What do you think?
Rate this book
A Study of History #1
A Study of History, Vol 1: Introduction; The Geneses of Civilizations
From the back
Arnold Toynbee
In the first volume of A Study of History, I start by searching for a unit of historical study that is relatively self-contained and is therefore more or less intelligible in isolation from the rest of history. I was led into this quest by finding myself dissatisfied with the present-day habit of studying history in terms of national states. These seemed, and still seem, to me to be fragments of something larger, and I found this larger and more satisfying unit of study in a civilization. The history of the United States, for instance, or the history of Britain, is, as I see it, a fragment of the history of Western Christendom or the Western Christian World, and I believe I can put my finger on a number of other societies, living or extinct, that are of the same species. Examples of other living civilizations besides the Western Civilization are the Islamic and the Civilization of Eastern Asia, centring on China. Examples of extinct civilizations are the Greco-Roman and the Ancient Egyptian. This practice of dealing in civilizations instead of nations is taken for granted by orientalists, ancient-historians, archaeologists, and anthropologists. The carving-up of a civilization into pieces labelled "nations" is, I believe, something peculiar to students of modern Western history, and, with them too, this present practice of theirs is only recent. Down to the beginning of the eighteenth century the classic works of Western historians took for their field the whole history of Western Christendom or even the whole history of the World from the creation to the Last Judgement.
Arnold Toynbee
In the first volume of A Study of History, I start by searching for a unit of historical study that is relatively self-contained and is therefore more or less intelligible in isolation from the rest of history. I was led into this quest by finding myself dissatisfied with the present-day habit of studying history in terms of national states. These seemed, and still seem, to me to be fragments of something larger, and I found this larger and more satisfying unit of study in a civilization. The history of the United States, for instance, or the history of Britain, is, as I see it, a fragment of the history of Western Christendom or the Western Christian World, and I believe I can put my finger on a number of other societies, living or extinct, that are of the same species. Examples of other living civilizations besides the Western Civilization are the Islamic and the Civilization of Eastern Asia, centring on China. Examples of extinct civilizations are the Greco-Roman and the Ancient Egyptian. This practice of dealing in civilizations instead of nations is taken for granted by orientalists, ancient-historians, archaeologists, and anthropologists. The carving-up of a civilization into pieces labelled "nations" is, I believe, something peculiar to students of modern Western history, and, with them too, this present practice of theirs is only recent. Down to the beginning of the eighteenth century the classic works of Western historians took for their field the whole history of Western Christendom or even the whole history of the World from the creation to the Last Judgement.
- GenresHistoryNonfiction
484 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1934
32 people are currently reading
1120 people want to read
About the author
Arnold J. Toynbee
691 books520 followersNot the same as Arnold Toynbee, economist and nephew of Arnold Joseph Toynbee
British educator Arnold Joseph Toynbee noted cyclical patterns in the growth and decline of civilizations for his 12-volume Study of History (1934-1961).
He went to Winchester college and Balliol college, Oxford.
During both world wars, he worked for the foreign office. He additionally published Nationality and the War (1915), The Armenian Atrocities: The Murder of a Nation (1915), The German Terror in France: An Historical Record (1917), and Turkey, a Past and a Future (1917). He attended the peace conference of Paris in 1919 as a delegate.
From 1919 to 1924, Arnold J. Toynbee served as professor of modern Greek and Byzantine at King's college, London. From 1925, Oxford University Press published The Survey of International Affairs under the auspices of the royal institute of international affairs, and Toynbee, professor, oversaw the publication. From 1925, Toynbee served as research professor and director at the royal institute of international affairs. He published The Conduct of British Empire Foreign Relations since the Peace Settlement (1928).
His first marriage to Rosalind Murray produced three sons and ended in divorce in 1946. Toynbee, professor, then married Veronica M. Boulter, his research assistant. He published Civilization on Trial (1948).
Toynbee served as research professor and director at the royal institute of international affairs until 1955.
People published best known lectures of Toynbee, professor, in memory of Adam Gifford as An Historian's Approach to Religion (1956). His massive work examined development and decay. He presented the rise and fall rather than nation-states or ethnic groups. According to his analysis, the welfare depends on ability to deal successfully with challenges.
He also published Democracy in the Atomic Age (1957), Christianity among the Religions of the World (1958), and Between Niger and Nile (1965).
He died in York, North Yorkshire, England.
British educator Arnold Joseph Toynbee noted cyclical patterns in the growth and decline of civilizations for his 12-volume Study of History (1934-1961).
He went to Winchester college and Balliol college, Oxford.
During both world wars, he worked for the foreign office. He additionally published Nationality and the War (1915), The Armenian Atrocities: The Murder of a Nation (1915), The German Terror in France: An Historical Record (1917), and Turkey, a Past and a Future (1917). He attended the peace conference of Paris in 1919 as a delegate.
From 1919 to 1924, Arnold J. Toynbee served as professor of modern Greek and Byzantine at King's college, London. From 1925, Oxford University Press published The Survey of International Affairs under the auspices of the royal institute of international affairs, and Toynbee, professor, oversaw the publication. From 1925, Toynbee served as research professor and director at the royal institute of international affairs. He published The Conduct of British Empire Foreign Relations since the Peace Settlement (1928).
His first marriage to Rosalind Murray produced three sons and ended in divorce in 1946. Toynbee, professor, then married Veronica M. Boulter, his research assistant. He published Civilization on Trial (1948).
Toynbee served as research professor and director at the royal institute of international affairs until 1955.
People published best known lectures of Toynbee, professor, in memory of Adam Gifford as An Historian's Approach to Religion (1956). His massive work examined development and decay. He presented the rise and fall rather than nation-states or ethnic groups. According to his analysis, the welfare depends on ability to deal successfully with challenges.
He also published Democracy in the Atomic Age (1957), Christianity among the Religions of the World (1958), and Between Niger and Nile (1965).
He died in York, North Yorkshire, England.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews
June 26, 2011
This first volume of Toynbee's 10-volume investigation of how civilizations arise, flourish, and die provides a fresh and exciting panorama of the whole terrain of human history.
The first reference to Toynbee's work that I can recall was in Joseph Campbell's The Masks of God series, where Campbell, who as a young man had been a big fan of Oswald Spengler's The Decline of the West, makes a rather dismissive remark about Toynbee, whom he sees as being too attached to a Christian viewpoint. Looking at other references and reviews, I see that dissing Toynbee seems to be an accepted practice, almost a consensus.
But so far, I disagree. Toynbee is a great thinker and a great writer, and his ideas deserve careful consideration.
I decided to read Toynbee when my own research into the epic genre (especially reading the excellent The Epic Cosmos edited by Larry Allums) had brought me to see epics as being essentially about the birth or transformation of societies. What exactly is a society or civilization? What are its boundaries, its defining features?
This is Toynbee's hunting ground. I started off by buying and reading D. C. Somervell's two-volume abridgement of the 10-volume work. I was excited and stimulated enough by that to decide to take the plunge on the original volumes.
At the outset Toynbee states that he was driven by his own dissatisfaction with the tendency of historians to focus on the history of nation-states, which in his view was an artificial and arbitrary way of slicing up the subject area. He sought the "natural" units of history: entities that could truly be regarded as individuals, cohesive and relatively self-contained. He determined that this unit is the "civilization": a collection of people who share a culture, the core of which is a spiritual system or faith. In volume 1 he sets out to defend this thesis, and to identify and inventory the civilizations that have been known to exist since the beginning of history. He comes up with a total of 21 (give or take--Toynbee recognizes that there are uncertainties of identification, especially as you get into the deep past), provides labels for them, and sketches an overview of each. (Not to keep you in suspense: our own civilization--that is, the one in which I sit right now as I type--he calls Western Christendom.)
