII. Iteconsideration•. By ARNOLD TOYNBEE. Londonand Toronto:OxfordUniversity Press.Issuedunderthe auspices of the Royal Instituteof International Affairs.1961.Pp.x, 740. $9.00. ENTITLED Reconsiderations, this final volumeof Toynbee's Studypresents the author's long-promised replytohiscritics. Thetoneismild:"It ismoreprofitable to learnfromone's critics," he writes,"thanto fightthem."Onlyan occasional flareof sarcasm, andthe eloquent "nocomment" addressed to hisarch-tormenter, Trevor-Roper, suggest the extentof the author's deliberate self-control as he reviewsa generationof criticism.The eomprehensiveness of this review is astounding: therewill surely be few whohavewrittenaboutToynbee whowill fail to findsomesnippet of theirwisdom encapsulated in the footnotes to this volume. Carpingcriticsmayperhaps seein thisverycomprehensiveness--this elaboratemarshalling of remarksfor and against--further evidenceof the alleged vanityof the author,asif the controversy weremoreimportant thanthe problems. It seems to thisreviewer, however, that Toynbee's footnotes will be welcomed bymost students ofhiswork;theyprovide auseful entr6e toa scattered literature. The topicscovered in the volumedealwith both empiricaland theoretical questions. An exampleof the firstkind is the revision of the configuration of MiddleAmerican history(madenecessary by newarchaeological evidence). The secondkind rangesfrom abstruse philosophical discussion of the nature of explanation (it is necessarily both "relative" and "subjective"), througha reexamination ofmanyofhistechnical terms, totheelaboration of a newclassification scheme for civilizations. The latter eliminates the categoryof "arrested" civilizations altogether, andintroduces such newconcepts as"satellite civfiization" and"multipleaffiliation." Thisresults in the disappearance of someold friends, there-naming of others, andtheintroduction of a numberof newmembers of the species civilization, whichat the present counttotal84. On somequestions, suchaswhetherRomeshould be regarded asa separate civilization, Toynbee firmlystands hisground.On a few others, like the possibilityofdiscovering a standard time-span forthebreakdown anddisintegration of civfiizations, hisoriginal position iswhollyabandoned. Onmost points, however, hisresponse tocriticism amounts to a graceful butlimitedretreat--areformulation of histheoryin a sorerform.It is nowconceded, for example, that creative minorities wereformerly contrasted far toosharply with uncreative masses; that leadership bycharm, whichwassupposed tomarkthegrowth stage of a civilization ,hasneverbeenexercised withoutleadership by force;that the contrast between growthandbreakdown was,in anycase, greatlyexaggerated, since creativity isnotfound inallaspects ofa civilization atthesame time;thatcultural 48 l•V•EWS 49 "diffusion" is a muchmorecommon and important featureof contacts between civilizations thanhad previously beenallowed.Eventhe foundation proposition of the Study--thatcivilizations are intelligible unitsof enquirywhile national states arenot--issignificantly modified. Civilizations, it is nowclaimed,are only moreintelligible; the)•ully intelligible unit (alas!)is"thesumtotalof Reality." In a reviewofvolumes w•-x in thisiournal(September, 1955), FrankH. Underhill contended that,astheworkprogressed, Toynbee's Studysuffered a "hardening of thecategories." Thesoftening process in thepresent volume oftenseems to reach themelting point. On theoretical questions, furthermore, Toynbee's policyof good-natured compromise sometimes involves him in difficulties whichappearto be insufficiently worked through. Theroleofmodels in hisenquiry isa case in point.In defending hisuseof the Helleniccivilization asa model,against the criticism that it often provides a Procrustean Bedforothersocieties, Toynbee thinksit helpfulto admit toequalstatus further models derived fromChinese andJewish history--the reader beingassured thatif onemodelisilluminating, thenthreemodels mustbe three timesasilluminating. Exactlywhy thirty-fourmodels wouldnot be still more illuminating isnotmadeveryclear,although it doesseemto be suggested that what the authoris workingtowardsis a single"composite" model,deviations fromit in everycase requiring special explanation. Oneveryprominent feature oftheReconsiderations isToynbee's ratherpainful wrestling with the interpretation of Jewishhistory.Besides a sectionon "The HistoryandProspects of theJews," the question emerges at a numberof other points. The charge of anti-Semitism hasobviously stunghim, andhe triesin a numberof waysto meetit. Thereis, for example, a decidedupgrading of Judaism asa higher religion. Thereisalsoanattempt to placate those whohave obiected to hisuseof the term"fossil" for the continuing Jewishcommunity-although it maywell be doubted that his suggested alternative, "coelacanthus," will be received with muchenthusiasm. The substance of hisposition, although expressed moregently, isinanycase thesame. Judaism isstill"thetalentwrapped in a napkin andburiedin theearth." It isurgedto abandon its"double thinking," to renounce its"paramount aim"of preserving a national identity,andto "seize the opportunity for becoming themissionary religion. . . that its two daughter religions, Christianity andIslam,haveeachsince become." It seems doubtfulthatmanycriticswill feel that their obiections havereally been answered b,yToynbee in thisbook. Geylhasalready recorded hisown dissatisfaction withit ("Toynbee's Answer," Meded. Kon.Neded. Akad.Wetensch. Afd. Letterk.,N.R. 24, 1961), and others will surelyfollow.Whatevermay be thought ofitsdoctrine, however, theReconsiderations should atleast dosomething to dissipate theunfortunate imageof a condescending know-it-all whois utterly impervious tocriticism. It represents a remarkable...