Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 546 views

    Holt-Jensen - The Foundation of Geography

    Uploaded by

    María Lejandra
    The term geography was first used by scholars at the Museum in Alexandria about 300 Be. It is difficult to imagine how there were ever people who didn't think geographically, and never wondered how people lived in other places. The ancient Creeks made the first major contribution to the development of geography; Scholarly writers produced topographical deseriptions of places in the known world.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Holt-Jensen - The Foundation of Geography

    Uploaded by

    María Lejandra
    546 views40 pages
    The term geography was first used by scholars at the Museum in Alexandria about 300 Be. It is difficult to imagine how there were ever people who didn't think geographically, and never wondered how people lived in other places. The ancient Creeks made the first major contribution to the development of geography; Scholarly writers produced topographical deseriptions of places in the known world.

    Original Title

    Holt-Jensen--The Foundation of Geography

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The term geography was first used by scholars at the Museum in Alexandria about 300 Be. It is difficult to imagine how there were ever people who didn't think geographically, and never wondered how people lived in other places. The ancient Creeks made the first major contribution to the development of geography; Scholarly writers produced topographical deseriptions of places in the known world.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    546 views40 pages

    Holt-Jensen - The Foundation of Geography

    Uploaded by

    María Lejandra
    The term geography was first used by scholars at the Museum in Alexandria about 300 Be. It is difficult to imagine how there were ever people who didn't think geographically, and never wondered how people lived in other places. The ancient Creeks made the first major contribution to the development of geography; Scholarly writers produced topographical deseriptions of places in the known world.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 40
    2: The Foundation of Geography GEOGRAPHY IN THE ANCIENT WORLD Interest in geographical problems, and writings on subjects we can recognize as geographical, began long before the introduction of the subject into universities. In fact it is difficult to imagine how there were ever people who did not think geographically, who never considered the conditions under which they lived, and never wondered how people lived in other places. In this sense geographical thinking is older than the term geography (literally meaning “earth description’ ), which was first used by scholars at the Museum in Alexandria about 300 8c. Herodotus The ancient Greeks made the first major contribution to the development of geogra- phy. Scholarly writers produced topographical descriptions of places in the known ‘world, discussing both natural conditions and the culture and way of life of the people who lived there. The best known of these was Herodotus (c. 485-125 nc), He was first and foremost a historian, and is indeed often regarded as the father of history, but he placed historical events in a geographical setting: some of his writings are truly ‘geographical in character. He not only described geographical phenomena as, for ‘example, the annual flow of the Nile but also attempted to explain them. Herodotus had no interest in those mathematical and astronomical problems that later became associated with geography - the measurement of the circum- ference of the earth and the establishment of exact locations for places. He ac- cepted the Homeric view of the earth as a flat disc over which the sun travelled in ‘an arc from east to west. The belief that the earth was a sphere was discussed in Herodotus’ time but it was Aristotle, about a century after Herodotus, who pro- duced observational evidence for a spherical form of the earth. The scholars at the ‘Museum in Alexandria were then able to establish the foundations for the calcula- tion of latitude, longitude and the size of the earth, Eratosthenes Eratosthenes (276-194 uc), who wes chief librarian at the Museum, succeeded in i . OF equal eaiculating the circumference of the earth with remarkable precision. importance was his development. of systems’ of co-ordinates for the world; 18 Geography: History and Concepts Box 2.1 How Eratosthenes calculated the size of the earth Eratosthenes learned that the rays of the mid-day sun penetrated to the bottom of a well at Syene (Assuan) on the Tropic of Cancer, at the summer solstice. At the same time and on the same day he observed that the obelisk in front of the Museum in ‘Alexandria cast a shadow. He used a plurrb line to measure the angle of the sun's rays at that time and day, which tured out to be 1/5Qth of a circle. The north-south distance from Syene to Alexandria must be 1/SOth of the circumference of the earth. The story {goes that he sent some reliable slaves to Syene, travelling on an ox-cart with a lump on. ‘each wheel. They counted the jolts from the lumps to arrive at the number of wheel tums and, knowing the size of the wheel, calculated the distance from Alexandria to Syene. From this measurement, Eratosthenes calculated the circumference of the earth to be 252,000 stai (a stadium equals 1575 m) or c 39,700 km, Modem measurements show the actual circumference to be 40,000 km. if you look closer at a map of Egypt you will find that Alexandra is located 7.8° nerth of the Tropic of Cancer, 1/50 of the circle ‘or 7.2° is thus inaccurate. But this might have been counterbalanced by the fact that the road along the Nile does not go straight north-south. Pate sueare is Shadow in ——_ Syere Aorancio Wat in Syene Figure 2.1 How Eratosthenes calculated the size of the earth Source: Bilmann, 1981 i.e. latitude and longitude, which he used to locate places and to measure dis- tances. This made it possible for him to draw the first passably accurate map. Ptolemy Eratosthenes’ cartographical work was later developed by his students and suc- cessors at the Museum in Alexandria. Ptolemy (ap 90-168) wrote a major work in eight volumes which is now known as Ptolemy’s ‘Geography’. The first volume The Foundation of Geography 19 explained the principles for calculating the dimensions of the earth, its division into degrees, calculations of latitude and longitude, and a discussion of map projections. The eighth volume contained maps of different parts of the world. Other volumes included tables of latitude and longitude for 4,000 places. Although it was widely known how to calculate geographical latitude from the altitude of the sun in Ptolemy’s time, calculations had only been made for a handful of places. The calculation of longitude was then only possible by estimat- ing the length of journeys from one place to another, and so many of Ptolemy's locations for places were erroneous. His biggest mistake was to underestimate the size of the earth, rejecting, the almost correct estimate of Eratosthenes in favour of a reckoning made by Posidonius in about 100 sc. Posidonius reckoned the cir- cumference of the earth to be 180,000 stadii against Eratosthenes’ estimates of 252,000 stadii. Because calculations of longitude had to be based on rather unreli- able travel distances, Ptolemy's otherwise remarkably accurate map of the known world included too many degrees of longitude. The map extended from a prime ‘meridian in the Canary Islands to a 180° meridian which crossed inner China. The actual distance between these places is only 120°. Strabo The topographical tradition of Greek geography, represented by Herodotus, was carried forward into Roman times. Strabo (64 BC-AD 20) wrote a work of 17 volumes called Geographica. This was largely an encyclopaedic description of the known world whose chief value was that it preserved for posterity many writings which he annotated and cited. Geographica also included attempts to explain cultural distinctiveness, types of governments and customs in particular places. ‘The significance of natural conditions for cultural development was discussed in relation to a number of places, especially in the description of Italy. Greek and Roman geographers concerned themselves with three basic issues: 1) The detailed topographical description of places and their history, which Ptolemy called chorography. 2) The measurement of the earth and the production of maps. 3) A more philosophical interest in the relations between humanity and the en- vironment, which involved the beliefs that the earth demonstrates an order and purpose which has been designed by a deity, that the environment influ- ences people and that peaple can only to some extent modify their environment. These ideas have had an important bearing on the later development of geography. MIDDLE AGES AND THE RENAISSANCE. The Middle Ages were a dark period for the development of science in Europe. At best, scholars made accurate but sterile copies of the works of the ancients, reject- ing anything that did not conform with the dogmas of the Christian Church. Such an intellectual environment stifled any development of scientific investigation. 