SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Page #
4 1. With the exception of Strabo's work, the works in this section are listed in the language of the original. Humboldt's major works (listed here as Nos. 45-47, 59-60) have been republished in many languages, but the reader cannot rely fully on correctness in the translations. This is even more true of the two volumes of Ritter's essays (Nos. 50 and 61) which were translated into English by W. L. Gage and published as Geographical Studies, Boston 1861 and Comparative Geography, Philadelphia, 1865.
35 2. On viewpoints concerning geography in ancient times, the standard reference work in English is Bunbury's History of Ancient Geography (402), which has recently been republished. A shorter study, recently revised, is that of Tozer (403). Berger's analysis of the character of the work done in different schools is more nearly comparable with the classifications familiar to modern geographers (404). For the entire period from classical times to the early nineteenth century, there is no counterpart in English for Peschel's richly documented history (401), which however is less pertinent for the purpose of this chapter than Wisotski's detailed study of geographic thought in the late eighteenth century (1).
57 3. The corrections of translations and paraphrases in this and a number of the following footnotes were deemed necessary because of errors published in the Annals the previous year. In the period since, no one, to my knowledge, has challenged the reliability of these corrections.
58 4. Much of this discussion of the work of Humboldt and Ritter has subsequently been confirmed and amplified by George Tatham, "Geography in the Nineteenth Century," in "Geography in the Twentieth Century," edited by Griffith Taylor, New York, 1951, pp. 42-59; and, with respect to Humboldt, by Rayfred L. Stevens-Middleton, in La Obra de Alexander von Humboldt en Mexico, publ. no. 202, Instituto Panamericano de Geografia-e Historia, Mexico, D.F. 1956, pp. 199-246. The commemoration in 1959 of the hundredth anniversary of the death of both of these "founders" of the field led to publication of numerous studies of their work by German geographers.
67 5. The last two sentences of the paragraph are in error. While Humboldt included man, as the highest organism, in his "physical geography," he did not include the realm of the intellect or art, even though he recognized that the distinction was in a sense unreal (60, 69, 386); see Perspective…, footnote to page 68.
68 6. Ritter's writings are somewhat inconsistent in use of the term "nature"; see Perspective…, footnote to page 48.
74 7. Leo Waibel has subsequently shown the soundness of Ritter's theory of the origin of the plantation system, in contrast to theories of several later students, Geographical Review 32 (1942), p. 307-310.
83 8. Ritter was much more definite than these sentences indicate in restricting the scope of geography to the earth shell; see Perspective…, footnote to page 22.
85 9. The statement concerning Mary Somerville was based on the source named in the next sentence, Spörer. J. N. L. Baker finds this doubtful, in his study of "Mary Somerville and Geography in England," Geographical Journal, CXI (1948), 207-22.
85. 10. Guyot, though of French Hugenot parentage, had received the greater part of his advanced training in Germany, particularly in Berlin where, almost certainly, he studied under Ritter. At one time he had started to translate several portions of Ritter's work into French, but evidently never carried it through. Political difficulties in 1848 caused him to leave Switzerland and come to America. The Lowell Lectures which he delivered in French at Harvard, in 1848-49, on "Comparative Physical Geography in its Relation to the History on Mankind," were translated into English and published in 1849 as The Earth and Man (64). He was long employed by the Smithsonian Institute and in 1854 was appointed Professor of Geology and Physical Geography at Princeton, retaining that position until his death in 1884. In addition to an extensive series of Meteorological and Physical Tables, prepared for the Smithsonian Institute (his work in this field stimulated the establishment at the U.S. Weather Bureau), he published a series of school geographies. See the "Memoir" by James D. Dana, (410).
90 11. The most thorough-going and authoritative study of Ratzel's concepts and their origins, has subsequently been made by Johannes Steinmetzler in a doctoral dissertation, "Die Anthropogeographie Friedrich Ratzels und ihre ideengeschichtliches Würzeln," published in Bonner Geographische Adhandlungen, Heft 19, 1956.
94 12. Under the Nazi regime, Hettner was not permitted to publish, but his Allgemeine Geographie des Menschen was published posthumously, in 1947. It includes a detailed sketch of his professional background and career, by Schmitthenner.
