Chapter XIV. THE NINETEENTH CENTURY AND AFTER; EVOLUTION AND PROGRESS OF GEOGRAPHICAL SCIENCE

As during a long period in the history of geography it was usual to limit the connotation of the term, so, when a wider connotation came to be recognized, there naturally followed the creation of certain clearly-defined departments of study under distinguishing titles. The whole structure of geography rests upon two great pillars—upon exploration and upon measurement. With the main lines of exploration we have dealt in preceding chapters, and we have carried that part of our history which deals with precise measurement down to the close of the eighteenth century and the institution of the ordnance survey of Great Britain (Chapter X.). The early part of the sixteenth century witnessed the birth of accurate land-measurement; the early part of the nineteenth its re-birth as a function of organized state-administration. The Indian trigonometrical survey, with which the names of Col. W. Lambton and afterwards Sir George Everest are associated, was begun in 1800; a famous survey of Switzerland, coupled with the name of Gen. H. Dufour, was undertaken in 1809, one of Austria-Hungary in 1816, one of France in 1817; what is now the territory of the German Empire was already fairly represented on local maps when a general survey was undertaken in 1878. Indeed, all European countries may be said to be completely surveyed except certain of the Balkan States, though Russia is much behind in this respect. It must not be forgotten that the processes of close survey are slow: the primary triangulation of Great Britain was only completed in 1858, though the filling-in of details of course proceeded concurrently. And the survey never stands still; there is always revisional work to do.

As concerns the British Empire, it has been an unrealized ideal that a territory should be surveyed as soon as possible after occupation, and it was not until 1905 that the defects and lack of system in the mapping of British territories generally were sufficiently widely realized to cause the creation of a Colonial Survey Committee as a central advisory and supervisory body.

Geodetic survey steadily advanced during the nineteenth century, from the work of Friedrich Wilhelm Bessel in East Prussia in 1838—of the highest importance owing to the systematic accuracy of the observations and their calculation (on the principle of “least squares”)—down to the institution of the International Geodetic Association (Erdmessung), which had its origin in a proposal of the Prussian General, J.J. Baeyer, in 1862, and has headquarters near Potsdam, over twenty European, American, and Asiatic countries being represented in it. The accuracy of instruments has been carried far above the standard of those referred to in an earlier chapter. As an illustration we have only to trace the mechanical methods of measuring a baseline or other distance on the surface, from that of counting the revolutions of a wheel, up to that of employing rods of metal or other substance, or chains—methods associated with the endeavour to compensate for or overcome even the slight contraction or expansion of a rod, due to variation of temperature, which might vitiate the results, culminating in the discovery (in France in 1896) of invar, an alloy for practical purposes invariable, when applied to the measurement of baselines by means of such apparatus as that of E. JÄderin of Stockholm.

The work of the cartographer, as exemplified in atlases and small-scale maps of general utility, has by no means in all cases followed the high standard of the surveyor. Commercial considerations are not to be overlooked; cheap and rapid methods of reproduction bring their temptations as well as their advantages to bear upon cartography. Their advantages are manifest; the map, whether as an adjunct to travel or as a graphic illustration of a great variety of subjects, has become a commodity of almost daily use. But in some countries, such as the United States, the standard of cartography generally is as low as that of the maps of the survey is high. The reduction and selection of details from a large-scale survey for use on a small general map, the methods of representing such details, the permissible limit of generalizing them, the choice of colours—these and other aspects of cartography really demand a scientific standard as exalted in its way as that of the surveyor. That standard has been most firmly upheld in Germany, in such geographical establishments as that founded by Justus Perthes at Gotha in 1785, which publishes the famous general atlas originally formed by A. Stieler in 1817–32, the physical atlas of H. Berghaus (1838–42), and many other such works. Other names of individual workers in the same field come readily to the mind—H. Kiepert, A. Petermann, K. von Spruner, Behm, Supan, Langhans, Andree, Debes, A. Ravenstein. The British and French lists are shorter, though the names of John Bartholomew, W. and A.K. Johnston, Edward Stanford and George Philip, Vivien de St. Martin, F. Schrader and Vidal de la Blache must be remembered.

