Germany’s contribution to the evolution of geography is immense and foundational, particularly during the 18th and 19th centuries.
German scholars provided philosophical depth and a scientific base, transforming geography from a descriptive art into a systematic academic discipline.
The classical contributions of Alexander von Humboldt and Carl Ritter laid the groundwork for modern geography:
Humboldt advanced empirical and inductive methods in physical geography.
Ritter emphasized regional and anthropocentric approaches.
Institutional Developments:
The first German university was established in 1809, but geography was not immediately institutionalized as a subject.
Until the late 19th century, very few universities offered geography courses.
Geography teachers often came from non-geographical backgrounds, many being disciples of Ritter without formal training in the subject.
Standardization of Sciences:
By the mid-19th century, German universities began standardizing courses across physical, biological, and social sciences.
Students were allowed to select geography as an optional subject, leading to a more structured academic growth.
Military and Administrative Influence:
The political unrest in Europe and expansionist ambitions created a high demand for maps and charts.
Military and administrative institutions wanted to understand physical and cultural conditions of various regions.
This demand led to a practical orientation of geography, where anything that could be mapped was considered part of geography.
Conceptual Expansion:
German scholars not only systematized the discipline but also offered new definitions and scopes of geography.
Their work laid the epistemological and methodological foundation of:
Systematic and Regional Geography
Chorology
Human-Environment Interaction
Cartography and Physical Sciences
Period-wise Development of German Geography
Germany’s contributions to geographical thought can be classified into three major periods:
Pre-Classical Period – Foundations of descriptive and mathematical geography (Apian, Clüver, Varenius)
Classical Humboldt-Ritterian Period – Scientific and humanistic development of modern geography
Post-Classical Period – Institutionalization and emergence of thematic branches (Ratzel, Hettner, Richthofen)
Pre-Classical Period (15th–17th Century)
After the initiation of the scientific revolution, specialization within the subject got prominence.
The influence of this revolution brought by the works of Kepler, Copernicus, Galileo, and Newton was so massive that German geographers started defining the discipline as a branch of mixed mathematics; scholars working on the description of regions were vehemently criticized.
Different traditions evolved which laid the foundations of scientific geography.
In the pre-classical period, Peter Apian, Sebastian Muster, and Cluverius produced the compendia for geography.
These scholars revived the classical Ptoleminan tradition as well as the Roman tradition of Strabo.
Key Thinkers and Contributions
Apian (1495-1552) was an astronomer and cartographer; renowned for his two works.
The first one is an astronomical treatise, and the second one deals with the concepts of geometry and astronomy.
He accepted the notion of the geocentric universe and also recognized Aristotle’s view of ekumene.
In 1530, he produced a heart-shaped world map where both latitudes and longitudes have been shown by curved lines (Figure 1).
Munster (1489-1552) is renowned for his work “Cosmographia Universalis’ which was published in 1544.
This work has been regarded as one of the authoritarian works on world geography for many decades.
He too recognized the geocentric approach of the universe.
Cluverius (1580-1622) was the first geographer to talk about universal geography.
He flourished the tradition of Munster and published a book ‘Introduction in Universam Geographiam’ in 1616 which dealt with the historical geography of Germany.
Apart from these, various German scholars produced numerous works that, in one way or another, helped in building blocks for geographical thinking.
The names of Waldseemuller and Mercator are worth mentioning.
Both of them are credited to produce world maps that are being recognized even in present times.
Waldseemuller’s map was published in 1507 and was labeled Carta Marina.
In 1538, Mercator made a world map which became the only map to be used for navigation in the low and middle latitudes.
Despite the scientific discoveries and new concepts, their contributions faded by the seventeenth century.
Bernhardus Varenius (1622–1650)
The German scholar who influenced the geographical scholarship for more than a century was Bernhardus Varenius (1622-1650).
He was one of the first scholars to highlight the differences in the nature and content of physical and human geography.
He believed that the methods of the natural sciences could be successfully used to draw conclusions about natural phenomena with precision to a considerable extent.