20 Geography: History and Concepts Concepts of the world which had been developed in ancient times were reshaped to conform to the teaching of the Church. The earth became a flat disc with Jerusalem at its centre. Arab geographers Ancient learning was, however, carefully preserved in the Islamic countries at the Arab universities of Spain, north Africa and the Middle East. Arab traders trav- elled widely and gathered information which could be used by scholars to fill in the gaps on Ptolemy's original map. The best known of these travellers was Ibn. Batuta (1304-68), who travelled as far east as Peking in China, and sailed far south of the equator along the east coast of Africa. This particular trip showed that Aristotle had been wrong in believing that it was too hot here for human habita- tion, in what the Greeks had called the ‘torrid zone’. But already by the twelfth century, Al Idrisi (1099-1180) had shown that the Greek division of the world into five climatic zones (two cold, two temperate and one torrid) did not correspond to reality, and had suggested a more sophisticated world climatic system. He wrote a descriptive geography to accompany a large silver map of the world that had been constructed for Roger II of Sicily. His connec tion with this mighty Christian king made it possible for him to give an account of Europe in the first half of the twelfth century that is unrivalled (Unwin, 1992, p. 57). ‘Al Mugaddasi (945-88) was the most eminent Arab geographer of the Middle Ages, according to Scholten (1980). Before his time, geographers had generally based their topographical descriptions on compilations of second-hand sources. Mugaddasi was a pioneer of fieldwork and stated in his book The Best Divisions of the Study of Climate that he would not present anything as fact to his readers unless he had seen it with his own eyes. His book was based on extensive travels within the Islamic world. The last great Islamic geographer of the Middle Ages was Ibn Khaldun (1332- 1406). He established the foundation for historical geography in those of his writings which analysed the rise and fall of empires. He suggested that warlike nomads often founded large states, but after a while the nomads were absorbed by their permanently settled subjects. As peasants and townspeople, the rulers lost their warlike spirit and eventually their kingdoms fell apart. Ibn Khaldun both predicted and lived to see the collapse of the Islamic state he lived in. At the fall of Damascus in 1400 he actually met Tamerlane, the conqueror and devasta- tor. It was unfortunate that the works of the Arab scholars were not translated into Latin or any other language until the nineteenth century; as a result, scholars in other parts of the world were unable to make use of their observations. Europeans ‘The journeys undertaken by Europeans during the Middle Ages made little sig- nificant contribution to the development of geographical knowledge. Around AD 1000 the Norsemen sailed across the North Atlantic to Greenland and North America but the sagas of these adventures were only passed on by word of mouth and written down long afterwards in isolated Iceland. Similarly, the Irish sailors who crossed the Atlantic during the same period made little impact on geograph- ical understanding about the world. The Foundation of Geography 24 ‘China ‘Meanwhile, exploration and learning flourished in China. Actually, Europe and India were ‘discovered’ by Chinese travellers long before Europeans reached the Orient. In the period between the second century bc and the fifteenth century aD, Chinese culture was the most efficient in the world in applying knowledge of ‘nature to useful purposes. The study of geography was advanced well beyond anything known in Europe at this time; among other things, the Chinese used co- - ordinates and triangulation to produce beautiful maps of China and neighbouring countries. When, however, the Italian Marco Polo (1254-1322) wrote an account of his travels to China describing the high level of Chinese learning, his book was widely discounted as a fictitious adventure. The Renaissance ‘The Renaissance brought about a renewed interest in the geographical knowledge of ‘ancient times. A copy of Ptolemy’s Geography, which had been preserved in a monastery in Byzantium (Istanbul), was discovered and brought to Italy where it ‘was translated into Latin in 1406. After the invention of printing in the 1450s, copies of this book, including reconstructed maps, were printed in Bologna, Rome and Ulm, and made a great impact on contemporary scholars (Bagrow, 1945). Columbus and other expeditionary leaders relied on Ptolemy's calculations (see above), but ‘some of their more famous discoveries disproved the latter’s calculations and changed the world picture he had established. There were new developments in eee = new projections, especially that of Mercator in 1569, were invented; first globes were made; and new world maps were published. The rediscovery of ‘classical cartography played a significant role in the European expansion of political and economic power in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Few European explorers or scholars regarded themselves as geographers. They preferred the term cosmography (the descriptive science of the globe and its elation to the universe) which was used in a number of treatises, often modelled ‘on the works of Strabo and Ptolemy. The Renaissance saw a revival of another branch of ancient geography, that of ‘topographic description. Accounts of voyages provided raw material for en- cyclopaedic works on the world, or on parts of it, often called chorographies. The jumble of information related to place-names included in such chorographies (where notes on natural and physical conditions were juxtaposed beside mis- cellaneous information on folklore, etymology and history) places them outside the field of science as we understand it today. The popularity of these works in their own time might well puzzle us until we realize that we are often prisoners of contemporary logic and cannot see those qualities of old works which cannot be integrated into our system . . . at the time it had just as much relevance as what continues to interest us today: it was part of what the episteme of the time indicated was knowledge (Claval, 1980, p. 379) ‘Strabo (64 nav 20) had made a rough definition of the study of geography when hhe said that wide learning, which alone makes it possible to undertake a work on geography, is possessed solely by the man who has investigated things both human and divine... The 22 Geography: History and Concepts utility of geography . .. regards knowledge both of the heavens and of things on land and sea, animals, plants, fruits, and everything else to be seen in various regions - the utility of geography, Tsay, presupposes in the geographer the same philosopher, the man ‘who busies himself with the investigation of the art of life, that is, of happiness. (Cited in Fischer et al., 1969, p. 16) Above all geography retained in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries the practical importance attributed to it by Strabo. It was essential for statesmen and merchants working towards the European domination of the globe. But as a science it was, diffuse; there was no need to define disciplinary boundaries. Later disciplinary discussions on the content of the discipline have, however, been influenced by this early development; geography could be defined as the all-embracing cos- mography, the science of the globe, or it could be chorography, the descriptive science of single regions (Box 2.2). Box 2.2 -GRAPHY or LOGY. Well into the seventeenth century, geographical writing was profoundly influenced by Greek and Latin classical writers, and a number of classical Greek words were used to define aspects of the subject. Thus ‘geography’ combines geo (the earth) with graphos drawing’ and, by extension, ‘description’). ‘Cosmography’ involved the description of the universe (Cosmos) and included the modem sciences of biology, cartography, geog- raphy, geophysics and also anthropology. Chorography (choros = place) described places in general and larger areas, whereas ‘topography’ was concemed with particular places ata smaller scale. Words ending in Jogy incorporate the Greek word logos, which signifies a rational principle or structure. (Logos is the ‘Word! which was ‘from the beginning’ in the first chapter of St John's Gospel) So logos implies explanation rather than the description implied by grophos. ‘Chorology’ suggests some explanation about places, just 2s ‘chro- nology’ deals with time and how historical events can be seen as logical outcomes of a course of previous events. VARENIUS Strabo (in the citation above) considered that geographers should study both human activities and natural conditions, a reasonable conclusion so long as geog- raphy was regarded as a descriptive