100 13. DeMartonne, writing in 1924, found that geography in France had developed as an emancipation from the dominance of history (412; see also 415). In the present work, views of geography by French students are limited largely to the writings of Vidal de la Blache, Brunhes, and Vallaux; a much larger number are considered in Perspective…, pages 4, 188-89.
100 14. Thanks to the common practice in British geography of discussing methodological operations without reference to sources, a number of important papers did not come to the author's attention. Particularly notable are early papers by MacKinder (422 and 423) and the collection of Herbertson's notes published after his death in 1915 (424). Keltie's brief outline of "The Position of Geography in British Universities" in 1921 contained much information on the background of geographic thought in Britain, as well as direct quotations of views held at that time (411). The relatively larger number of methodological papers published in recent years by British geographers are considered in Perspective…, pages 4-7, 189-91.
112 15. The paper by Penck was published in this country, in Congress of Arts and Science, Universal Exposition, St. Louis, 1904, Howard J. Rogers, editor, Boston, 1906, but the passage mentioned here was not included in the American publication.
119 16. For further discussion of the concept of the earth shell as defining the physical scope of geography, see Perspective…, pages 22-25.
122 17. Concerning the position of Ratzel and Semple on the question of "geographic determinism," however, see Perspective…, footnote 5 on page 56.
122 18. The most vigorous later-day upholder of the "environmentalist concept" is Griffith Taylor (432, 434), who provided a record of his own development in geographic work, and that of Australian geography in general (451); see also Perspective…, pages 58, 62.
123 19. Although Barrows' presidential address was much discussed in this country at the time, and has been frequently cited in methodological writings of foreign students, its influence among American geographers was short-lived, if we except the work of George Renner (436).
134 20. Since Kant's statement about geography has subsequently appeared in several articles in somewhat different form, it may be noted--as explained in footnote 3 on pp. 38 f.--that (1) the form here presented is probably the most nearly correct presentation of what Kant actually said; (2) any differences in the several sources are of little significance so far as this particular section of his lectures is concerned; and (3) in contrast to other portions of the published versions of Kant's lectures, which are either of doubtful authenticity or were based on what he presented in the first few years of his teaching, the section here translated is based on a full and fairly reliable record of his lectures in 1775, in mid-career. 

Whatever the merit of Kant's statement, it cannot be assumed to have had significant influence on the subsequent development of geographic thought; see Perspective…, page 180, and my article on "The Concept of Geography as a Science of Space, from Kant and Humboldt to Hettner," Annals, Association of American Geographers, XLVIII (1958), 97-108.

135 21. Additional statements of the views of Humboldt and Ritter on this topic are included in a previous chapter, page 77, and more particularly in my paper of 1958, cited in the preceding note, including full translation of his basic statement of 1793, from the original Latin.
139 22. Almost simultaneously and evidently independently, Krebs expressed concepts of geography which, as he noted, were very similar to Hettner's (416).
140 23. That Hettner was not aware of Humboldt's statement on this topic was confirmed by him in personal letter to me. Subsequent investigation has failed to find any clear evidence of connection between Kant and Humboldt or between either of them and Hettner on this concept; see my article of 1958, cited in Note 20.
140 24. This concept of the logical position of geography among the sciences was included here, and is repeated with minor alteration and amplification in the more recent study, because it seems to explain characteristics of geography as determined from empirical evidence; it is not to be considered as a basic and necessary proposition on which those findings depend. See Perspective…, pages 10 f., 173-82.
142 25. Ritter's expression is explained more fully on page 57, and still further in Perspective…, footnote on page 66; see also, in the same work, the footnote on page 116.
144 26. This statement is found to be an inadequate answer to Kraft's question, which is re-considered in Perspective…, pages 41-47.
175 27. This section on "The Relation of History to Geography" might more logically have been placed later, and the student may find it less disrupting to his thought to postpone reading it till after Section X. Its brevity, in comparison with subsequent sections, is not to be taken as a measure of the importance of the topic, but as a measure of the small degree to which it appeared, at the time, to constitute a topic of controversy among geographers in this country. Likewise it reflects the fact that the writer found himself in complete agreement with Hettner's treatment of the question which was followed consistently throughout the section (with one exception specifically noted on page 186 f.). The subject is reconsidered, in Chapter VII of Perspective…, with a change noted below.
