Clark Atlanta University

Toynbee and the Webers

Author(s): Ossip K. Flechtheim
Source: Phylon (1940-1956), Vol. 4, No. 3 (3rd Qtr., 1943), pp. 248-264
Published by: Clark Atlanta University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/271437
Accessed: 23/08/2009 10:18

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cau.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Clark Atlanta University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Phylon (1940-
1956).

http://www.jstor.org
248 PHYLON

VI
Now his name is monumentalto us,
Not wholly in touchablethings
But it is also writtenin this air,
Writtenin this water;
It is in the dignity of dark mothers;
In our sailors and soldierswhen they sing like men of war;
It hoversover like permanentwriting in our sky;
It holds some shine of the peace to come;
It is a sort of exultationto us here;
A constellationof optimisticstars
In the disastervolcanic in the skies over free land.

By OSSIP K. FLECHTHEIM

Toynbee and the Webers

Some Remarkson Their Theoriesof History

If we turn from Hegel and Marx' to the outstandingcontemporary

contributionstowards the understandingof the historical process as a
whole, we will find that the ongoing secularizationof Westernthought
already mentionedhas by no means come to an end with the Marxian
"seculartheodicy." We shall try to show that the theories of both Max
Weberand Alfred Weberhave reacheda point where all theologicaland
transcendentelements have at last been overcome. Likewise, the socio-
historical systems of Pareto, Spengler, and Sorokin,2in spite of other
shortcomings,are free from theological elements. On the other hand,
one of the importantrecent systems of historical synthesis partly shows
such a relapse into a theodicy. Arnold J. Toynbee'sA Study of History'
constitutesa most ambitiousand comprehensiveundertakingin the field
1Cf. Phylon, 1941, Vol. II, pp. 238-49, 1942; significance does not consist so much in his
Vol. III, pp. 46-65. often outrageous construction of the past as in
2Their systems are not dealt with here be- his sometimes ingenious insight into the future.
cause they are not quite as important as the He certainly ranks high as one of the great
theories treated here. Cf. F. Borkenau, Pareto, precursors of what one may hope will sometime
1936; Coulborn and Du Bois, "Mr. Sorokin's develop into a real science of "Futurology."
Systems," Journal of Modern History, Vol. 14, 36 Vols., London 1933 to 1939. The reader
1942, p. 500-521; T. W. Adorno, "Spengler To. of this magazine will be acquainted with Rush-
day," Studies in Philosophy and Social Science, ton Coulborn's "The Individual and the Growth
Vol. 9, 1941, pp. 305-325. Among these three, of Civilizations," Phylon, Vol. 1, 1940, pp. 69-
Spengler is still the most important. Yet his 89, 136-148, 243-264 and his Toynbee review
"A Study of the Destiny of Man," Ibid., pp.
 TOYNBEEAND THE WEBERS 249

of history and social theory. There are few elements of thoughtwhich

the author has not directly or indirectly, consciously or unconsciously,
incorporatedinto his philosophy. Even a casual perusal of the volumes
discloses the vitalistic and voluntaristic influences of Schopenhauer,
Nietzsche,and Bergson;the individualisticimpress of modern Western,
particularlyEnglish and French,philosophyand sociology; the dialectic
and mystic impactcomingfrom the most ancientmythologyand theology
or from classical Germanphilosophy and poetry. All these influences,
however, are overshadowedby the transcendentdarkness which the
grandiosestructureof Christianreligious thinkingthrowsover the whole.
Consequently,Toynbee'ssystem representsa more genuine and sincere
theodicythan do Marx'sand even Hegel's diluted philosophies.
There are, nevertheless, problems with regard to which Toynbee
occupies a middle-of-the-roadposition between Hegel and Marx on the
one hand, and between theology and philosophy pure and simple (as
representedtoday by Berdyayevand Croce, for example) and so-called
"historical sociology"4 (as represented among others by Max Weber and
Alfred Weber) on the other. (Small wonderthat time and again, the his-
torian-sociologist Toynbee comes to blows with the homonymous
theologian-philosopher.)As regards his interpretationof the present,
Toynbee sides with most "common-sense"historiansand sociologists as
against Hegel and Marx in assumingthat our age constitutesneitherthe
end nor the beginningof humanhistory. It is but one phase in the de-
velopment of Western Civilizationwhich, in its turn, is derived from
previousHistoricCivilizationsand will be followed by many more Civili-
zations of the same type.5 For, as the various Civilizationsfollow each
other in eternal repetition, so each Civilizationruns through the cycle
of genesis, growth,break down, disintegrationand dissolution,the whole
history of a Civilization after its breakdownbeing characterizedby
Toynbee as the succeeding stages of the "Time of Troubles" and the
"Universal State" and "Universal Church." For our own Civilization,
he leaves the questionopen whetherwe find ourselvesstill in the phase
of growthor whetherthe breakdownhas already occurredand the "Time
of Troubles"begun.
This philosophy,the readerwill be aware,lies in the traditionof the

364-367. Cf. also the remarkable review by
P. A. Sorokin, "Arnold J. Toynbee's Philosophy
of History," The Journal of Modern History,
Vol. 12, 1940, pp. 374-387. The criticism of
Toynbee is put forward here tentatively for two
reasons: Firstly, because we do not yet have
the complete work before us, no less than three
additional volumes will appear later; secondly
because my understanding of Toynbee's work
is based on a first, necessarily incomplete study
of this already stupendous work.
4Cf. H. E. Barnes and Howard Becker, Social
Thought from Lore to Science, Vol. 1, 1938, p.
743 ff. and their Contemporary Social Theory,
1940, p. 491 ff.
5Toynbee, op. cit., Vol. 1, p. 462 ff. and Vol.
4, p. 10, in all seriousness puts forward "the
unverifiable but not intrinsically unreasonable
assumption ... that there is time ahead of us
250 PHYLON

