Search

In 1795, the private library of William Macintosh, author of Travels in Europe, Asia, and Africa (1782), was seized from his home in Avignon by the revolutionary authorities. Using the inventory of this seizure as a guide, this note presents a reconstruction of Macintosh’s library and identifies those books that exist today in the collections of the Bibliothèque municipale d’Avignon.

As histórias da geografia são, por sua própria natureza, empreendimentos seletivos. A aparente tendência dos geógrafos a depreciar períodos específicos da história da disciplina, ao mesmo tempo em que exaltam outros, é caraterística do modo pelo qual o progresso tem sido mensurado, a relevância definida e a novidade identificada. Contudo, enquanto outras disciplinas das humanidades e ciências sociais se comprometem ativamente com seus cânones textuais e figuras fundadoras, os geógrafos notoriamente evitam fazê-lo. Neste artigo, nós refletimos sobre o porquê disso e como diferentes concepções de canonicidade têm sido importantes para as maneiras como a história da geografia e seus fundamentos intelectuais foram narrados. Ao refletir sobre a importância dos textos de geografia para as maneiras como imaginamos a disciplina – seu passado, presente e futuro –, nós consideramos como os processos de lembrança e esquecimento têm sido empregados para servir a determinadas agendas intelectuais e ideológicas. Concluímos defendendo um comprometimento mais sério com o legado textual da geografia: algo que pode beneficiar não apenas a historiografia, mas também a consciência disciplinar e, consequentemente, o futuro da própria geografia. Histories of geography are, by their very nature, selective enterprises. The apparent tendency of geographers to disparage particular periods of the discipline’s history, at the same time as exalting others, is characteristic of the way in which progress has been measured, relevance defined, and novelty identified. Yet, whilst other disciplines in the humanities and social sciences actively engage with their textual canons and founding figures, geographers have notoriously avoided doing so. In this paper, we consider why this has been the case and how different conceptions of canonicity have mattered to the ways in which the history of geography and its intellectual foundations have been narrated. In thinking through the significance of geography’s texts to the ways we imagine the discipline – its past, present, and future – we consider how processes of remembering and forgetting have been employed to serve certain intellectual and ideological agendas. We conclude by advocating a more serious engagement with geography’s textual legacy: one which might benefit not only disciplinary historiography but also disciplinary consciousness, and thus the future of geography itself. Les histoires de la géographie sont, par nature, des entreprises sélectives. L'apparente tendance des géographes à, d'un côté, dénigrer certaines périodes de l'histoire de la discipline et, d'un autre côté, à en exalter d'autres, est caractéristique de la manière dont le progrès a été mesuré, la portée définie et la nouveauté identifiée dans le domaine scientifique. Pourtant, alors que d'autres disciplines des sciences humaines et sociales questionnent activement leurs références textuelles et leurs figures fondatrices, les géographes sont connus pour avoir longtemps évité de le faire. Dans cet article, nous nous demandons dans le contexte des géographies anglo-américaines pourquoi cela a été le cas et comment différentes conceptions des "canons géographiques" ont pris part aux récits historiques de la discipline et à la manière dont ses fondements intellectuels ont été narrés. En envisageant les textes géographiques à travers la façon dont nous pensons la géographie dans le temps (dans son passé, son présent et son futur), nous considérons comment les processus de remémoration et d'oubli ont été employés pour servir certains agendas intellectuels et idéologiques. Nous concluons en invitant à un engagement plus sérieux des géographes envers leur héritage : ce qui bénéficierait non seulement à l'historiographie disciplinaire, à une conscience disciplinaire plus grande, et ainsi au futur de la géographie elle-même. Las historias de la geografía son, por su propia naturaleza, empresas selectivas. La tendencia aparente de los geógrafos de desestimar periodos particulares de la historia de la disciplina al mismo tiempo que exaltan otros, es característico de la forma en que el progreso ha sido medido, la relevancia definida y la novedad identificada. Con todo, mientras que otras disciplinas en las humanidades y las ciencias sociales se comprometen activamente con sus cánones textuales y sus figuras fundacionales, los geógrafos han notoriamente evitado hacer esto. En el presente artículo, consideramos por qué ha sido este el caso y cómo diferentes concepciones de “canonicidad” han sido importantes en las maneras en que la historia de la geografía y sus fundamentos intelectuales han sido narrados. Al considerar el significado de los textos de geografía en las maneras en las que imaginamos la disciplina —su pasado, presente y futuro— consideramos la manera en la que los procesos de recuerdo y olvido han sido empleados para servir a ciertas agendas intelectuales e ideológicas. Concluimos advocando por un compromiso más serio con el legado textual de la geografía, uno que pueda beneficiar no solamente la historiografía disciplinar sino también la consciencia disciplinar y de esta manera el futuro de la geografía en sí misma.

Historians and geographers of science have, in recent years, become increasingly attentive to science as a form of communication: a mode of exchange in which processes of transmission and translati...

This report takes a new English-language translation of Friedrich Ratzel’s infamous essay Der Lebensraum (1901) as a prompt to consider the ethical questions that are raised by revisiting geography’s dangerous ideas and discredited practitioners. Attending to a series of recent interventions that offer new readings of Ratzel and his essay, I consider how historiographical practice and moral obligation intersect in the process of making sense of, and coming to terms with, disciplinary pasts that haunt the present. The report concludes by considering the future of the series of which it forms part and argues that the task of narrating progress in the history and philosophy of geography should be assumed by a more diverse range of authors than has heretofore been the case.