177 28. These views of Hettner were vigorously opposed by Winkler, (418, 419) who argued that geography must be a science of time as well as of space, that landscapes form objects of study in geography (see Chap. IX in this volume) and therefore an essential theme in geography is the history of the cultural landscape (Landschaft). See also note 38 below.
178 29. This study by Broek should rather have been cited as an appropriate example of "comparative historical geography" discussed later, on page 187.
183 30. Meigs' study utilizing the relative number of young non-bearing fruit trees as an index of regional trends illustrates the thought here. These trees, of which no account is taken in production statistics, are a significant feature in the present worlding economy of a region, and at a future date will be a significant feature in a different way. He is interested in the situation at each of those times, not primarily interested in the process of growth of the orchards (450).
184 31. MacKinder spoke similarly, in 1931, of the "danger that we should mix history with geography without seeing clearly what we are doing." Perhaps he has offered a key in the following distinction: "Geography should, as I see it, be a physiological and anatomical study rather than a study in development...it should be a description, with causal relations in a dynamic rather than genetic sense." (429, 268; italics added; see also the similar discussion in this volume, page 358).
187 32. The consideration presented in the remainder of this chapter is re-examined, with significant change in conclusions, in Perspective…, pages 102-106.
189 33. At the time of writing, in 1939, the restriction considered in this chapter was the subject of vigorous discussion in the methodological writings of German and American geographers. I do not know of any American geographers who now support it.
195 34 These statements made by Finch in a symposium should not be presumed to represent his considered judgment; they were used here because they present clearly the thinking of many who maintained the limitation.
237 35. The term "areal differentiation," as used here and in innumerable other places in this volume, has been found to lead easily to misunderstandings, so that the author now uses rather the term "areal variation"; see Perspective…, pp. 12-21.
242 36. The author has since concluded that geographers, in fact and for logical reasons, depend on an additional criterion in measuring the significance of areal variations, namely, the significance to man; see Perspective…, pages 41-47.
252 37. While no American geographer today, so far as I know,asserts that a region is an object, discussions of the concept of regions are nonetheless frequently based on assumptions which in fact imply such a belief.
263 38. On the basis of similar assumptions, Winkler, writing in 1938, had urged the logical reorganization of general (systematic) geography, in terms of Landschaft morphology, physiology, chronology, chorology, and system of types. Geomorphology, climatology, etc., were dismissed to other disciplines (442).
285 39. The consideration of regions in this chapter and in portions of the following chapter, requires significant modifications in the light of subsequent developments in concepts of regions; these are analyzed in Perspective…, pp. 129-43.
294 40. In 1914 Joerg presented an illuminating analysis of six published maps of "natural regions" of North America and of fifteen other divisions of the continent, each based on a single natural element--physiography, climate, or vegetation (443). The study was based on thorough examination of the European literature, including, in addition to the studies of Herbertson, Hettner and Passarge, a major example of the school of Vidal de la Blache, by Gallois (437). It is of historic interest to note that a committee of American geographers at that time decided to postpone, as "a work of a different and higher order," the construction of a map of "natural regions" of the United States, which would supply "the logical units of regional investigation" (444). Instead, they decided to concentrate efforts on the division of the United States into physiographic units--the work ultiniately carried through by the late Professor Fenneman.
299 41. The thesis of this paragraph, which is assumed in numerous subsequent discussions as it has long been assumed by geographers generally--namely, that it is necessary in geography to distinguish among all the factors of environment between those of human origin and those of natural origin--is opposed in Perspective…, pp. 48-64.
306 42. This problem was considered at the time of writing as of almost exclusively academic interest. Since then, however, geographers in many countries have been called on to participate in studies of planning in which it may be necessary at any early stage to determine the most suitable regional divisions of an area, or of a state, for purposes of economic planning, less commonly for political subdivisions. The published literature on this subject is now large, that unpublished no doubt far more voluminous.