philosophy of the historical cycle as developed by Polybius and Ibn

Khaldun, Machiavelli and Vico, Gobineau and Nietzsche, Pareto and
Spengler;and it is far removed,indeed, from any theology or theodicy.
In Toynbee, however, the Christiantheologian hastens to integrate the
cycle conceptioninto a more basic and comprehensiveWeltanschauung of
the human progress towards the "Kingdom of God." Using Goethe's
allegory of the Earth Spirit weaving God's living garmenton the loom
of time6 and the simile of the wheel turning monotonouslyaround the
axle and yet bringingabout a non-repetitiveprogressivemovementof the
wholevehicle,7Toynbeetries to demonstratethat, in humanhistory"there
is manifestly a 'progresstowardsan end' and not just an 'endless repe-
tition'."s8"The music that the rhythmof Yin and Yang beats out is the
song of creation"since it produces"not a discord but a harmony."9To
be sure, the HistoricCivilizationsbreakdown and disintegrate,but some-
times God Himself intervenesin this process and thus transformsde-
structioninto creation. Thus for Toynbeethe disintegrationof a Civiliza-
tion with its legacy of universal state, barbarianwar-bands,and, most
important,universalchurch10 embodyinga "higherreligion"is more than
a purely secularsocio-,historicalprocess. For the questionof the universal
church'sdestiny "holds the key to the meaningof the weaver'swork.""
The higher religion of the universalchurchcomes into this world as the
result of the two processes of "Transfiguration"and "palingenesia.""
"The aim of Transfiguration. . . is pursuedby seeking the Kingdomof
God in orderto bring its life ... into visibility ... in the field of life in
this world."'3 It is "an act of God and an effect of God'spresence. * ."
Palingenesia, for Toynbee, means "an attainment of another supra-
mundanestate . . . which ... is a positive state of life-though this in
a higher spiritual dimensionthan the life of This World."'5 The King-
dom of God is in this world and yet essentiallynot of it.L On the other

for at least 1,743,000,000 civilizations to come
into existence and to. pass away"; this assump-
tion is made on the grounds of Sir James Jeans'
"computation that the Human Race has at
least 500,000 million years of existence still to
look forward to."
Already here we have to face an inevitable
terminological difficulty. The terms culture and
civilization each have at least three different
meanings: Toynbee, A. Wright, and other
writers close to their point of view by the term
civilization comprehend either a given historic
civilization consisting of a "highly civilized"
society such as for example the Egyptian
Civilization, the Hellenic or Graeco-Roman
Civilization, the Western Civilization, etc., or
the more abstract concept of "'civilization" as
constructed on the basis of these historic civili-
zations. While the term"'civilization"is identical
with a highly developed type of society and life
characteristic of all given historic civilizations,
the term "culture" in their terminology com-
prises the whole life of a more primitive pre-
civilizational society (people, tribe, etc.). In
this paper the concept of civilization in the
sense just explained is referred to as "Historic
Civilization" (always capitalized).
61bid., Vol. 1, p. 204; Vol. 4, p. 34; Vol. 6,
p. 324.
71bid., Vol. 4, p. 33 ff.; Vol. 6, p. 324.
Slbid., Vol. 4, p. 34.
MIbid.,Vol. 6, p. 325.
lOIbid.,and Vol. 5, p. 23.
Ibid., Vol. 6, p. 326.
12Ibid., Vol. 6, p. 149 ff. and p. 169 ff.
3Ibid., Vol. 6, p. 171.
41bid, Vol. 6, p. 161.
5Ibid., Vol. 6, p. 174.
l6Ibid., Vol. 6, p. 157.
 TOYNBEEAND THE WEBERS 251

hand, as Toynbeeemphasizes"in the person of ChristJesus-Very God

yet also Very Man-the divine society and the mundanesociety have a
commonmember... -."1 Althoughin this context,he does not mention
thegreatMystics-Saints extolledpreviouslyas "a new spiritualspecies-
a veritableSuperman"18 we may assumethat they are the first citizens of
this new Kingdomof Jesus on earth. For it is exactly the "Communionof
Saints"19that will eventually emerge as the new "TransfiguredEtherial
Super-Civilizationof the Kingdomof God."20From the state of under-
man and his primitiveculture, God leads His children throughthe long
series of the many essentially similar Civilizationsof historical man to
the final goal of the Super-Civilizationof saintly super-man.
Toynbeebewaresof indicatingthe time when the history of Civiliza-
tions will come to an end and the new Super-Civilizationemerge.Still he
leaves us some hope that our own Civilizationmay be chosen by God to
witnessthis epochalKairos. It is true, "by the Law of Chancethe odds
are certainly sixteen to ten, and possibly twenty-fiveto one, that Death
the Levellerwill lay his icy hand on us likewise.. ."21 But if the "blind
arbitrament"of the vital statistics of all other preceding and contem-
porary Civilizationsis against us, there remains "a message of encour-
agement for us. ... The door of death is not closed."22The only
alternativeto seeing our Civilizationlike all the othersrunningits deadly
course through breakdownand disintegrationtowards final dissolution
or petrifaction,in Toynbee's conviction, is spiritual reversal, religious
revival, growthof saintliness: "In our past-wargeneration. . . the sap
of life is visibly flowing once again through all the branches of our
Western Christendom .. An apostate Western Christendommay be
given grace to be born again as the RepublicaChristiana"23 based upon
"that primitive Christiancharity which does know the secret of making
Socialism work as one of the terrestrialinstitutionsof a supra-mundane
Civitas Dei.24 He even intimatesthat the simple and deep religiosity of
the AmericanNegro may performthis "miracle":"... they may perhaps
be capable of rekindlingthe cold grey ashes of Christianitywhich have
been transmittedto them by us, until in their heartsthe divine fire glows
again. It is thus, perhaps,if at all, that Christianitymay conceivablybe-
come the living faith of a dying civilization for the second time."25
Toynbeeis, if course,too much of a trainedhistorianto predictthe resur-
rection of Christianityon scientific grounds. Decidedly the task is the
"miracleof raisingthe deadto life."26 Consequently,the mostappropriate

I7lbid., Vol. 6, p. 162. 221bid., Vol. 4, p. 38.

lsIbid., Vol. 3, p. 234.
191bid.,Vol. 4, p. 649.
2oSorokin,op. cit., p. 378.
2lToynbee, op. cit., Vol. 3, p. 373; Vol. 4,
p. 128.
23lbid., Vol. 5, p. 194.
24bid., Vol. 5, p. 587.
25Ibid., Vol. 2, p. 220; cf. also Vol. 2, p.
218 ff. and Vol. 5, p. 192 if.
261bid.,Vol. 2, p. 219.
252 PHYLON

method to be applied is to invoke supernatural divine intervention: ". . we

may and must pray that a reprieve which God has granted to our society
once will not be refused if we ask for it again in a contrite spirit and
with a broken heart."27
We are not surprised to find that a scholar who, like Toynbee,
adhering thus strongly to a transcendent doctrine of salvation and grace,
is unable to reconcile his beliefs with the postulates of science, "that
intrinsically God-alien power,"28 without falling into contradictions that
lay his entire system open to the criticism of logic and experience. Just
as much as Hegel's and Marx's metaphysical beliefs have fatally dis-
torted their conceptions of history and spciety, a number of weak points
and inconsistencies in Toynbee's system may be traced back to his at-
tempt to interpret the entire history of the human race as part of one