discipline. The role of geography was to describe the earth and its different places, and in such descriptions both humanity and nature would play a role. After the Renaissance, as the natural sciences developed analytical methods, some scholars began to argue that the respective methodologies of physical and human geography should be different. In studies of natural phenomena, including climate, geology and landforms, it is possible to use the methods of the natural sciences and to draw conclusions with a large measure of scientific precision. The methods of natural science, however, do not lend themselves very well to the study of social and cultural phenomena. Our The Foundation of Geography 23 generalizations about human groups must be limited in time and space, and must, relate to statements of probability rather than certainty. Bernhard Varenius (1622-50), whose Geographia Generalis was published in Amsterdam in 1650, was one of the first scholars to suggest these essential dif- ferences in the character of physical and human geography. His book includes much material which today would be treated as mathematical geography or as astronomy. The Geographia Generalis is divided into three parts: 1) The absolute or terrestrial section, which describes the shape and size of the earth and the physical geography of continents, seas and the atmosphere. 2) The relative or cosmic section, which treats the relations between the earth and other heavenly bodies, especially the sun and its influence on world climate. 3) The comparative section, which discusses the location of different places in relation to each other and the principles of navigation. Varenius intended that the Geographia Generalis should be followed by what he called, in his Foreword to the book, ‘special’ geography in which descriptions of particular places should be based upon 1) ‘celestial conditions’, including climates and climatic zones; 2) terrestrial conditions with descriptions of relief, vegetation and animal life; and also 3) human conditions including trade, settlement and forms of government in each country. In fact he showed little enthusiasm to embark on the study of human geography as it was not possible to treat it in an exact way. He explained that he had included this last group of conditions as a concession to traditional approaches to the subject. Unfortunately, he did not have the opportunity to write on special geography since he died at the early age of 28 (Lange, 1961). Varenius made two major contributions to the development of geography. First, he brought together contemporary knowledge of astronomy and cartogra- phy and subjected the different theories of his day to sound critical analysis. Secondly, his partition of geography into general and special sections originated what we now call systematic and regional geography. His Geographia Generalis dealt with the whole world as a unit, but was restricted to physical conditions which could be understood through natural laws. Special geography was pri- marily intended as a description of individual countries and world regions. It was difficult to establish ‘laws’ in the special (regional) part, for the explanation must be descriptive where people are involved. Preston James (1972, p. 124) points out that the general (systematic) and special (regional) parts of Varenius’ work com- plement each other, and that Varenius saw general and special geography as two mutually interdependent parts of a whole. THE PHILOSOPHER, IMMANUEL KANT ‘The lectures on physical geography given by Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) in Konigsberg were of great significance for the later development of geography. The course, which was given more than 40 times, was one of his most popular. It was not 2 course on physical geography as we now understand it, because it also 24 Geography: History and Concepts discussed human racial groups, their physical activities on the earth and natural conditions in the widest sense of the term. Kant regarded geography as only an approach to the empirical knowledge that was necessary for his philosophical research: But, finding the subject inadequately developed and organised, he devoted a great deal of attention to the assembly and organisation of materials from a wide vz ty of sources, and also to the consideration of a number of specific problems ~ for example, the detec- tion of wind direction resulting from the Earth’s rotation. (Hartshorne, 1939, p. 38) Kant provided a philosophical foundation for the belief that the subject has a significant scientific contribution to make. He pointed out that there are two dif- ferent ways of grouping or classifying empirical phenomena for the purpose of studying them: either in accordance with their nature, or in accordance with their position in time and place. The former isa logical classification, the latter a physical one. Logical classification lays the foundations for the systematic sciences ~ the study of animals is zoology, that of the rocks is geology, that of social groups is sociology and so on. Physical classification gives the scientific basis for history and geography: history studies the phenomena that follow one after the other in time (chronological science), while geography studies all phenomena belonging to the same place (chorographic science). This enabled him to argue that as empirical sciences ‘geography and history fill up the total span of knowledge; geography namely that of space, but history that of time’ (Kant, in May, 1970, p. 261). Geographers have often appealed to Kant in justifying the existence of the subject and its special character amongst the sciences. Alfred Hettner (1859-1941), who did most to affirm the significance of Kant’s work to geography, admitted (1927, p. 115) that for a long time he had not paid sufficient attention to Kant’s exposition of geography but had later rejoiced to discover a close correspondence between the conclusions of the great philosopher and his own. The American geographer Richard Hartshorne closely followed Hettner in his The Nature of Geography (1939), which considers that Kant’s approach led towards a satisfactory understanding of the nature of geography and answered all its basic questions. Werlen (1993, pp. 2-3) maintains that Hettner misinterpreted Kant: For Kant geography was a descriptive or taxonomic discipline, rather than a science: it only had the status of a propaedeutic discipline. Kant used the word “‘chorographic’, meaning descriptive, to describe geography. Hettner (1927) transformed this into ““chorologic’, which refers to explanation rather than description.’ However, in the days when Kant was lecturing in Konigsberg, history sought to tell a tale of temporal sequences, while geography described the world and its parts in a systematic way. To suggest, as Werlen does, that Kant would have distinguished between taxonomy and science is about as odd as it is to state that the Swedish botanist Carl von Linneaus (1707-78), who created the taxonomic order of plants in species, families (Latin names), etc., did not think of taxonomy as science. A close reading of Kant reveals that, to Kant, geography was not only descriptive but also predictive. We also have to bear in mind that science has changed a great deal since the late eighteenth century. The change in the appella- tion of geography from a chorographic to a chorologic science by Hettner and Hartshorne must also be seen as a consequence of general changes in all the ‘The Foundation of Geography 25 sciences, which took place during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. As we shall see later, however, Hettner and Hartshorne were still subsequently at- tacked for presenting geography as a mere descriptive science. Today it is widely considered to be impossible, and to some extent philosophically untenable, to draw such sharp divisions between the ‘sciences’ as Kant, in Hettner's interpretation, did. Understanding of geographical situations is always improved when we consider their development over time. Just as there are geographers who wish to study the cultural landscapes of former times with- ‘out necessarily using their knowledge to illuminate contemporary conditions, so historians should not neglect the study of differences between places. Here the individual sciences overlap each other. Hettner considered that the biggest difference between history and geography does not lie in that geography sets out to study a given time, namely the present, but that ‘in geography the time aspect recedes into the background. Geography does not study development in time as such ~ although this particular methodological rule is often broken ~ geographers cut through reality at a distinct point in time and only consider historical developments in so far as they are necessary to explain the situation at that chosen point in time. (Hettner, 1927, pp. 131-2) During the period between the death of Kant in 1804 and Hettner’s book in 1927, this ‘methodological rule’ had not only been broken but also almost systematically opposed, since Kant’s philosophical guidelines