In talking about the "geneses" of civilizations, he discusses the difference between primitive societies and civilizations, and speculates plausibly on how, very occasionally, a primitive society undergoes the transformation into a full-blown civilization with intricate institutions, arts, sciences, and a well-developed religion.
No matter how large a civilization is, its members feel relatively at home as long as they are within it. That means that as a Canadian, if I travel to places such as, say, the United States, or to France or Italy or Denmark, even while I'm in a foreign country I nonetheless feel myself in a culture that is congenial and familiar. But if I travel to, say, Egypt, part of what Toynbee calls the Arabic Society, I'm in a place where not only is the language unfamiliar, but the culture as a whole is very different and much more foreign to me. Its basic ideas and premises, its spiritual foundation, are fundamentally different from those of my own civilization. And when I traveled to Russia in 1982 it was the same again, and, Toynbee would say, not simply because it was then still the USSR, but rather because Russia itself is not part of Western Christendom, but part of Eastern Christendom, a zone that also includes Greece and other places built around Orthodox Christianity.
Toynbee in one sense takes his time in developing these ideas--the whole work is 10 big volumes--but in another sense it seems that he's speeding along, since his subject-matter is so vast. He's an excellent writer, with an arch, ironic, self-deprecating style, and makes many interesting asides, the longest of which he places as annexes at the back of the book. He's fond of homely extended metaphors, like regarding the notion of world "ages" (Ancient History vs. Medieval, etc.) as an extendable chimney-cleaning brush.
But his mind is deep and sharp: he likes getting to the root of things. His erudition is tremendous; his prose is salted with quotations from the classics and especially the Bible, usually in the original language. His knowledge of history is encyclopedic. One of the stretches for the reader is following Toynbee's shifts from discussing events in the history of, say, ancient India, to events in Precolumbian Mexico or medieval Hungary or the Khmers of Cambodia. He seems to know it all.
So while it seems that Toynbee's work has been deemed a safe target for criticism and even ridicule, I have to wonder how many of his critics have even 10% of his command of the subject area. Toynbee spent 20 years writing these volumes; they are the considered, mature work of a brilliant man. Reading them, to me, seems like the very opposite of a waste of time.
The first reference to Toynbee's work that I can recall was in Joseph Campbell's The Masks of God series, where Campbell, who as a young man had been a big fan of Oswald Spengler's The Decline of the West, makes a rather dismissive remark about Toynbee, whom he sees as being too attached to a Christian viewpoint. Looking at other references and reviews, I see that dissing Toynbee seems to be an accepted practice, almost a consensus.
But so far, I disagree. Toynbee is a great thinker and a great writer, and his ideas deserve careful consideration.
I decided to read Toynbee when my own research into the epic genre (especially reading the excellent The Epic Cosmos edited by Larry Allums) had brought me to see epics as being essentially about the birth or transformation of societies. What exactly is a society or civilization? What are its boundaries, its defining features?
This is Toynbee's hunting ground. I started off by buying and reading D. C. Somervell's two-volume abridgement of the 10-volume work. I was excited and stimulated enough by that to decide to take the plunge on the original volumes.
At the outset Toynbee states that he was driven by his own dissatisfaction with the tendency of historians to focus on the history of nation-states, which in his view was an artificial and arbitrary way of slicing up the subject area. He sought the "natural" units of history: entities that could truly be regarded as individuals, cohesive and relatively self-contained. He determined that this unit is the "civilization": a collection of people who share a culture, the core of which is a spiritual system or faith. In volume 1 he sets out to defend this thesis, and to identify and inventory the civilizations that have been known to exist since the beginning of history. He comes up with a total of 21 (give or take--Toynbee recognizes that there are uncertainties of identification, especially as you get into the deep past), provides labels for them, and sketches an overview of each. (Not to keep you in suspense: our own civilization--that is, the one in which I sit right now as I type--he calls Western Christendom.)
In talking about the "geneses" of civilizations, he discusses the difference between primitive societies and civilizations, and speculates plausibly on how, very occasionally, a primitive society undergoes the transformation into a full-blown civilization with intricate institutions, arts, sciences, and a well-developed religion.
No matter how large a civilization is, its members feel relatively at home as long as they are within it. That means that as a Canadian, if I travel to places such as, say, the United States, or to France or Italy or Denmark, even while I'm in a foreign country I nonetheless feel myself in a culture that is congenial and familiar. But if I travel to, say, Egypt, part of what Toynbee calls the Arabic Society, I'm in a place where not only is the language unfamiliar, but the culture as a whole is very different and much more foreign to me. Its basic ideas and premises, its spiritual foundation, are fundamentally different from those of my own civilization. And when I traveled to Russia in 1982 it was the same again, and, Toynbee would say, not simply because it was then still the USSR, but rather because Russia itself is not part of Western Christendom, but part of Eastern Christendom, a zone that also includes Greece and other places built around Orthodox Christianity.
Toynbee in one sense takes his time in developing these ideas--the whole work is 10 big volumes--but in another sense it seems that he's speeding along, since his subject-matter is so vast. He's an excellent writer, with an arch, ironic, self-deprecating style, and makes many interesting asides, the longest of which he places as annexes at the back of the book. He's fond of homely extended metaphors, like regarding the notion of world "ages" (Ancient History vs. Medieval, etc.) as an extendable chimney-cleaning brush.
But his mind is deep and sharp: he likes getting to the root of things. His erudition is tremendous; his prose is salted with quotations from the classics and especially the Bible, usually in the original language. His knowledge of history is encyclopedic. One of the stretches for the reader is following Toynbee's shifts from discussing events in the history of, say, ancient India, to events in Precolumbian Mexico or medieval Hungary or the Khmers of Cambodia. He seems to know it all.
So while it seems that Toynbee's work has been deemed a safe target for criticism and even ridicule, I have to wonder how many of his critics have even 10% of his command of the subject area. Toynbee spent 20 years writing these volumes; they are the considered, mature work of a brilliant man. Reading them, to me, seems like the very opposite of a waste of time.
January 11, 2016
Toynbee’s magnum opus was a milestone in historical theory, which is said to be the next such attempt after Marx’s study in the previous century. The 12-volume series attracted widespread attention and is thought to be the last word in its genre. I made a go at it in 2002, reaching almost halfway, but then lost steam and the attempt was dropped. The language is so superb and formidable that completing a volume was a hefty task. Twelve years later, I am trying to scale this mountain once again, and it is immensely satisfying to have reached the first landmark. Anticipation of the moment when I complete the series brings me goose bumps. Arnold Joseph Toynbee need no introduction. He was simply the greatest historian of the last century. His 12-volume series which overarched his career from 1934 to 1961 brought him fame as the author of an audacious attempt to formulate theories out of social phenomena documented in history. His mind numbing scholarship that ranges equally in literature as in history has produced its most valuable fruit in this historical series.
When making a study of history, we should define an ‘intelligible field of study’ in which analysis should take place. This field, however, should not be limited by the modern concepts of nation-states. Spatially, it must be extensive so as to envelope other states, which share common attributes with the purported field of study. In time, it must reach to the dawn of cultural attributes that is a peculiar feature. Industrial Revolution had furnished mankind with the twin ideals of nation-states and democracy, but history is a wider arena, in which the scholar must focus on society rather than states. Toynbee identifies some societies that are ‘intelligible fields of study’ such as Western Orthodox, Christian, Islamic, Hindu and Far Eastern societies. It appears that religion was the most prominent identifying factor for a society.