271bid., Vol. 6, p. 321.-As a social scientist I
have no business to take issue with such
religious and theological thinking as long as it
is based on faith and nothing but faith, and as
long as this is made clear beyond doubt.
Toynbee thus acknowledges that "the nature of
Transfiguration is a mystery that passes our
understanding" (Ibid., Vol. 6, p. 157). Dis-
cussing the dogma of the Trinity, he confesses
that God "is as accessible to the human heart
as He is incomprehensible to the human under-
standing." (Ibid., Vol. 6, p. 162.) Science,
natural and cultural, can only deal with "human
understanding," namely reason, as far as reason
is common to all human beings. Furthermore,
science has to make it clear that the idea of
"the human heart" today is unthinkable since
science has shown that there are as many
human hearts as there are Civilizations, peoples,
classes, individuals, and ages. Finally, science
can partly explain the immanent socio-historic
conditions inducing "God" to become "acces-
sible" to certain men of certain historic group-
ings and ages and to remain "incomprehensible"
to other individuals of a "God-alien" social
sphere and historic age. This, we hope, is
sufficient explanation why we cannot accept
Toynbee's religion and theology. In addition
we are surprised to discover logical flaws in
Toynbee's theology that necessarily strengthen
our cautious attitude. For Toynbee states that
"the divine nature, in so far as it is accessible
to us, must have something in common with
our own" and that it is the "faculty of Love"
"which we also can attribute with absolute con-
fidence to God-because God would be spirit-
ually inferior even to Man (quod est absurdum)
if this faculty were not in Him but were never-
theless in us. .." (Ibid., Vol. 6, p. 164.)
Granted that the Godhead, in order to be acces-
sible to us, must have something in common
with us-what entitles us to single out "with
absolute confidence" the "faculty of Love" as
the common ground? Certainly, if the title be
nothing but faith, we do not object. But
Toynbee seems to ratiocinate in using the terms
"because" and "absurd." Where has true faith
yet been afraid of absurdity? Has Toynbee
forgotten the old tenets credo quia absurdum
est and credo ut intelligam? On the other
hand, if we follow Toynbee's allegedly logical
argumentation, do we not have to assume that
the Godhead has all the faculties granted to
man, ,and does this not imply that God be
both Love and Hatred? If the term "'spiritual
inferiority" did make any sense in a com-
parison of a transcendent Godhead with mor-
tal beings-and logically we are inclined to
say that it does not make any sense at all!-
would it not refer to a lack of hatred as
well as to a lack of love.? Would not thus
God be "spiritually superior" just because
He possesses all attributes of man and many
more? But it is certainly not logic and reason
which cause Toynbee to fancy his God as
Love-it is the old attempt to find a super-
natural confirmation for his own desires and
intentions - intentions certainly laudable, yet
also human and transitory. After all, the
very term "'superior" betrays the animal meta-
physicum which looks up to the stars and hopes
to find there all the Love (both libido and
caritas) which it has been missing in this
valley of tears. -With all this criticism, we
must not be understood as objecting to the
ethics of love and fellowship implied in Toyn-
bee's theology. We do prefer this ethos to the
metaphysics of hate and domination glorified,
for example, in Spengler's pagan theory. But
while we are, like Toynbee, longing for the
Kingdom of Love and Brotherhood, we do not
feel justified to transfigure our human anguish
into a transcendent and cosmic Godhead, nor
even into a future Millenium.
28Max Weber, Wissenschaft als Beruf, 1919,
p. 20.
 TOYNBEE AND THE WEBERS 253

gigantic Christiantheodicy. True that, theoretically,Toynbee attributes

an equal,valueto the variousCivilizations.29Nevertheless,throughouthis
study,he regardsreligion as the "mostimportantfield of any in the whole
range of human life.""3 And among the so-called "higher religions"
it is, of course, Christianitywhich for him incarnatesthe highestvalue."1
Thus, in spite of all historical relativismnecessarily implied in any
cyclical philosophy of history, specifically Christianideals and evalua-
tions becomeultimatevalues and absolute norms.32Time and again, as
he proceeds in his investigation,he pronouncesvalue-judgmentswhich
are not mademanifestas such,but remainhalf-conscious.Toynbeeseems
to have really no notion how importantit is for a scholar to distinguish
sharplybetweenvalue-judgmentand value-understanding.33 He does not
see the abyss which separatesthe "causal-meaningful" methodof history
and sociology from the evaluating and moralizing method of practical
ethics and politics. Of course, we are far from reproachinghim for
having outspokenconvictions,some of which we even share. We notice,
however, how his convictionsdistort his understandingof the historic
reality in all its complexity. Toynbee condemnsthe "devil" before he
takes the trouble of getting fully acquaintedwith him and thereforehas
no means of appreciatingboth his limitationsand his strength.
As an illustration,we may ask what Toynbee achieves when he dis-
misses as "vulgar," "superficial," "non-essential," and "trivial" phe-
nomena like material technics, economic performance, and, especially,
capitalist striving for profit, thus warping the understanding of these fatal
is
powers.34 It is no doubt the moralizing philosopher in Toynbee who
responsible for his repeated failure to notice the power and significance
of the material, natural basis35 of all history and the important part
played by material needs throughout the entire life of a Civilization."
At the same time his spiritualism logically leads him to over-emphasize
two other processes: Firstly, as before mentioned, the cultural and

290p. cit., Vol. 1, p. 175 ff., and Vol. 5, p. 371.
SOlbid.,Vol. 4, p. 224.
SlIbid., Vol. 5, p. 371.
32Jbid., Vol. 3, p. 156, p. 159, p. 192, p. 211;
Vol. 5, p. 16.
a3The elaboration of this distinction is one of
the lasting contributions of Max Weber to the
method of social science. Cf. the critical expo-
sition of Talcott Parsons, The Structure of
Social Action, 1937, p. 591 ff.
340p. cit., Vol. 5, p. 16, p. 200; cf. also
Vol.
3, p. 154, p. 159; Vol. 4, p. 242, and passim.
35Understood here not in the monistic sense
of Marx's Historical Materialism, but in the
sense of modern Phenomenology, Existential
Philosophy, or Pluralism, namely that the basis
constitutes the "lowest" level, the most ele-
mentary conditio sine qua non of all "higher"
levels which are conditioned by that basis and
yet reach 'a considerable degree of freedom.
36Toynbee demonstrates well the importance
of natural factors as challenges for the genesis
of a Civilization. He does not realize, how-
ever, that in spite of the state of self-determina-
tion reached by a growing Civilization it re-
mains dependent upon its ability to make a
living, namely through productive work, and
that work always represents "a process going
on between man and nature" (Marx, Capital,
Vol. 1, ed. by E. and C. Paul, 1929, p. 169).
Once a Civilization has become well established
the pressure of external forces, such as climate,
soil, natural resources, etc., may lessen. Still,
throughout its course, material conditions and
factors remain of momentous importance,
namely as integrating or disintegrating factors
254 PHYLON