for the subject had been virtually forgotten until Hettner and Hartshorne resurrected them. In the nineteenth century, geographical research was closely associated with the study of process, that is, the development of phenomena over time in geographical space. THE ‘CLASSICAL’ PERIOD While Kant gave geography a theoretical justification, it was Alexander von Hum- boldt (1769-1859) and Cari Ritter (1779-1859) who laid the scientific foundations for geography as a branch of knowledge. These two men had many views in common and were united in their criticism of the casual and unsystematic treat- ment of geographical data by their predecessors. The similarity of their opinions was not accidental ~ Ritter regarded himself as a student of Humboldt, and Humboldt described Ritter as ‘his old friend’. They differed markedly, however, in temperament and character. Humboldt Humboldt was the last of the great polymaths. Penck (1928, p. 31) regarded him as a cosmographer rather than a geographer. He mastered a number of disciplines and put all his energy (and fortune) into travel and research in order to under- stand the whole complex system of the universe. In his great work Kosmos, with its subtitle Sketch of a Physical Description of the World, he a‘tempted to assemble all the contemporary knowledge of the material world. Kosmos was published (1845— 62) in five volumes at the end of his life, while the results from his long and important journeys in Latin America (1799-1804) had been published in 30 vol- umes in Paris (1805-34). 26 Geography: History and Concepts Humboldt had a gift for exceptionally sharp observation, and in fieldwork he was unsurpassed. His books and letters demonstrate that nothing escaped his observation. This, together with his training in geology, is shown in a letter he wrote to a Russian minister after a visit to the Urals: ‘The Ural Mountains are a true El Dorado,’ he wrote, ‘and I am confident, from the analogy they present to the geological conformation of Brazil, that diamonds will be discovered in the gold and platinum washings of the Urals.’ A few days later, diamonds were actually discovered (Tatham, 1951, p. 55). Humboldt was primarily interested in the natural sciences. He undertook a large number of altitudinal measurements during his travels and drew height profiles of the continents. These measure- ments were used in his studies of climatic and vegetation zones which were of basic importance for later research in biogeography and climatology. He also wrote regional accounts of Mexico and Cuba that are still of interest today (Schmieder, 1964). In contrast to most other natural scientists of his day, Humboldt was not so much interested in discoveries of new species and in collections for natural science museums as he was in understanding the connectivities in the world of nature —a scientific approach he called physikalische Geographic. This must not be confused with the more limited concept of ‘physical geography’ as used today. ‘The relations between the vegetable and animal kingdoms, and also humankind, with geographical conditions of climate, topography and altitude were central to Humboldt’s interests. In his search for Occonomia Naturae, we find some of the roots of modern ecological thinking. His work is much freer of the environmental determinism than the much later studies of Ratzel and Semple (see below). Humboldt transferred Kant’s idea of a threefold division of all the sciences to the natural sciences, dividing them into 1) physiography or description of nature; 2) historia telluria, the geological history of the earth; and 3) geonosia or physikalische Geographie (Beck, 1982, p. 90). Humboldt did not wish to confine his research to any one of these subdivisions. ‘As a cosmographer, he was not interested in becoming a specialist in either history or geography. Geography and the natural sciences were not then institu- tionalized and specialized disciplines. Humboldt and Ritter would barely have understood the later division of science into disciplines, the specialized fields of work of scientific institutions or the interminable discussions about the nature or limitations of specific disciplines. They were both, in this sense, cosmographers, although their field of inquiry differed. Ritter Ritter’s recognition as a geographer dates from the publication (in 1817-18) of the first two volumes of his Erdkunde - with a volume on Africa and a volume on Asia. The second edition was published in 19 enlarged volumes in 1822-59. On the initiative of leading politicians he was established in 1820 as the first professor of geography in Berlin. Although Ritter travelled widely in Europe, he spent relatively more of his time in his study than did Humboldt. The two men can be considered as complements to each other, in that Ritter was chiefly concerned with studies of The Foundation of Geography 27 human geography, and stood somewhat apart from the rapidly advancing research front of the natural sciences, It would be wrong to describe him as a crude determi- nist as some commentators have done. He believed, as did Vidal de la Blache much later, that ‘earth and its inhabitants stand in the closest reciprocal relations, and one cannot be truly presented in all its relationships without the other. Hence history and geography must always remain inseparable, Land alfects the inhabitants and the inhabitants the land’ (cited in Tatham, 1951, p. 44). This implied that the individual region or continent had a unity, a Ganzheit (which | may be translated as a ‘whole), which it was the task of the geographer to study. This entity was something more than the sum of its parts ~ more than the totality of topographical, climatic, ethnic and other circumstances. Ritter’s views were shaped by his deeply religious outlook and by the accepted natural philosophy of his time. His ideas on the ‘wholeness’ of things were in accordance with the writings of the German ‘idealist’ philosopher Georg W. F. Hegel (1770-1831), whose attitudes amounted to an attempt to comprehend the entire universe, to know the infinite and to see all things in God (Chisholm, 1975, p. 33). Holistic views dominated scientific thought throughout the nineteenth century, and Ritter’s ideas were in line with accepted biological, geographical and geological discussion. ‘The scientific stance of Ritter, like Immanuel Kant before him, was teleological (Greek tel~s = ‘purpose’). Teleology seeks to understand events in relation to their ‘underlying purposes. Teleological explanations are therefore often regarded as the ‘opposite of mechanical explanations, where the phenomena and observations are understocd as outcomes of prime causes such as the ‘laws of nature’ (see p. 39) Ritter studied the workings of nature in order to understand the purpose behind its “order. His view of science sprang from his firm belief in God as the planner of the "universe, He regarded the earth as an educational model for humanity, where “nature had a God-given purpose which was to show the way for humanity's de- ‘velopment. He did not regard the shape of continents as accidental but rather as "determined by God, so that their form and location enabled them to play the role designed by God for humankind’s development. Ritter’s approach to knowledge has been strongly criticized; Hettner (1927, p. 87) dd that Ritter’s views were in accordance with the spirit of his time, and this forced their influence on his generation. This influence, however, was bound to "decline wen Darwin's Origin of Species inaugurated a new philosophy of science. Ritter combined a basic teleological standpoint with a very critical scientific precision: ‘My system builds on facts, not on philosophical arguments’, he said in a er (cited in Tatham, 1951, p. 46). The collection of facts was not an end in itself; systematization and comparison of data, region by region, would lead to a ition of unity in apparent diversity. God's plans, which give purpose and g, could only be discovered by taking into account as objectively as possible the facts and relationships in the world. In this he followed the advice of Imma- el Kant that the scientist must, on the one hand, continue to explore the universe 1g mechanistic lines, and should never abandon this approach yet, on the other ind, should bear in mind that organic life can best be understood by minds like in terms of the principle of natural teleology (Greene, 1957, p. 68). es and in his ability to systematize extensive material. In these respects his 28 Geography: History and Concepts work is in the same tradition as that of Humboldt. While earlier regional descrip- tions had consisted to a large extent of the accumulation of unsystematized data about particular places, Humboldt and Ritter effected a clear structuring of such material and, through deliberate research into both the similarities and the dif- ferences between countries and regions, they sought to compare the different parts of the world each with each other. Ritter was, according to Hassinger (1919, p. 66), ‘the founder of the comparative method in regional geography, the