Toynbee introduces twenty-one societies around the globe that is related to the five living societies in one form or other, either across space or in time. These five living species are affiliated and apparented to old societies and the author names them – Hellenic, Syriac, Indic and the Sinic respectively. And then the general principle is enunciated. Civilizations take roots; grow with a vitality of its own creativity, reach a mature phase and then disintegration sets in. in this phase, internecine warfare erupts between contending states in the bosom of the society. This period is called ‘Time of Troubles’, at the end of which one of the states rise up as a supreme power at the expense of its neighbors and establishes a universal state, ruled by a dominant minority and its religion. After an interval of time, this state itself begins to dissolve, and barbarians begin to gnaw at its borders. Toynbee called them ‘Volkerwanderung’ (a german term for ‘wandering nations’). These outsiders grow powerful as time progressed. In the meanwhile an internal proletariat develops a different form of religion that is acceptable to the masses. The term ‘proletariat’ has no relationship with that of Marx’s coinage. In our sense, it means a community that is not at all related to the ruling dominant minority. After the Volkerwandeung gets sufficient powerful, it displaces the universal state, adopting the universal church of the internal proletariat. This is the exact point at which a new society is being born of the chrysalis of the old one, being affiliated and apparented to it. He lists out the names of all 21 societies which are living at present or died out. The archeological evidence for the Indus Civilization had not been conclusively established at the point of time of the writing of the volume. Consequently, Toynbee provisionally classify the Indic society to be apparented to Sumeric society, due to the fact that John Marshall’s initial expositions of the newly founded civilization hinged on the similarity of seals obtained from Harappa and ancient Sumer.
According to the prevailing logic propounded by Toynbee, a civilization originates by the cession of a degenerated society’s internal or external proletariats linked by a universal church. But we have to account for the independent origin as well, as many of the ancient societies grew up without being parented to another. The author solves this puzzle with a concept deftly borrowed from Darwin’s evolutionary theory. The birth of an independent civilization is attributed to be the result of mutation sustained by primitive societies whose number is huge while compared to full fledged societies that are intelligible fields of historical study.
Having set the stage for all societies that ever existed to display their wares, Toynbee goes on to analyse what caused civilization to bloom in the first place. The spark of innovation that catalyzed a primitive society into a civilization is investigated in detail and a convincing assertion established. Race and environment were assumed to be the two factors that guided a society along the path of civilization. The author rubbishes both ideas. In fact, he minces no words in uprooting the weedy concept of racism from the minds of historians who might have accumulated a sense of racial superiority as a result of widespread acceptance of Western political and scientific ideas. He borrows the findings of modern science to point out that the changes in skin colour, which constitutes the essence of racial theories is in fact the presence or absence of a chemical called melanine. The environmental factor is also discarded with an illuminating comparison of similar environments around the world and detecting the emergence of civilizations only in a few. Tropical forest is a common feature in India, Indonesia and Yucatan peninsula, but an independent society emerged only in the latter. Likewise, fertile river deltas exist at many places, but only in a handful of them did societies that attract our attention arise. Thus environment alone as a factor does not carry much weight.
In the end, the theory of ‘Challenge and Response’ is emerged. In a nutshell, it may be summarized as follows. An environmental or a human factor may throw a challenge to the society that is staying peacefully in a geographical location in the form of climate changes or aggression. The ingenuity of response to the challenge determines the success or failure in sprouting a civilization from it. At the end of the last Ice Age, sea level rose and precipitation plummeted along the Nile valley. Grass lands slowly transformed into desert. Primitive societies that lived without any concern till that time were thus thrown a challenge. Some migrated to the upper reaches of the Nile where similar climate to which they were habituated still existed. In a sense, they shirked the challenge and are still to be found in the primitive state today. Another group faced the call and converted the jungle swamps into land fit for husbandry and agriculture, paving the way for the rise of the Egyptiac Civilization. Similar arguments hold for the Sumeric and Sinic civilizations as well.
The book is littered with long quotes and notes in many languages, including French, German, Greek and Latin. Naturally, this impedes the free flow of navigation. The language is exquisite and the prose of a very high caliber. Reading is a tough exercise, but it is worth the effort when counting the numerous instances of original thought and logically sharp analysis and conclusions. There may be source for disagreement with the author regarding his assertion of the Mahayana and Hinayana schools of Buddhist thought as fossils still lingering in Tibet and Sri Lanka respectively. Both the religions are going strong in the two countries at present and earmarking them as fossils don’t do justice to the argument.
The author’s attack on racism as an explanation for the origin of civilizations is very progressive for his time, when the black people were not even allowed to vote in America. His unequivocal condemnation of such fallacious ideas bring home the fact that scholars who combine intuition with wide reading transcends the barrier of time and culture. However true this assertion may be, there is an unfortunate aspect in which Toynbee falls short of another enlightenment that came a little later. This book places religion in a high pedestal, as “a human being’s religion is a vastly more important and significant factor in his life than the colour of his skin, and is therefore a vastly better criterion for purposes of classification” (p.224). It is clear that he couldn’t foresee the drop in status of religion as a personal identifier. The author’s vulnerability is seen again in his remarks on ‘casteism’ in India, as “The disappearance of the racial factor which originally evoked the sense of caste has not entailed the disappearance of caste-consciousness. In India to-day there is hardly a sign that the sense of caste divisions is yielding to any sense of common nationality, transcending caste, on the objective basis of a common country and a common race” (p.243). Even in 1934 when this first volume saw light, this outright comment fell far short of reality and exactly 13 years later, India proved Toynbee absolutely wrong on this point by carving out a state amidst all the debilitating effects of caste.
The book contains a number of annexes that range to about a third of the entire book. Many are not particularly appealing that caters to only a few minor points in the argument. These may safely be skipped. But the annex on Shiism and its growth in Iran at the arms of Ismail Shah Safawi provides good reading.
The book is highly recommended for the serious reader of history.
For details see http://sapientiasemita.blogspot.in
When making a study of history, we should define an ‘intelligible field of study’ in which analysis should take place. This field, however, should not be limited by the modern concepts of nation-states. Spatially, it must be extensive so as to envelope other states, which share common attributes with the purported field of study. In time, it must reach to the dawn of cultural attributes that is a peculiar feature. Industrial Revolution had furnished mankind with the twin ideals of nation-states and democracy, but history is a wider arena, in which the scholar must focus on society rather than states. Toynbee identifies some societies that are ‘intelligible fields of study’ such as Western Orthodox, Christian, Islamic, Hindu and Far Eastern societies. It appears that religion was the most prominent identifying factor for a society.
Toynbee introduces twenty-one societies around the globe that is related to the five living societies in one form or other, either across space or in time. These five living species are affiliated and apparented to old societies and the author names them – Hellenic, Syriac, Indic and the Sinic respectively. And then the general principle is enunciated. Civilizations take roots; grow with a vitality of its own creativity, reach a mature phase and then disintegration sets in. in this phase, internecine warfare erupts between contending states in the bosom of the society. This period is called ‘Time of Troubles’, at the end of which one of the states rise up as a supreme power at the expense of its neighbors and establishes a universal state, ruled by a dominant minority and its religion. After an interval of time, this state itself begins to dissolve, and barbarians begin to gnaw at its borders. Toynbee called them ‘Volkerwanderung’ (a german term for ‘wandering nations’). These outsiders grow powerful as time progressed. In the meanwhile an internal proletariat develops a different form of religion that is acceptable to the masses. The term ‘proletariat’ has no relationship with that of Marx’s coinage. In our sense, it means a community that is not at all related to the ruling dominant minority. After the Volkerwandeung gets sufficient powerful, it displaces the universal state, adopting the universal church of the internal proletariat. This is the exact point at which a new society is being born of the chrysalis of the old one, being affiliated and apparented to it. He lists out the names of all 21 societies which are living at present or died out. The archeological evidence for the Indus Civilization had not been conclusively established at the point of time of the writing of the volume. Consequently, Toynbee provisionally classify the Indic society to be apparented to Sumeric society, due to the fact that John Marshall’s initial expositions of the newly founded civilization hinged on the similarity of seals obtained from Harappa and ancient Sumer.
