BUTTIMER, Anne. Society and Milieu in the French Geographic Tradition

8/19/2019 BUTTIMER, Anne. Society and Milieu in the French Geographic Tradition

1/119

(

(

r

r f

r

(

C ‘

c

cc

c ,c , c

C )

f ,

c

c

r

rr

rrr

r(

S

(

c

SOCIETY AND MILIEU

IN THE FRENCH

GEOGRAPHIC

TRADITION

A N N E B U T T I M E R

(Sister Mary Annette, O.P.)

Sixth in the Monograph Series

Published for

The Association of American Geographers

by

Rand McNally and Company Chicago

BIBLIOTECA “CONRADO PASCHOALE*

tG/UNICAMP

C 0 L E Ç Â 0 P R O F . “ D R . A N T Ô N I 0 C H R I S I O F U E I l l


2/119

■NSTITUTO DG ûEOCÎEC\& *

J ,-'«I.*CHAWA A ft ‘iS a^ > - ! * - ?.

D i

T O M 8 0 SC i S M J B J L ■T O ? v i B ü 10/ _ _ _ _ _ _ _P R OC .,-JJ -1-OON/Çpf c ï Z j » DZ3

j P R E Ç Oi D A T A O S / Ô E / O ~ Ô

i r i . " CPO

The Monograph Series of the

Asso ciation of Amer ican Geographers

fa.

EDITORS

Derwent Whittlesey Andrew H. C larkThomas R. SmithClarence J. GlackenMarvin W. Mikesell

*95 6

1957 - 19611961—1964ig^-igeö1966-

Copyright © 1971 by the Association of American Geographers

All rights reserved

Printed in the U.S A. by Rand MSNally if Company


3/119

vi Editor ’s Note

other concepts considered—genre cle vie, paysage, civilisation, and

so on—are intellectual constructs designed to facilitate understand-

ing of this grand and pervasive theme. Since most of the mono-

graph is devoted to the formative period of French geography—

its first and second “generations”—the work is essentially historio-

graphic, the study of a literature. Sister Annette has also tried, asall intellectual historians must, to take account of more subtle cur-

rents of personal influence.

In presenting this study as volume number six of the Mono-

graph Series of the Association of American Geographers, I am

confident that it will prove useful to scholars in many countries.

One must also hope that Sister Annette’s effort will demonstrate

the desirability of an ecumenical movement among the many na-

tional “schools” of geography.

University of Chicago

Chicago, Illinois

M a r v in W. M i k e s e l l

A T r ibu t e

to the creative artists of

France’s humanistic tradition in social science

and

AP l e a .

for aggiornamento within

the geographic noôsphère


4/119


5/119

X

Preface

study. In short, I have attempted to review the Vidalian school in

its historical context, giving primary attention to the social dimen

sion of the enterprise. Thus, this monograph is by no means a

documentary study on the evolution of geography in France; it is

simply an interpretative essay on one particular aspect of that tra

dition based upon the published literature and the opinions expressed by some contemporary French scholars. Nor is it a “case”

for social geography. It merely attempts to explore one important

chapter in the evolutio’n of that field. Finally, this is primarily

an historical review; it does not attempt to describe or interpret

modern developments within the French school.

In the execution of this task, several French confrères have

helped and encouraged me enormously. Among these are espe

cially MM. Paul Claval, Jean Gottmann, Pierre Gourou, Philippe

Pinchemel, and Mme. Jacqueline Beaujeu-Garnier. Besides, at

each of the major geography departments visited I found coopera

tion and interest from professors, lecturers, and graduate students.

Thanks are due especially to MM. François de Dainville, Gabriel

Le Bras, P.-H. Chombart de Lauwe, and Mme. Mariel J.-B. Dela-

marre, and the late André Cholley in Paris; to M. Etienne Juillard

at Strasbourg; to M. Pierre Flatrès and Mme. Géneviève Pinchemel

at Lille; to MM. André Journaux and J. Brunet at Caen; to M.

Michel Lafferère and Mlle. Renée Rochefort at Lyon; to M. and

Mme. Veyret-Verner and their colleagues at Grenoble; to MM.

Raymond Dugrand and Jean Le Coz at Montpellier; to M. Bernard

Kayser at Toulouse; to MM. Guy Lasserre and Louis Papy at Bor

deaux; and to MM. Michel Phlipponneau and G. Galibert at

Rennes. In Belgium I received valuable help from MM. L. G. Pols-

poel, M. Goossens, and the.late Mile. Marguerite Lefèvre at Leuven(Louvain); from MM. Omer Tulippe and Ch. Christians at Liège;

and from M. Pierre Gourou at Bruxelles. In Britain, the late Pro

fessor FI. J. Fleure helped me greatly; also Professors Emrys Jones,

R. J. Harrison Church, E. W. Gilbert, J. M. Houston, and

A. F. Martin at Oxford, Professor R. W. Steel at Liverpool, and

Professors E. Estyn Evans and R. FI. Buchanan at Belfast. In the

Netherlands, Professors Chr. van Paassen and Willem Steigenga

gave me many valuable insights; as did Dr. Wolfgang Hartke at

Munich, Professor Hans Bobek at Vienna, and Dr. Nils Lewan at

xi Preface

Lunch To all of these scholars I owe a great debt of gratitude.

Finally, in the United States I have received direction, encourage

ment, and inestimable help from my teachers, Professors Richard

Morrill, Morgan Thomas, John Sherman, and Edward Ullman at

the University of Washington. But most valuable of all has been

the interest and direction of Professors Jan O. M. Broelc at theUniversity of Minnesota, and Marvin W. Mikesell at the Uni

versity of Chicago, and Dr. David Lowenthal at the American

Geographical Society. Their inspiration has brought this little

monograph into being. T o every scholar mentioned and to all those

whose names I may have omitted, I offer sincere thinks.

Clark University

Worcester, Massachusetts

A n n e B u t t i me r

(Sister Mary Annette, O.P.)


6/119

I

I.

II.

III.

IV.

V.

VI.

VII.

VIII.

IX.

X.

XI.

Contents

e d i t o r ’ s n o t e

PREFACE

INTRODUCTION

Part One: The Historical Context

The Academic Setting

Anthropogeography and Social Morphology

Part Two: The Foundations

Contributions of Paul Vidal de la Blache

Neiu Horizons in the Work of Jean Brunhes

Basic Orientations of the First Generation

Part Three: From Regional Ensemble to Social System

Thematic Perspective on the Region

Functional Approach to Rural Habitat Study

Essays on Milieu and “Civilisation”

Part Four: Inventory and Prospect o£the Vidalian Tradition

Toward aMore Comprehensive Framework for Human

Geography: Maximüien Sorre (1880-1962)

Classical Principles and Systematic Specialization

Social and Demographic Perspectives

(

(

(

(

(

I

(

(

(

(

(

(

(

(

V

(

ix(

1 (

c9

11(

27 (

4 i(

43 r

59 C 73

c87

(

9 1 /

99{

1 11 f

121r

; (

123

V

(

1361 .

(15 0

xiii

(

(


7/119

xiv Contents

Part Five: Recapitulation: The Vidalian Core Revisited 163

XII. “Milieu” and “Civilisation” 166

XIII. “ Genres de Vie” and “ Circulation” 178

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 19 6

AUTH OR INDE X 22 0

SUBJECT INDEX 223

Introduction

Stimulated by consecutive discoveries which in

the space of a hundred years have successively re

vealed to ou r genera tion several impo rtant things

—first the profundities and significance of time,

then the limitless spiritual resources of Matter,

and lastly the power of living beings acting in

association—it seems that our psyche is in .the

process of changing. A conquering passion which

will sweep away or transform what has hither to

been the imm aturi ty of the earth has begun to

show itself, and its salutary action comes just at

the right moment to control, awaken, or order the

emancipated forces of love, the dormant forces of

human unity, and the hesitant forces of research.

—P. T e il h a r d d e C h a r d i n , Buil ding the

Earth (1965), p. 44.

T h e F r e n c h s c h o o l o f h u m a n g e o g r a p h y founded by Vidal dela Blache (1845-1918) is one of the richest sources of ideas and in

sights into the subject of society and milieu. Unlike other geog

raphy schools of the twentieth century, which tended to treat man

individualistically or as the pawn of economic law, the French

maintained an Aristotelian vision of collective man as zoon politi-

kon, organized into spatially recognizable social groupings. The

Vidalian tradition (la tradition vidalienne )1 is thus a precious in-

11 define the tradition vidalienne here in terms of those French scholars who

have been directly or indirectly influenced by the teachings of Paul Vidal de la


8/119

2

Society and Milie u in the French Geographic T radition

gredient of geographical history, and also an important milestone

in the history of ideas. Originally a unified and organically cohe

sive field, la géographie humaine*2 contained the seeds of several

systematic subdisciplines, including social geography.