spiritual process37which, by means of the universal churches and higher

religions, leads towards Christianity and the future "Communion of
Saints"; secondly, the eternal up and down, the ever-recurring circle of
the essentially political structures and forms of the Historic Civilizations.
Only after publication of the remaining volumes of his study in which he
promises to show the connection between the sequence of Civilizations
and the "apparently progressive process of religious enlightenment,"38
will we be in a position to trace further the apparent contradiction be-
tween these two aspects. Yet it should be intimated that, in spite of its
logical inconsistency, Toynbee's dualism is preferable to Spengler's
monism. Whereas Spengler ab ovo dismisses ideals, reason, honesty,
equity, etc.,3"Toynbee makes these important aspects of human develop-
ment a part of his system, although glorifying them as the supra-historic
and transcendent intervention of God into the realm of man.

If, finally, we add to the picture the influence of prevailing Anglo-

French individualistic thought upon Toynbee's philosophy, we can easily
understand his mystic evangelic, anarchic-individualistic bias-so sugges-
tive of early Christianity-causing him to see the historic development
as carried along by the few great men. Repeatedly Toynbee propounds
that a society is only "an intelligible field of study" and "the common
ground between the respective fields of action of a number of individual
souls."40 In the last analysis, societies, groups, and institutions are re-
duced to human relations and to human individuals.41 All attainments
and creations, in his opinion, are based upon the work of the few
"creative personalities," chiefly the great mystics and saints.42 Under
Bergson's influence, Toynbee proceeds to contrast the so-called creative
individual or creative minority with the vast masses, uncreative and

within the structure of the Civilization. Max
Weber, in spite of his life-long fight against
the exaggerations of the materialist conception
of history, stresses the importance of "economic
history as a substructure, without knowledge of
which the fruitful exploration of any of the
great spheres of spiritual culture is unthink-
able." (Translated here from the German edi-
tion of his Wirtschaftsgeschichte, 1923, p. 16,
as this portion of the book has been omitted in
the English edition, entitled General Economic
History, s.d., London, tr. by F. H. Knight.-
Quincy Wright, A Study of Wr, 1942, Vol. 1,
p. 394, n. 46, correctly observes that it depends
on the background of the respective philosopher
of history which aspect of history he chooses
to stress. Therefore cultural philosophers like
Toynbee, Spengler, and Hegel have, in my
opinion, overemphasized the influence of ideas
or personalities.
370p cit., Vol. 3, p. 129; Vol. 4, p. 57; Vol.
5, p. 200, and passim.
38Toynbee, op. cit., Vol. 5, p. 119 ff; Note 1.
39Cf. Adorno, op. cit., p. 317.
40Op.Cit., Vol. 1, p. 147; Vol. 3, p. 222 ff.,
p. 230, p. 289; Vol. 6, p. 175.
41Ibid., Vol. 3, p. 223, p. 231; Vol. 4, p. 12.
421bid., Vol. 1, p. 192, p. 426; Vol. 3, p. 232
ff., 239 ff., 365, Note 1, p. 373; Vol. 5, p. 34 if.,
36 Note 2. In many of his theoretical state-
ments, Toynbee comes dangerously close to
Pareto's conception of the elite as being a class
supposed to dominate on account of inherited,
biological aptitudes, 'a conception well refuted
by Borkenau, op. cit., p. 106 if. If however on
p. 117 he asserts that, in Toynbee's theory,
elites "are not treated as biological entities,
but as social factors" he must have neglected
Toynbee's theoretical statements under the
impact of the rich historical material.
 TOYNBEEAND THE WEBERS 255

imitating. In the case of the martyr, Toynbee nearly carries his own
argument to absurdity admitting that even the martyr is generally imi-
tating a preceding martyr and therefore is uncreative. The only creative
deed that, in the end, finds recognition is that of the "protomartyr."43 As
for the mystics and saints, this reasoning would logically lead to the
hypothesis that only the "protosaint" and "protomartyr" are genuinely
creative. It is fortunate that such excess of speculation finds its check
in the scholarly part of Toynbee's self, which strives to discover historic
laws of development and is well aware of the historico-social roots of the
so-called natural aptitudes." In a number of general statements and
exceedingly convincing, concrete analyses, the empiricist refutes the
metaphysician, describing how creativeness, in its historic appearance,
function, and distribution is dependent on the given situation. Here,
creative historic achievement is shown to be the product of the society
as a whole, of the interaction of ideas, institutions, and groups.45 In most
instances even the creativeness of the great individual asserts itself his-
torically only through the many groupings and organizations cooperating
and competing with one another, and each consisting of a whole gamut
of leaders, lieutenants, and followers, all creative in varying degrees.
Toynbee may be expected to find believers ready to accept his theodicy
at its face-value. Doubters, however, will object that after the experiences
of the last centuries any historical theodicy is unpracticable for Western
scientific thought. Toynbee's theodicy is out of date by at least a century
or two; in this respect it belongs to what he himself calls the Epimethean
as against the Promethean system.46 The great age of theodicies, in our
own Civilization, made its beginning with St. Augustine's Civitas Dei;
it came to an end more than a millenium later with Bossuet's Discours
sur l'Histoire universelle. Hegel's titanic construction betrays much of
the tragic struggle of the late epigone for a forlorn hope. For, even
prior to his time, for centuries the wave of secularization and scientifica-
tion had been surging on against the bulwark of Christian faith. We have
seen that Hegel's superhuman attempt to secularize the theodicy and to
intellectualize the faith had come to naught. For much the same reason,
Marx's edifice has crumbled: the flood of rational skepticism drowned
his efforts to bring harmony and perfection down to earth and to replace