According to the prevailing logic propounded by Toynbee, a civilization originates by the cession of a degenerated society’s internal or external proletariats linked by a universal church. But we have to account for the independent origin as well, as many of the ancient societies grew up without being parented to another. The author solves this puzzle with a concept deftly borrowed from Darwin’s evolutionary theory. The birth of an independent civilization is attributed to be the result of mutation sustained by primitive societies whose number is huge while compared to full fledged societies that are intelligible fields of historical study.
Having set the stage for all societies that ever existed to display their wares, Toynbee goes on to analyse what caused civilization to bloom in the first place. The spark of innovation that catalyzed a primitive society into a civilization is investigated in detail and a convincing assertion established. Race and environment were assumed to be the two factors that guided a society along the path of civilization. The author rubbishes both ideas. In fact, he minces no words in uprooting the weedy concept of racism from the minds of historians who might have accumulated a sense of racial superiority as a result of widespread acceptance of Western political and scientific ideas. He borrows the findings of modern science to point out that the changes in skin colour, which constitutes the essence of racial theories is in fact the presence or absence of a chemical called melanine. The environmental factor is also discarded with an illuminating comparison of similar environments around the world and detecting the emergence of civilizations only in a few. Tropical forest is a common feature in India, Indonesia and Yucatan peninsula, but an independent society emerged only in the latter. Likewise, fertile river deltas exist at many places, but only in a handful of them did societies that attract our attention arise. Thus environment alone as a factor does not carry much weight.
In the end, the theory of ‘Challenge and Response’ is emerged. In a nutshell, it may be summarized as follows. An environmental or a human factor may throw a challenge to the society that is staying peacefully in a geographical location in the form of climate changes or aggression. The ingenuity of response to the challenge determines the success or failure in sprouting a civilization from it. At the end of the last Ice Age, sea level rose and precipitation plummeted along the Nile valley. Grass lands slowly transformed into desert. Primitive societies that lived without any concern till that time were thus thrown a challenge. Some migrated to the upper reaches of the Nile where similar climate to which they were habituated still existed. In a sense, they shirked the challenge and are still to be found in the primitive state today. Another group faced the call and converted the jungle swamps into land fit for husbandry and agriculture, paving the way for the rise of the Egyptiac Civilization. Similar arguments hold for the Sumeric and Sinic civilizations as well.
The book is littered with long quotes and notes in many languages, including French, German, Greek and Latin. Naturally, this impedes the free flow of navigation. The language is exquisite and the prose of a very high caliber. Reading is a tough exercise, but it is worth the effort when counting the numerous instances of original thought and logically sharp analysis and conclusions. There may be source for disagreement with the author regarding his assertion of the Mahayana and Hinayana schools of Buddhist thought as fossils still lingering in Tibet and Sri Lanka respectively. Both the religions are going strong in the two countries at present and earmarking them as fossils don’t do justice to the argument.
The author’s attack on racism as an explanation for the origin of civilizations is very progressive for his time, when the black people were not even allowed to vote in America. His unequivocal condemnation of such fallacious ideas bring home the fact that scholars who combine intuition with wide reading transcends the barrier of time and culture. However true this assertion may be, there is an unfortunate aspect in which Toynbee falls short of another enlightenment that came a little later. This book places religion in a high pedestal, as “a human being’s religion is a vastly more important and significant factor in his life than the colour of his skin, and is therefore a vastly better criterion for purposes of classification” (p.224). It is clear that he couldn’t foresee the drop in status of religion as a personal identifier. The author’s vulnerability is seen again in his remarks on ‘casteism’ in India, as “The disappearance of the racial factor which originally evoked the sense of caste has not entailed the disappearance of caste-consciousness. In India to-day there is hardly a sign that the sense of caste divisions is yielding to any sense of common nationality, transcending caste, on the objective basis of a common country and a common race” (p.243). Even in 1934 when this first volume saw light, this outright comment fell far short of reality and exactly 13 years later, India proved Toynbee absolutely wrong on this point by carving out a state amidst all the debilitating effects of caste.
The book contains a number of annexes that range to about a third of the entire book. Many are not particularly appealing that caters to only a few minor points in the argument. These may safely be skipped. But the annex on Shiism and its growth in Iran at the arms of Ismail Shah Safawi provides good reading.
The book is highly recommended for the serious reader of history.
For details see http://sapientiasemita.blogspot.in
October 23, 2025
Toynbee's ambitious opening volume sets out to map the entirety of human civilization through a grand comparative framework, identifying 21 distinct civilizations across six millennia and investigating the fundamental question of what causes civilizations to emerge from primitive societies—what he calls "differentiation." It is a work of breathtaking scope and Toynbee's historical acumen is second to none, but the execution leaves much to be desired.
The book's central inquiry revolves around whether the genesis of civilizations can be attributed to race or environment—essentially a nature versus nurture debate elevated to civilizational scale. This is where my frustrations begin. Toynbee's treatment of the racial factor feels, from the very start, dismissive and polemical rather than a point of genuine analysis. Writing in the 1930s at the height of eugenics and race science movement, he launches into what can only be described as a vitriolic attack on "race theory," yet his critique rings hollow. He appears to operate under the same assumption that race means nothing more than skin pigmentation, reducing a complex biological and anthropological question to its most simplistic terms.
His comparison of White attitudes toward skin color with Japanese attitudes toward body hair stands out as particularly bizarre. I'm uncertain what the state of knowledge was in the 1930s regarding human biodiversity, but Toynbee's dismissal is difficult to see as anything but ideological positioning. The arguments he employs bear an uncanny resemblance to modern liberal talking points, which makes one wonder whether he's genuinely grappling with the question or simply defending the status quo.
Having dispensed with race to his satisfaction, Toynbee moves quickly to dismiss environment as an exclusive explanatory factor as well. Neither nature nor nurture alone can account for the leap from static "yin" to dynamic "yang"—from primitive stasis to civilizational genesis. This leads him to what he considers firmer ground: collective mythology and religious narrative.
Through examining the stories of Job, Faust, and the Fall of Man in Genesis, Toynbee identifies his catalyst for differentiation in Goethe's Faust, where God sends Mephistopheles to tempt humanity. This "devil" becomes Toynbee's metaphor for the challenge that awakens dormant societies from their primitive slumber and propels them into the creative ferment of civilization-building. It's an intriguing literary and philosophical framework, though one wonders if it explains more than it obscures.
Despite my frustrations with his methodology and conclusions—particularly regarding race—there's no denying Toynbee's extraordinary breadth of knowledge. He moves effortlessly between civilizations, epochs, and intellectual traditions with a command that few historians can match. His prose, too, deserves praise: elegant, clear, and engaging even when wrestling with abstract concepts. These qualities make the book enjoyable even though it can feel exhaustive at times.
Volume 1 is far from perfect. Its blind spots are significant, and its conclusions feel at times more asserted than proven. Yet Toynbee's ambition and synthetic vision remain compelling enough to pull me forward. I'm curious—if skeptical—about where he'll take this framework in the volumes to come.
On to Volume 2...