But they cannot be applied to human groups because they are more subject to probability than certainty.
Generalizations with respect to human groups must be restricted to a particular time and space.
His contributions eventually gave rise to the dualisms and dichotomies between physical and human geography and, more importantly, between regional (special) and systematic (universal) geography, though he asserted that they were mutually interdependent branches of geography.
Varenius was the first to describe the differences in the amount of insolation received at different latitudes on the earth and pointed out that the highest temperatures on the earth are recorded in the hot deserts of the tropical areas and not in the equatorial belt.
He was also one of the first to explain the world’s wind systems by stating that the air masses close to the equator get heated up and thin out to be replaced by cold and heavy air masses from the Polar Regions.
His first book, ‘Description Regni Laponiae et Siam’ (Regional description of Japan and Siam) was published in 1649. It has five parts:
i. A description of Japan.
ii. A description of Siam (Thailand) being translated into Latin.
iii. A description of the religions of Japan.
iv. Some information on the religions of Africa.
v. A short essay on the governments dealing with places and people.
Varenius’s most significant contribution was his book, ‘Geographia Generalis’ (1650) which was one of the first attempts to combine three branches of geography—general (systematic), mathematical, and physical—and, chorology (science of space). This book consisted of three parts:
i. The absolute or terrestrial part dealing with the shape and size of the earth as well as the physical geography of continents, seas, and the atmosphere.
ii. The relative or the cosmic part describing the relation between the earth and other celestial bodies, especially the sun and its effects on global climate.
iii. The comparative part focusing on the principles of navigation and the location of different places in relation to each other.
In the prologue of his book, Geographia Generalis, Varenius advocated the description of particular places and stated that these should take into consideration the –
a) Celestial conditions like climate;
b) Terrestrial conditions which include relief, soil, vegetation, and biotic life and
c) Human conditions that are population, settlement, trade, forms of government.
Therefore, geography as a discipline should focus on the surface of the earth in combination with these conditions.
It is often regarded that Varenius’s Geographia Generalis could have had a second volume, but due to his untimely and premature death in 1650, it could not be completed.
Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) – Founder of Exceptionalism
Another scholar who influenced the geographical scholarship in the pre-classical period was Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804).
His early works like ‘General Natural History and the Theory of the Heavens’ (1755) did not have much to do with geography and were more related to speculative astronomy.
It was the same even with his treatises on earthquakes that dealt with the interior of the earth.
However, geographical references may be found in his later works such as ‘Critique of Pure Reason’ (1781) and ‘Critique of Judgement’ (1798).
His essay, ‘Anthropology from Pragmatic Point of View’ (1798) also contained a vivid geographical description of the races and ethnic groups around the world.
In his famous ‘Critique of Pure Reason’, Kant freed geography from its close bond with theology by rejecting the teleological concept.
This put an end to the Aristotelian era in geography.
He insisted that explanations for any phenomenon should be sought in chronologically antecedent events.
Kant believed that the geography of any place played a pivotal role in determining the progress of human civilization.
The physical geography that Kant developed was essentially ‘anthropocentric’ in nature and content.
This is because, according to Kant, physical geography not only included the features visible on the earth’s surface created by natural processes but also by human actions.
This viewpoint, Kant seems to have conceived and borrowed from Buffon’s ‘Historie Naturelle’ and later, this point of view was adopted by Ritter.
Kant opined that physical geography is the first part of knowledge of the world and is essential to develop our basic understanding of the earth as the abode of humans and for furthering philosophical studies.
Empirical knowledge, according to Kant, could be obtained in two ways—either (i) through pure reason, or (ii) through the senses.
Senses again could be divided into—(i) inner senses and, the (ii) outer senses.
The world as perceived by the inner senses is the seele (soul) or mensch (man) while as perceived by the outer senses, is the Nature.
While anthropology (used by him as analogous to the modern term of Psychology) deals with soul or man, physical geography deals with Nature.
Kant advocated that knowledge can be classified in two ways:
Logical classification that categorizes items on the basis of morphological similarities and may give rise to systematic sciences like zoology concerned with animals; geology concerned with rocks, or sociology concerned with social groups.