Today the term “social geography” probably evokes more am

biguity than clarity .3During the past half-century so many mean

ings have been assigned to this term that it is impossible to formu

late any universally acceptable definition of the field.4 Some have

used it interchangeably with human geography; others regard it

as a systematic subdivision of the general field; others still regard

it as the sociometric, deductive approach to the study of society’s

spatial order. This is not the place to discuss these and other defi

nitions of social geography. However, two facts should be noted:

most scholars within the discipline today would agree that the rela

tions between society and milieu constitute an essential component

Blache. Being such an organically unified whole, this tradition cannot be iden

tified in terms of periods and specific dates; however, there is a general and implicit agreement among contemporary French geographers that the postwarperiod, particularly since the 1950s, has witnessed a radical reorientation of research and teaching within that school. The Vidalian tradition is thus definablemore in terms of personalities and major research directions than in terms of

specific dates.2 La géographie hum aine as articulated by Vidal de la Blache cannot be properlytranslated as “human geography’’ because of the connotation of this term inEnglish-speaking and German schools since Ratzel’s Anthropogeographi e (1882-91). It could be considered a “social” geography as distinct from economic andphysical geography (cf. A. Demangeon, Géographie économique et humaine de la France [Paris, 1948]), in that its predominant focus was on social organizationand milieu. Utrecht’s sociale geogrape (cf. H. D. de Vries Reilingh, “De Sociale

Ardrijk skunde als Geestescetenschap,” in Tidjschrift van hel Koninglijk Nederlandsch Aardrijkskund ig Genootschap 77 [1961], pp. 112-32; and J. H.Keuning, "The Practice of Modern Geography in the Netherlands,” Tidjschrift

voor Economische en Sociale Geogrape 54 [1968], pp.3

0-34

) is more nearlycomparable to Vidal’s géographie humaine, as indeed is “social geography,” defined implicitly by H. J. Fleure in his lectures on Some Problems of Society and

Environmen t, Institute of British Geographers, Publication No. 12 (London,1947). Hans Bobek’s conception of Sozialgeographie is also consistent with

Vid al’s origina l definition of géographie humaine. See his “Aufriss einer Vcr-gleichenden Sozialgeographie,” Mitteil ungen der Geographischen Gesellschafl in Wien 92 (1950), pp. 34-45- See also J. W. Watson, “ Th e Sociologi cal Aspects ofGeography,” in G. Taylor (eel.), Geography in the Twentieth Century (London,

1951), pp. 463-99.3See Ch. van Paassen, Over vormverandering in de sociale geogrape (Groningen,1965); also K. Ruppcrt (ed.), Zurn Standort der Sozialgeographie: Wolfgang

Hartkc zurn 60. Geburtstag (Regensburg, 1968).4I have discussed this question more thoroughly in “Social Geography,” Interna-tional Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (New York, 1968), vol. 6, pp. 132-45.

3

Introducti on

of geographic study; many also pay at least lip service to the Vi

dalian tradition as an important source of ideas on the subject. Yet,

to date there is no systematic survey of this tradition either in

French or English;5 and without such a survey it is impossible to

define the nature and scope of social geography.

Society and milieu—sociality and territoriality—universally

characterize man’s occupance of the earth.6 Viewed in time and

place, these two scaffolds of human existence interact to produce

the earth’s variegated cultural landscapes: society a complex web

of organizational arrangements, milieu a variegated mosaic of

physically differentiated regions. Since the dawn of history great

curiosity and speculation have surrounded the question of man’s

place in the universe and of society’s relationship with its biophys

ical environment. Imaginative writers have postulated theories

concerning the influence of soil, climate, and topography on the

physiognomy and mentality of human groups. For centuries the

question was studied on two levels: speculatively, scholars soughtontological principles governing man’s place in nature; and em

pirically, others explored the oikoumene to ascertain what actual

relationships society had established with its milieu in different

parts of the world. For many reasons these two channels of thought

5Paul Claval's Essai sur l’évol ution de la géographie humaine (Paris, 1964) at

tempts to place the Vidalian tradition within the context of international geographic thought. Its purpose is not, however, to highlight the social dimensionin French work. His more recent statement, with J. P. Nardy, Pour le Cinquan -tenaire de la mort de Paul Vidal de la Blache (Paris, 1968) focuses more sharplyon the academie setting of Vidal’s work. The mid-century “inventory and prospect” published by L’Information Géographique, La géographie française au milieu du XXe siècle (Paris, 1957) and the subsequent anthology edited by

André Journ aux et al. under the title, Géographie générale (Paris, 1966) give agood illustration of the various research trends in contemporary French work. André Meyni er’s Histoire de la pensée géographique en France (Paris, 1969), which appeared after the presen t wo rk was comp leted, attempts a more generalcoverage of French geographic thought, i.e., from Reclus to the scholars of thecurrent decade.

6“M ilieu” here refers exclusively to the biophysical (physiographic, climatic, and biotic) environm ent, the ecological notion articulat ed by Vida l de la Blacheand consistently utilized by the “first generation” of French human geographers

in their regional monographs. It was later that milieu was given an extendedmeaning to include the artificial aspects of environment. Unless otherwise stated,the biophysical (ecological) definition of milieu will be maintained throughoutthis monograph. “Society” here refers generally to world population in spatialperspective, sociality rio t being a prim ary object of study, bu t a premise or explanatory hypothesis in the exploration o f man’s territorial behavior.


9/119

followed separate paths, thereby losing the mutually enriching in

fluence which interaction might have occasioned.

The history of thought on the subject of society and milieu thus

appears as two roughly parallel and only occasionally converging

currents: at one time the speculative current surging forward to

stimulate the imaginations of literary writers; at another time thezealots of empiricism feverishly accumulating information to

undermine a priori hypotheses and utopian social theories. There

are in fact two histories of thought on the subject: a history of

what men have thought and believed concerning society and

milieu, and a history of society’s actual perception and use of its

milieu. The vastly expanded technical and conceptual apparatus

of post-Cartesian science has helped clarify and collate elements

from these separate currents. However, deeper fissures have ap

peared which may be even more difficult to bridge eventually.

Scholarly energies are being siphoned off into new and more nar

rowly defined research channels exploring society on the one hand

and the physical environment on the other. Perched between twoincreasingly divergent research batteries of social and physical

science lies the question of society-milieu relationships; there too

stands many a frustrated human geographer.

What then is the historical background of this question of

society-milieu relationships? Roughly two millennia of speculation

and observation have produced a series of thought currents, each

one exploring individual aspects of the question, and only in a

few instances have these currents converged to provide an inte

grated perspective on the question. These points of convergence

have occurred in the lives and work of certain great individuals or

groups, who, sharing insights from different modes of analysis,have arrived at synoptic pictures valid for particular times and

places. Since such points of convergence represent critical mile

stones in the history of ideas they deserve careful attention. In

twentieth-century geography we can decipher three broad pat

terns of convergent thought: the environmentalist, the possibilist,

and the cognitive behaviorist syntheses.7 Each of these broad

7 See Harold and Mar garet Sprout, Man-M ilieu Hypothe sis in the Contex t of

Internati onal Polit ics (Princeton, N.J., 1956); Paul Claval, Essai s ur révol ution de la géographie humaine (Paris, 1964); and E. A. Wrig ley, “ Changes in the

4

Society and M ilie u in the French Geograp hic Tradition Introdu ction

thought patterns represented a distinct perspective on society and

milieu which had varying degrees of validity for the description

of particular places and periods. Each also became partly obsolete

as the object of analysis changed, yet each perspective can still

claim relevance to the description of certain places even today.

In our efforts to see broad lines of development we sometimesoverlook or minimize the individuality of specific schools. Facile

communication among scholars today tends to promote standard

ization of research procedures and a tendency to view the past from

a pragmatic viewpoint, viz., in terms of its relevance to present re

search objectives. This orientation diminishes our ability to ap

preciate the uniqueness of individual schools whose research aims

and methodological procedures may have differed radically from

ours. Some historic developments need to be viewed as unique

entities, whose personalities developed within a unique scholastic

tradition, and focused on a particular object of study.

This monograph attempts to survey the French school of human

geography as one such entity. Since one of its major aims is to

shed light on the nature of social geography, it cannot begin with

a dogmatic definition of the field. It will, however, outline concepts

and phenomena which could logically fall within the realm of

social geography, allowing a more explicit definition of the field

to emerge from the discussion of some key contributions to the

French geographic tradition. This general realm could be outlined

in terms of (1) a horizontal dimension: spatial variations in man

kind’s social characteristics; and (2) a vertical dimension: how these

variations are related to, or reflect society’s relationship with its

geographical milieu. With this very general definition, the works

of the great pioneers can be combed for insights and guidelines regarding the nature and scope of social geography. Given the co

hesive quality of French geographic literature, this is a difficult

task. How does one highlight thematic evolution while maintain

ing the holistic perspective upon which the fame of Vidalian geog

raphy rests?