The book's central inquiry revolves around whether the genesis of civilizations can be attributed to race or environment—essentially a nature versus nurture debate elevated to civilizational scale. This is where my frustrations begin. Toynbee's treatment of the racial factor feels, from the very start, dismissive and polemical rather than a point of genuine analysis. Writing in the 1930s at the height of eugenics and race science movement, he launches into what can only be described as a vitriolic attack on "race theory," yet his critique rings hollow. He appears to operate under the same assumption that race means nothing more than skin pigmentation, reducing a complex biological and anthropological question to its most simplistic terms.
His comparison of White attitudes toward skin color with Japanese attitudes toward body hair stands out as particularly bizarre. I'm uncertain what the state of knowledge was in the 1930s regarding human biodiversity, but Toynbee's dismissal is difficult to see as anything but ideological positioning. The arguments he employs bear an uncanny resemblance to modern liberal talking points, which makes one wonder whether he's genuinely grappling with the question or simply defending the status quo.
Having dispensed with race to his satisfaction, Toynbee moves quickly to dismiss environment as an exclusive explanatory factor as well. Neither nature nor nurture alone can account for the leap from static "yin" to dynamic "yang"—from primitive stasis to civilizational genesis. This leads him to what he considers firmer ground: collective mythology and religious narrative.
Through examining the stories of Job, Faust, and the Fall of Man in Genesis, Toynbee identifies his catalyst for differentiation in Goethe's Faust, where God sends Mephistopheles to tempt humanity. This "devil" becomes Toynbee's metaphor for the challenge that awakens dormant societies from their primitive slumber and propels them into the creative ferment of civilization-building. It's an intriguing literary and philosophical framework, though one wonders if it explains more than it obscures.
Despite my frustrations with his methodology and conclusions—particularly regarding race—there's no denying Toynbee's extraordinary breadth of knowledge. He moves effortlessly between civilizations, epochs, and intellectual traditions with a command that few historians can match. His prose, too, deserves praise: elegant, clear, and engaging even when wrestling with abstract concepts. These qualities make the book enjoyable even though it can feel exhaustive at times.
Volume 1 is far from perfect. Its blind spots are significant, and its conclusions feel at times more asserted than proven. Yet Toynbee's ambition and synthetic vision remain compelling enough to pull me forward. I'm curious—if skeptical—about where he'll take this framework in the volumes to come.
On to Volume 2...
January 25, 2022
Denna bok är briljant, men väldigt mycket ett barn av sin tid. Författaren blandar oavsiktligt högt och lågt genom att både driva en mycket intressant tes (att samhällen växer genom att besvara utmaningar), polemisera mot tidens stora antihumanister (nassarna, och de antropologer som hävdade geografisk determinism) och samtidigt förfalla till pseudomysticism, med en stor dos fascination för både daoism och asatro. Detta förmänskligar honom, och för att parafrasera Churchill, så föredrar jag att mina mytiska gestalter åtminstone ibland förblir mytiska.
Jag är glad över att ha läst något av Toynbee - jag har velat göra det sedan jag var 12 och älskade Indiana-Jones-tv-serien. Och jag kan inte säga att det inte var värt det. Samtidigt förstår jag varför evolutionärt orienterad historia betraktar honom som en viktig föregångare snarare än en portalgestalt. För de som tvekar - teorin han framför har framförts lika bra av senare tänkare. Om du fortfarande vill bekanta dig med en av det förra sekelskiftets skarpaste hjärnor, är han värd din tid.
Jag är glad över att ha läst något av Toynbee - jag har velat göra det sedan jag var 12 och älskade Indiana-Jones-tv-serien. Och jag kan inte säga att det inte var värt det. Samtidigt förstår jag varför evolutionärt orienterad historia betraktar honom som en viktig föregångare snarare än en portalgestalt. För de som tvekar - teorin han framför har framförts lika bra av senare tänkare. Om du fortfarande vill bekanta dig med en av det förra sekelskiftets skarpaste hjärnor, är han värd din tid.
December 19, 2020
O AUTOROVI.: Arnold J. Toynbee bol anglický historik, narodený v Londýne 1889, bol vysokoškolským profesorom na mnohých dôležitých anglických univerzitách, prednášal o medzinárodných dejinách, pôsobil aj v štátnych medzinárodných službách. Okrem Štúdia dejín napísal napríklad prácu, v ktorej svetu odporúča návrat k duchovným hodnotám, kde sa odzrkadlil jeho katolícky duch s názvom An Historian‘s Approach to Religion či prácu, v ktorej predpovedá dôležitú úlohu Číny ako zjednocujúceho prvku medzinárodných vzťahov s názovm Change and Habit: The Challenge of Our Time.
O STUDIU DEJIN.: Toynbee svoju prácu začal písať v tridsiatych rokoch, pričom prvý zväzok vyšiel v roku 1934 a finálny zväzok v roku 1961. Na diele pritom podľa svojich slov pracoval už od rou 1921. Okrem toho Toynbeeho priateľ Somervell napísal Abridgement, čo je vlastne skrátená verzia Toynbeeho diela, pričom aj tá sa dočkala dvoch kníh s viac ako deväťsto stranami. V tejto mohutnosti stvoril filozofiu dejín, podloženú obrovským množstvom znalosťami, v ktorej vyjadril nedôveru triešteniu jednotnej vízie sveta a pokúsil sa prekonať stále postupujúcu špecializáciu pribúdajúcich vedeckých odborov metódou akéhosi príčinného prepojenia.
CIEĽ KNIHY.: Cieľom jeho práce bolo analyzovať genézu, vzostup a úpadok každej známej ľudskej civilizácie. V rámci tejto analýzy vstupov a pádov identifikoval opakujúci sa vzorec a vo svojej práci popisuje zákony, ktoré sú za týmto vzorcom. Darí sa mu to aj pomocou porovnávania jednotlivých identifikovaných civilizácií.
KRITIKA: V minulosti bolo jeho dielo obľúbeným čítaním, hlavne v Spojených štátoch po druhej svetovej vojne a Toynbee bol nazývaný prorokom svojej doby. Akademická obec sa však na jeho dielo pozerala skepticky, jeho metódu odsúdila ako nevedeckú a jeho závery nespoľahlivé, ba jednoducho nepravdivé. Kritiku vyvolala tiež jeho snaha ohraničiť civilizácie spôsobom, akým to robí a mnoho sporov vyvolal jeho odmietavý vzťah k násilným spoločenským zmenám, motivovanými utopickým futurizmom či konzervatívnym archaizmom. Jedným z dôsledkov jeho teórie by totiž je, že ak ju prijmeme, musíme uznať, že história je porozumiteľná ako celok a na základe Toynbeeho vzorcov by bolo možné predpovedať smerovanie ľudských dejín.
MOJE HODNOTENIE: Toynbeeho premýšľanie o dejinách je určite inšpiratívne a podnetné na premýšľanie. Prostého človeka neprestane udivovať akým spôsobom došiel k tak veľkolepej a ucelenej filozofii dejín. Áno, vedeckosť jeho metódy a záverov je možné spochybniť, ale ich filozofickosť či imaginatívnosť nie. Ako napríklad došiel k javom, ktoré určujú konkrétnu civilizáciu? Objavil ich u jednej a následne sa snažil fakty napasovať tak, aby ich bolo možné nájsť u každej? Kto vie, každopádne, knižka sa číta veľmi dobre. Prečítal som ju za tri či štyri dni aj s tým, že som si robil nejaké poznámky.