Physical classification that categorizes items as belonging to the same time or space.
In relation to this, he asserted that history differs from geography only in that, while the former is related to time, the latter is related to space.
History studies phenomena that follow one another (nachienander) and has reference to time (chronological), whereas geography studies phenomena spread beside each other (nebeneinander) on space (chorological).
Since any individual’s experience is restricted to a specific time and space, his knowledge has to be supplemented with the experiences of others.
Such knowledge derived indirectly from others may be divided into two types –
(i) narrative or,
(ii) descriptive.
While history is narrative, geography is descriptive.
Thus, history and geography make up the entire gamut of empirical knowledge—the former that of time, and the latter that of space.
To be more precise, empirical knowledge may be classified according to space and time.
Regarding the concept of ‘space’, Kant pointed out in his ‘Critique of Pure Reason’ that space is not something objective or real, neither is it any substance, but it is something which is subjective and essentially a mental construct.
It is governed by an unchanging law and provides a kind of framework for coordinating things and events all of which can be perceived with the outer senses.
Immanuel Kant may rightly be regarded as the ‘father of exceptionalism’ as he was opposed to generalizations and believed that history and geography were methodologically different from the other sciences as, they were concerned with the study of the unique and the ‘exceptional.’
Germany, in the 19th century, witnessed the emergence of what may be described as ‘neo-Kantianism.’
Followers of this tradition sought to draw a line of difference between the historical and cultural sciences on one hand, and the natural sciences on the other.
This is supposed to have sowed the seeds for another dualism in the discipline of geography.
They upheld that whereas, natural sciences deal with the objects that can be sensed externally and thus be explained, the cultural and historical sciences deal with those objects that are mainly mental constructs and therefore, need to be understood.
Hence, while the former is concerned with the ‘nomothetic,’ the latter is concerned with the ‘idiographic.’
The dichotomy between the two approaches may be explicated as—the idiographic or empirical approach does not seek to develop laws but mainly focuses on the description of particular places in the context of their lands, seas, or places and attempts to find its relation with other places.
The nomothetic or deductive approach, on the other hand, seeks to establish laws relevant for a location and make deductions based on those laws.
Branches of Geography by Kant:
Apart from physical geography, Immanuel Kant may also be credited for pioneering several other branches of geography as well:
Mathematical geography dealing with the shape, size, form, and movements of the earth and, its position in the solar system.
Moral geography that describes the customs and traditions of humans in different places.
Political geography which essentially studies the interrelationship between political units and their physical set up.
Commercial geography which probes into the fact that why one country has an abundance of some commodities but may be deficient in others; a situation believed to give rise to international trade.
Theological geography which tries to analyze the changes theological principles experiences in different spatial units.
Legacy:
Kant was of the view that since physical geography describes the natural composition of the earth and includes almost everything on it — the atmosphere, mountains, rivers, oceans, humans, plants, animals — representation by cartographic means is not important and even if such maps existed, they should only be used for pedagogical purposes.
Kant placed geography in a central position amongst the sciences which have been reiterated by geographers time and again.
In human geography of modern times, the development of the ‘possibilistic approach’ of the French school and ‘humanistic geography’ may be attributed to the Kantianism.
Classical Humboldt-Ritterian Period
Period dominated by Alexander von Humboldt and Carl Ritter in the late 18th to mid-19th century.
This can be aptly said for Humboldt and Ritter who in the late nineteenth century established most of the theoretical concepts of geography and thus have rightly been called as the “Founding Fathers of Modern Geography”.
Hartshorne (1976) called this phase “Classical Geography”, marking the end of the classical phase and ushering in systematic geographical thought.
Their approaches were based on empirical observation, systematic analysis, and scientific reasoning.
Alexander von Humboldt
Key Contributions:
Alexander von Humboldt (1769-1859) led the way in the expansion of the geography outside and outside Germany, he travelled about 40,000 miles with modern equipment and the people travelled to the Andes south to traversing, explorers reached Lima, Peru-Guyana Bird pieces were seen on the banks of the river, which are very famous prices.