Viewin g the Vidalian tradition chronologically, three rather

discrete periods can be outlined: (1) 1890-1918: the foundations;

Philosophy of Geography,” in R. J. Chorley and P. Haggett (eds.), Frontiers in Geographical Teaching (London, 1966), pp. 3-20.


10/119

6

Society and Mil ieu in the French Geographic Tradit ion

(2) 1919-40: the second generation; and (3) 1940-to the present:

methodological debate and renewal. Viewing it thematically, how

ever—since thematic evolution is the focus of this study—the

chronological framework is only partially satisfactory. We have

adopted a compromise plan, viz., while adopting an approximatelychronological framework, our focus is on the evolution of concepts

and therefore references to the literature frequently deviate from

the historical order. Because of the enormous variety of writers

and studies involved, we have chosen certain key personalities who

seem to illustrate particular conceptual developments or whose

ideas have significantly influenced others in the field. In most

cases an effort is made to allow these scholars to “speak for them

selves,” i.e., key passages are translated rather than summarized,

and interpretations are open and suggestive. The treatment is

therefore eclectic, not exhaustive; it merely presents certain themes

and research orientations which appear particularly important as

precedents for social geography.Part One (Chapters I and II) sketches the academic background

in France before the time of Vidal de la Blache. Part Two (Chap

ters III, IV, V) describes the foundations for social geography

(géographie de la civilisation) laid down by Vidal de la Blache

and developed by his immediate disciples. Part Three (Chapters

VI, VII, VIII) views the Interwar Period in terms of the gradual

evolution of a thematic rather than a regional approach to geo

graphic study. Part Four (Chapters IX, X, XI) discusses the final

phase when the utility of Vidalian concepts was seriously ques

tioned in the light of postwar social changes and philosophical re

orientations within French geography itself. The concluding sec

tion (Chapters XII, XIII) is simply a recapitulation on the core

concepts of Vidal’s géographie de la civilisation: milieu, civilisa-

tion, genres de vie, and circulation, examining the development

of these concepts throughout the entire period.

An interpretative essay of this kind written by an outsider will

no doubt appear naïve and even erroneous to scholars trained in

the French school and to those who have studied it perhaps more

closely than I. Problems of language and values, of differing re

search orientations and objectives, arise when one attempts to

communicate between French and American schools. I have there-

7

Introdu ction

foie endeavored to base this work entirely on an interpretation of

the literatuie and on opinions expressed during interviews with

contemporary French geographers. Hence, questions of interper

sonal relationships and influences, though perhaps highly signifi

cant in the evolution of French geographic thought, cannot bedealt with satisfactorily in this work. In fact, opinions seem to vary

so widely among contemporary French geographers that it would

be virtu ally impossible to write a noncontroversial essay on this

subject. If only it will elicit some discussion and dialogue between

scholars in the French and American schools, however, it may haveserved a valuable function.


11/119

(

(

(

r

r(

c

c

r

(

<

(

\

(

(

(

(

PART ONE

The Historical Context

The Vidalian tradition in French geography, spanning roughly

the first half of the twentieth century, can in many ways he re-

garded as one organic component of a unique scholastic tradi-tion. Outside the French historic and academic context, such a

convergence of ideas could scarcely he imagined. By the second half

of the nineteenth century scholars from a variety of backgrounds

had explored the question of society and milieu. Natural science in

France and Germany had dissected and analyzed the physical

milieu, while history, comparative ethnography, and political econ-

omy had examined the multidimensional nature of social organiza-

tion. In France particularly the question of “environmental influ-

ences" remained a fascinating topic for philosophical reflection,

while internal differences within French society became the object

of literary essay and historical research.

How should the relationship between society and milieu be

studied? Should societies be studied in their environmental set-

ting, or should they be treated as autonomous systems indepen-

dently of milieu? These and other academic questions xuere burn-

ing issues around the time xohen Vidal de la Blache first developed

his ideas on la géographie humaine. In order to appreciate the

Vidalian enterprise, it is necessary to reflect briefly on this his-

toric context. This is attempted in Chapters One and Txvo.


12/119

;;É:

'K.

The Academie Setting

In m e d i e v a l ph i l o s o p h y man’s relation to nature was conceivedin terms of universal principles logically derived from naturallaw.1 The earth, as temporary home of mankind, was the passivestage upon which the drama of human life took place. Man wasthe center of the universe. Bodin’s Six livres de la République (1606) raised the first major dissenting voice against this view. Heintroduced the idea of relativism, suggesting that the milieu mighthave a certain influence on the molding of social differences.2 Toillustrate this claim he mapped the distribution of world population in terms of major “environments” : frigid, temperate, torrid;plains, valleys, barren lands, and lands of promise.3T he implication was deterministic, but the question was open-ended: could

environmental factors have played some role in promoting socialdifferences? Many of Bodin’s questions had remained unansweredfor almost a century when Baron de la Brède et de Montesquieu

1 Clarence Glacken has treated this subject exhaustively in his recent publication, Traces on the Rhodian Shores (Berkeley, 1967). See also Jacques Leclercq,

Introdu ction à la sociologie, 3rd ed. (Paris, 1963); H. E. Barnes and H.Becker, Social Thou ght from Lore to Science , 2 vols. (New York, 1938-39); andR. H. Lowie, The History of Ethnological Theory (New York, 1937).2Jean Bodin, Six livres de la Ré pub liqu e (Genève, 1606).3See Robert E. Dickinson and O. J. Howarth, The Making of Geography (Oxford, 1933), p. 192; Henri Joseph Léon Boudrillard, Jean Bodi n et son temps (Paris, 1853); and Etienne Fournol, Bod in , prédécesseur de M ontesq uieu (Paris,1896).


13/119

introduced the topic once more.4During the intervening century

new philosophical ideas from England had gradually tempered

the rigidity of French classical thought. The Abbé Dubos had

written on the physiological effects of climate on human behavior,

relating this to the “distribution of genius.”5

Montesquieu, a philosopher, juror, and keen explorer, hesi

tated to accept any simplistic explanations of social differences.

From his travels and studies he accumulated voluminous data on

people and places, and then proposed hypotheses concerning pos

sible causal connections between climate and social character

istics. His Lett res persanes (1721) reported on the dramatically

contrasting customs of France and Persia. Montesquieu pon

dered the following questions: Why do some peoples progress

while others stagnate? W hat role do environmental factors play,

and how significantly do historical forces influence a society’s

evolution?

Having made the useful distinction between the “personal”

and “impersonal” forces in history, Montesquieu held that the keyto progress and civilisation lies in the superiority of the former (ra

tional) over the latter (environmental and external).6 Yet even

among European peoples, whose political and cultural progress

were quite comparable, he noted many differences of “mentality” :

Nordic, Germanic, Alpine, and other peoples differed widely in

culture and life-style. They also inhabited physically contrasting

milieux. Examining these societies at closer range, Montesquieu

sought an index to social differentiation which would adequately

express both the environmental and cultural factors involved. In

every case, he distinguished between the internal (social and psy

chological) and external (biophysical and technological) milieux

of human life. What mechanism mediated between the internal

and external? Why did some groups have greater intimacy with,

greater technological mastery over their external milieux? Montes-

4Oeuvres complètes de Montesquieu (Paris, 1853). See also Kingsley Martin, French L iberal Thou ght in the Eightee nth Century (London, 1929); and JosephDedieu, Monte squieu et la tradition polit ique anglaise en France (Paris, 1909).5R. J. Harrison Church, "The French School of Geography,’’ in G. Taylor (ed.),Geography in the Twentieth Century (London,- 1951), pp. 70-91.6Baron de la Brède et de Montesquieu, Voyages de Montesquieu (Bordeaux,

1894); A. Prioult, “La psychologie des peuples de Montesquieu,” Revue de Psychologie des Peuples a (May, 1947), pp. 170-96.

12

Society and Milieu in th e French Geographic T radition13


quieu suggested that the key mechanism relating the internal and

external milieu was the legal structure, the institutional codifica

tion of a society’s relationship to its environment.7

The Esprit des Lois (1748), the culmination of his life work,

proposes a general theory of mankind’s social differences: the

spirit (essence) of law embodies all those environmental, cultural,and historical factors which mold the general spirit (“mentality”)

of a people. His three basic types of government, despotism, re

public, and monarchy, derive from three deeper lying principles,

largely emotional in character, but with roots traceable to geo

graphic and geographically determined economic factors. Montes

quieu’s exaggerations of this basic connection have been widely

discussed, but one rarely hears of his categoric refutations of deter

minism: for example, “There is no climate under the sun which

can prevent free men from functioning creatively . . . provided

their legal system is a rational one, and does not interfere with in

dividual liberty. . . .”8

At least two great themes emerge from Montesquieu’s writings:(1) the distinction between the milieu interne and the milieu

externe (or the milieu moral and the milieu physique), a

distinction later reiterated in the work of Claude Bernard,

and in a certain sense the foreshadowing of the modern

distinction between “subjective” and “objective” environ

ments;

(2) the suggestion that laws and social institutions provide a

key to society's relationship to its environment. This was

the culmination of a thought pattern initiated by Bodin a

century earlier; it pointed to the important role of institu

tions in codifying a society’s relationship to nature, a

theme which recurred frequently in French social history.