43Toynbee, op. cit., Vol. 5, p. 379 ff., Note 3.
44The extent of Toynbee's confusion in re-
gard to the nature of creativeness is evident
from his attitude towards Aristotle's thesis of
the natural difference between slaves and free-
men (Politics, book 1, chapter 5). Toynbee,
op. cit., Vol. 3, p. 106, rejects this conception.
In Note 1 on the same page he quotes "a great
Western philosopher" (Bergson) as giving "a
certain measure of support" to Aristotle. The
quotation itself, however, reveals that for once
Bergson contradicts Aristotle by maintaining
that most frequently psychic dimorphism
makes, at the same time, both masters and sub-
jects of all of us.- For a critique of Bergson's
"vagueness" on this point, cf. Coulborn, op. cit.,
p. 136.
45Toynbee, op. cit., passim, especially Vol. 3,
p. 239 ff., 375, Note 1; Vol. 4, p. 15 if., 133 ff.,
245 ff.; Vol. 5, p. 26, p. 29 ff.; Vol. 6, p.
176 if.
461bid., Vol. 3, Note 1 on p. 375 ff.
256 PHYLON

the transcendent Godhead by an idolized Humanity. For once we agree

with Toynbee when he rejects the "Religion of Humanity" as an unsatis-
factory and contradictory "idolization" of an "ephemeral Self."47 There
is indeed "bitterness in the boast that Man is a monarch," and this mon-
arch certainly is a "castaway"-at least sub specie aeterni. Yet we do
not agree with Toynbee when he thinks that the worshipper of Humanity
lives "in a spiritual solitude which is an abomination of desolation."
Humanity, for its devotee, can make a "Living God" as powerful as the
Gods of any of the innumerable religions men have continued to wor-
ship since the origin of the race. We do know, however, of men who
live in a spiritual solitude, in a desolation which, to be sure, is no
abomination, but a destiny dark and terrible, and yet not without chal-
lenge and grandeur. Those who have matured to recognize all idolization
and deification as a childlike escape and primitive fetishism, will be
ready to face the universe as it appears to them-unreasonable and mys-
terious, impenetrable and transcending. Nevertheless they will refrain
from seeking consolation in beliefs not warranted by scientific experience
and logic. Theirs is to face the head of Medusa without growing torpid
and to find, in their innermost self, the strength to bear their destiny with
courage, the courage of despair. They travel through this world mindful
of unavoidable "damnation" that, time and again, manifests itself in
wreckage and death.
Although this philosophy of life is of a dignified age, it has made
its way into social science mainly as a result of Max Weber's life work.
So it is fitting that Karl Jaspers, a philosopher and disciple of Max Weber,
closes his profound essay on Weber with the words: "Closer to him comes
he who understands wreckage and death. But unintelligible shall he
remain to him who forgets death over the beautiful world which Max
Weber also enjoyed in calm serenity."48 Indeed, Max Weber's insight
into our world was too profound to let him overlook its seamy side.
What he liked to call "plain intellectual honesty" bids us to state that we
must not be content to wait for prophets and saviors today, and that the
thing for us to do is to go to work and to do justice to the challenge of
the day, a task plain and simple for anyone who finds and obeys the
daimon holding the threads of his life. For we live in a period and a
world which is under the iron rule of advancing rationalization and intel-
]ectualisation. Whether we like it or not, matters little: The so-called
"Disenchantment" (Entzauberung) of the world is a process which has
been going on in occidental history for millenia, and it is the destiny

47Ibid., Vol. 4, p. 300 ff. Parsons, op. cit., pp. 500-686, gives the best idea
48Karl Jaspers, Max Weber. Deutsches of the greatness of the man and his work. Cf.
Wesen im politischen Denken, im Forschen und also H. Speier, "Max Weber," Encyclopedia of
Philosophieren, 1932, p. 78.-In English, T. the Social Sciences, Vol. 15, 1935, p. 386 ff.
 TOYNBEEAND THE WEBERS 257

of our and future generationsto face it and to search for the kind of
freedom compatiblewith such a world.49
It may be said that Max Webernever tries to escape from the tragic
aspect of all existence, nor does he ever attemptto make the relative
appearas the absolute. Science,he believes, has no access to the absolute
and transcendent.It is of its essence to remain within the limits of the
immanent.Still it recognizesits ownlimitation,it concedesthat theremay
be "something"beyond knowledge and experience and reason, but, at
the same time it affirmsthe absolute impossibility for itself to fathom
that "beyond." Accordingto Max Weber,it is the all-pervadingrational-
ization and disenchantmentwhich have shaped our mind in such a way
that it has becomeimpossiblefor us to breakthroughthe shell of secular
historyand society and clasp the hand of a transcendentGodhead.
Scientificskepticismof this kind must not serve, in Weber'sopinion,
as an excuse for commonplacesuperficialityor philistine banality. The
scope of his researchesis immenseand the radicalismof his questioning
unsurpassed.Still he confinedhimself to studyingcomplexesof concrete
historical relations and actions. He offered no closed system, no final
statement,no definitiveanswer, knowingthat, because of the nature of
science itself, his workmust remainfragmentaryand provisional.
In the world of man, therewill always exist a variety of problems,of
possibilities, of value attitudes.Max Weber refers to John Stuart Mill
for the paradox situationthat, if we start our investigationsfrom pure
experiencewe must find a kind of polytheisticworld. What held true
for ancienttimes with their gods and demons, is still valid today, only
divestedof its mythical appearance. The many gods struggle with each
other forever, and above them hovers fate, not "science."50Therefore
the universe appears pluralistic, and we have to separate clearly the
various spheresand attitudes. Science is to be kept apart from religion,
politics, and art. These take side in the strugglefor final goals, whereas
the former is not concernedwith the ends, but with the means solely.
All thatsciencemay and mustofferis rationalclarificationof the innumer-
able viewpoints. Thus it can bring about immanentunderstanding(Ver.
stehen) of humanactionsand meaningsthoughtby men (gemeinterSinn).
Free from partialityit can explain historicaltrendsand social tendencies
in their origin, function, and consequences.To enable us to seize upon
the decisive aspectsof the socio-historicalreality, Max Weber constructs
his famous "ideal-types"which "are neither average types nor ideals

49Max Weber, Wissenschaft. . ., passim, porarySocial Theory,ed. by H. E. Barnes,H.