After many years of effort on the part of the International Geographical Congress, a conference consisting of official delegates from most civilized states met in 1909 to deliberate on the methods to be adopted in the construction of an international map of the world. After much discussion a series of regulations was drawn up to be followed by each country in producing a map of its territories on the scale of 1/1,000,000, or about sixteen miles to the inch. The projection will, of course, be uniform, and altitudes are shown by layers of different tints from sea-level upwards. Actual experience may no doubt demand certain modifications, but it will be a great advantage to have an authoritative map of the world on a strictly uniform plan.

As to the progress of geodesy in recent years, in 1899–1902 an arc was measured in the extreme north in Spitsbergen, by Swedish and Russian workers (P.G. Rosen, O. BÄcklund, and others), while Sir David Gill, as director of the Royal Observatory in Cape Town, subsequently initiated the measurement of a great arc in Africa along the meridian of 30° E. These arcs are capable of connection through Asia Minor and Europe, by which means a continuous measured arc of 105° would be obtained. The arc of Quito (Peru) was re-measured in 1901–06 under the direction of the French Academy of Sciences; a great arc in 98° in the United States of America has been undertaken by the Coast and Geodetic Survey, and these again are capable of ultimate connection. Other arcs of special importance have been measured in Europe and India.

Geomorphology, though not accepted without demur as a definite branch of science in itself, has at last come to be generally recognized as a convenient term to connote the study of terrestrial relief. Elie de Beaumont in 1852 enunciated with too great precision the theory that similarity of orientation was a standard test of similarity in the age and origin of the great mountain chains. Lowthian Green in 1875 proposed his tetrahedral theory of the disposition of the continents and the ocean basins, on the ground that a sphere undergoing contraction tends to assume the form of a tetrahedron, or body enclosed by four equal equilateral triangles. He applied this theory to the form of the spherical earth at its present stage of contraction, indicated how far it accounted for the present distribution of land and sea, and attempted to give reasons for its failure to do so in certain respects. Professor C. Lapworth in 1892 stated his theory of folding, according to which the continents are the arches of vast folds in the crust of the earth, and the ocean basins the troughs between them. E. Suess has modified this view in his treatise Das Antlitz der Erde (The Face of the Earth), 1885–1901. Sir George Darwin invoked the effects of tidal strain upon the crust, associating this with the form of the continents. The subject, which has also been dealt with by Professors J.W. Gregory and A.E.H. Love, M. Bertrand, A. de Lapparent, and A. Supan, among others, has thus been approached from both the purely physical and the mathematical standpoint, but the problem has not reached its solution.

We have already given sufficient indication that the exact scope of geography has not been found easy to define by common consent; that fact does not lighten the task of tracing its development in the nineteenth century. It is not inconceivable that on one view of the subject this volume should have concluded with the preceding paragraph. On the other hand, the new value attaching to the geographical studies of distribution and environment makes it imperative to carry the story further. These studies have not only been systematized in themselves, but have become complementary of other sciences, and thus we find the term “geography” incorporated in certain scientific compounds—zoogeography or zoological distribution; anthropogeography, the distribution of mankind; biogeography, the distribution of living things generally—or perhaps more mercifully treated in such phrases as “plant geography.” Zoogeography and plant geography are concerned with the division of the earth’s surface into regions possessing individual characteristics in regard to their fauna or flora. The principle of regional division, indeed, has become a leading principle of geographical research, in regard not only to fauna and flora, but to man as well; to the physical characters of the land, and to climatic conditions.