The eighteenth century brought much substantive information

on newly discovered parts of the earth. Yet, as de Dainville demon

strated, little attempt was made to describe or codify this material

7 Gustave Lanson, Histoire de la littérature française, 12th ed. (Paris, 1912); A. Gumplo witz, “W hat Montesquieu wrote in human geograp hy,” Revue Polonaise Géographique 7 (1927), pp. 18-43.8Baron de la Brède et de Montesquieu, Dissertation sur la p olitiq ue des Ro-

mains dans la religion (Bordeaux, 1716) which was reproduced as the 27th book

of L’Esprit des Lois (Paris, 1748).


14/119

in terms of any general theory of society and environment.9 At

home, new horizons were pioneered by Jean-Jacques Rousseau

(1712-78) and other champions of liberty and equality. Their

writings were primarily responsible for the extension of scholarly

interest to all sectors of society. Up to this time literary efforts were

oriented mainly toward the social life of upper classes; the unlet

tered masses were ignored or regarded as the pawn of political or.

economic law.10

The whole democratic movement in France introduced two

new dimensions to scholarly thought: humanitarianism, which

tried to minimize the differences between people; and internation

alism, which implied that every true scholar should be a “citizen

of the world.”11 Like the Physiocrats in Britain, Rousseau viewed

social differences not so much in terms of the milieu, although he

wrote some entertaining comments on the effects of climate on

human behavior. His Discours sur les sciences et les arts (1750)

remarked on the misery associated with the onward march ofcivilization. Yet, he also noted that primitive people seldom ap

pear happy (1775), which suggested that neither polar situation

—submission to, nor aggressive mastery over milieu—provided the

key to individual happiness. His Contrat Social (1762) in one

way reaffirmed Montesquieu’s theory of social laws: only by be

havioral codes (rules) and the internal discipl ine necessary to

enable men to obey them, could happiness be ensured.12

Thus while Bodin, Montesquieu, and the Jesuit missionaries’

Lettres édifiantes (1705-75) stimulated speculation on man-nature

relationships, Rousseau directed attention along the horizontal

plane, toward the actual social differences of his own day, and the

potential role of laws in changing the social order. In this he an

ticipated Marx, Ruskin, Le Play, and the other nineteenth-century

heralds of humanism in social science.13

9François de Dainville, La géographie des humanistes (Paris, 1941).10Leclercq, Introducti on à la sociologie; C. Bougie, “Sociologie, psychologie ethistoire,” Revue de Mé taphysique et de Morale 4 (1896), pp. 362-70.11 Leclercq, Introducti on à la sociologie, pp. 20-24; Henri Beaudouin, La vie et les oeuvres de Jean-Jacques Rousseau, 2 vols. (Paris, 1891).12Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discours sur les sciences et les arts (Paris, 1750);idem, Le Contrat Social (Paris, 1762).18Rousseau, Discours sur l’origine et les fondements de l’inégalité parmi les hommes (London, 1922; first published Paris, 1755).

14

Society and Milie u in the French Geographic Trad ition

15


Philosophers had thus, by the nineteenth century, laid several

conceptual foundations for the study of society and milieu. They

had speculated on causal relationships between groups and their

milieu, reported on exotic phenomena abroad, and harangued

about inequalities among social classes at home. In such cases, at

tention became focused on social institutions as the key to liberat

ing the personal and moral forces which enable society to over

come the impersonal (environmental) circumstances of life. In

contrast to the Promethean, Hegelian, and other idealistic concep

tions of man-nature relationships, the French approach was essen

tially a relativistic one: neither the social nor the environmental

should be overemphasized, and both should be studied objectively.

T H E M I L I E U I N F R E N C H S O C I A L H I S T O R Y

The philosophical reorientation associated with the names of

Bodin, Montesquieu, and Rousseau had thus placed considerations

of milieu in the forefront of scholarly endeavor. The great eighteenth-century Encyclopedia had given a definite stimulus to the

development of human sciences, while the Enlightenment, in its

violent attacks on the ancien régime, had rejected the idea of a

static authoritarian system rooted in tradition. Each society should

be viewed as a product of its own environment and history in a

world operating according to “natural laws.”14 Statesmen should

try to discover these laws and remold society in the interests of the

sovereign people. Herein lay a challenge for scholarly research on

the customs, traditions, and needs of all sectors of society. In France

this meant above all an exploration of rural peasant groups within

their natural surroundings.The cohesive and relatively autonomous character of French

rural communities had, to a considerable extent, survived the stan-

14 This was particularly true of German thought at this time, e.g., AdamMidler’s Leçons sur la science de l’ Etat (Paris, 1808) which refuted the libertarianand contractual theories of Rousseau and affirmed that the State had a law untoitself. In 1814 Fr. Ch. de Savigny preached that every. State should have a legalsystem compatible with the spirit of its people. Fr. List, Wilhelm Roscher, andothers applied this “nationalistic” idea to economic life. See some of the articlesin Zeitschrift für Völkerpsychologie (1823-99) which explored the collective“mentalities” of different peoples. See also G. R. Crone, Background to Geography (London, 1961), pp. 48-49; and Leclercq, Introdu ction à la sociologie,

pp.14-18.


15/119

16

Society and Milieu in th e French Geographic T radition

dardizing effects of the Revolution. For social historians like

Michelet and Demolins, it was in this peasant setting, in all its

simplicity and isolation, that French civilization was created and

perfected. From peasant ranks sprang great scholars like Michelet,

Demolins, and Le Play, sympathetic students of, and articulate

spokesmen for the rural peasants. In their classic works we find

insights into the intimate environmental relationships which were

thought to explain the harmony and stability of the French pays.

From these, no doubt, Vidal de la Blache drew inspiration for his

Tableau de la géographie de la France. The evolution of a peas

ant’s self-identity was viewed as the outcome of his twofold attach

ment to (i) a particular life-style within (2) a particular locality.

Place and livelihood thus constituted two fundamental ingredients

in the personality integration of French paysans.

Among the more influential historians of the nineteenth cen

tury ranks Pierre Guillaume Guizot (1787-1874), Prime Minister

under Louis Phillipe.15 An ide alist and professor at the Sorbonne

where he taught Alexis de Tocq ueville , Guizot became the spokesman for the liberal.economic policy of the bourgeois regime. His

Essais sur l’ histoire de la France (1853) are replete with references

to the environmental factor in French social history.16 More ex

plicit still was Michelet’s treatment of the French peasant, “the true

author of French history.”17 His seventeen-volume Histo ire de

France showed the development of France’s mosaic of natural pays

through the prolonged dialogue of community and region. Speak

ing of Flanders, Michelet once wrote: “It has been created, so to

speak, in defiance of Nature; it is the product of human labor.”18

Herein Michelet invited a generation of young geographers to ex-

15François Pierre Guillaume Guizot, Essais sur l’histoire de la France, 14th ed.(Paris, 1878). See also the Revue Française which was edited by Guizot and usedas a mouthpiece for the liberal economic policies of the bourgeois régime untilhis demise in 1848. Guizot’s Histoire générale de la civilisation en Europe (Paris, 1840) is an example of social history which ascribed great importance tothe role of environmental factors in shaping rural life in France.16Guizot, Essais sur l’hi stoire de la France.

17Jules Michelet, Histoire de France, 17 vols. (Paris, 1833-67). La France devant l’Europe (Paris, 1871) has even more chauvinistic remarks on the French national character. See also Lanson, “Le table au de la France de Michelet: notessur la texte de 1833,” in M. Wilmotte, Mélanges de philolo gie romane et d’histoire littéraire, 2 vols. (Paris, 1910), pp. 267-99.

18Cited in Lucien Febvre, La terre et l’évolut ion humaine (Paris, 1922).

17


plore the details of this intimate dialogue of paysan and pays:

the key to an understanding of French landscapes and regions.