especially p. 15 ff. and p. 35 ff. Cf. the quota- Becker,and F. B. Becker,1940,p. 521 ff.
tions from Max Weber in English translation 50MaxWeber,Ibid., p. 27.
in H. Becker, "HistoricalSociology,"Contem.
258 PHYLON

but non-normativestandardsbuilt up by the deliberateselectionand com-

binationof particularelementsof reality."51
As a sociologist and historian Max Weber always remains a true
philosopher.In orderto understandas muchof the universeas is granted
mortals to understand, he follows Pope's dictum that "the proper study
of mankind is man." In the great tradition of Aristotle, Hegel, Marx
and many others, and in opposition to the hero worship of Bergson and
Toynbee, he conceives of man not as of an isolated great personality, but
as being indissolubly integrated into historically changing society. In
studying universal history, he attempts to find a clue to the present and
future of the common man. By investigating our own age, he detects
the problems and forces which contribute to an understanding of the
past. In resuscitating the past, he shows the interdependence of freedom
and necessity characteristic of all human affairs, the range of "objective
possibilities" open to the actors of a given period. His study of the great
crises of the past reveals the role played by the occidental world religions
in the process of rationalization. The rational prophecies of Judaism
and Christianity, the stress of Calvinism on inner-worldly asceticism, are
described as contributing to the triumph of modern capitalism-a power
destined to eventually undermine its own creators.
On the basis of Max Weber's philosophy and methodology his
younger brother, Alfred Weber, as early as 1914, undertook to develop
his historico-sociological system. Since then he has published several
articles and essays; the latest publication, the magnum opus entitled
Kulturgeschichte als Kultursoziologie (Cultural History as Cultural So-
ciology) appeared in 1935 in Leiden outside of the boundaries of the
Third Reich. Alfred Weber gives his interpretation of the whole of
human history both in historical and sociological terms. The historic
detail is well integrated into a network of ideal-types. Looking at human
history from the standpoint of present-day society, Alfred Weber makes
a first step towards a synthesis of the linear and the cyclical conceptions
of history, combining the methods of historical materialism and cultural
idealism and therefore interpreting history both as the unfolding of the
laws of mass-movements and as the result of the free and unique actions
of individuals. Taking as the point of departure the concept of man as
he develops historically in all his various manifestations in society, Weber
comes to a pluralism of social and historical levels.
Before presenting a full picture of the historic dynamism, Alfred
Weber gives us a vertical scheme, a cross-cut of the processes into which
the totality of human development may be ideal-typically dissected.

51H. Speier, op. cit., p. 386; cf. also H.

Becker's concept of the "constructedtype,"
Ibid., pp. 527-530and pp. 1746.
 TOYNBEEAND THE WEBERS 259

Startingfrom three "focal-points,"52 he distinguishesthe following three

processes (spheres,systems): The "civilizationalprocess" (Zivilisations-
prozess), the "societalprocess" (Gesellschaftsprozess),and the "cultural
process" (Kulturprozess) .5 The civilizational process is characterized
by its preponderantly linear development. Within this realm Alfred
Weber, opposition Spengler or Sorokin,recognizesthe existenceof
in to
the kind of "progress"which has made such overwhelmingimpression
upon all the optimisticideologistsof progressfrom the seventeenthcen-
tury FrenchmanPerraultonwardsdownto our contemporaryH. G. Wells,
and whichconstitutesthe basis for Hegel's and Marx'theodicies. In spite
of all interruptionsand retrogressions,Weber'scivilizationalprocess ad-
vancesthroughthe wholeof mankind'shistory. It traversesthe prehistoric
stages (Palaeolithic age, Neolithic age, Bronzeage, etc.) as well as the
hithertoexisting Historic Civilizationsand will, in all probability,con-
tinueto growin the nearfuture. It consistsof the whole rangeof technical
achievements,scientificdiscoveriesand rationalformsof life and organiza-
tion of humanity. In detail, it includes three processes: First, an inner
intellectual clarificationof the human mind, a process of growth and
aging startingwithprimitivetotemism,myth and empiricism,and advanc-
ing towardsreflection,intellectualand scientificconstruction,and ration-
ality; further,a growingintellectualaccumulationof scientificknowledge

52Barnes and Becker, Social Thought .. .
p.772.
53Alfred Weber and those authors who follow
him name Toynbee's Civilizations "'Geschichts-
bezirke," "'Hoch-Kulturen,"or sometimes simply
"Kulturen" (as for example does Spengler).
The terms culture and civilization, as used in
the compounds cultural process and civilization-
al process for Alfred Weber have a completely
different meaning since they refer to two di-
verse processes going on at the same time
within the same Historic Civilization (this term
now used in the sense of Toynbee) and to two
different spheres of life existing side by side
within the same society and typical for all
civilized societies. For Alfred Weber culture
means the "higher" symbolic expressive activi-
ties and achievements of the human soul, espe-
cially religion and art, whereas civilization
stands for the technical, scientific, utilitarian,
material side of human activity.- We do not
know whether in his three-fold distinction Al-
fred Weber was influenced by H. St. Chamber-
lain. At any rate, Chamberlain in much the
same manner distinguished between "Knowl-
edge" (including discovery, science, and even
industry) (Weber's civilizational process),
"Civilization" (including economy, politics, and
church) (Weber's societal process), and "Cul-
ture" (including Weltanschauung, religion,
ethics, and art) (Weber's cultural process).
(Chamberlain, Foundations of the Nineteenth
Century, tr. by J. Less, 1914, Vol. 2, p. 234 ff.;
cf. also A. Niceforo, "Masstaebe der Ueber-
legenheit des Fortschritts einer Zivilisation,"
Jahrbuch fuer Soziologie, Vol. 1, 1925, p. 249).
J. W. Woodward's classification (quoted by
Reuter, "Race and Culture," An Outline of the
Principles of Sociology, ed. by Robert E. Park,
1939, p. 197) of what he calls a culture into
the three categories: inductive, control, and
aesthetic culture, and Ralph Turner's (The
Great Cultural Traditions, 1941, Vol. 2, p. 1242
ff.) division of a culture into the three major
elements, namely the technological, or the
integration of the carrying group with its en-
vironment, the institutional, or the organiza-
tion of social relations within the carrying
group, and the intellectual, or the interpreta-
tion of the experience of the carrying group,
come both rather close to Alfred Weber's
trinity. On the other hand, R. M. Maclver's
"utilitarian or instrumental systems" combine
Weber's civilizational and societal processes;
Maclver's concept of "culture" is broader than
Weber's cultural process; Maclver's third ele-
ment, the material (biological and environ-
mental) factors, have no counterpart in Weber's
trinity (Maclver, "The Historical Pattern of
Social Change," Journal of Social Philosophy,
Vol. 2, 1936, p. 35 ff.) A critical evaluation
of Alfred Weber's, Maclver's, and Turner's
theories will be attempted in a later article.
260 PHYLON