O STUDIU DEJIN.: Toynbee svoju prácu začal písať v tridsiatych rokoch, pričom prvý zväzok vyšiel v roku 1934 a finálny zväzok v roku 1961. Na diele pritom podľa svojich slov pracoval už od rou 1921. Okrem toho Toynbeeho priateľ Somervell napísal Abridgement, čo je vlastne skrátená verzia Toynbeeho diela, pričom aj tá sa dočkala dvoch kníh s viac ako deväťsto stranami. V tejto mohutnosti stvoril filozofiu dejín, podloženú obrovským množstvom znalosťami, v ktorej vyjadril nedôveru triešteniu jednotnej vízie sveta a pokúsil sa prekonať stále postupujúcu špecializáciu pribúdajúcich vedeckých odborov metódou akéhosi príčinného prepojenia.
CIEĽ KNIHY.: Cieľom jeho práce bolo analyzovať genézu, vzostup a úpadok každej známej ľudskej civilizácie. V rámci tejto analýzy vstupov a pádov identifikoval opakujúci sa vzorec a vo svojej práci popisuje zákony, ktoré sú za týmto vzorcom. Darí sa mu to aj pomocou porovnávania jednotlivých identifikovaných civilizácií.
KRITIKA: V minulosti bolo jeho dielo obľúbeným čítaním, hlavne v Spojených štátoch po druhej svetovej vojne a Toynbee bol nazývaný prorokom svojej doby. Akademická obec sa však na jeho dielo pozerala skepticky, jeho metódu odsúdila ako nevedeckú a jeho závery nespoľahlivé, ba jednoducho nepravdivé. Kritiku vyvolala tiež jeho snaha ohraničiť civilizácie spôsobom, akým to robí a mnoho sporov vyvolal jeho odmietavý vzťah k násilným spoločenským zmenám, motivovanými utopickým futurizmom či konzervatívnym archaizmom. Jedným z dôsledkov jeho teórie by totiž je, že ak ju prijmeme, musíme uznať, že história je porozumiteľná ako celok a na základe Toynbeeho vzorcov by bolo možné predpovedať smerovanie ľudských dejín.
MOJE HODNOTENIE: Toynbeeho premýšľanie o dejinách je určite inšpiratívne a podnetné na premýšľanie. Prostého človeka neprestane udivovať akým spôsobom došiel k tak veľkolepej a ucelenej filozofii dejín. Áno, vedeckosť jeho metódy a záverov je možné spochybniť, ale ich filozofickosť či imaginatívnosť nie. Ako napríklad došiel k javom, ktoré určujú konkrétnu civilizáciu? Objavil ich u jednej a následne sa snažil fakty napasovať tak, aby ich bolo možné nájsť u každej? Kto vie, každopádne, knižka sa číta veľmi dobre. Prečítal som ju za tri či štyri dni aj s tým, že som si robil nejaké poznámky.
March 15, 2020
An incomparable work by a highly erudite scholar. What detracted from a full five star rating was the chapter where Toynbee attempted to explain the geneses of civilization based off of the ideas and philosophy of Manichean dualism. Toynbee uses a two star astronomical theory to somehow tie the concepts of yin and yang with good and evil and also devil and god. He quotes exaustively from Faust, The New Testament, and the story of Job in order to somehow explain his belief that these stories harbor at their core the germ for all civilizations. Toynbee fails in this undertaking in my humble opinion, because (just to name one error) he equates the devil as being equal to god as a sort of yang to god's yin. His error is obvious when he uses the story of Job to highlight this belief. However, as anyone who has read the story of Job knows, the devil asks for god's permission. And, as anyone knows, if you have to ask permission for something then you are the subject of whomever you are asking permission. Either that, or the entity that you are asking permission has as their subject the object that you are asking permission about. This obviously shows that the yin and yang concept cannot be applied to god and the devil in the story of Job, since yin and yang are equal in force and as a whole are meant to be in balance.
It is a chapter that thankfully does not take up too much time in an otherwise objectively coherent study on the geneses of civilizations.
It is a chapter that thankfully does not take up too much time in an otherwise objectively coherent study on the geneses of civilizations.
November 23, 2018
I stopped after a hundred pages. Part of the problem was the free archive.org copy I was reading from was muddled, but even with that, his approach to history and morphology was absurd and not worth my time.
July 12, 2023
هذا الكتاب هو الجزء الأول من أربعة اجزاء تمثل مختصراً لما كتبه توينبى فى عدة مجلدات فيما يسمى بدراسة للتاريخ . وهو عمل أراد كاتبه أن يضع فيه نظرية فى نشأة وإنهيار الحضارات . وتوحى كلمة نظرية بحقيقة كون الكتاب عملاً علمياً من طراز رفيع ، يمتزج فيه البحث والمعرفة الأكاديمية بحدس المؤلف بما يشمله من منهجيه وقدرة على التحليل والحكم والاستنتاج .
وبالفعل نجد محتوى الفصول المختلفة عبارة عن نقاش لمواضيع محددة بغية التحقق من صحة نظرة ما وإثباتها او ادراجها فى محلها المناسب كعرض او سبب او نتيجة فى سياق الاحداث او نقضها والتثبت من بطلانها .
وفى هذا الجزء يبدأ الكاتب فى التحقق من طبيعة وصيرورة عملية نشأة الحضارات وانهيارها . ويبدأ بتحديد مفهوم المجتمع كوحدة للدراسة التاريخية ، ثم ينطلق الى البحث عن نسب الحضارات والمجتمعات القائمة الى الحضارات الأقدم منها وتحليل عملية التبنى والبنوة الثقافية الى عناصرها ومراحلها الأساسية . ولا يجد الكاتب فى سياق البحث فى الحضارات القائمة وتحديدها اى احقية بالنسبة للفكرة التى تم التنظير لها والقائلة بأن الحضارة الغربية هى الحضارة الوحيدة الحقيقية او بكونها مثال الحضارة ، رغم رؤيته لها بكونها الوحيدة الآن التى لا تبدو عليها مظاهر الانهيار . كما رفض فكرة الاصل الواحد او المصدر الاصلى للحضارات كمصر او غيرها . لكنه دافع عن فكرة قابلية الحضارات للمقارنة حتى تلك البائدة مع القائمة ، فبالتأكيد هنالك ما هو ماهوى مشترك ويجب النفاذ اليه واستخلاصه ، كما انه يرى ان الاختلافات لن تكون كبيرة لدرجة مشوشة للبحث نظراً لكون الحضارة عموماً ظاهرة تاريخية حديثة بالنسبة للتاريخ البشرى .
ثم يبدأ بحثه عن آلية بداية الحضارات واسبابها . وعن الاسباب فقد بحث فى الادعاء بالتفوق العرقى او اولوية عامل البيئة واثبت بطلان كلا العاملين من خلال منهجه الرئيسى فى العرض المقارن للحالات المختلفة والبحث عن العوامل الاساسية والاسباب الجذرية للظواهر التاريخية المتعلقة بالحضارة . ويستخلص حتى من تحليل الاساطير الشعبية العامل الأول فى نشأة الحضارة وهو ظهور تحدى جديد (بيئى او بشرى) يتطلب استجابة فريدة من نوعها فى زمنه وهو العامل الذى يتردد من حين لآخر على كل حضارة لاستكمال نموها او تثبيطه . وتقوم الأقلية المبدعة والقيادية فى الحضارة بتولى زمام الاستجابة للتحدى ، مالم تتردى هذه الاقلية المبدعة لمستوى الاقلية المسيطرة او حكم الطاغية . بينما بقيت المجتمعات البدائية فى مناطق الحياة اليسيرة والتى لازالت مناسبة لنمط حياتهم البدائى فى وحشيتهم حتى حلت عليهم الحضارة فى صورة الغزو والاستعمار .