victor over every dead aggregate presentation of geographical knowledge. He gave our science unity and coherence’ through his, use of historical development as its leading thread. Ritter himself, however, re- garded Humboldt as the founder of the comparative method (Schiiltz, 1980, p. 44). The basis for Ritter’s comparative studies was the physical layout of the land ~the area and character of river basins, for example. In this way he could present a land classification or a set of physical regions. The most important part of his work, however, would be to explain the relationships between humanity and nature in the different regions through the history of humankind. Ritter believed that thorough research into the historical development of culture and its relations to physical regions would demonstrate the physical layout of the land as God’s educational home for humankind. He therefore made historical development in geographical space the main theme of his educational endeavours. For a long time afterwards geography followed this tradition, including during the period of its institutionalization as a specific discipline. Subsequent writers have commented on the differences between Humboldt’s and Ritter’s religious and scientific outlooks, and have somewhat exaggerated them. Both men laid great stress on the unity of nature. They both believed that the ultimate aim of research was to clarify this unity and, in this respect, were in accord with the idealistic philosophies of their time. Humboldt did not pursue idealism in the same way as Ritter, for his concept of the unity of nature was more aesthetic than religious. In this respect he had more in common with Goethe than with Ritter. Unlike Ritter, he saw no reason to explain unity and order in nature as a God-given system to further humanity's development. Humboldt was very much engaged in the gradual development of natural science, and his greatest contributions lay in the field of systematic physical geography. Many regard him as the founder of biogeography and climatology. Ritter was, on the other hand, to a considerable extent a regional geographer. The geography Ritter and Humboldt represented was designated as ‘classical’ by Hartshorne (1939) because it dominated the foundation — or perhaps we should rather say the prefoundation - period of the subject, since the discipline's institutionalization came much later. FROM COSMOGRAPHY TO AN INSTITUTIONALIZED DISCIPLINE No geographer, before or since, has enjoyed a more central position in science and society than Humboldt and Ritter. It might be thought that, in Germany at least, this would have led to a real breakthrough for geography as a scientific discipline Quite the contrary: with the death of both Humboldt and Ritter in 1859 the ‘The Foundation of Geography 29 ‘classical’ period came to an end; there were no real successors. The personal professorship Ritter had held ceased with his death, and new university chairs in -geography were not established until much later. Geographical societies An important reason for this lack of progress was the cosmographic character of iter's and Humboldt's achievements. At this time, ‘geography’ was still not ated to a specific discipline; it remained an umbrella concept for a variety of expeditions and other activities within the natural and social sciences, to a large extent supported by geographical societies (see Box 2.3) which were flourishing this time. Box 2.3 Geographical societies as promoters of expeditions and national interests The founders of the geographical societies included prominent members of the middie classes and enthusiastic scientists who sought to widen support for expeditions and research, These societies also received help from governments during the tum-ofthe- century period of colonial expansion. Although forerunners of these societies existed during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the first modem geographical saciety was founded as the Société de Géographie de Paris in 1821. in rapid succession came the Gesellschaft fir Erdkunde 2u Beriin in 1828, the Royal Geographical Society in London in 1830, then societies in Mexico (1833), Frankfurt (1836), Brazil (1838), the lmpenal Kussian ‘Geographical Society in St Petersburg (1845), and the American Geographical Society in 1852. By 1885 nearly 100 geographical societies (with an estimated membership of over 50,000) were spread across the world (Freeman, 1961, pp. 52-3) These societies’ most important work was their support for expeditions and their publication of yearbooks and journals, which included maps and other material from expeditions. Many of the societies also supported their respective countries’ colonial ‘expansion. Some, such as the societies at Nancy and Montpellier, supported local studies in their home areas. At Nancy, barely 10 km from the Franco-German frontier after the 1870-1 war, the Société Géographique de I'Est pursued studies supporting the retum of Alsace-Lorraine to France. During this time geographical societies enjoyed a | high profile because of their commitment to popular political causes. Their meetings attracted great public interest, especially when wellknown explorers came to give accounts of their discoveries and adventures. ‘The geographical societies’ activities were in marked contrast to the develop- ent of academic geography at the time. In the 1880s there were fewer than 20 niversity teachers in geography in the whole world, and there were far fewer ’versity students in the discipline than members of the geographical societies. universities were, however, reluctant to give geography status as an aca- discipline largely because of the cosmographic nature of the investigations joted by the societies. In the latter part of the nineteenth century, the univer- promoted the disciplinary division between the sciences. The information 30 Geography: History and Concepts brought back by explorers helped to build up the new disciplines at the univer- sities, particularly in the natural sciences. Many scientists who worked in these disciplines depended on the geographical societies for their data-collecting ac- tivities, and feared this support would dwindle if geography became established as a separate academic discipline. Geography becomes an academic discipline Many academics considered that geography was not a science; it was only sus- tained by borrowing from others (Schiiltz, 1980, p. 65). This argument was based on a scientific philosophy that emphasized natural laws and causality (partial- general reasoning - see Figure 1.2), which was gradually replacing earlier holistic philosophies. These scientists found it difficult to accommodate a ‘cosmographic’ geography as a scientific discipline. The year 1859 however, (in which, inciden- tally, both Humboldt and Ritter died), saw the publication of Charles Darwin's Origin of Species, which provided much of the basis for the new ways of scientific reasoning. Part of the reason for the lack of new chairs in geography was the fact that the discipline, as expounded by Ritter, was considered by influential academics as merely a subdivision of history or, at best, as a subsidiary subject to it. In his zeal to demonstrate that the earth is a school for humanity, Ritter had become more and more interested in its historical development, and his more influential stu- dents concentrated to an even greater extent on historical research. In many schools of geography, especially in France, the subject came to be closely associ- ated with history. In Germany by 1850, geography was a widespread school subject, taught in most cases as an auxiliary subject to history. However, the modem pedagogical principles of the Swiss educationalist Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi (1746-1827) gave geography in Germany, Switzerland and France a somewhat more independent role in compulsory elementary education. Geogra- phy was here seen as a means to develop children’s power of observation, and the education of geography teachers made the development of academic geography possible. By 1875 there were geography chairs at three Swiss universities (Capel, 1981, p. 59). It was after the Franco-Prussian war of 1870-1 that influential politicians in Prussia came to realize that geography could also serve an important political purpose. Geographical education could be used to reinforce and popularize the idea of the nation-state (a commendable objective at that time), and could also provide people with a better understanding of the economic and political pos- sibilities of world trade and development. To achieve these goals, geography teachers needed to have a better education. For this reason, in 1874, the Prussian government decided to establish chairs of geography in all the Prussian univer- sities. By 1880, ten professors had been appointed. For more or less the same reason (Boxes 2.4 and 2.5), other European countries also established geography as a university discipline. One of the reasons why France had lost the war of 1870-1 was considered to be the superiority of the German educational