and insight into nature; finally, the materialization of this "intellectual

cosmos," its transformation into an apparatus of tools and instruments,
methods and principles of organization.54
Weber's societal process is identical with the life-process of Toynbee's
Historic Civilizations. For both, the Historic Civilizations are the societies
par excellence (although for Alfred Weber, as against Toynbee, the
human society as a whole is of great importance as the subject of the
civilizational process). On this point, we may assume that Alfred Weber
was somewhat influenced by Spengler's conception of the "Kulturkreise."
(Toynbee's work was certainly unknown to Weber while on the other
hand, Toynbee does not seem to believe that consideration of German and
French post-Marxian and post-Comtian social theorists, besides Spengler
and Bergson, would have contributed to the value of his investigation.)
Of course, Alfred Weber remains a world afar from Spengler's dogmatism
and organicism, even when he asserts that the Historic Civilizations are
"communities of destiny," formations of the natural human forces of
drive and will under definite natural conditions. In each Civilization, he
continues, we find a new attitude toward life and fate and a new cultural
and spiritual physiognomy based on a varying ethnic substance and, to
use Spengler's picturesque language, the "motherly quality of the land-
scape." Out of the original situation, the ethnic psychic substance of a
Civilization develops into something fixed; the will to psychic-spiritual
formation appears as a sort of "psychic entelechy." Although all
Civilizations have a different destiny and vary in their structure, the
stages of their evolution are comparable to a certain degree. A general
principle of social evolution operates in various forms. Most characteristic
of the societal process of a Civilization is its social structural formation
and its transformations. The social structure is peculiar to each Civiliza-
tion though its phases resemble each other in some respects. Reluctant to
encroach upon their individuality, Alfred Weber does not venture to
indicate a general law of evolution valid for all Civilizations. He hints,
nevertheless, at a few general types of development common to all of
them, such as the trend from simple to more complicated forms of social
organization, or the tendency of kinship organizations to develop into
territorial groupings.55
The cultural process, together with the civilizational process, forms
other
part of the intellectual-psychic realm of the human mind; on the
hand, the former differs qualitatively from the latter and is in extremely

54Alfred Weber, "Prinzipielles zur Kultur-
soziologie (Gesellschaftsprozess, Zivilisation-
sprozess und Kulturbewegung)," Archiv fur
Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik, Vol. 47,
1920-21, pp. 1-49, especially p. 9 ff. A short but
good summary of Weber's theory in English is
to be found in Barnes and Becker, Ibid., pp.
771-777 and their Contemporary Social Theory,
pp. 522-524.
"5Alfred Weber, "Prinzipielles .. ", p. 5,
Kulturgeschichte .. ., p. 9 ff.
 TOYNBEEAND THE WEBERS 261

close connectionwith the societal process. For both (the societal process
as well as the cultural process) are only two aspects of the life cycle of
a Civilization. While the category"societalprocess"is meantto express
the material side of a HistoricCivilization,the ideal type "culturalpro-
cess" is constructedto grasp its more spiritual aspect. The cultural pro-
cess thus is identicalwith the rangeof creationsthroughwhicha Civiliza-
tion manifests its inner self and with the series of symbols in which it
makes evident its psychic essence. Whereas through the civilizational
processthe intellect aims at rationalcontrolover the world, the cultural
processis the work of the soul whichstrivesto portrayitself or to escape
from itself. Culture,in Weber'smeaningof the term, is "the respective
form of expressionand redemptionof the psychic in the materially and
spiritually presentedsubstanceof existence."6 All cultural emanations
as creationsare unique and not transferable. The culturalprocessknows
of no stages of evolution,but only of reversals,periods of productivity
and unproductivity,decline and standstill. It resemblesa troubled sea
which does not flow towardsa goal.57 "There is no 'march'of culture.
It is subject to retrogressionas well as to advance. Its past does not
assure its future."58 In so contrasting the march of civilization with the
"eternal" recurrence of cultural and societal life of the Historic Civiliza-
tions, Alfred Weber is developing a theme touched upon by Max Weber
who had emphasized the difference between science harnessed to the run
of progress and art finding its perfection within itself.69
With the publication of his latest book, Alfred Weber has given us a
panorama of universal history within the frame of reference of the three
processes just sketched. Now at least we can imagine to a certain degree
how the "progress" of the human race through the civilizational process
can be brought into agreement with the cyclical up and down of the many
Civilizations which is manifested in their societal and cultural process.
At long last we see how in the Fourth Millenium B.C. the primary Civi-
lizations in a few places originate out of the stagnate magic agricultural
culture of the Neolithic age. For the first time in those Civilizations, a
third type of man, the equestrian master man (Reiterlicher Herrenmensch)
makes his appearance within the ruling class (the first type, according to
Weber, being the Neanderthal man, the second being the Neolithic man).
That class overcomes a servile, magic attitude towards nature and begins
to establish state government and to organize society rationally. Only
with the appearance of this new type of man, real history finds its begin-
ning as a great epic, as the tragedy of the struggle for power-a drama

56AlfredWeber,"Prinzipielles.. .", p. 30. p. 275, quoted here from Barnes and Becker,
567bid.,p. 28 ff. Social Thought.. ., p. 775.
58R.M. Maclver,Society: A Textbook,1937, 59Max Weber,op. cit., p. 14.
262 PHYLON

of which we seem to witness the final act today.6 Yet all the primary
Civilizations-consisting mainly of the four "supporting pillars" of
history, i.e. Egypt, Babylonia, China, India-remain essentially magic
representinga wedlockbetweenprimitivemagic and rationalorganization
of economy,society, and state.6' In spite of numerouscontactsthrough
commerce, spiritual intercourse, and attempts at unifying organization,
they remain widely separated, self-contained unities only loosely con-
nected because of the pressure brought upon them by the migrations of
the nomadic tribes who, time and again, break forth from the wide steppes
of the Eurasian-African block that surrounds the primary Civilizations.
Consequently, they communicate with one another, so to speak, only by
way of "narrow pipes.""6 Within the group of primary Civilizations,
Alfred Weber rather sharply contrasts the oriental with the occidental pair.
There the primary Civilizations survive in their essence through the whole
of human history, striking forth and back like a pendulum. Thus in
China and India we witness the repetition of a process unrolling vertically
from the social bottom to the top and, time and again, manifesting the
eruption of the powerful and primitive magic substance.63 In the West,
on the contrary, we can discern a sequence of periods running through
history horizontally. Here the primary Civilizations break down com-
pletely, the centres of gravity of the Civilizations shift considerably.
Out of the primary Civilizations develop entirely different secondary
Civilizations which are of two degrees (stages).64
Within the group of secondary Civilizations of the first stage, it is the
Jews and Persians in the Hither Asiatic sphere and the Greeks and Romans
in the Mediterranean sphere (both spheres, based upon Egyptian and
Babylonian Civilizations) who gain the greatest importance for the sub-
sequent development of the West. The former do so since Judaism and
Parsism, for the first time, brought into history the idea that the true
greatness of the master man consists in the ready and proud acceptance of
his humiliation and agony; the latter stand out for the reason that they
were the first to discover the aristocratic man and the Promethean man
demonstrating at the same time that a culture based upon this type of man
was inwardly threatened by its own self.65 In addition to this outstanding
achievement of Classical Civilization we have to remember the equally
important transformation of the magic world view into a mythic-symbolic
world interpretation, further the rise of systematic science in the modem
meaning of the word, and, last but not least, the birth of the idea of

6OAlfred Weber, Kulturgeschichte . . ., p. Vol. 1, p. 183 ff. and Vol. 2, passim.