ثم يمضى الكاتب ليبرز انواع التحديات والتى اعتبرها كحوافز على تقدم الحضارة مثل وعورة البلاد ، إغراء حيازة أرض جديدة وتعميرها ، الضربات والهزائم المفاجئة ، الضغوط السياسية والعسكرية ، ضغط الإضطهاد . ولا تعوزنا فى كل مرة الأمثلة والتى يتطرق الكاتب خلالها لحل مشكلات خاصة بفهم هذه الحضارات تحديداً .
ولا يغفل توينبى البحث فى أثر مقدار شدة التحدى حيث وجد أن هناك شدة حرجة للتحدى بالنسبة الى كل حضارة يصبح بعدها الإستجابة الأكثر عبقرية مجرد محاولة فاشلة وتتردى الحضارة المهزومة فى حالة من التعطل عن الانجاز والتقدم كجماعات الجزر البولينيزية والبدو والإسكيمو . او الى الدمار التام كالحضارة الانديزية والبيزنطية . ويجد إنتاج تصورات اليوتوبيا كأحد أعراض تحلل الحضارات التى ترمى الى إبطاء الإنهيار او منعه .
ويقر توينبى بضرورة تولد تحدى جديد ينجم عن طبيعة الاستجابة للتحدى السابق من اجل استمرار نمو الحضارة او فى حالة أكثر تقدماً من خلال التسامى وتقرير الشعوب لمصيرها من خلال بحثها ذاتياً عن تحديات لم تظهر للآن والشروع فى خلق استجابات متناسبة معها وهذا هو افضل سبل الارتقاء الحضارى المستدام . وبالنسبة لقياس الارتقاء الحضارى ، فلا يجد الكاتب اى رابط ضرورى بين هذا الارتقاء والسيطرة المتزايدة إما على البيئة أو على الشعوب الأخرى اى التقدم التكنولوجى والعسكرى . ولكنه يجده دائماً فى تنامى دور الأقلية المبدعة فى مجتمعاتها وفى تمايز هذه المجتمعات ذاتها الى مجتمعات داخلية نتيجة نجاح بعض افراد المجتمع الواحد فى الاستجابة لتحديات داخلية وفشل البعض الاخر فى التصدى للمشكلة حتى ان التاريخ الداخلى للمجتمع ذاته ينقسم ويتمايز .
ويبدع الكاتب فى شرح آلية ضمن آليات ارتقاء الحضارة وهى آلية ( الإنسحاب والعودة ) والتى تسرى على ارتقاء الفرد المبدع كالانبياء وكبار رجال الفكر والاخلاق والسياسة فى التاريخ ، وعلى ارتقاء جماعات محددة كجماعات المثقفين والعلماء وكذلك على المجتمعات خلال ارتقاءها كالمجتمع الأثينى خلال الفصل الدور الثانى من ارتقاء الهيلينية او ايطاليا فى الدور الثانى من ارتقاء المجتمع الغربى ( النهضة الايطالية ) . وانجلترا فى دوره الثالث ( الثورة الصناعية ).
واخيرا يفند كاتبنا القول فى العديد من الاراء التى تعلل انهيار الحضارات سواء كانت اراء تنسبها الى عوامل خارج سلطة البشر او عوامل فقدان السيطرة على البيئة المادية والبشرية . ولكنه يرى هذا الانهيار الحضارى كقرار انتحار يُتخذ حين تنقلب الأقلية المبدعة الى اقلية مسيطرة ومن ثم سحب البروليتاريا الداخلية ولائها من الأقلية وانهيار الوحدة الاجتماعية .
الكتاب منهجى علميا ولا يخلو من متعة غير أن طبيعته وغايته هى ما يجعلنى أعده تتويجاً لقراءة التاريخ .
وبالفعل نجد محتوى الفصول المختلفة عبارة عن نقاش لمواضيع محددة بغية التحقق من صحة نظرة ما وإثباتها او ادراجها فى محلها المناسب كعرض او سبب او نتيجة فى سياق الاحداث او نقضها والتثبت من بطلانها .
وفى هذا الجزء يبدأ الكاتب فى التحقق من طبيعة وصيرورة عملية نشأة الحضارات وانهيارها . ويبدأ بتحديد مفهوم المجتمع كوحدة للدراسة التاريخية ، ثم ينطلق الى البحث عن نسب الحضارات والمجتمعات القائمة الى الحضارات الأقدم منها وتحليل عملية التبنى والبنوة الثقافية الى عناصرها ومراحلها الأساسية . ولا يجد الكاتب فى سياق البحث فى الحضارات القائمة وتحديدها اى احقية بالنسبة للفكرة التى تم التنظير لها والقائلة بأن الحضارة الغربية هى الحضارة الوحيدة الحقيقية او بكونها مثال الحضارة ، رغم رؤيته لها بكونها الوحيدة الآن التى لا تبدو عليها مظاهر الانهيار . كما رفض فكرة الاصل الواحد او المصدر الاصلى للحضارات كمصر او غيرها . لكنه دافع عن فكرة قابلية الحضارات للمقارنة حتى تلك البائدة مع القائمة ، فبالتأكيد هنالك ما هو ماهوى مشترك ويجب النفاذ اليه واستخلاصه ، كما انه يرى ان الاختلافات لن تكون كبيرة لدرجة مشوشة للبحث نظراً لكون الحضارة عموماً ظاهرة تاريخية حديثة بالنسبة للتاريخ البشرى .
ثم يبدأ بحثه عن آلية بداية الحضارات واسبابها . وعن الاسباب فقد بحث فى الادعاء بالتفوق العرقى او اولوية عامل البيئة واثبت بطلان كلا العاملين من خلال منهجه الرئيسى فى العرض المقارن للحالات المختلفة والبحث عن العوامل الاساسية والاسباب الجذرية للظواهر التاريخية المتعلقة بالحضارة . ويستخلص حتى من تحليل الاساطير الشعبية العامل الأول فى نشأة الحضارة وهو ظهور تحدى جديد (بيئى او بشرى) يتطلب استجابة فريدة من نوعها فى زمنه وهو العامل الذى يتردد من حين لآخر على كل حضارة لاستكمال نموها او تثبيطه . وتقوم الأقلية المبدعة والقيادية فى الحضارة بتولى زمام الاستجابة للتحدى ، مالم تتردى هذه الاقلية المبدعة لمستوى الاقلية المسيطرة او حكم الطاغية . بينما بقيت المجتمعات البدائية فى مناطق الحياة اليسيرة والتى لازالت مناسبة لنمط حياتهم البدائى فى وحشيتهم حتى حلت عليهم الحضارة فى صورة الغزو والاستعمار .
ثم يمضى الكاتب ليبرز انواع التحديات والتى اعتبرها كحوافز على تقدم الحضارة مثل وعورة البلاد ، إغراء حيازة أرض جديدة وتعميرها ، الضربات والهزائم المفاجئة ، الضغوط السياسية والعسكرية ، ضغط الإضطهاد . ولا تعوزنا فى كل مرة الأمثلة والتى يتطرق الكاتب خلالها لحل مشكلات خاصة بفهم هذه الحضارات تحديداً .
ولا يغفل توينبى البحث فى أثر مقدار شدة التحدى حيث وجد أن هناك شدة حرجة للتحدى بالنسبة الى كل حضارة يصبح بعدها الإستجابة الأكثر عبقرية مجرد محاولة فاشلة وتتردى الحضارة المهزومة فى حالة من التعطل عن الانجاز والتقدم كجماعات الجزر البولينيزية والبدو والإسكيمو . او الى الدمار التام كالحضارة الانديزية والبيزنطية . ويجد إنتاج تصورات اليوتوبيا كأحد أعراض تحلل الحضارات التى ترمى الى إبطاء الإنهيار او منعه .