system, which led to ealls for school reform and the better teaching of geography. During the 1870s, a handful of chairs of geography were established at French universities, the most. significant ‘The Foundation of Geography 31 Box 2.4 Political arguments for school geography in the nineteenth cen- tury: the relations between history and geography While both history and geography could serve to develop nationalistic sentiments, the relative position of these two subjects in the educational system largely came to depend on the degree to which either seemed more useful in building up the idea of a national identity. in Germary, with its long history of shifting borders and divisions into small states, geographical patterns associated with the German-speaking lands seemed very significant, and so geography was seen as very important. Norway, on the ‘other hand, had developed its educational system during the union of the crowns with Sweden (814-1905) and it had no disputed borders. Under these circumstances, Norway's national awakening was fostered by teaching about the glorious history of Viking times and about the precious liberal constitution of 1814. Hence history pre- dominated over geography. Finland, however, which had also experienced a union of ‘crowns (in this case with Tsarist Russi), lacked a clearly discernible glorious past and so ‘geography developed as a relatively more important subject. A pioneering research ‘work of great political importance in the Finnish liberation process, the Atlas of Finland (first edited in 1899), stressed the uniqueness of the Finnish lands. Box 2.5 Arguments for school geography today ‘As early as 1885, Kropotkin suggested that geographical education is ideally suited to Promote a sense of mutual respect between nations and people. Geographical know- ledge of other cultures, civilizations and ways of life increases our ability to communicate and is a necessary prerequisite for international co-operation and solidarity. These views have been recently re-emphasized by the Commission on Geographical Education of the International Geographical Union in its Charter on Geographical Education (1992). This charter particularly addresses the principles of the United Nations, the World Declaration of Human Rights and the Rights of Children and the recommendations from UNESCO on education in crossnational understanding, co-operation and peace. The charter points out that geographical education helps to promote the principles of these charters and declarations. There are four other main reasons why geography should have a role as a ‘key discipline’ in school education. A ‘key’ discipline 1) should provide students with some basic concepts to enable them to understand the ‘world around them. This is provided by Kant's categories of classification. Space is an ‘elementary and universal key concept. Geography is the science of space and spatial relations; 2) should provide students with qualifications to cope with the world around them. ‘Geography teaches the techniques needed for expeditions out in the world. A basic ‘education in geography is needed early in life so as to understand maps, the use of, maps, places, peoples and countries, The first task should be to map the path from home to kindergarten or primary school 32 Geography: History and Concepts 3) should explore the possibilities of synthesis. Geography is the only discipline that has constantly sought to build bridges between the social and physical sciences, between humanity and nature. Geographical education provides students with the ability to understand the ‘wholeness’ of a place and how the landscape evolves as a result of natural processes and human actions; and 4) should also provide basic knowledge needed by other discipines. Geographical facts and the understanding of map-making and spatial relations provide essential back- ground knowledge for students of history and the environmental, and social and political sciences. appointment being that of the young Paul Vidal de la Blache (1845-1918) to the chair at Paris in 1877 (Capel, 1981, p. 60). Geography at British universities ‘The political arguments in favour of teaching geography in the universities met with more or less active opposition from within the universities themselves. In Britain, the first personal chair of geography was held by Captain James Ma- chonochie at University College, London from 1833 until 1836. Permanent univer- sity teaching was only established from the 1860s onwards when the Royal Geographical Society began to take a growing interest in education. The Society urged the need to establish chairs in geography at Oxford and Cambridge, point- ing out that chairs had been or were being established in German, Swiss and French universities. But the proposals were only taken up in 1887, when the Royal Geographical Society offered to cover the main bulk of the costs involved in establishing lectureships at Oxford and Cambridge. This financial support led to the appointment of Halford J. Mackinder to a readership at Oxford in 1887. ‘Mackinder became an outstanding promoter of geography at both universities and schools. In 1893, together with a group of schoolmasters, he founded the Geographical Association, which did much to encourage and improve geograph- ical education, and although he was elected to Parliament in 1901, he remained an ‘important father-figure in British geography. Mackinder firmly believed that ge- ography should help to train future citizens for the ‘world stage’ upon which, in Mackinder’s view, the British Empire was a force for good. Geographical teaching should therefore be ‘from the British standpoint’: ‘This is, no doubt, to deviate from the cold and impartial ways of science. When we teach the millions, however, we are not training scientific investigators, but the practical and striving citizens of an Empire which has to hold its place through the universal law of survival through efficiency and effort. (Mackinder, 1911, pp. 79-80) ‘The first British university geography department was established at Oxford in 1900; but geography only achieved a firm footing at Cambridge after 1908, mainly through the continued financial support of the Royal Geographical Society. Dur- ing a period of 35 years, the society invested about £7,250 in the Cambridge Project and £11,000 at Oxford (Stoddart, 1986, pp. 83-125). ‘Hence we have the paradox that in the 1880s and 18%0s British geography emerged as a scientific ‘The Foundation of Geography 33 Box 2.6 Elisée Réclus (1830-1905) — the life of an idealist |} Rédus was first and foremost an uncompromising idealist. He was expelled from the ‘teacher seminary at Montauban in his very first year because he supported the ideals of the 1848 revolution. When only 20 years old he went to Berlin to study theology, but ‘began to attend the popular lectures of Cari Ritter, which awakened his interest in geography. Retuming to France in the autumn of 1851, Réclus resumed his political ‘activity. Resisting the coup d'état of Napcleon ll in the same year, he was obliged to flee ‘to England with his brother (Dunbar, 1981, 9. 155). Réclus then travelled extensively in ‘North and South America, more in order 70 observe than to do research. Sustained research was, in fact, beyond his means, for Réclus had to make a living from the meagre ‘wages he could eam as a tutor and worker en route. in 1857, he returned to France and ‘befriended the leading anarchist, Mikhail Bakunin (1814-76). From that time onwards, Réclus belonged to the inner circle of the secret anarchist association Fratemité Intema- tionale. In 1871, he took an active part in the Paris Commune but was captured during the first days of fighting, He was helc in prison for almost a year. A sentence of deportation to New Caledonia was commuted to ten years’ banishment as a result of the active intercession from geographical societies and such leading personalities as Charles Darwin, Réclus chose to settle in Switzerland in his exile. Although promised a readership in geography in the Université Libre in Brussels in 1892, the university reneged on the appointment for fear of demonstrations after an outbreak of anarchist. violence in France in the autumn of 1893. A support committee for Réclus started to collect money and eventually founded the New University of Brussels where Réclus was prefessor for the last years of his life, refusing to take any salary since his modest needs ‘could be satisfied by the income from hs books. ipline without the benefit of aid from strictly scientific men’ (ibid., p. 67). ‘The reluctant and somewhat hostile attitudes in the universities towards the stablishment of geography as an academic discipline were largely due to the rapid growth of the systematic sciences and the increasing need to specialize in scientific ‘The image of geography as an all-embracing cosmographic subject did not fit ‘with academic development at this time. Influential academics argued that the lds of geographical inquiry were already covered by existing disciplines. The ‘historian, Edward A. Freeman, could not understand how