The Subject of Geography and the Science of the Man-Nature Relationship

A philosopher views the geographical environment as a natural-social concept, in which individual elements function simultaneously in a system of natural and social relationships. The geographical environment should be the province of a discipline called general geography, which would exist in addition to specialized physical and social geography. However, since general geography is limited spatially to the earth's landscape sphere, it cannot deal with the broader aspects of the man-nature relationship now that man's influence extends increasingly beyond the earth into outer space. A new discipline called “noology” is proposed to deal with the interplay between human society and all of nature.     

The Landscape Sphere and the Geographical Environment

An advocate of a unified geography adopts a biosocial, or natural-social, approach to the definition of several concepts in geography, distinguishing the landscape sphere and the geographical environment. The landscape sphere of the earth consists of the sphere of the natural landscape (comprising both untouched and man-altered nature) and the sphere of human activity, or sociosphere, which includes the sphere of the cultural landscape (agrosphere plus technosphere) and mankind itself. The geographical environment includes the natural environment (man-altered nature plus parts of untouched nature), the material results of the labor of past generations and geographical manifestations of the social environment.     

Atlas of the United States

In an attempt to distinguish between regional physical geography and the Soviet school of landscape science, the author defines the study objects of the two disciplines and provides a useful review of the present state of landscape science in the Soviet Union. Physical geography is said to be concerned with study of the entire geographical shell of the earth, ranging from the troposphere to the bottom of the layer of sedimentary rocks in the earth's crust. Landscape science focuses on the so-called landscape sphere, which is defined as the portion of the geographical shell that lies at or near the surface of the earth and is imbued with present-day life. Although some Soviet geographers treat the term “landscape” as a broad conceptual term (similar to climate), most investigators tend to give the term a classificatory or typological connotation, regarding landscape as the basic unit in a classification of natural geocomplexes. One landscape school focuses on the morphological structure of landscape, the other on model-building of the landscape mechanism.     

The Teaching of Ethnography in Higher Schools and of Elements of Ethnography in Middle Schools

Apparently encouraged by Il'yichev's speech, Anuchin uses the forum of a philosophy journal to urge more work on synthesis in geography. He visualizes the geography of the future as a science that would seek to uncover what he calls the “parameters” of the geographic environment and would seek to establish the precise limits within which man might alter the environment without causing undesirable after-effects.     

A New Work on Theoretical Geography (a review of David Harvey,Explanation in Geography)

A discussion of Harvey's book, with particular reference to the landscape concept, classification principles, modeling, the map as an information channel, the systems paradigm and the organization of geography as a science. In the reviewer's view, Harvey's book represents a useful introduction to the strategy of geography because it seeks to formulate a sort of metatheory of geography as a whole, instead of dealing with particular geographical disciplines. Sochava regards geography not as a simple collection of particular disciplines that sometimes exchange information and join in the solution of interdisciplinary problems. He views geography rather as a vast area of human knowledge that seeks to integrate within itself those elements from various disciplines that relate to the basic function of geography, leaving all that is nongeographical to such sciences as geology, biology and economics.     

On the Unity of Geography

A Leningrad University physical geographer criticizes attempts to affirm the unity of geography through the creation of new disciplines like “general geography,” which would focus on study of the man-nature relationship. He contends that such a general geography, which would seek to identify general geographic laws, is advocated primarily by economic geographers who would emphasize the role of man at the expense of physical geography. Isachenko takes issue with the view that what makes any research “geographical” is its relationship to man. He contends that the criterion of whether any investigation is “geographical” is its relationship to the geosystem, defined as any natural complex, ranging from the global to the local scale. In his opinion, the unity of geography should be furthered not through the establishment of new supradisciplines, such as general geography, but through closer ties, both in methodology and in organizational terms, between the two main groups of geographical disciplines—physical geography and economic geography.     

On the Significance of Lenin's Ideas for Soviet Geography

The president of the Geographical Society USSR reviews the present state of Soviet geographic theory in the light of Leninist philosophy. The objective existence of natural regions with definite boundaries is affirmed. The approach of “social physics,” applying natural laws to social phenomena, is rejected. The use of mathematical techniques is welcomed, but not to the extent of giving rise to a separate discipline of “theoretical geography” that would deal with whatever is common to both physical and economic geography. The geographical environment is defined as that part of the earth's natural environment in which nature and society are in direct interaction. Both geographical determinism and social determinism (geographical nihilism) are rejected. The definition of geography as a system of scientific disciplines is affirmed, and a proposed redefinition of geography as dealing with the evolution and control of dynamic spatial systems is rejected.     