14 ff.-Weber's treatment of the rise of the 61Alfred Weber, Ibid., p. 31 ff.
first Civilizations seems to have been invali- 621bid.,p.7.
dated by Toynbee's and others' investigations 63lbid., p. 43 ff., especially p. 76.
into the origin of Civilizations with which 641bid.,p. 6.
Weber is not acquainted. Cf. Toynbee, op. cit., 51bid., p. 77 ff.
 TOYNBEEAND THE WEBERS 263

politicalfreedom.66All these achievementsare unique. Yet Alfred Weber

does not overlookthe great commondevelopmentshared by the Hellenic
Civilization with the two other contemporarysystems of Civilization:
In the later partof the age of universalmigrations(ninthto sixth century,
B.C.) the three spheres of Civilization,namely the Hither-Asiatic-Clas-
sical, the Indian, and the Chinese, simultaneouslyreach the stage of
religious and philosophicsearching,questioning,and creation that tend
towardsuniversality. Thus a synchronousworld age emerges filled with
philosophicalinterpretationand faith drawn from the world religions.67
The further systematization,reformation,and expansionof the world
religions, however,partly belongsto the stage of the secondaryCiviliza-
tions of the second order. These, for Alfred Weber, are the Byzantine,
Islamitic,Russian,and WesternCivilizations. Amongthem it is our own
WesternCivilizationwhich shows the greateststrain and tension due in
partto its originalsituation:The irruptionof layers of equestrianmasters
acquaintedwith agricultureinto the sinking Western Antiquity placed
before the representativesof the new Civilizationthe challenge of having
to live in permanentcontact with the ChristianAntiquity in its final
civilizational,societal,and especiallycultural-spiritualforms, a challenge
all the more provokingsince it was representedby the highly sublimated,
religiouslyuniversalistfinal productof the Judo-Christianreversalof the
Hellenic masterattitude.68From the thirteenththroughthe fifteenthcen-
tury A.D. the great world age of the wild Volkerwanderungen is calming
down, and since 1500 A.D. in a strangesynchronismwith the ending of
religious productivity, the organizing and conquering expansion of the
WesternCivilizationover the globe has been taking place.69 According
to Weber,therefore,since 1500, we have been witnessingworld history in
a new sense, a world historywhich had not asserteditself fully until the
nineteenthcenturywhen it began to break up the age-old antagonismof
East and West and to seize the entire globe in chaotic entanglement.70
It is at this stage only that historycomesunder the sway of what we may
call the new "demons" of rational-intellectual Weltanschauung, of natural
science and technology, of ethos of work and profit as embodied in
capitalism, of nationalism and democracy, of rebellious masses and
shrinkage of the planet.7' It is our destiny to witness "the transformation
of the earth into an organized unity growing to be ever more uniformly
governable by man, and, with the improvement of communication, shrink-
ing in size-until it comes to resemble a kind of domesticated world

66Ibid., p. 116 ff. 68Alfred Weber, Kulturgeschichte . .. p.

671bid., p. 7 ff., for the parallelismof Chinese 179 ff.
and Greek philosophy cf. also Bowers, "The 691bid.,p. 8.
Chinese and Greek Philosophies and Their 701bid.,p. 321 ff., p. 382.
Place in History,"Phylon, Vol. 4, 1943, pp. 7lIbid., p. 305 ff., p. 382 if., and passim.
55-65.
264 PHYLON

metropolis, should this development continue in a logic way. According

to the trend in technics we are living in the epoch of world domestication
however little domestic its effect may have been until now."72
With Alfred Weber's noteworthy synopsis of the historic process, we
believe we have come to a point where historical sociology has shown its
superiority over historical theodicy. In a later article, therefore, we shall
attempt to outline a theory of social change which will coordinate the
scientific elements present in the systems of Hegel and Marx, Spengler
and Toynbee, Max Weber and Alfred Weber. In how far our endeavor
will contribute to the understanding of the past and future of our society,
we do not know. We are certain, however, that we will not add another
theodicy to the many already available.

72lbid., p. 8. Alfred Weber's panorama of conception of history underlying Wright's

world history corresponds in many decisive
points with the interpretation of history offered
by P. Gordon Walker, An Outline of Man's
History, London, 1939. This agreement is the
more valuable since Walker does not know
Alfred Weber's studies, but bases his concep-
tion upon the theories of Marx, Toynbee, and
to a lesser degree, upon those of Max Weber
and Spengler. Further, a remarkable similarity
exists between Alfred Weber's system and the
Study of War,2 Vols., Chicago,1942, although
the resemblanceis less outspoken as Wright
to a great extent follows Toynbee. Cf. Wright's
Table 2, "Origin, Stages, and Termination of
the Historic Civilizations" (Ibid., Vol 1, p.
463) where he groupsall previousCivilizations
into Primary, Secondary,and Tertiary Civili.
zations. Our own Civilizationsince 1500 he
considers as a new quarternaryCivilization
(Ibid., Vol. 1, p. 166 ff. and passim).

By W. 0. BRYSON, JR.

War Industry Employment for Negroes

in Maryland

Justsouthof the Mason-Dixonline lies Maryland,the homeof 301,931

Negroes.1 One-sixthof the citizens of the state are classifiedas Negroes.
He who looks for a definite patternof employmentin this border state
will, sooneror later, cometo the conclusionthat segregationand liberality
have togetherwoven an intricatedesign which has no rhyme or reason.
While many Marylandersgain their livelihood from agriculture, the
state is primarily urban, 59.3 per cent; and manufacturingand other

'Characteristicsof the Population of Mary- statistics used in this report are from this
land, Sixteenth Census of the United States: source.
1940. Unless otherwise credited, population