geography could be ‘recognized as an independent university discipline when ‘on the one hand a great eal belongs to history, but on the other the geologists lay claim to much of its terial’ (Keltie, 1886, p. 466). McKenny Hughes, a professor of geology at umbridge, argued that his geology department already did all the necessary lectur- and fieldwork in physical geography. At a university, students should specialize ‘cither history, geology, or zoology, drawing on a knowledge of geography already ed at school (Stoddart, 1986, p. 70). But Mackinder articulated, in a lecture to Royal Geographical Society in 1887, the need for a geographical science to bridge e gap between the natural sciences and the study of humanity ‘which in the pinion of many is upsetting the equilibrium of our culture, He believed that es of social evolution, based on Darwinian ideas, would replace the arguments 34 Geography: History and Concepts of Ritter (Livingstone, 1992, pp. 190-92; see also Box 2.7, p. 38). ‘The Keltie Report of 1886 (p. 71) was a powerful and comprehensive documen- tation of the academic and practical value of geography: It is through geography alone that the links can be seen that connect physical, historical and political conditions; and it is thus that geography claims the position of a science distinct from the rest, and of singular practical importance ... scientific geography may be defined as the study of local correlations. ‘The USA In the USA, university teachers of geography included William Morris Davi (1850-1934), who began teaching at Harvard in 1878. The first geography depart- ment was established in Chicago in 1903. By the First World War, the discipline ‘was firmly established at a number of North American universities, notably Har- vard, Yale, Teachers College (Columbia University), the Wharton School (Univer- sity of Pennsylvania) and Chicago. The ‘new’ geography The institutionalization of geography meant that examinations with national standards had to be organized and the discipline defined as a subject area with a distinct content. This ‘new’ geography, for which syllabuses and reading lists were drawn up, led to the professionalization of people calling themselves geographers. New professicnal journals were founded, such as the Geographical Journal in Britain, Annales de Geographie in France and the Annals of the Association of American Geographers in the USA The new academic geography gradually distanced itself from the geographical societies as university geographers developed a scientific base which the societies lacked. This divergence was, in some cases, widened by the attitudes of promi- nent members of the societies. The chairman of the Finnish Geographical Society, for instance, maintained the cosmographic view that geography was a collection of different sciences but not a science in itself. This view was of course strongly repudiated by the Finnish professors of geography (Grand, 1986). In the new academic journals (which had often been founded almost in opposition to the geographical societies’ journals), geographers set out to justify the new science: they defined its long traditions, its utility and special methods, and delimited geography unequivocally from neighbouring disciplines, A more important func- tion of the academic journals was to publish research that students could use as exemplary models (see Chapter 3) The new geography drew on some of the ideas of Humboldt and Ritter but was also influenced by developments within the natural sciences which followed the Darwinian breakthrough, and by the political milieu of the period. THE SOCIAL ANARCHISTS Réclus The French geographer, Elisée Réclus (1830-1905), attended some of Ritter’s lec- tures, but was much more influenced by the new political and scientific develop- The Foundation of Geography 35 ‘ments of his time. He achieved recognition with a work of systematic physical geography called La Terre (1866-7), but is best remembered for his 19-volume regional geography Nouvelle Géographie universelle (1875-94). The clarity and ac- curacy of this work made it much more popular than Ritter’s Erdkunde, which had Deen its exemplar in many respects but which also contained many obscure passages. Réclus’s work became a model for a range of encyclopaedic studies of "the geography of the world and of particular countries. Réclus (see Box 2.6) was probably the most productive geographer of all time. Right at the end of his life he wrote L’Homume et la Terre (mostly published posthumously in 1905-8), which may be described as a social geography com- prising a broad-brush historical presentation of humanity's life on earth and its ‘use of its resources. Réclus also wrote travel handbooks and articles. Although he ‘was the best-known French geographer of his time, Réclus never held a university chair in France and had to earn a living from his writings and, although most of ‘his books were published by Hachette in Paris, he was obliged to live abroad in ‘exile because of his political activities and hence could not directly influence the development of French academic geography. Réclus’s books, including his major work, Nouvelle Géographie universelle, ‘showed little evidence of his political beliefs. For this reason they attracted a large, ‘middle-class readership and provided politicians and leading members of the ‘geographical societies with a model for the geography they wished to introduce ‘as a subject in schools and universities. So Réclus had an important indirect {influence on the institutionalization of geography at a time when most aca- -demics saw geography only in its role as a natural science. Like Ritter, Réclus was particularly interested in the human aspects of geography. He had a sharp eye for the inequalities of the human conditions around the world, and made this a ‘central theme of his books. He was also the first European geographer to support tthe ideas of the American geographer George Perkins Marsh. Marsh had written ‘Man and Nature, or Physical Geography as Modified by Human Action in 1864, describ- ing his book as ‘a little volume showing that whereas Ritter and Guyot [a student of Ritter who emigrated to the USA] think that the earth made man, man, in fact ‘made the earth’ (cited in Beck, 1982, p. 148). Marsh suggested that humanity had, ‘throughout history, destroyed many natural resources and landscapes and he ‘called for a better management of natural resources. In his very first work, La Terre (1866-7), Réclus acknowledged his debt to Marsh. Réclus’s political views were more directly expressed in his last work, L’'Homme ‘et al Terre, which introduced the concept of social geography. Since Réclus de- ‘voted his political life to social justice, social conditions were inevitably always discussed in his books. He had made a special study of social geography and his inclusion in a travel guide of a description of poverty and relief among the poor of ‘London broke new ground (Beck, 1982, p. 135). Réclus also established a connec- tion between geography and modern town planning and sociology. He influ- ‘enced and had close contacts with Frédéric le Play, the French sociologist, and Sir Patrick Geddes, the Scottish biologist, social scientist and planner. Geddes, al- ‘though no anarchist, became a close friend of Réclus in the last decade of Réclus’s life. He spread Réclus's ideas in Britain and was most interested in his ideas on 36 Geography: History and Concepts social geography, which he found a suitable basis for the development of his work on applied research and planning (see p. 53). Kropotkin We have laid emphasis on the life and work of Réclus to demonstrate that the old masters still have something to say to us today. The urge for social relevance in geographical work is not a recent phenomenon; it was present in the life and work of the anarchist geographers one hundred years ago. Today Réclus and his fellow anarchist friend and geographer, Count Peter Kropotkin (1842-1921), have aroused renewed interest. The Russian nobleman became famous for his research into the physical geography of northern Europe and Siberia and was a welcome speaker among the geographical societies of western Europe. Kropotkin also gave Réclus ample help with the sections of Nouvelle Géographie universelle that dealt with Siberia and eastern Europe. Kropotkin voiced his political opinions much more directly than Réclus, trying to revolutionize the discipline of geography in a number of ways. He presented theories of geographical education, the relations between humanity and nature, and of decentralization, which were clearly aimed at discouraging the use of geographical research for exploitative and imperialistic purposes (Breitbart, 1981, p. 150), Kropotkin’s political ideas had developed while he was travelling in Siberia during the 1860s. He was impressed by the Russian peasants’ spirit of equality and self-sufficiency but was disheartened by the negative effects of political cen- tralization and social inequality. In 1871, Krupothin became an active advocate of social anarchism and, as a consequence, had to go