The Interaction of Nature and Society

The author reviews the material of his article on the Stalinist definition of the geographical environment [Soviet Geography, December 1963, pp. 3–19] in the light of L. F. Il'yichev's pronouncement on the unity of the natural and social sciences [Soviet Geography, April 1964, pp. 32–34]. Like V. A. Anuchin, Saushkin interprets the ll'yichev statement as encouraging more work on geographic synthesis that would integrate the findings of the specialized physical and economic geographic disciplines.     

Some Thoughts on the Subject of Historical Geography

A geographical historical geography, concerned with the history of development of the landscape, is distinguished from the historian's historical geography, dealing with the geography of countries and regions in the past and the history of development of cities and transport routes. The aim of the geographer's approach to historical geography is to characterize changes in the natural environment during historical times, to map landscapes from the point of view of their evolution and to classify and regionalize them on the basis of genetic principles. For this purpose, historical geography is to be distinguished from paleogeography, which should be limited to evolution of the landscape in prehistoric times.     

The Subject and Structure of Geosystems Theory

A logical model of the system of disciplines generally known as physical geography distinguishes three subjects of study, each associated with a particular level of organization of the basic study object, namely the earth's physical landscape envelope or landscape shell and its subsystems (individual landscapes or geocomplexes): (1) study of the componental level of organization would be the subject of the particular disciplines in physical geography (geomorphology, climatology, etc.); (2) study of the integrated level of organization would be the subject of landscape science, which is viewed as a synthesis of the particular disciplines; (3) study of the earth's natural environment at the level of the entire landscape envelope would be the subject of general physical geography or general earth science. The subject matter of the particular disciplines and of the synthesized landscape science is further broken down into research areas: regional research (concerned with geographical spaces); typological research (quasi-geographical spaces) and general research (nongeographical).     

Sacred Geography,Antiquarianism and Visual Erudition: Benito Arias Montano and the Maps in the Antwerp Polyglot Bible

The final volume of the Polyglot Bible, edited by Benito Arias Montano and printed in Antwerp by Christophe Plantin, was published in 1571–1572. Forming part of the Bible's Apparatus, the volume contains a number of essays, illustrations and maps by Montano relating to questions raised by the biblical text. Montano's maps were a product of his philological training in Oriental languages and exegesis, his profound interest in antiquarianism and geography and his practice of visualizing and tabulating knowledge. He designed his maps both as study aids and as devotional‐meditative devices. Moreover, the maps reflect his wider philosophical outlook, according to which Holy Scripture contains the foundations of all natural philosophy. Montano's case encourages us to re‐examine early modern Geographia sacra in the light of the broader scholarly trends of the period.     

李旭旦先生的学术思想和贡献及其他——纪念李旭旦先生诞辰100周年

李旭旦先生是人文地理学家、区域地理学家和地理教育家,毕生致力于地理教育和科学研究,培养了几代地理学人才,桃李满天下。他才思敏捷,知识渊博,治学严谨、执着,有较高的学术造诣。学术上他强调人地协调论和统一地理学,提倡区域研究,致力于地理教育理论的建设,创办《地理知识》杂志,曾任德国《GeoJournal》杂志编委,主编《人文地理学》(中国大百科全书分册)、《人文地理学论丛》、《人文地理学概说》,提出白龙江是我国西部南北地理分界线的科学论断,主张把解决现实问题作为人文地理学的主攻方向,重视野外调查,晚年他提出复兴人文地理学的倡议,把我国人文地理学的发展推向一个新的阶段。他是我国现代人文地理学的奠基人。     

A Selected Bibliography of Mathematical Articles in Soviet Economic Geography (1960–1968)

Advocates of a new discipline of theoretical geography seek to bolster their argument for establishment of the discipline with quotations from Lenin. Theoretical geography, conceived more broadly than Bunge's mathematical geography, would seek to generalize the findings of all the particular geographical disciplines, to formulate general geographical laws, develop a common geographic method and common approaches to the formalization and modeling of geographic phenomena. Its objects of study are so-called geosystems, which are conceptualized as totalities of the autonomous spatial systems of the environment, population and the economy. Each geosystem is viewed as being associated with its geospace, defined as the “eigenspace of geographical objects, of geographically whole formations”. Geosystems are regarded as possessing a certain degree of freedom in contrast to the view that cause-and-effect relations within such systems are rigidly predetermined. The outlines of a number of general geographic laws are suggested. They include the law of growing contrast in spatial systems of all types and the law of asynchronism in the development of spatial systems. Theoretical geography is presented as having significant practical application in the analysis and prediction of the effect of man's development of spatial systems, in setting of development priorities and determining optimal types of development.     

