Human Geography
SIR,--4 was much interested in the review of Professor Fleure's admir- able book, A Natural History of Man in Britain, which appeared in the Spectator of September 7th. I agree entirely with the reviewer's estimate of it as a masterly piece of work, and with his opinion that such distinguished writing of human geography is indeed rare. I agree also with his finding that French geographical literature is, on the whole, of a much higher standard than that in this country, although long acquaintance with French work of this kind eventually gives the impres- sion of natural skill and careful training in the techniques of description and analysis rather than of profound thinking. But one sentence in this review is irresponsible to say the least: "The true human geo- grapher must be thoroughly conversant with many of the natural sciences, as well as with many of the social scienoes and the humani- ties." What does Dr. Daniel mean ? What is implied by the words "thoroughly conversant " ? Surely, a graduate in one of the natural or social sciences would hesitate to proclaim himself "thoroughly con- versant" with it. I am quite sure that I could not call myself "thor- oughly conversant" with the humanity in which I took my degree.
Once in a century, perhaps, a Humboldt emerges with an intellect which amazes in Iti domination alike of philosophy and science. But such giants are rare in all fields of scholarship and the increasing bulk of knowledge in itself has made their stature less. Moreover, wealth, leisure and the ability to move freely from country to country and continent to continent (even in times of global war) helped to make Humboldt what he was, and these are not the circumstances of the mid- twentieth century. Certainly, in our time, scholars like Professor Fleure and, in France, Professor de Martonne, stand out, giving to the academic world, and sometimes to the ordinary reader, the fruits of a huge fund of knowledge, of patient field-work and of experience in correlation, the kind of contribution which, as Dr. Daniel points out, comes from a life-time of teaching and research. But of course such range and quality of scholarship are unusual. is it likely that they would be easily achieved ?
Those of us who work at the development of geography in the univer- sities are often confronted with this demand for omniscience as a pre- requisite of geographical competence. But scholars have realised now for some three centuries that, as the range of knowledge grows, "thorough conversance" with many branches of it automatically decreases, and that to insist indiscriminately on both quality and quantity is like crying for the moon. Were the geography departments in the British universities less harassed by the problem of numbers, by the requirements of a unique and formidable teaching routine, and by expenses of travelling, their staffs might have more chance of much- needed reflective thinking: many of them watch with longing the oppor- tunities in less busy departments for such pondering. But this, although it would cure many ills, would not result in the "thorough conversance" which Dr. Daniel appears to think indispensable.
In our generation, from term to term, and with very varied back- grounds of university training, we have to think out and acquire that discipline of synthesis and integration, which as Dr. Daniel points out, has become an exhilarating and necessary part of modern scholarship. We have to pass it on to undergraduates as best we may, but also to recognise from the standpoints of practical necessity and theology that omniscience is still accounted an attribute only of the Almighty.—Yours
Previous page
