{"title":"The Toynbee Affair at 100: The Birth of ‘World History’ and the Long Shadow of the Interwar Liberal Imaginaire","authors":"Arie M. Dubnov","doi":"10.3390/histories3040021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Functioning as “precedent” and “templates” for future transfers, the Greco-Turkish population exchange and the Lausanne Treaty) are undoubtedly events of world-historical significance. But they are also crucial in the genesis of the subfield of historical research we now call “World History”: they provided the backdrop against which Arnold Joseph Toynbee (1889–1975) began sketching his magnum opus, A Study of History and developed the foundations of this subfield of history writing. This article revisits the so-called “Toynbee Affair” and places it in its intellectual and political contexts. First, it revisits the British classicist scholarship that provided the backdrop and initial inspiration for Toynbee as it shifted its gaze from ancient Rome to Greece, which was put forward as a better model for foreign and imperial policy. Next, it examines Toynbee’s wartime activities and shows that his attitudes towards the new states of Central Europe were based on principles that often stood in tension with his activities and views connected to the Middle East. During these years, Toynbee was an active participant in a discourse concerning the need to manage “mixed populations,” which moved to the forefront of a new form of internationalism, while also exposed to the writings of authors such as Oswald Spengler and Frederick J. Teggart, who pushed him to advance a new type of historiography. Third, the article looks at the uneven reception of Toynbee’s ideas after 1945, including his views on the US, the “Muslim civilization,” and his controversial views on Jews and the politics of the Middle East. The article concludes by arguing that his views, which rested on a deep suspicion of liminal hybridity or cultural mestizos, failed to transcend the basic logic of separation developed in Lausanne. Entirely on the contrary: Toynbee’s story offers us a case in which we can recognize the making of the interwar “cultural imaginaire” and “reinvention of differences,” which continues shaping our view of “the West’s” supposed borders to this day.","PeriodicalId":41517,"journal":{"name":"Architectural Histories","volume":"71 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Architectural Histories","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/histories3040021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHITECTURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Functioning as “precedent” and “templates” for future transfers, the Greco-Turkish population exchange and the Lausanne Treaty) are undoubtedly events of world-historical significance. But they are also crucial in the genesis of the subfield of historical research we now call “World History”: they provided the backdrop against which Arnold Joseph Toynbee (1889–1975) began sketching his magnum opus, A Study of History and developed the foundations of this subfield of history writing. This article revisits the so-called “Toynbee Affair” and places it in its intellectual and political contexts. First, it revisits the British classicist scholarship that provided the backdrop and initial inspiration for Toynbee as it shifted its gaze from ancient Rome to Greece, which was put forward as a better model for foreign and imperial policy. Next, it examines Toynbee’s wartime activities and shows that his attitudes towards the new states of Central Europe were based on principles that often stood in tension with his activities and views connected to the Middle East. During these years, Toynbee was an active participant in a discourse concerning the need to manage “mixed populations,” which moved to the forefront of a new form of internationalism, while also exposed to the writings of authors such as Oswald Spengler and Frederick J. Teggart, who pushed him to advance a new type of historiography. Third, the article looks at the uneven reception of Toynbee’s ideas after 1945, including his views on the US, the “Muslim civilization,” and his controversial views on Jews and the politics of the Middle East. The article concludes by arguing that his views, which rested on a deep suspicion of liminal hybridity or cultural mestizos, failed to transcend the basic logic of separation developed in Lausanne. Entirely on the contrary: Toynbee’s story offers us a case in which we can recognize the making of the interwar “cultural imaginaire” and “reinvention of differences,” which continues shaping our view of “the West’s” supposed borders to this day.
希腊-土耳其人口交换(《洛桑条约》)无疑是具有世界历史意义的事件,是未来人口转移的“先例”和“模板”。但它们对于我们现在称之为“世界史”的历史研究分支领域的起源也至关重要:它们为阿诺德·约瑟夫·汤因比(1889-1975)开始勾画他的巨著《历史研究》提供了背景,并为这一历史写作分支领域奠定了基础。本文重新审视了所谓的“汤因比事件”,并将其置于其知识和政治背景中。首先,它回顾了英国古典主义学术,当汤因比将目光从古罗马转向希腊时,它为汤因比提供了背景和最初的灵感,希腊被提出为外交和帝国政策的更好模式。接下来,它考察了汤因比的战时活动,并表明他对中欧新国家的态度是基于他与中东有关的活动和观点经常处于紧张状态的原则。在这些年里,汤恩比积极参与了一场关于管理“混合人口”的讨论,这场讨论走到了一种新形式的国际主义的前沿,同时也接触到了奥斯瓦尔德·斯宾格勒(Oswald Spengler)和弗雷德里克·j·特加特(Frederick J. Teggart)等作家的著作,他们推动他推进了一种新型的史学。第三,文章着眼于1945年后汤因比思想的不平衡接受,包括他对美国,“穆斯林文明”的看法,以及他对犹太人和中东政治的有争议的观点。文章的结论是,他的观点建立在对界限混杂或文化混血儿的深刻怀疑之上,未能超越洛桑发展起来的分离的基本逻辑。完全相反:汤因比的故事为我们提供了一个案例,我们可以从中认识到两次世界大战之间的“文化想象”和“差异的再创造”的形成,直到今天,这些都在继续塑造着我们对“西方”所谓边界的看法。