R E G I O N A L L I T E R A T U R E A N D M I L I E U

The individuality of French regions, the physical and cultural

uniqueness of particular locales (pays), inspired much literary work in the nineteenth century. T he regional novel in particular

aroused popular consciousness of the deep-rooted loyalties and

cultural identity of France’s regional communities whose solidar

ity rested largely on the harmonious dialogue of society and

milieu. In fact, each of the major philosophical currents men

tioned earlier found some echo in the literary world. Hippolyte

Taine (1828-93) and Ernest Rénan (1823-92) profoundly influ

enced literary thought by calling attention to the racial, political,

and other cultural forces evident in the evolution of society.10Like

Thierry and Gobineau, Taine ascribed great importance to the

racial factor in the development of culture, even literary styles

he regarded as reflections of particular racial “ mentalities.”20

The romantic movement reintroduced the milieu into litera

ture, and with it came a new connotation for homeland, the pays

as fundamental political unit.21 Rénan’s Souvenirs d’enfance et de

19Hippolyte Adolphe Taine (1828-93), described by Lanson as the “theoreticianof naturalism,” interpreted the history of social thought in terms of comparative psychology. See his He l’Inte lligence (Paris, 1892) and the more influential

works, Histoire de la littérature anglaise, 5 vols. (Paris, 1892) and Philosophes classiques du XIXe siècle en France (Paris, 1888). Ernest Rénan (1823-92) wrotea number of essays on the history of religion, particularly on those of Judaeo-Christian origin, e.g., Histoire des origines du Christianisme (1863-67), of whichthe more significant were tome I, Discours et conférences (1885), tome VI, Histoire du peuple d’Israël (1888). Rénan was also a keen traveler. His Souvenirs

d’Enfance et de Jeunesse (Paris, 1883) remains a classic example of nineteenth-century essays on regional character and landscape.20See Joseph Arth ur Gob ineau, Essai sur l’inégalité des races humaines (Paris,1884), one of the first essays on sociocultural evolution which expressed a decidedly racist viewpoint. Taine’s Essais de critique et d’histoire (Paris, 1892)took a more moderate position. “There are three gener-al causes determining thequality of literature,” he wrote in the preface to Histoire de la littérature anglaise, “race, milieu (physical and historic) and moment (weight of previousexperience; tension between reality and aspirations).” His more famous workson literary criticism were La Fontaine et ses Fables (Paris, 1892); L ’Essai sur Tite-Live (Paris, 1888); and La phi losoph ie de l’art (Paris, 1885). Like Rénan healso wrote some perceptive reflections on his travels. See, for example, his

Voyages aux Pyrénées (Paris, 1891); and Carnets de Voyage (Paris, 1896).21 See G. Monod, Rénan , Taine, Michelet (Paris, 1894); Lanson, “Après le


16/119

18

Society and Milieu in the F rench Geographic T radition

jeunesse (1883) illustrated very well the regional character of

nineteenth-century literature. Examples are numerous: Pierre

Loti’s and Chateaubriand’s graphic descriptions of Brittany;*22

René Bazin’s delicate capturing of local life in Nivernais;23 the

Thara ud brothers’ dramatic account of peasant life in Limousin;24

and the poignant pieces from Alsace-Lorraine at the turn of the

century.25 Regional life in French colonial lands, were equally

featured: Louis Hémon’s Maria Chapd élaine is an oft-quoted

classic on rural life in Québec, as is Gérard d’Houville’s l’Esclave

on daily life in New Orleans.26

This regional literature did more than re-create graphic pic

tures of French localities, hotyever; it also introduced general ques

tions relating to rural societies and milieux. Loti's Pêch eur

d’Islande, for example, was not simply a typical Breton incident;

it related this to the universal human problems of fishing so

cieties.27 So, too, Eugène Lero y’s Le Mo ulin du Frau (1895) and

Jacq uou le Croq uant (1913), while amply describing the socialaspirations of Périgord workers, also pointed to the general pat

terns of socioeconomic change within peasant societies in other

regions.28

Thus nineteenth-century regional literature yielded a twofold

perspective on society and milieu.~0n the one hand it dramatically

portrayed the local interplay of milieu and cultural traditions in

routinized daily life, and on the other hand it pointed to the uni

versal problems of social evolution and progress so idealistically

naturalisme: le mouvement symboliste,” in his Histoire de la littérature fran

çaise (Paris, 1894), pp. 1105-66.

22Ch ateaub riand ’s genius in landscape description shines through particular lyin his Mémoires d’Out re-tombe, 1849-1850 (Paris, 1899—1900). See also PierreLoti (pseudonym used by Louis-Marie Julien Viaud), Mon Frère Yves (Paris,1892) and Pêcheu r d ’Islande (Paris, 1887), which capture the spirit of late nine

teenth-century Brittany.23Re né Bazin, le Blé qui lève (Paris, 1907).24Jérôme and Jean Thara ud, Les Hobéreau: Cahiers de la Çhiinzaine; la maî

tresse servajite (Paris, 1921).25 M. Barrés, Au service de l’Allemagne (Paris, 1916); Bazin, Les Oberlé (Paris,1901); and B. Valloton, On changerait plutôt le coeur de place (Paris, 1917).23Lo uis Hémon, Maria Chapdelaine: Récit du Canada français (Paris, 1924):

Gérard d’Houville, l’Esclave (Paris, 1905).27 Loti, Pêcheu r d’Islande.28Eugène Leroy, Le Mouli n du Frau (Paris, 1895); Jacquou le Croquant (Paris,

1913); and Les gens d’A ubéroq ue (Paris, 1907).

19


articulated by the Utopians.29It spoke to the question of “nation,”

to the appropriate scale of its regional components in an agricul

tural society which was being transformed by industry, and to the

economic and social plight of a country’s insufficiently endowed

rural districts. It was in relation to this latter problem, rural

misery and social disorganization, that the final thought current

on society and milieu emerged—“social science.”

O R I GI N S O F A “ S O C I A L S C I E N C E ’ ’ A P P R O A C H

Concomitant with the social transformations of the late nineteenth

century there came a slow permeation of democratic and national

istic ideas throughout Europe. In France scholars had drawn at

tention to all classes of society; in Germany the “nation” cult had

evoked a consciousness of fatherland, of Raum , and a decided con

viction that the pure race was the Teu tonic one.30T he latter 1800s

in England witnessed the rapid advance of fields like biology and

economics, and with them came arguments for a positivistic ap

proach to the study of society. The influence of Charles Darwin

permeated most of the natural sciences at this time, and Comte’s

plea for a positivistic approach to sociology no doubt voiced a

widely held resentment against philosophical approaches to sci

ence.31 The famous debate between Louis Pasteur and Claude

Bernard—the “microbe versus milieu” controversy—was an impor

tant event in drawing attention to the milieu concept once more.32

29Marie-Jean Antoin e Caritat Condorcet, Esquisse d’un tableau historique des progrès de l’esprit humain (Paris, 1794), trans. J. Barraclough as Sketch for an Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Mind (London, 1955). See also

Th. Flory, Le mouvement rêgionaliste Français: sources et développements (Paris, 1966).

30Mü ller, Leçons sur la science de l ’Etat; and Leclercq, Introdu ction à la sociologie, pp. 14—18; see also Johann' Gottlieb Fichte, Addresses to the German

Nation, trans. R. F. Jones and G. H. Turnbull (Chicago, 1922).31Aug uste Comte, Cours de philosophie positive, 6 vols. (Paris, 1830-42).32Sec E. Lebret, Pasteur, sa vie, son oeuvre, son influence (New York, 1947) fora detailed explanation of Pasteur’s work on microbes. Bernard, a “free-thinker”opposed to the microbe theory expounded by Pasteur, maintained that microbes

would no t cause disease if the environm ent were not conducive or at least pe rmissive. If a microbe met enough resistance, in Bernard’s view, it might neversucceed in being infectious; in other words, the milieu interne (resistance togerm) was more important than the milieu externe (contact with microbe).Claude Bernard’s famous Introducti on à l ’étude de la mé decine expérimentale (Paris, 1854) was an important milestone in the evolution of biology and also


17/119


18/119


19/119


20/119

26

Society and Milie u in the French Geographic Tradition

greater still. Within any particular soil or climate, a country’s best

resource is its population; and the population’s best resource is itsintelligence and “morality,” its productive potential, i.e., its work

and capital; another precious resource is its social order which helps

create and develop its productive powers.68

This excerpt from Levasseur provides an appropriate conclusion to our cursory survey of the academic background in France

before the development of géographie humaine. Another question,

however, needs to be reviewed; the debate between Burkheim’s

school and the anthropogeograpliers. In many ways this debate

developed simultaneously with Vidal de la Blache’s géographie hu-

maine. Nevertheless, it is instructive to reflect on this debate before

making a more thorough critique of Vidal de la Blache’s work.

08Lev asseur, La France et ses colonies, p. 437.