The general tendency towards scientific specialization has resulted in the erection, as it were, of separate laboratories for the study of certain specific features of the physical earth, each with its name-plate upon the door. From some of these—as from meteorology and geology—the geographer, in the course of the studies we have just outlined, borrows such data as are necessary to his purpose, and puts them to his special uses. It is no part of a history of geography to deal with that of meteorology or of geology, though both these sciences are fundamentally geographical, owe an obvious debt to exploration and travel, and make ample use of cartography. On the other hand, there are some departments of research which, though standing under their own names, are grouped perhaps more closely as offspring of physical geography. Such are oceanography (the study of the sea), limnology (the study of lakes), potamology (that of rivers). The last term might be justified on the ground that it helps to lighten the burden of different meanings which rests upon the term “hydrography”; it at any rate defines a clear field of study which, in view of its practical importance, has attracted much recent attention. The study of lakes—the depth, movement, and composition of their waters, the life in them, the physical nature of their basins—which was practically initiated by Professor F.A. Forel’s investigations of Lake Geneva published in 1892–94, has already a notable monument in the bathymetrical survey of the Scottish fresh-water lochs, completed under Sir John Murray’s direction in 1908.

The line between these various branches of science is for our present purpose difficult to draw; but at the risk of a charge of arbitrary treatment it appears pertinent to refer to certain facts in the history of oceanography. As an organized department this is no less a creation of the nineteenth century than others we have named. Among ancient geographers there was certainly some speculation as to the physical character of the seas, known and unknown. From a very early period sounding in shallow waters has been recognized as a method of navigation, and Strabo, for example, displays some knowledge of the greater depths of the Mediterranean. But to mere navigation a close study of the sea was not essential, and explorers with their eyes fixed on distant lands were concerned merely to make the best of their way over the intervening waters. It is not, therefore, until towards the close of the eighteenth century, the period of the scientific exploration of the Arctic region and of Cook’s great voyages—exploration necessarily carried out mainly on shipboard—that any systematic investigation of the deep seas is found. Phipps, Scoresby, John and James Clark Ross, and especially the last, made deep soundings; but the whole subject of oceanography may be said to have been first organized by Matthew Fontaine Maury (1806–73), an American naval officer, who, after his appointment to the United States DÉpÔt of Charts and Instruments (which became the Hydrographic Office), systematized the collection of navigators’ observations on winds and currents, while his example inspired the establishment of similar collections in other countries. He also devoted himself to the study of the relief of the ocean floor, an investigation which was forwarded by the invention of a compatriot, J.M. Brooke, of the United States Navy, who introduced the principle of sounding in great depths by means of a lead which was detached from the line on reaching the bottom, so that the line might be easily hauled aboard. Maury published his Physical Geography of the Sea in 1855. Meanwhile the possibility of connecting England and America by submarine telegraphic cable had been discussed ten years earlier. Communication across the Channel with France had been successfully established in 1851, and in 1856 the first signals passed across the Atlantic. This first trans-oceanic cable survived only for a little, but the investigation of the sea-floor had now acquired a commercial as well as a scientific interest. As early as 1834 Edward Forbes had made biological investigations in the Irish Sea, and in 1841–42 in the Mediterranean; while in 1868–70 similar studies, together with soundings and observations for water-temperature, salinity, and deposits, were carried on in the British seas, the Bay of Biscay, and the Mediterranean by investigators on board vessels of the Royal Navy—the Lightning, Porcupine, and Shearwater. This and similar work elsewhere was preparatory to the greatest of all marine scientific expeditions, that of H.M.S. Challenger in 1872–76. That vessel was commissioned at the instigation of the Royal Society, in command of Captain (afterwards Sir) George Nares, and a scientific staff under Sir C. Wyville Thompson as director, and including Sir John Murray, H.N. Moseley, and J.Y. Buchanan. The Atlantic was the first field of study, and was crossed several times; the southern ocean was then traversed south-east and east from Cape Town; the Challenger was the first steamer to cross the Antarctic circle, and afterwards proceeded into the Pacific. The route now lay from Melbourne to New Zealand, Fiji, Torres Strait, the Malay Archipelago, and Chinese and Japanese waters, after which the Pacific was crossed from Yokohama by Honolulu and Tahiti to Valparaiso. The homeward route lay by the Straits of Magellan, Montevideo, Ascension Island, and the Azores. Every branch of oceanographical research was fully dealt with in the fifty volumes of reports upon the voyage. More lately other vessels of the British, American, German, and other navies have been detailed for scientific research; and cable laying has afforded additional opportunities. Mention must be made of the Dutch expedition in the eastern Malay seas on board the Siboga in 1899–1900, the work of the German surveying vessel Planet in the Pacific and elsewhere in 1906 and following years, and the Atlantic expedition of Sir John Murray and Dr. Johan Hiort on the Michael Sars in 1910. The observations of the last-named expedition, especially on the distribution of life in the sea, are of the first importance. Oceanographical work has remained an integral function of scientific expeditions in the Arctic and Antarctic regions. Among the names of investigators which are specially identified with oceanography (independently of other departments of geographical research) reference is perhaps most justly due to those of Professor Alexander Agassiz in the United States, and the Prince of Monaco. The establishment of the International Council for the Study of the Sea in 1901, nominated by nine European Governments, with its headquarters in Copenhagen, was not only an outstanding event in the history of the science at large, but also draws attention to one of its most important practical applications, for the Council is specially concerned with the study and improvement of the fisheries in the North Sea and other European waters.