308 43. John K. Wright had noted a number of examples from more remote times in suggesting that as one aspect of the effect of geographic conditions on human thought, geographers might study "the impress of geographical conditions themselves upon the nature of geographical thought"--study he would call "the geographic history of geography" (405).
309 44. In addition, the factor of areal size itself makes for regional division. Lösch, among others, has pointed out that in a theoretical inland plain completely homogenous in its natural features and in its political and cultural background, the needs of urban-rural trade and for major centers of urban concentration will lead to the development of distinct economic regions (449).
331 45. Mark Jefferson's presidential address of 1916 contained a very illuminating suggestion for arriving at significant regional division, namely by mapping cities and towns and observing the groupings of these human foci in contrast with the less differentiated rural population (446).
379 46. In the subsequent discussion, the term "nomothetic" is considered to include the construction of generic concepts as well as laws; the term "unique" is not to be considered in the sense of "unusual," but of "individual."
382 47. The question under discussion in much of the remainder of this chapter--namely, the degree to which geography seeks to establish generic principles or laws and the extent to which it is concerned with individual cases--is re-considered more directly in Perspective…, pages 147-72. While that discussion leads to no change in the essential conclusion that geography is concerned with both, it includes new material leading to additional conclusions of importance.
386 48. On generic concepts particularly in regard to landforms, there is much of value in such earlier studies as those of Hettner (438), William Morris Davis (445), and Campbell (447).
397 49. The discussion, in various passages in this chapter, of the comparison and relations between systematic and regional geography depicts a sharp dichotomy between the two approaches. Reconsideration of the question has led to the conclusion that what we have in fact is a continuum of gradations from the more specialized topical studies to the more nearly completely regional; see Perspective…, pp. 113-29.
399 50. The two previous paragraphs, as well as others in the following pages were based on the widely-held assumption that all the various "natural" aspects of geography constituted one branch of the field, physical geography, in contrast to the other main part, human geography. The author has opposed this view in oral discussions and correspondence for more than a decade, and has recorded the objections in Perspective…, pages 65-80.
400 51. A brief paper by Zuber, in 1937, compares the academic relations of the sciences concerned with planning to their relations in planning work (456; see also the papers listed as ##s 451-460).
401 52. While the conclusion is surely correct as an empirical statement based on the works which their authors call "political geography," this may represent failure of geographers to recognize the need for other types of studies which should be included under this head. Subsequent development of views on this field are discussed in the following studies by this author: "The Functional Approach in Political Geography," Annals, Association of American Geographers, XL (1950), pp. 95-130; "Political Geography" in American Geography: "Inventory and Prospect," Preston E. James and Clarence F. Jones, eds. Syracuse 1954, pp. 162-225; and "Political Geography in the Modern World," Conflict Resolution IV(1960), pp. 52-66.
405 53. The fact that little consideration is given in this volume to the work of geographers in governmental agencies is due to the nature of such work, in which the author subsequently participated for several years, as applied geography. Such studies, as previously noted (pages 399 f.), cannot readily be classified in any theoretical branch of geography, or indeed within science itself. The nature of the work in practical problems is dictated on the one hand by the problems themselves and on the other by the particular abilities of the individuals studying them.
423 54. The question of the relation of geomorphology to the field of geography, which is avoided here as it is throughout this volume, is examined at length in Perspective…, pages 84-96.
433 55. This statement assumes much too high a degree of certainty as necessary for the term "prediction"; see Perspective…, footnote 10 on page 165.
437 56. This list should have included Wellington Jones' short paper of 1930 (448). That was the first presentation of the "fractional method" of field analysis worked out by the spring field group, later carried out more fully by Finch (285) and subsequently adapted for use in planning surveys, as described by Hudson (458, 459).
455 57. This sentence, which might well be emphasized, is expanded further in Perspective…, page 164.


Hartshorne, Richard. 1939. The Nature of Geography. Lancaster, Penn.: Association of  American Geographers.  Reprinted with permission of the Association of
American Geographers.


Created on 1999.11.14.  Last revised 1999.11.14.  Kenneth E. Foote.