I n l i t e r a r y a n d p h i l o s o p h i c a l c i r c l e s the society-milieu ques

tion evoked considerable speculation. New analytical devices and

conceptual models in social and natural sciences during the latter

part of the nineteenth century suggested that the subject could now

be approached from a more objective viewpoint. How was such an

investigation to be designed? T o what disc ipline did it belong?

Obviously the logical candidates were geography and sociology, yet

their disparate approaches to the question led to several methodo

logical debates. Precedent for such academic exchange was the

rather protracted controversy concerning anthropogeography and

social morphology. As in other controversies the arguments of both

sides had been largely premised upon and substantiated from the

work and ideas of two great scholars. On one side stood a German,

Friedrich Ratzel (1844-1904), the father of anthropogeography,and on the other a Frenchman, Emile Durkheim (1858-1917), the

father of social morphology. Heirs to two contrasting philosoph

ical, political, and academic traditions, these two scholars had one

common interest, namely, how to study the social differentiation of

mankind. Ratzel, trained in zoology and history and endowed with

an amazing memory, was a man of grandiose ideas with a unified

vision of terrestrial reality. Accord ing to Lowie, he was noted for

his “conception of humanity as a unity, the tempering of environ

mentalism with an historical perspective, the demand for a conver-


21/119


22/119

30

Society and Milie u in the French Geographic Tradition

Dürkheim probably became acquainted with Ratzel’s workduring his sojourn in Germany (1895-96), and his initial reaction,it seems, was not enthusiastic.*10Could not all these environmental variables be incorporated into the morphological aspects of sociology? Did not the Anth ropog eogra phic ascribe too much signifi

cance to purely natural factors in social life? Dürkheim suggestedthat it was better to study social organization as an autonomousspatial system, a product of institutional framework and collective consciousness, and to avoid the question of environmentalinfluences.11

In brief, a fundamental duality of method was initiated: theRatzelian approach which studied world society in terms of spatialmovements and ecological adaptation to habitat; and the Durk-heimian one which studied world society as an autonomous systempossessing a “morphology” (formal patterns) and a “physiology”(life-styles, behavior) of its own.12 In order to understand thepremises from which this duality sprang, it is necessary to examine,

briefly the life work of these two scholars.

R A T Z E L A N D D Ü R K H E I M

“Die Menscheit ist ein Stück der Erde,” wrote Ratzel: it is impossible to study man apart from the “piece of ground” on which helives.13So many sociologists, he complained, treat society as thoughit lived suspended in air, as if it had no connections with theearth.14 Society and environment (particularly land) exist in close

Cultur- und Flandelsgeographie (Breslau, 1876); Die Vereinigten Staaten von Nordamerika, 2 vols. (Munich, 1878-80); Politische Geographie (Munich andLeipzig, 1897). J. Steinmetzler has recently given an excellent résumé of the

Anthropogeographi e in his “Die Anthropogeographie Friedrich Ratzels undihre ideengeschichtlichen Wurzeln,” Bonne r Geographische Abhandlung en 19(1956)-10See Durkheim’s review of the first volume of Anthropogeogr aphie in L ’Année

Sociologique 3 (1898-99), pp. 550-58; and also R. E. Dickinson and O. J.Howarlh, The Making of Geography (London, 1933), p. 199.11 Durkheim’s review of vol. 1 of Anthropogeographie and also “Morphologiesociale,” L’ Aimée Sociologique 2 (1897-98), pp. 520-21.12Durkheim, “Morphologie sociale.” This distinction is explained more thoroughly by Marcel Mauss in “Divisions et proportions des divisions de la sociologie,” L ’Année Sociologique, Nouvelle série, 2 (1927), pp. 96-176.13 Ratzel, Anthropogeogr aphie, vol. 1, 2nd cd., p. 23.14Ratzel, “ Le sol, la société et l’Et at,” L’ Année Sociologique 3 (1898-99), pp.1-14.

31


mutual interdependence; it is the function of anthropogeographyto study the forces which maintain this interdependence. It cannotencompass all of them, of course, for the physical environmenttends to influence human physiology and even temperament, butthis lies beyond the domain of the anthropogeographer.15 Ratzelconfined himself to those influences which affect the collectivelives of people, their propensity for expansion and movement, andprocesses of adaptation to environment.16 The threefold object ofanthropogeography was thus to (1) describe the distribution andgrouping of mankind on the earth; (2) explain these distributionsin terms of historical movement, taking account of physical conditions; and (3) estimate the influences of physical environment onsociety.17 The first two tasks were essential to anthropogeography;the third was only of marginal interest.18

Durkheim responded quite warmly to the second volume of Anthropogeo graph ie (1891) and also to the revised edition of Vol

ume One (1899). He drew his colleague’s attention to it in the Ann ée Socio logiq ue (1898-99), acclaiming it as an indication ofgeography’s emergence from stagnation and purely physical concerns, to becoming a “potential ally” of the social sciences.19 Manyof the insights and empirical facts exposed in Ratzel’s work could be integrated into Durkheim ’s morphological study of society, ashe had elaborated in the previous volume of the Année .20 Thougha definite morphological approach had been implicit in Durkheim’s earlier writings, it was not until 1898, i.e., after his re

view of Ratze l’s Pol itisç he Géograph ie, that he published an overall framework for the discipline of social morphology. In the

Rule s of Sociolog ical Me tho d (1950) he had termed “morphological” those “facts which concern the social substratum.”21

15 Ratzel, Anthropogeograph ie, vol. 1, 2nd ed., pp. 18-79. See also Steinmetzler,“Die Anthropogeographie Friedrich Ratzels und ihre ideengeschichtlichen

Wurzel n,” pp. 16-28.10Ratzel, Anthropogeograp hie, vol. 1, 2nd ed., p. 77.17Steinmetzler, “Die Anthropogeographie Friedrich Ratzels und ihre idcengc-schichtlichen Wurzeln,” pp. 16-25.18Ratzel, Anthropogeograp hie, vol. 1, 2nd ed., p. 48.19Durkh eim,-review of volume 1 of Anthropogeographi e.20Ibid.21 Durkheim, Les règles de la méthode sociologique, trans. S. A. Solovay andJ. H. Mueller as The Rules of Sociological Method (Glencoe, 111., 1950), referenceto pp .12-13.


23/119


24/119

and eventually expand. This was the key point: to Ratzel "mor

phology” was not a static concept; like a living organism, each

group is in continual movement.31 Every cell is in process of ex

pansion or consolidation. In this discussion he echoed the ideas

of his contemporary, the biologist Moritz Wagner. He was no

doubt also influenced by Ernst Haeckel, the founder of ecology, who was concerned with distributions as well as the relationship of

organisms to their environments.32 Groups evolving wi thin partic

ular places occupy certain situations and need space for subsistence

and expansion.33Th is application of ecological notions to political

behavior became a bone of contention. Ratzel viewed every state

in terms of a natural propensity for expansion until it had filled

its perceived Raum. In this light, he applied a "whole series of

biogeographic conceptions to . . . the diffusion of the human

race.”34However, he also suggested that "when we say that an area

increases, we must remember that by this, we mean the intelligence

which views it and the wil l that holds it together have increased,

and naturally also that which is requisite for rendering intelli

gence and will capable for their work.”35*

This spiritual and intellectual component (later to be labeled

the nodsphere by Teilhard de Chardin) comes through much later

in French thought.30It also epitomized the humanistic Ratzel, the

antideterminist who said, "I could perhaps understand New En

gland during the first thirty years after the landing of the May

flower without knowing the character of the land, but never witli-

34

Society and M ilieu in the F rench Geographic Traditio n

31 Ratzel, Anthrop ogeogr aphie , vol. 1, 2nd ed., p. 120.32See H. Overbeck, “Das politische geographische Lehrg ebäude von FriedrichRatzel in der Sicht unserer Zeit,” Die Erde 88 (1957), PP- 169-92; and H. Wank-

lyn, Friedri ch Ratzel: A Biograph ical Memoire and Bibliog raphy (Cambridge,

1961) -33 Ratzel, Preface to Anthrop ogeogra phie, vol. 1, 2nd ed., and “L e sol, la société etl’Etat”; G. A. Hückcl, "La géographie de la circulation selon Friedrich Ratzel,”

Annales de Géographie 15 (1906), pp. 401-18.34Ratzel, “ Man as a Life Phenomenon on the Earth’s Surface,” chapter 3 ofH. F. Helmolt, The History of the World: A Survey of Man’s Record (New York,

1902), reference to p. 63.

35 Ibid., p. 85.30Pierre Te ilhar d de Chardin, “L ’hominisation: introduction à une étude scientifique du phénomène humain,” in E. Leroy, Les origines humaines et l’évo lu-tion de l’intelligence (Paris, 1928), pp. 9—134; and “U n seuil mental sous nospas: du cosmos à la cosmogénèse,” in C. Cuénot, Teilhard de Chardin (Paris,

1962) , pp . 83-84.