The educational value of geography, as we have seen, was recognized in a practical manner by Newton; and towards the close of the eighteenth century physical geography was taken as a lecture-subject by the philosopher Immanuel Kant at KÖnigsberg, and by him was given exalted rank as a “summary of nature.” Alexander von Humboldt (1769–1859) further systematized the theory of the control of land-forms and climate over the distribution and habits of plants, animals, and man, and was able to draw not only upon the collection of facts made by other travellers, but also upon his own observations. His journey in 1799–1802 in America, during which he explored the Orinoco and discovered its connection with the Amazon through the Casiquiare, and visited Cuba, Quito and Mount Chimborazo, and Mexico, was the practical foundation of his scientific career. In the course of it he collected material for his researches into temperature at different elevations, into plant geography, terrestrial magnetism, volcanic phenomena, and much besides, while he also travelled through Russia to the Yenisei in 1829. In the work of Karl Ritter (1779–1859) is found the importance of establishing comparisons and investigating differences between similar regions in different parts of the world. Oscar Peschel (1826–75) corrected Ritter’s marked tendency to give excessive prominence to historical detail. The exposition of theoretical geography was carried on by Ferdinand von Richthofen, Hermann Wagner, and Friedrich Ratzel; and with the work of these and other leaders in the school of German geographical thinkers and teachers is associated the German pre-eminence in cartography during the nineteenth century, in which connection a passing tribute should be paid to Humboldt’s introduction to cartographers of the principle of drawing upon maps lines to show areas of equal temperature (isotherms), rainfall, etc.

Geography as an educational subject of widely-recognized value is coming by its rights, though the majority of the last generation may recall it as affording little else than superficial instruction in the position of countries, places, mountains, and rivers. But now, not only in Germany, but in Great Britain and elsewhere, it has been widely adopted as an examination-subject in both primary and secondary education, as well as for certain specific purposes, and geographical chairs or lectureships have been established in a number of universities. The fostering of geography as an educational subject has been one of the great tasks, and that of furthering exploratory and other research another, of the many geographical societies which have been founded throughout the civilized world in the nineteenth century and after. That of Paris in 1825, and that of Berlin in 1827, are the oldest of these now flourishing, though with the Royal Geographical Society in London (1830) was merged the older African Association.

The theory of evolution, as set forth by Charles Darwin, Alfred Russel Wallace, Sir Joseph Hooker, and others in the middle of the nineteenth century, has clearly the closest relationship with the geographical theory of the control exercised by environment; it has become, indeed, its fundamental principle. Darwin accompanied the Beagle surveying expedition round the world in 1831–36, and his observations during the voyage qualified him for his life-work. Wallace’s study of the distribution of animals brings at once to the mind his line of demarcation between faunal regions passing through the Malay Archipelago. Hooker was prepared for his interest in plant geography by his voyage with Ross to the Antarctic, by his travels in northern India (1847–51), and other journeys of wide range. Such men were geographers though their fame does not name them so. The application of geographical method is either essential or at least valuable in every branch of natural science; in itself it fulfils functions which the other natural sciences, taken individually, do not, and that is its justification.

---