452 



NA TURE 



[March ii, 1886 



Dr. Archibald Geikie, than whom no one can speak with 

 higher authority, ha? expressed a most decided opinion on the 

 peculiar value of physical geography in education. He writes, 

 in a letter published in Mr. Keltic's excellent Report, that he 

 knows of no other subject "that lends itself so effectively to the 

 teacher who wishes to inspire his pupils with some appreciation 

 of the nature and value of scientific education and reasoning." 

 He has long been of opinion that, in this sense of the term, 

 geography (that is physical geography), should form an essential 

 part of education. 



It seems generally conceded that the teaching of geography 

 in this country is at present in a very unsatisfactory con- 

 dition, and far behind that existing over a great part of the 

 Continent of Europe. It is most remarkable, and much to be 

 regretted, that in England, of .all countries where advanced edu- 

 cation prevails, with her world-wide possessions and interests, 

 such a condition should exist. There can be no doubt about 

 the matter. The fact that it is not found by English publishers 

 to pay to issue first-rate maps and works on physical geography, 

 equivalent to those published in Germany, is striking evidence 

 of its correctness. The present movement is founded on a con- 

 viction that it is so. The reasons for this condition of things are 

 probably not far to seek. When we find that geography, 

 whether in lower or higher schools, or .at military training col- 

 leges, is best taught and provided for in such countries as 

 Germany and Austria, where the subject is represented by 

 special professors .and systematically taught at the Universities, 

 whilst at no British University is there any professor of geo- 

 graphy at all, it is surely mt unreasonable to conclude that the 

 lack of professors and higher teaching of the subject at our 

 Universities is the main cause of the inferior position of the 

 subject here. 



The present energetic effort of the Society to promote geo- 

 graphical teaching cannot but yield considerable results in im- 

 proving the po-ition of the subject in this country, but it is most 

 important that a further attempt to introduce the subject in .any 

 form, as a University one, should be made. 



Possibly, although at the present moment it may not be fea- 

 sible to secure the representation of geography as a whole, 

 because of the apparent vagueness of its bounds and the att.acks 

 on all sides to which it is in consequence liable, there may be a 

 chance of success if the attempt be made to press the claims of 

 physical geography. It is, however, scarcely pos^ble that the 

 establishment of physical geography at the Universities can ever 

 be effected without the cordial co-operation of the leading geo- 

 logists of this country. I know that several of these, including 

 Prof. Bonney, to whom I am indebted for much advice in the 

 present matter, believe that the time has come when speci.al 

 chairs of physical geography should be established, regarding the 

 question as one of, as it were, splitting the subject of geology 

 into two parts. Prof. Archibald Geikie expresses himself as of 

 a similar opinion in his letter published in Mr. Keltic's Report. 

 That there is a necessity for lectures on the higher branches of 

 physical geogr.aphy is shown by the fact that courses of lectures 

 nearly relating to this subject are now being given by Prof. 

 Hughes at Cambridge and Prof Boyd Dawkins at the Owens 

 College, and I venture to suggest to the Council of the .Society 

 that it would be well to make an attempt to secure the co- 

 operation of the Geological Society in a joint endeavour to induce 

 the Universities to establish professorships of physical geography. 

 There are many reasons why success may attend an effort to 

 establish the representation of physical geography rather than 

 the wider .subject. It is obvious that any professor who could 

 hold such a chair must be a geologist, the two subjects of 

 physical geography and geology being most closely allied and 

 overlapping. I am not going to attempt to define physical 

 geography .as a subject. The term geography is, no doubt, a 

 somewhat unfortunate one, and a great deal of serious opposition 

 has been raised to the advancement of the subject on such 

 grounds as that it is a " graphy " and not a "logy." But the 

 Germans have not only practically separated geology and geo- 

 graphy as subjects of University study with the highest success, 

 but find no difficulty in the use of the term physical geography 

 to cover such knowledge as is represented in Peschel's excellent 

 work, " Allgemeine Erdkunde." 



