368
PARTISAN REVIEW
in which its predecessors had moved, and of the tremendous vital–
ity of its new problems.
The historical and methodological unit in Toynbee's theory
of civilizations is not the national state nor even its enlarged pres–
ent-day form, the so-called Great Power. Like de Gobineau, Marx,
and Spengler before him, he starts from the more comprehensive
concept of a "society" which to him is equivalent to one of the
several co-existing "civilizations." As already mentioned, he dis–
{'nguishes twenty-one such independent civilizations-not counting
four embryonic civilizations that have never come to birth, and five
or six other civili?:ations which have not developed but have been
"arrested" after birth. Of those twenty-one civilizations all but
seven are now extinct, and the majority of these seven are unmis–
takably in de· ay.
This picture might appear almost as somber as Spengler's
theory of universal decline. Yet in fact each of those successive
phases:
Genesis, Growth, Breakdown, Disintegration of Civiliza–
tions,
encloses centuries and millenia of tremendous activity,
drama and adventure, challenges and responses. Even the phase
of the
"universal state"
which may or may not be passed by a
particular civilization is not conceived, like Spengler's "Caesar–
ism," as the static end-phase of a totally exhausted culture. It is
described as a new attempt at rallying all the remaining vital
energies of a declining civilization which may postpone its prog·
ress towards final disintegration for an indefinite time. Even when
the ultimate eclipse of a moribund society takes place, there is
still the possibility of a regeneration. A new society may arise
through the combined effect of two actions: that of an "internal
proletariat" which secedes from the dominant minority within the
old civilization, and that of an "external proletariat," from with–
out. Like many other features of Toynbee's theory, this scheme
of the emtrgence of a new society from the womb of a pre-existing
civilization which has lost its creative power is strongly reminiscent
of the well known Marxian scheme of the "social revolution."
Neither Toynbee nor Spengler can be described as conscious
supporters of present-day Nazism. Professor Toynbee is definitely
opposed to all tenets of racism, nationalism, and militarism; judg–
ing from the contents of his work, his main allegiance is to the
Christian faith. Even Spengler, who certainly rendered an im·