In addition, Peru’s current cold water was also recorded and recorded for the first time.
The temperature and velocity of this current were measured.
In March 1803, a campaign was started from Guayaquil to Mexico Port, that is, Acapulco travelled to different parts of Mexico and saw the effects of landscapes on the cultural landscape.
The ongoing campaign for a short period in Philadelphia and Washington returned to France in 1804.
The adventurous nature of Humboldt made him travel to Vesuvius Volcano (Italy) in 1806.
After completion, he wrote his experiences and comments in thirty volumes in the French language, which was later translated into many foreign languages.
It encouraged many young scientists to examine the geography of the unemployed areas of the world.
In his writings, Humboldt explained the reason for the prosperity of Mexican residents to better use of land resources.
The idea of digging a canal across Isthmus was also put forward by him.
Based on his American In 1829, Humboldt was invited by the Russian Tsar to the city of Petersburg (Leningrad) and was tasked with finding the virgin land of Siberia across the Ural Mountains.
During the Siberian campaign, a regular record of temperature, and pressure was kept.
Based on these comments a result was estimated that the temperatures on the same latitude are inward from the coast.
It was on his advice that many weather stations were established by Tsar in different parts of Russia.
Humboldt also founded the concept of continent, apart from that; the noun of Permafrost was fabricated to explain the frozen characteristics of Siberian soil.
After the undertaking that the term ‘climatology‘ appeared in geographical literature, it is related to all variations of atmosphere, temperature, humidity, barometric pressure, winds, atmospheric purity and degree of visibility.
Major Work – Kosmos (1845–1862):
In 1845, the great work of Humboldt was published, which was accepted all over the world and translated into many foreign languages.
Kosmos is a comprehensive account of Humboldt’s journey and expeditions; the first volume was published in 1845 and the fifth volume was published in 1862 after his death.
In the first volume a general picture of the whole universe is presented.
The second volume has a portrayal of nature through the ages since the time of ancient Egyptians; based on the paintings of landscape painters and even poets.
In the third volume Humboldt discusses the laws of celestial space.
Man has been discussed in the fourth volume; he believed that all the races of man had a common origin and that no race was inferior or superior to other.
With respect to the subject of geography, Humboldt pronounced a word ‘cosmography’ and divided it into urography and geography.
In his opinion, urography is descriptive astronomy, which is related to celestial bodies.
Geography on the other hand was limited to geographical geography, which is related to the terrestrial part.
Geography, according to him, is the description of the earth (Erdbeischreibung) which is related to the interconnection of events in one area together.
Humboldt believed in the inductive method and emphasized the importance of the experimental method of research.
He studied comparative studies of various geographical areas, especially steps and deserts.
They emphasize the importance of the geographical representation of the data on the usefulness of maps and maps for geographical studies.
He believed in the unity of nature and used to accept the idea of underlying casualties (accidental relationship).
Humboldt believed that there was a common origin among all the peoples of human race and no race was superior or low for other people.
Apart from this, he emphasized the need for a careful measurement of nature’s observational observations and observations in the field.
This theory was an approach towards creation and modelling.
In a nutshell, Humboldt asked for a great variety of specific questions.
For example, they attempted to develop a general picture of the distribution of average temperatures in the world in relation to the distribution of continents and oceans.
He also tried to heighten height in the tropical areas of plants, animals and human life.
Carl Ritter (1779–1859)
One of the contemporary scholar of Alexander von Humboldt and distinguished scholar, Carl Ritter (1779-1859) is also known as one of the founders of modern geographical ideas.
He has influenced more on the development and growth of geography than Humboldt.
His initial work in geography includes two volumes on Europe written between 1804 and 1807.
In 1810, he wrote a complete systematic geography of the world entitled “Handbuch der Physischen Geographie” but was never published.
In this work Ritter expressed hid interest towards inductive method.
For Ritter, geography was an empirical and descriptive science.
He declared Geography as the Earth Science, which is related to local conditions and embraces the properties of the place in relation to the temporal, formal and physical characteristics.