Regarding physical geography as a part of geology to be sepa- 

 rated from it : — The reason why such a separation should be 

 effected is that there is thus formed and brought together for 

 special treatment a subject which is far more necessary and suit- 



able for general educational purposes than the whole of geology 

 itself, which will attract far more students and act as a lever for 

 promoting the study of other branches of science as special 

 subjects, as well as of geology itself. 



The principal argument that is always brought against the 

 establishment of professorships of physical geography at the 

 Universities, is th.at the subject is already covered by the pro- 

 fessors of geology ; but Prof. Geikie evidently does not take 

 that view, and points out in his letter already referred to, 

 " Geology is every day increasing in its scope, which is 

 already too vast for the physical powers of even the most 

 indefatigable teacher." It is already impossible for one 

 teacher to cover all which may be supposed to be included 

 under the name geology. When both physical geography 

 and geology are represented by a single professor in a Uni- 

 versity they must needs be inadequately covered, or one 

 branch must receive but meagre treatment in proportion to the 

 other ; or the period covered by a course of lectures is too long 

 for any one student to attend the whole. Convinced that it is a 

 matter of the utmost importance for the progress of geography 

 here to show that the two subjects, geology and physical geo- 

 graphy, can be taught with perfect harmony and advantage by 

 different professors at the same time at a University, I asked Mr. 

 Keltic to write to some of the German professors of geography, 

 and request them to express their views on the matter, and to ask 

 for copies of the syllabuses of courses of lectures on geography 

 and geology delivered at the same time within their Universities. 

 He h.as handed me the following most interesting letter from 

 Prof. Kirchhoff, Professor of Geography at H.alle : — 



"Unfortunately, I cannot send you .syllabuses of the Uni- 

 versity lectures in geology like those of my own lectures on 

 general geography, and on the countries of Europe, which I 

 placed in your hands, since such do not exist. 



"However, the question now being raised in England is 

 already practically settled in Germany. All the Universities in 

 Northern Germany, and now those in Austria also, possess geo- 

 graphical as well as geological professors, and it is not found in 

 any instance that the two interfere with each other, or are super- 

 fluous to each other, but, on the contrary, they have proved to 

 afford mutual support. 



" It is, no doubt, correct that geology, in just the same way 

 as geography, is concerned with the earth and all its various 

 parts. But the point of view on either side is different. For 

 e.xample, whilst I am delivering in Halle during four successive 

 semestres the course on geography, with the nature of which you 

 are acquainted, Prof, von Fritsch and two colleagues are lectur- 

 ing to almost entirely different audiences on mineralogy, crystal- 

 logr.aphy, geology, and palaeontology. In summer. Prof, von 

 Fritsch arranges excursions for geological purposes, and many 

 of the students attending my lectures take part in these, because 

 a problem of great geographical importance is able to be solved 

 during these excursions, namely, the explanation of the form of 

 the land surface as resulting from its composition, and by means 

 of the history of its development. 



"The two sciences do, indeed, touch one another in what is 

 termed superficial geology, but from this zone of contact they 

 stretch wide apart from one another. Geology discusses not 

 only the developmental history of the earth in the Quaternary 

 period, a matter which concerns the geographer quite as much 

 as the geologist, but it discusses also that of the most remote 

 periods of the earth's antiquity, investigates the petrographic 

 structure and the organic life of every formation, subjects which 

 hardly concern the geographer at all. 



" On the other hand, geography h.as to deal not only with the 

 land surface and the waters, but also with climate, the flora and 

 fauna, and human inhabitants, both of the earth .as a whole and 

 of each separate country, confining its view to the present only, 

 that is to say to the Quaternary period. It might as well be 

 said that the existence of history as a "subject at Universities 

 rendered geography unnecessary, because it also has to do with 

 the entire earth's surface. 



" In reality, geography embraces all facts relating to the 

 earth, borrowing them often from other sources. The geology 

 of the British Isl.inds, for example, together with their history 

 since the time of Cassar, does not by any means represent the 

 geography of the islands." 



Prof. Wagner, of Gbttingen, Professor of Geography in that 

 University, a most em.inent authority on geographical edu- 

 cation, has sent a note, in which he gives a syllabus of his 