35

Anthropogeogr aphy and Social Morph ology

out knowing the character of the Puritan people.” 37 In Ratz el’s

characterization of various types of population movement, he

made the critical distinction between nomadic peoples, farmers,

and commercial travelers.38 Livelihood emerges as a distinct cri

terion for classification of social movements, an idea which may

have been inspired by Eduard Hahn.39Durkheim also considered livelihood as a fundamental basis

for social integration. In fact, a central thesis of the revised edi

tion of De la division du travail social (1902) was that occupational

homogeneity provided the optimal rationale for social organiza

tion.40T he moral reintegration of society, he claimed, hinges upon

a restoration of the syndicate, patterned on the medieval guild or

Roman corporation.41 “For anomie to end,” he wrote, “ there must

exist a group which can constitute the system of rules actually

needed.”42 Like Montesquieu, Durkheim believed that laws and

behavioral norms should reflect the “spirit” or "mentali ty” of a

people, and that this was strongly influenced by occupational struc

ture. Suicide, anomie, and other social problems reflected a lack of

coordination between legal systems and livel ihood systems.43 Each

livelihood group should design its own laws, for

. . . economic life, because it is specialized and grows more special

ized each day, escapes their [states, etc.] competence. . . . An occu

pational activity can be efficaciously regulated only by a group inti

mate enough with it to know its functioning, feel all its needs, and

be able to follow all their variations. The only one that could an

swer all these conditions is the one formed by all agents in the same

industry, united and organized into a single body. This is what iscalled the corporation or occupational group.44

While Ratzel expounded on the ecological characteristics oflivelihood groups, Durkheim elaborated on their political, juri-

37R atzel, “Einige Aufgaben einer politischen Ethnogr aphic,” Zeitschr ift fur Sozialwissenschaft 3 (1900), pp. 1-19, reference to p. 6.

33R atzel, Anthropog eograph ie, vol. 2 (1891), pp. 131-35, 149-72.30Eduard Hahn, Die Haustiere und ihre Bezieh ungen zur Wirtschaft des

Menschen (Leipzig, 1896).

40Dur kheim , De la division du travail social, 2nd ed. (1902).41 Ibid., p. 6.42I bid., p . 5.

43Ibid ., pp. 353-72.44Ibid., p. 5.


25/119


26/119


27/119

40


up the threads again in 1957.60However, the sociologists continued

to consider the idea with varying degrees of clarity. Daudé in 1937

summed up the situation succinctly:

Human geography and social morphology study the same phenom

ena. The former, however, studies them in terms of their connec

tions with the geographical milieu, viz., the whole interacting en

semble of physical, biological and human phenomena within oneplace on the earth’s surface, while the latter studies them in terms

of their connection with the social milieu, viz., the whole interact

ing ensemble of social pheno men a... . Distinct disciplines .. . social

phenomena are partly explained by geographical conditions, while

the “humanized landscapes” are partly explained by social causes.61

Daudé, of course, could draw on the results of a whole generation

of geographic research to make this statement. At the turn of the

century, however, the situation was less clearly definable. In fact,

it is not at all clear that the social morphology-anthropogeography

debate preceded the work of Vidal de la Blache. There is strong

evidence of a lively va-et-vient between Durkheim and Vidal, and

it is difficult to say who influenced whom. At any rate, one canreadily find echoes both of Ratzel and Durkheim in Vidal’s géogra

phie humaine: the organismic perspective on group-milieu rela

tionships reflects Ratzel, while the focus on livelihood groups

reflects Durkheim. Let us now see how these and other ingredients

were integrated into Vid al’s monumental life work, la géographie

humaine.

60Max. Sorre, Rencontres de la géographie et de la sociologie (Paris, 1957), pp.

51-52.61 R. Daudc, “Géographie et l’unité de la science,” IXe Congrès International de

Philoso phie 10 (Paris, 1937), pp. 56-61.

The Foundations

Germany and France at the turn of the century thus witnessed

the birth pangs of a scientific approach to the study of nature and

society. Darwinian concepts had revolutionized the natural sciences, particularly biology, while geology had become established

in most of the major universities. Social history, philosophy, and

literature had encouraged the emergence of democratic and nation

alistic ideas and had also evoked curiosity about mankind’s phys

ical and cultural diversity. Into such an academic setting entered

Vidal de la Blache, schooled in classical literature and history,

ruidely traveled in France and the Mediterranean world, and fas

cinated by the diversity of Europ e’s “ humanized landscapes.” In

an era dedicated to proliferating modes of scientific explorations

into nature and society, Vidal recognized the need to treat certain

questions from a holistic point of view. The dialogue of man and

milieu which produced France’s variegated landscapes, for instance, should be approached from a comprehensive vietupoint.

Focus on landscape itself provided only a partial solution, how

ever; life-styles (genres de vie) soon becaràe Vidal’s more character

istic central concept in this kind of study. Genres de vie, the prod

ucts and reflections of a civilisation, represented the integrated

result of physical, historical, and social influences surrounding

man’s relation to milieu in particular places. Within the study of

this dialogue, the material object of la géographie humaine, Vidal


28/119

saw the need for a distinct study of internal and culturally defined

subjective influences upon man’s choice of genre de vie. This field

he labeled géographie de la civilisation.

Jean Brunhes’ “codification” of Vidal’s ideas brought a more

narrowly defined focus for géographie de la civilisation. Social

organization and social behavior, treated either systematically (as Brunhes’ irrigation studies) or regionally (in his “ island” studies),

became its central themes. Though in theory Brunhes recognized

the importance of “psychological” factors in geographic studies, he

tended to concentrate on the material products of a civilisation,

thereby introducing an “artifactal” emphasis in contrast with

Vidal’s “ideational” orientation.

The first generation of French human geographers between

z 8 po and i p i 8 attempted intermittently to develop some of Vidal’s

ideas. The dialectic of ideational or artifactal orientations, of sys

tematic or regional approaches, of thematic focus on landscape or

life-style (paysage versus genre de vie) continued to prevail. With

few exceptions, however, their energies were directed primarily to

small-scale regional monographs, to studying the complex web of

relationships binding society and milieu in particular French

pays. Despite the articulate rhetoric of Lucien Febvre, an historian-

admirer of the Vidalian school, the first generation was subject

to much criticism for this emphasis on the regional method and its

apparent lack of scientific precision.

The germinal phase 'thus bequeathed a scattering of heuristic

ideas rather than a well-defined field of social geography. Vidal’s

ideas lay dormant in large part during the predominantly “re

gional” phase of French geography, but soon flowered in the

unique contributions of Sion, Demangeon, and Sorre.

42

Society and M ilie u in the F rench Geographic Traditio n

III


A m o n g t h e m o s t c r e a t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n s to the history of geo

graphic thought ranks that of the gentle Languedocian, Paul

Vidal de la Blache (1845-1918). Historian by training, well-versedin literature and the classics, a keen scientist and sensitive artist,

Vida l’s record stands as the origin and the glory of the French

school of geography.1 His career coincided with an epoch when

nature in all its aspects was being explored by an array of scientific

disciplines, and man (zoon politikon) was being investigated more

thoroughly than ever before. Conscious of these scholarly advances

and deeply inspired by the writings of his German predecessors,

Alexander von Humboldt and Car l Ritter,2V idal began his career

1 See Lucien Gallois, “Paul Vid al de la Blache,” Annale s de Géographie 27(1918), pp. 161-73, and Albert Demangeon, "Vidal de la Blache,” Revu e Uni versitaire 27, pt. 2 (1918), pp. 1-15; also the obituary notice of G. G. Chisholm

in Geographical Journal 52 (1918), pp. 64-65, and Max. Sorre’s Introduction to Les fondem ents de la géograp hie humain e, 3 vols. (Paris, 1943-52). The essayof Paul Marres, “Centenaire de Paul Vidal de la Blache,” Bu llet in de la Société

Langued ocienne de Géographie 19 (1948), pp. 146—58, is also en lig hte ning , as isthe recent work of André Meynier, Histoir e de la pensée géographiq ue en

France (Paris, 1969).

2In his Essai sur l’évol ution de la géographie humain e (Paris, 1964), pp. 98-

109, Paul Claval suggests that Ritter and Humboldt greatly influenced Vidal’sthought. See also the discussion of the influence of Emile Levasseur and othernon-geographers in Paul Claval and J.-P. Nardy, Pour le cinquante naire de la mort de Paul Vidal de la Blache (Paris, 1968). Meynier’s Histoi re de la pen sée géographique en France ascribes great importance to Elisée Reclus as a predecessor of Vidal. See also Marvin W. Mikesell, “Observations on the Writings ofElisée Reclus,” Geography. 44 (1959), pp. 221-26.