The first feature was topographical, that is, it is related to the natural division of the Earth’s surface.
The second included water distribution, sea and atmosphere -the bases of human life.
The third conditions were described as the geographical aspect of natural history; it covered the distribution of minerals, plants and animals.
Thus, according to Ritter, Geography, it is the branch of science that brings together all its features, events and relations with the world as an independent entity and reflects the relationship of man and man with this unified ‘whole’ is.
He claimed that the central theory of geography is ‘the relationship of all events and the nature of nature to humankind’.
He makes rhetoric of geography claiming that the Earth goes beyond the real purpose in the form of science, that is, the earth is described as a human home.
It is in Erdkunde (published in 1817) that he provides the above explanation about geography; making his geography anthropocentric.
In the words of Tatham (1967) Ritter’s man-oriented geography clearly states “the earth and its inhabitants stand in the closest reciprocal relation and one cannot truly presented in all its relationships without the other.
History and geography must always remain inseparable.
Land effects the inhabitants and the inhabitants the land”.
The principle of unity in diversity was the fundamental principle developed by Ritter.
According to him, there is a fundamental unity in the biological and uninterrupted constituents of the habitat in which man gives sculpture to his cultural environment.
In this approach, all the physical and cultural components of the environment are kept in mind and their interconnection is understood to understand the geography of an interstate unit.
It is a regional view that unity in diversity means that every naturally bound area is unity in relation to climate, production, culture, population and history.
Ritter was a teleologist; his geography seemed to be an attempt to interpret philosophically that which science could not explain.
He even sought to construct ‘a law of the arrangement’ of the parts of each continent to the whole.
In short, Ritter gave a systematic frame to geography which remained valid for the future scholars for number of centuries.
With the death of Humboldt and Ritter in 1859 the classical period of geography came to an end.
The Post Classical Period
The post-classical period of Geography marked a shift from classical Humboldt-Ritterian thought to scientific, professionalized geography.
Emphasized causality, materialistic philosophy, and scientific laws.
Lack of a unified paradigm led to diverse interpretations, helping geography gain academic status; thus establishing geography as a permanent and independent discipline.
The emergence of this new geography is credited to the works of: Oscar Peschel, Ferdinand von Richthofen, Friedrich Ratzel, Alfred Hettner, and Albrecht Penck.
Oscar Peschel (1826–1875)
Oscar Peschel (1826-1875) was the first professor of geography in Germany.
He gave geography a new outlook, orientation and dimension that were conflicting to the Humboldt-Ritterian tradition.
To him geography was an empirical systematic and science. his book on history of geography was published in 1865 by the name ‘Geschichte der erdkunde’.
He even recognised dualism in geography and excluded man from its study.
His morphological research has caused an academic stir in physical geography in contemporary Germany.
But his untimely death at the age of forty-nine left his work incomplete which was a great loss to the emerging ‘new geography’ in Germany.
Ferdinand von Richthofen (1833–1905)
The incomplete works of Peschel flourished under the able leadership of Ferdinand von Richthofen (1833 – 1905) who carried forward the scientific spirit instilled by Peschel.
In his opinion, the purpose of geography is to focus on the various events occurring in the difference on the face of the earth.
The method he suggested for the study of geography was that the physical setting of the first area (relief, climate, soil, vegetation, organisms, and vegetation) should be studied and then the adjustment of humans should be examined in that setting.
According to him, the main objective of geography is to search for human relations with physical earth and biological features.
To him geography is the science of the earth’s surface an the things and the phenomenon that are causally interrelated with it.
Richthofen was the first German scholar, who had differentiated between ‘general’ and ‘regional’ geography.
He stressed that regional geography should be descriptive to highlight the key features of an area.
Apart from this, to prepare this hypothesis and try to achieve regularity of patterns and patterns of unique characteristics it should describe the observed characteristics.
General geography, according to him, is related to the spatial distribution of personal events in the world.
For systematic regional studies, he emphasized the need for regional work.