Emmanuel de Martonne and the ethnographical cartography of central Europe (1917–1920)

Abstract

Emmanuel de Martonne is well known among geographers as the founding father of geomorphology and as one of Paul Vidal de la Blache's main disciples. He also played a central role as a geographical expert on the Comité d'études, a body set up by Deputy Charles Benoist during the First World War to prepare guidelines for the organization of peace and, in particular, the demarcation of boundaries. De Martonne's special expertise was the construction and comparison of ethnographical maps. He applied his theories on ethnic mapping and improved methods of representation of mixed minorities to his map of the Romanian nation published in 1919 by the Service Géographique de l'Armée. In his reports on Central Europe, de Martonne claimed neutrality, but the graphical options employed on his map offered a biased view of the Romanian nation, inspired mainly by the views of the French school of regional geography.     

‘Taken captive by the mystery of the Great River’: towards an historical geography of British geography and Atlantic slavery

By examining the case of James MacQueen (1778–1870), this paper initiates a research agenda that contributes to what David N. Livingstone has argued remains the most pressing task for historians of geography: to write ‘the historical geography of geography’. Born in Scotland in 1778, MacQueen was one of the many ‘arm-chair’ geographers whose efforts at synthesising contemporary and historical sources were a significant feature of the encounter between Europe and the rest of the world. Indeed, although he never visited Africa, his speculations about the course and termination of the River Niger turned out to be broadly correct. What makes MacQueen a particularly significant figure was the original source of his theory: enslaved Africans in a Caribbean plantation-colony. In this light, a remark that MacQueen's imagination was ‘taken captive by the mystery of the Great River’ carries a dark double-meaning, because ‘captive’ knowledge was the very source of MacQueen's interest in African geography. Beginning with MacQueen's time in Grenada, the paper explores a series of personal relations, textual traces and West African ethno-histories to reveal how his geographical knowledge and expertise were bound up with Atlantic slavery. This shows not only how the colonial economy, centred on the Caribbean, underwrote the production of geographical knowledge about Africa, but also how British geographical discourse and practice might be probed for traces of Atlantic slavery and enslaved African lives. More generally, the case of James MacQueen illuminates a broader field of relationships between Atlantic slavery, West African exploration, and the development of modern British geography in the late eighteenth and first half of the nineteenth centuries. Examining these relationships is key to writing a ‘historical geography of British geography and Atlantic slavery’ and contributes to postcolonial histories of the discipline by revealing the tangled relationships that bound geography and slavery, knowledge and subjugation, that which ‘captivates’ and those held ‘captive’.     

The Place of Regional Economic Geography in the System of Geographical Sciences

The author holds that regional geography cannot be regarded as an independent geographic discipline because it lacks its own system of laws, such as the natural laws that operate in physical geography and the social laws that operate in economic geography. He agrees with the view that both physical and economic geography fall into theoretical and regional departments, and that regional studies test the localized application of the general laws formulated by the theoretical departments of the two great divisions of geography.     

The Development of General Earth Science in the USSR During the Soviet Period

General earth science, or general physical geography, is viewed as one of three synthetic physical-geographic disciplines, the two others being landscape science, or regional physical geography, and paleo-geography. General earth science is concerned with the earth's geographic or landscape envelope as a whole and with its general patterns: the laws of zonality and integrity of the landscape envelope, the circulation of matter, rhythmicity, polar asymmetry and other regularities.     

Yu. G. Saushkin's Reply to a Letter of Protest by Nine Soviet Geographers

The following is a reply to a letter that appeared in Soviet Geography, January 1963, pp. 60–62, accusing Saushkin of having given a misleading picture of Soviet economic geography in his article in the American journal Economic_Geography, 1962, No. 1. Saushkin rejects the charges that he gave a one-sided and impoverished picture of the Soviet discipline, that he minimized Lenin's contribution to Soviet economic geography, that he departed from an official definition of the discipline adopted in 1955, and that he supported three controversial Soviet geographers, R. M. Kabo, N. N. Kolosovskly, and V. A. Anuchin.     

The Concept of Landscape and Landscapes of Different Orders

The paper is an expanded version of a Lomonosov lecture given April 12, 1956, in the Earth Science Museum of Moscow University. Yefremov criticizes the confusion derived from the dual meaning of “landscape” as used by Soviet geographers: (1) landscape as an areal unit of varying taxonomic rank constituting a complex of all components that interact within the earth's surficial sphere (or landscape sphere), and (2) landscape as an indivisible basic areal unit, or “molecule,” or “cell” of physical geography. Yefremov defends the first and assails the second point of view.