ويقر توينبى بضرورة تولد تحدى جديد ينجم عن طبيعة الاستجابة للتحدى السابق من اجل استمرار نمو الحضارة او فى حالة أكثر تقدماً من خلال التسامى وتقرير الشعوب لمصيرها من خلال بحثها ذاتياً عن تحديات لم تظهر للآن والشروع فى خلق استجابات متناسبة معها وهذا هو افضل سبل الارتقاء الحضارى المستدام . وبالنسبة لقياس الارتقاء الحضارى ، فلا يجد الكاتب اى رابط ضرورى بين هذا الارتقاء والسيطرة المتزايدة إما على البيئة أو على الشعوب الأخرى اى التقدم التكنولوجى والعسكرى . ولكنه يجده دائماً فى تنامى دور الأقلية المبدعة فى مجتمعاتها وفى تمايز هذه المجتمعات ذاتها الى مجتمعات داخلية نتيجة نجاح بعض افراد المجتمع الواحد فى الاستجابة لتحديات داخلية وفشل البعض الاخر فى التصدى للمشكلة حتى ان التاريخ الداخلى للمجتمع ذاته ينقسم ويتمايز .
ويبدع الكاتب فى شرح آلية ضمن آليات ارتقاء الحضارة وهى آلية ( الإنسحاب والعودة ) والتى تسرى على ارتقاء الفرد المبدع كالانبياء وكبار رجال الفكر والاخلاق والسياسة فى التاريخ ، وعلى ارتقاء جماعات محددة كجماعات المثقفين والعلماء وكذلك على المجتمعات خلال ارتقاءها كالمجتمع الأثينى خلال الفصل الدور الثانى من ارتقاء الهيلينية او ايطاليا فى الدور الثانى من ارتقاء المجتمع الغربى ( النهضة الايطالية ) . وانجلترا فى دوره الثالث ( الثورة الصناعية ).
واخيرا يفند كاتبنا القول فى العديد من الاراء التى تعلل انهيار الحضارات سواء كانت اراء تنسبها الى عوامل خارج سلطة البشر او عوامل فقدان السيطرة على البيئة المادية والبشرية . ولكنه يرى هذا الانهيار الحضارى كقرار انتحار يُتخذ حين تنقلب الأقلية المبدعة الى اقلية مسيطرة ومن ثم سحب البروليتاريا الداخلية ولائها من الأقلية وانهيار الوحدة الاجتماعية .
الكتاب منهجى علميا ولا يخلو من متعة غير أن طبيعته وغايته هى ما يجعلنى أعده تتويجاً لقراءة التاريخ .
Read
January 16, 2016قرأت أول جزء فقط، منهج تفكيره المنظم جميل، بس التكرار وكونه معتمد على افتراض خلفية تاريخية تفصيلية مسبقة عند القاريء خلى المهمة صعبة إني أكمل باقي الأجزاء بأريحية، مكملتش الجزء التاني، وعموما هو هيكون مفيد أكتر أكيد لدراسي التاريخ ومنظرينه .. توينبي دماغه عظيمة وبنيتها واضحة من أقل حاجة تقرأهاله ..
كان تجربة لطيفة، بس مظنش هزود فيها عن كده في نفس الكتاب، لكن الوارد إني هجربله كتب تانية أصغر، كتب حكاية تاريخ ..
كان تجربة لطيفة، بس مظنش هزود فيها عن كده في نفس الكتاب، لكن الوارد إني هجربله كتب تانية أصغر، كتب حكاية تاريخ ..
June 20, 2018
هومنظم وواضح .. بس لشخص سريع الملل زيي .. مش مناسب على الإطلاق.
وفيه صفة مريحة بالنسبة لي، أن أفكار توينبي ونظرياته بشأن التاريخ وتكوين وسقوط الحضارات واضحة جدًا، من النادر أوي إن ألاقي كاتب أفكاره الأساسية اللي بتشكل نمطه الفكري واضحة كده في كتاباته زي توينبي ..
أحتمال كبير أؤجل قراءة باقي الأجزاء لحين الخروج للمعاش .. يمكن أكون حينها أكثر صبرًا.
وفيه صفة مريحة بالنسبة لي، أن أفكار توينبي ونظرياته بشأن التاريخ وتكوين وسقوط الحضارات واضحة جدًا، من النادر أوي إن ألاقي كاتب أفكاره الأساسية اللي بتشكل نمطه الفكري واضحة كده في كتاباته زي توينبي ..
أحتمال كبير أؤجل قراءة باقي الأجزاء لحين الخروج للمعاش .. يمكن أكون حينها أكثر صبرًا.
November 15, 2015
مش عارفة هو كتاب ممل فعلاً ولا دا عشان انا قرأت مؤخرًا في التاريخ كتير لدرجة اني زهقت؟
February 20, 2017
***1/2; vol 1 of 10.
Very uneven work, including natural history and detailed geography of zero interest along with the sociology, anthropology, and philosophy - the history of Civilizations, and of History itself - advertised. Dry writing, non-narrative, the author is undoubtedly extremely learned in many disparate fields; the work is filled with copious citations in the footnote apparatus, copious digressions, and what seems to be a nearly infinite grasp of fine, virtually irrelevant detail which, while possibly of interest to a specialist in other fields, is entirely out of place here and severely bogs down the work.
I think a more detailed review is out of place and premature until I have read more than one-tenth of the work.
My expectations were probably very exaggerated after trying to obtain a set for 8 years. Even without taking that in to account, the work is a solid 3.5, with several sections of deep insight interspersed with 'words' in the barest sense. Toynbee's interpretation of myth (though he is extremely hostile to traditional Christianity) is very enlightening, and, I believe is - as of the time of publication in 1935 - original.
Very uneven work, including natural history and detailed geography of zero interest along with the sociology, anthropology, and philosophy - the history of Civilizations, and of History itself - advertised. Dry writing, non-narrative, the author is undoubtedly extremely learned in many disparate fields; the work is filled with copious citations in the footnote apparatus, copious digressions, and what seems to be a nearly infinite grasp of fine, virtually irrelevant detail which, while possibly of interest to a specialist in other fields, is entirely out of place here and severely bogs down the work.
I think a more detailed review is out of place and premature until I have read more than one-tenth of the work.
My expectations were probably very exaggerated after trying to obtain a set for 8 years. Even without taking that in to account, the work is a solid 3.5, with several sections of deep insight interspersed with 'words' in the barest sense. Toynbee's interpretation of myth (though he is extremely hostile to traditional Christianity) is very enlightening, and, I believe is - as of the time of publication in 1935 - original.
April 13, 2019
I find this work not so much a recounting of historical facts, but rather a book on the methods of historical research with a good number a historical facts and considerable amount of classic material, much of it in original language.
July 17, 2023
One really needs to be a specialist to understand all of the intricate detail, much less the Arguments and positions contained in this book. Nevertheless, the author looks upon humanity as a case study, and attempts to explain the whys and wherefores.
September 22, 2021
Good books
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 6, 2024
I enjoyed it a lot. It offers interesting historical theories.
April 14, 2016
Life changing.
Highly recommended to gain a higher level perspective of current events.
The landmark treatise on comparative history.
Highly recommended to gain a higher level perspective of current events.
The landmark treatise on comparative history.
March 14, 2014
awesome book.
Want to read
June 28, 2015Perfect
Displaying 1 - 19 of 19 reviews