into exile. From that time onwards he devoted his life to two revolutions: one in social and economic rela- tions, the other in the discipline of geography itself. Kropotkin’s social anarchism sought to demonstrate that people had a capacity to develop a better society on a co-operative basis, provided that the structures of domination and subordination were taken away. He believed that centralized institutions inhibit the develop- ment of a co-operative personality, promote inequality and limit economic pro- gress (ibid, p. 138). He advocated small-scale economic activity within and between regions which, he thought, could produce economic development supe- rior to that produced by large-scale industry. Such arguments are advanced today by the ‘green’ movements and by economists such as Schumacher in Small is Beautiful (1974). Kropotkin suggested that large city regions should be disaggre- gated into small, more or less self-sufficient townships within which living, work- ing and recreational space might be integrated. Such ideas were later put into practice by the ‘garden city’ movement led by Ebenezer Howard and Lewis Mumford. Another important connection was to Patrick Geddes (see pp. 53-54). ‘Most significantly for his time, Kropotkin opposed strongly the dominant inter- pretation of Darwin's Origin of Species (1859), which saw nature as an immense battlefield upon which there is an incessant struggle for life and the extermination of the weak by the strong. He attacked the social Darwinist views of the influen- tial philosopher Herbert Spencer (1820-1903). Spencer envisaged human societies as closely resembling animal organisms which must engage in a constant struggle to survive in particular environments. Spencer believed that the ‘fittest individ- Foundation of Geography 37 would survive best in a free-enterprise system, and thus lead civilization ard. In his ‘general law of evolution’ he claimed that all evolution is charac erized by concentration, differentiation and determination. Kropotkin, on the hand, wrote (1924, p. vii): I failed to find, although I was eagerly looking for that bitter struggle for the means of existence between animals of the same pecies’. The struggle for existence may be hard, but it is not carried out by dividuals — rather, by groups of individuals co-operating with each other. In the evelopment of civilization, as in the quest for survival, Kropotkin believed that putual aid within small, self-contained communities was the best workable olution. _Both Réclus and Kropotkin stressed and developed the idea that geography as a discipline should encompass both humanity and nature. Kropotkin was a close riend of Scott Keltie (the secretary of the Royal Geographical Society) and frongly supported the arguments that were used to establish geography as a versity discipline in Britain (the ‘Keltie Report’ of 1886). But for Keltie it was intial that science should be politically and socially neutral and value free — is, based on the scientific ideals of positivism (see Chapter 4). In writing the ary of Kropotkin, Keltie (1921, p. 319) expressed the view that ‘this is not the e to deal in detail with Kropotkin’s political actions, except to regret that his bsorption in these seriously diminished the services which otherwise he might e rendered to geography’. Réclus and Kropotkin may have had little direct nfluence on the geographical establishments of their day but they retained alight flame of critical social inquiry that has been resurrected today. DARWINISM opotkin’s ideas demonstrate that, during the late nineteenth century, it was sidered important that we learn how to shape human societies from nature. jinism’s influence was strong, not only on social thinking but also on the jelopment of science as such. There are good reasons to purport that, alongside Bible, no book has had a more profound influence on our ways of thinking Charles Darwin's Origin of Species (1859). Stoddart (1966) suggests that the ollowing four main themes from Darwin's work can be traced in later geograph- 4) Change through time or evolution ~ a general concept of gradual or even tzansition from lower or simpler to higher or more complicated forms. Darwin used the terms ‘evolution’ and ‘development in essentially the same sense. 2) Association and organization — humanity as part of a living ecological organism, +3) Struggle and natural selection. 4) The randomness or chance character of variations in nature. e concept of change over time is, for instance, found in Davis's cyclic system of development of a landscape through the stages of youth, maturity and old e, which Davis himself described as evolution. The French school of regional aphy (pp. 45-48) also used the term in their study of the changing cultural Tandscape. 38 Geography: History and Concepts Box 2.7 Evolution and society The philosophical reflections of the Greek and Roman geographers on the relation ships between humanity and he environment survived into modern times. The belief that the earth had order and purpose designed by a deity had been fundamental to Ritter’s approach, but did not survive into the latter part of the nineteenth century. The view that the environment had an influence on people and on the development ‘of human society became central to environmental determinism. A more posi- tive alternative scenario was possibilism, which studied the extent to which people were able to modify their ervironment. Possibilists also recognized that humankind could have negative influences on the environment (as, for instance, suggested by Marsh and Réclus. The idea of evolution, the gradual or even transformation from lower and simpler to higher and more complicated forms of life, dominated scientific debate in the latter part of the nineteenth century, in both the natural and social sciences. There were fierce debates on whether evolution was strictly governed by inhertance and selection of the fittest through random biologcal variations, or whether qualities acquired or leant by an organism during its lifetime could be passed on to its offspring. The latter concept had been promoted by Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck (1744-1829), a gifted French natural scientist who lived before Darwin's time. Livingstone (1992, p. 187) maintains that geography was influenced more by the social ramifications of the neo-Lamarekian version of evolutionary theory than by Darwin's own ideas: Neo Lararckian argurnents support the belief that social progress ‘can be greatly accelerated by learning and through the acquisition of habits in response to adaptations to the environment. Biologists eventually agreed that Lamarck had been. wrong: an.individual's acquired abilities are not passed on to the next generation by inheritance. Today, of course, social theory no longer emphasizes the laws of natural science: social environment may be more important than biological inheritance in shap- ing life for future generations. Social Darwinism became a catch-all term used to characterize a variety of social ‘theories that emerged in the latter part of the nineteenth century (ibid. p. 184). These ‘theories have particularly been associated with the influential philosopher, Herbert Spencer (1820-1903). Spencer's ideas buttressed laissez-faire individualism in econ- omic and political life. He believed that the development of civilization was a manifesta- tion of the survival of the fittest, an argument much favoured by big business and imperialists. For instance, John D, Rockefeller, the founder of Standard Oil, saw the ‘growth of big business as the outcome of natural selection. On the other hand, political liberals used Darwinian language to make their assault on aristocratic privilege and landed property, which could protect some idle and unproduc- tive members of society from competition with more entrepreneurial individuals. The writer George Bemard Shaw, for instance, suggested that the quality of civilization might be improved by eugentes, the ‘science’ of improving the qualities of the human race by ‘the careful selection of parents. Such ideas developed into Nazi racial ideology, as later voiced by Hitler: Foundation of Geography 39 The ideas of association and organization - which Darwin had inherited earlier philosophers and scientists — have been rather tenacious in ographical research. The influential German geographer, Friedrich Ratzel 1904), discusses in his Political Geography (1897) ‘the state as an organism ied to the land’. Although this organism analogy was derived from the ral sciences, its roots may also be traced back to the earlier idealist josophy and concept of Ganzheit or ‘whole’ as used by Ritter (see above). The gion (that particular field of study for geographers) has been regarded as a ie functional complex which, despite a steady stream of material and gy, is in apparent equilibrium and constitutes a ‘whole’ that is more than ‘sum of its parts. This idea of the region is to be found in the French school of onal geography, and is also apparent in relatively more recent university

    You might also like