For regional studies, he used the term ‘chorology’ and differentiated it from “chorography” (non explanatory description providing information for systematic geography).
Richthofen distinguished different methods of study in areas of different sizes, which he named (in the order of increasing size):
(i) Erdteile (major divisions of the world);
(ii) Lander (major regions);
(iii) Landschaften (Landscape or the small regions);
(iv) Ortlichkeiten (localities).
In the context of Richthofen it has been rightly remarked that he followed the precedent of Humboldt, attempted to revive the close connection of geography to natural sciences, and at the same time restored the Ritterian tradition and sought to fulfil teh methodology of Peschel.
Friedrich Ratzel (1844–1904)
In the later parts of the 19th century, Frederick Ratzel dominated the view of German geography.
Being contemporary of Darwin, he was influenced by the Darwin’s theory of species especially the themes of ‘struggle and natural selection’ and ‘association and organisation’.
It was Ratzel, who compared the mode of life of different tribes and nations, and thus made a systematic study of human geography.
His interest in race and nations was inquisitive and after doing adequate regional work, he coined the term ‘anthropogeography’ – described it as the principal area of geographic study.
A scholar with versatile academic interests, he was a hardcore German; because of his patriotism during the Franco-Prussian war in 1870, he had joined the Prussian army.
After the integration of Germany (1871), he dedicated himself to the study of the ways the Germans live outside Germany.
The first volume of his monumental work Anthropogeographie was published in 1882.
Through his work he initiated the idea that cultural and natural phenomenon can be subjected to systematic study.
In the modified second volume (1891) he discusses the significance of the historical development and cultural background of the population.
In the words of Dickinson in his first volume he discusses the cause of human settlements and in the second volume he stressed on the facts of distribution.
In 1896 Ratzel wrote ‘Political Geography’ in which he compared ‘State’ to an organism.
He stressed that a state, like a few simple creatures, should either grow or die or cannot stand anytime.
This was the philosophy of ‘living place’, which created a controversy over the superior and the low levels, which advocates saying that the best people (nations) have to stay ‘at the expense of neighbouring countries.
It was Ratzel’s philosophy which ruled German policy in 1930 and as a result of which World War II took place.
He is often regarded as the Father of Political Geography.
It can be therefore, rightly said that through his works the main focus of Ratzel was to change geography from an inventory to explanatory science.
Alfred Hettner (1859–1941)
Much of the present German geography is indebted to Alfred Hettner (1859 – 1941) for his methodological innovations within the discipline.
After his extensive travels wrote his book ‘Europe’ which was published in 1907.
The second volume was published in 1924; these two books later became the “Foundations of Regional Geography”.
According to him geography is a chorological science or it is a study of the areas.
He explained the importance of distributing the event and explained the importance of regional geography.
In his opinion, the specific subject of geography was the knowledge of the areas of the Earth because they are different from each other; humans are an integral part of the nature of an area.
Hettner dismissed this view that geography might be either normal or regional, like other areas of learning, geography should behave with both unique things (regional geography) and universal (general geography).
As Hettner was against environmental determinism he appeared to be a significant contributor to the doctrine of possibilism.
He even rejected the idea that geography could be either idiographic or nomothetic but not both.
His ideas of organization in geographical studies influenced the German geography for decades.
Albrecht Penck (1858–1945)
Albrecht Penck (1858-1945) was a major German geologist from the early part of the twentieth century, who gave the concept of ‘geomorphology’.
He is remembered for his contributions to the development of modern physical geography.
Other Significant German Contributors
Apart from him scholars like Passarge, Koppen, Schott, Phillipson, Christaller, Kjellen and Haushofer made valuable contributions to different branches of geography.
These geographers made significant contributions to the field of landscape science and flourished the concepts of chorology, landscape morphology, Unity in diversity and so on to lay the foundations of modern scientific geography.
Thus, German geography in the twentieth century has been marked by a greater degree of unity of fundamental concepts than ever before.
In particular, Hettner’s methodological discussions have come to be regarded as “classics” in geography which no German scholar would ignore in any consideration of the methodology of the discipline.