44


29/119

in geography with a new vision for the field: “Modern geography,”

he later wrote, “is the scientific study of places.”3In other words, it

can no longer be simply an encyclopedic description of people and

places, nor must it be a deterministic interpretation of man-nature

relationships. Neither philosophical generalization nor archival

research could yield the true geographic picture; this could only be

gained from a well-formulated empirical approach to field study.To this task, Vidal de la Blache devoted half a century of pains

taking effort.

To be truly scientific, geography had to face the dilemma of

society-environment relationships, the dilemma which had caused

so much debate and hostility. Ratzel's Anthr op o geographie had

not been too successful among geographers and the sociologists re

garded it as presumptuous, “giving rise to unacceptable forms of

environmental determinism.”4Vidal’s challenge was thus a formi

dable one. Precedents within geography tended to orient them

selves toward the historical and geological dimensions of earth

reality; yet if the challenge of the French sociologists was to be

confronted, he had to venture into the hitherto unexplored social

realm. In response to this twofold challenge, Vidal de la Blache

pioneered la géographie humaine, the uniquely French style of

human geography which was to have a widespread influence on

other schools of geographic thought during the twentieth century.

“ g é o g r a p h i e h u m a i n e ”

At once as comprehensive as Ratzel’s Anthropogeographie, Vidal’s

géographie humaine was a much more modest, a conceptually less

ambitious design than that of his German predecessor. His ap

proach was more empirical, more inductive. Skeptical of a priori

laws of environmental relationships, he first of all set out on aseries of carefully designed regional studies. From the results of

these studies he hoped eventually to form some meaningful gen

eralizations. The core of his original method was the study of rural

3 P. Vidal de la Blache, “Les caractères distinctifs de la géograp hie,” Annales de

Géographie 22 (1913), pp. 289-99, and “Leçon d’o uverture du cours de géographie, ” ibid. 8 (1889), pp. 98-109. See also his renowned Tableau de la géogra-

phie de la France (Paris, 1903).4See Chapter IL

44

Society and Milie u in the French Geographic Tr aditionContributions of Paul Vidal de la Blache

45

communities within their natural milieux.5xMilieu here meant

the organically integrated physical and biotic infrastructure of

human life on earth: “A composite . .. capable of holding together

heterogeneous beings in mutual vit al relationships.”6 On a global

scale, Vidal saw large realms of nature which provide the milieu de

vie of different peoples. World population should be studied in thq.

context of these great milieux de vie—how people have adapted

the natural resources of these different milieux in the creation of

genres de vie, or life-styles.7

The natural milieu was the great leveler or harmonizer of

heterogeneous social elements:

Human associations, just like vegetables and animal associations,

though heterogeneous, are all subjected to the influence of milieu.

No one knows from whence they [human groups] have come . . .

but they live together in a country which, little by little, leaves

its mark on them.‘$ome societies have long since become incorpo

rated in their milieux, others are in process of becoming so. . . )


30/119

4 6

Society and Milieu in the French Geographic T radition

dress at the University of Paris, Vidal spoke of geography as a

natural rather than a social science.

Geography, getting its inspiration . . . from the idea of terrestrial

unity, has for its special mission to find out how the physical and

biological laws which govern the world are combined and modifiedin their application to different parts of the earth’s surface. It has

for its special study the changing expression which, according to the

locality, the appearance of the earth assumes.9

Superimposed upon these different rrjilieux and the point de

depart for human geography was the uneven distribution of man

kind on the face of the earth.10 Could the great concentrations of

population in Northwest Europe and East Asia be explained in

terms of abundant and easily exploitable natural resources? This

provided a partial answer, but why the internal differences in

population density? Why did China and India have heavier den

sities than Laos and Vietnam?11 Again, why did the North Amer

ican prairies and the South American pampas remain relativelyunexploited until the advent of Europeans? These and other enig

mas, unexplainable in terms of milieu alone, led Vidal to two

other vital facts: (1) the facteur social influencing human choice;

and (2) the importance of circulation as a promoter of exchange

and progress.12 Both of these topics had been treated by Ratzel:

society as mediator between man and milieu, and circulation as

the fundamental dynamism underlying mankind’s spatial distri

bution.13

Thus, la géographie humaine had a threefold structure: (1) the

distribution, density, and movement of population; (2) the meth

ods used by man to develop his environment and his diverse civilizations; and (3) transportation and communications.

The first consideration provided the materia, the question to be

9Vidal de la Blache, “Les caracteres distinctifs de la géographie.”10Gallois, review of Principes de géographie humaine.11 Vidal de la Blache, “La repa rtition des hommes sur le globe ”; “Les grandesagglomerations humaines,” Annales de Géographie 26 (1917), pp. 401-22; and

ibid. 27 (1918), pp. 92-101, i74>-87.12The circulation aspect of Vidal’s work is discussed by Christian van Paassen inhis inaugural lecture at the University of Utrecht, Over vormverandering in de

Sociale Gcografie (Groningen, 1965).13 For Ratze l’s discussion of society in geograp hy, sec Anthropogeographie, vol.1, pp. 53-56; and for circulation and movement, see ibid., vol. 2, passim.


47

examined; the second provided the solutions in terms of a static or

slowly changing balance between man and nature; the third repre

sented the fundamental promoters of change and spatial inter

action. Vidal’s impact upon the development of this threefold

structure has been felt mainly in terms of the second category.

As we shall see later, his contributions to the third considerationhere were mainly of a suggestive, heuristic nature, whose perti

nence to the objects of geographical research at that time were not

clearly evident. Vidal was first and foremost a teacher, a leader

with a charismatic talent for arousing the interest and enthusiasm

of his students.14In his lectures at the Sorbonne he reiterated the

guiding principles of geographical study: the unity of all earth

phenomena; the variable combination and modification of phe

nomena, visible especially in climate; the significance of environ

ment, illustrated especially in vegetation; the need for scientific

procedures in defining and classifying phenomena; and finally,

the primacy of man’s role in modifying his environment, illus

trated especially in the life-styles, or genres de vie, which haveevolved through history.15 His students remember Vidal more for

his personal interest in their intellectual development, his pains

taking arrangement of field experiences which enabled them to

examine the natural and human dynamism underlying French

landscapes. For Vidal, however, paysage meant the physical physi

ognomy of the land, not the cultural landscape implied in later

use of the term.16

One can readily understand how difficult it is to isolate any

dimension of this comprehensively integrated field. However, if

we keep this reservation in mind and focus sharply for a moment

on the social dimension, the nucleus of a special discipline seemsto emerge: la géographie de la civilisation.17

14Claval, Essai sur l’évolution de la géographie humaine, p. 48.15V idal de la Blache, “ Les caractères distinctifs de la géographie,” p. 288.16Vidal’s first Atlas was really a compilation of field experiences with his students and of reflection on his own extensive field travels. Atlas général, histo-rique et géographique (Paris, 1894, and rev. eds. in 1918, 1922, 1938, and 1951).17Vidal de la Blache, “Les conditions géographiqu es des faits sociaux,” Annales de Géographie 11 (1902), pp. 13-23. While Elisée Reclus e videntl y used theterm "géographie sociale” in the Introduction to his La terre et les hommes (Paris, 1877), p. 28, Vidal coined the term “gé ographie de la civ ilisation ” which

was subsequen tly developed by Jean Brunhes, Camille Vall aux, and Jules Sion.

48 49


31/119

48


S O C I A L G E O G R A P H Y A S

“ G É O G R A P H I E DE L A c i v i l i s a t i o n ”

From extensive field work in France and the Mediterranean world

and from the initial results of his disciples’ research, as early as

1905 Vidal proposed some preliminary hypotheses concerning so

ciety in geography. “By now,” he claimed, “certain connectionsappear between certain types of environment, e.g., valleys, moun

tains, city-hinterlands, and the kind of social conditions found

there. . . . Is it now possible to examine the precise effects of phys

ical conditions [literally, ‘geographical factors’] on the social life

of mankind?”*18 Vida l carefully reviews the Ratzelian hypotheses

regarding society and environm ent:19 the effect of location and

accessibility on the internal clan or tribal system of a society, the

effect of soil and vegetation on the choice of genre de vie, and

others. Each type of natural milieu, he suggests, is usually as

sociated with a typical kind of social organization. Climate is a

primary force promoting differentiation: Monsoon Asia, for

example, typifies the symbiotic network of relationships between

livelihood and natural milieu, a symbiosis which ensures the social

stability of these rice-growing communities.

Vid al’s ideas on social organization could be summarized ap

proximately as follows: a social system is closely connected with a

cultivation system, which is itself a reflection of physical (geo

graphical) conditions. This principle was, of course, most appli

cable to agricultural societies, but even in this context it tempered

the rigidl

Documents

BUTTIMER, Anne. Society and Milieu in the French Geographic Tradition