A Random Question to Brood Over.

[MoSSurII]

Wow, it's been a very long while since I've created a thread, but here we go!
This is just a question that randomly popped up in my head as I was creating my fictional world, it is...

...Does Geography influence History, or does History influence Geography?

This question might sound random and it probably is, but I feel like it would be fun to think about and consider all the aspects of history and geography and how they might affect each other. You could even get the others involved- How does Politics mix into this? What about Culture? And Science? Or even Art? I'd love to know how you people interpret this question and how you answer it.

 

[Ban]

Both. Without mountains you won't have a society of miners, and without miners you won't hollow out mountains.

 

[Avery Moore]

Does Geography influence History? Yes.
Does History influence Geography? Depends what you mean by Geography. If you're talking about the physical shape of the world and the types of terrain, then I'd say no. If you're talking about things like countries and borders, the line where one country ends and another begins, then yes, History influences Geography a lot.

Of course, you could go into more detail with this question, but it kind of feels like the chicken or the egg scenario. No matter how far back you go, there's always more to consider, so... Might as well just take the easy answer and say a simple "yes" to both.

 

[Ban]

Does Geography influence History? Yes.
Does History influence Geography? Depends what you mean by Geography. If you're talking about the physical shape of the world and the types of terrain, then I'd say no. If you're talking about things like countries and borders, the line where one country ends and another begins, then yes, History influences Geography a lot.

Of course, you could go into more detail with this question, but it kind of feels like the chicken or the egg scenario. No matter how far back you go, there's always more to consider, so... Might as well just take the easy answer and say a simple "yes" to both.

As a Dutchman, I would like you to google Flevoland and the former Zuiderzee as an example of history changing geography.

 

[pmmg]

I think, I was to look at the world map 600,000 years ago, and asked to pick out where the hot spots might be today, I would hit more than a few of them with a lot of accuracy. (course, I would need today's brain )

A theory I heard recently, and it might be too close to the rail, but talking about the nature of those who like change and those who like things not to change, living near the sea, and living far away from water, may be a strong contributing factor. That people who live near the ocean are used to seeing things change all the time, from the very shape of the water, and all the things that flow into it. They tuned more into motion. But people who live on the land, are used to seeing things stable, and don't like a lot change, and often, don't see a need for it. So, in just this alone, geography is influencing the way people come to their values and what they find important.

Given that that is just a drop in an ocean of influences, I just don't see how this question can be anything but...yes, it does influence all of those things you mention.

 

[MoSSurII]

It just occurred to me that the question is missing one word that can completely change the meaning of it, so here's the "corrected" version:

Does Geography influence History more, or does History influence Geography more?

I feel like this should make more sense, but I'll leave that for y'all to interpret.

 

[pmmg]

I am going to say, design is predictive. The land is the first cause, and from it spring the history...but, like as time goes on, and both engines start to gain their stride, they begin to affect each other.

Land is probably the stronger of the two influences, it is less mutable.

By saying design is predictive, if you two important regions, and only a small pathway between them, the pathway will likely come into conflict, as control of it will matter.

 

[Orc Knight]

I seem to recall Alexander (Really great guy), made a land bridge to siege an island and all. Think that's history remaking some geography.

 

[Genly]

Another classic example of how geography can influence history is the military history of Britain. As an island nation, it was difficult to invade, and this fact has influenced history many times: the extraordinarily slow conquest of England by the Anglo-Saxons when compared with the rapid "barbarian" invasions of much of the rest of the Roman empire, which allowed the myth of King Arthur to originate; the failure of the Spanish Armada, which proved the efficacy of the Royal Navy, the backbone of the subsequent British Empire; and of course above all, the inability of Hitler to cross the Channel at a time when he stood triumphant throughout much of the rest of Europe.

I guess history can influence geography in the sense that nations tend to form borders that are delineated by clear geographical features e.g. mountains, large rivers, seas.

 

[menollypop]

I think there are more answers to this question than a single human could ever comprehend. But here's an interesting YouTube video I watched a while ago by PBS Terra titled "How an Ancient Ocean Shaped US History"

 

[skip.knox]

I seem to recall Alexander (Really great guy), made a land bridge to siege an island and all. Think that's history remaking some geography.

It was the city of Tyre. When I was teaching Western Civ, that always made it into lecture. Along with Bucephalus.

 

[skip.knox]

I'm curious what is understood by "history" in that query. Do you mean did history affect the behavior of human beings? Well sure. Did human beings affect the terrain? Yes, but "geography" encompasses more than just the surface.

More importantly, though, is the nature of the affecting. Humans make choices; geography does not. If we put both on the same footing, then we would have to ask does geography affect humans in the same way humans affect geography. That is, do lakes or ocean beds physically alter humans (besides just plain killing them)? Looked at this way, the two avenues are not parallel.

There's another angle to this affectation (couldn't resist). Geography might affect how this human or that group of humans made certain choices, but does the influence run any deeper than this? Have our political structures or social relationships been influenced by geography? I can't begin to answer that, but it's interesting.

Thanks for the question!

 

[ThinkerX]

The question is relevant to my upcoming WIP, 'Exiles Pilgrimage.' That story is set on the 'Strand,' a ribbon of land that is wrapped around an entire planet - 24,000+ miles - but is usually a few dozen miles in width. It tops two hundred miles across along about 10 percent of that stretch - and there are long sections where its width is under a thousand yards. Yes, there are capes and peninsulas and offshore islands - some of them quite large, but these are all secondary. This constriction creates resource crises, forcing nations to expand or collapse. The Strand's history is filled with short-lived empires strung out over thousands of miles that eventually imploded.

 

[Fidel]

Does Geography influence History? Yes.
Does History influence Geography? Depends what you mean by Geography. If you're talking about the physical shape of the world and the types of terrain, then I'd say no. If you're talking about things like countries and borders, the line where one country ends and another begins, then yes, History influences Geography a lot.

Of course, you could go into more detail with this question, but it kind of feels like the chicken or the egg scenario. No matter how far back you go, there's always more to consider, so... Might as well just take the easy answer and say a simple "yes" to both.

I love your take on it! It nails the nuance with a light, humorous twist breaking down a complex topic into a simple “yes” while still hinting at the deeper layers. The idea of what counts as geography is a neat point that really adds to the conversation.

 

[pmmg]

but it kind of feels like the chicken or the egg scenario. No matter how far back you go, there's always more to consider, so... Might as well just take the easy answer and say a simple "yes" to both

Well.... Its not really chicken and the egg. Unless land masses and people both appeared at the same time. The land did come first

Once people showed up, thats when everything went south. Like too stubborn zax's...they probably could not agree on anything. Let me get this straight, we can both walk 6000 miles in any direction, and not encounter another living soul, but....this stretch of land here we have to fight over?

 

[Prince of Spires]

The land did come first

As a Dutch person, I beg to differ...

There's a poem that enscribed on a rock in the middle of a piece of Dutch flood protection works which sums up the mindset beautifully. It roughly translates to:
Here the tide is ruled by the moon, the wind, and us.

Though I accept that we're the exception

 

[pmmg]

As a Dutch person, I beg to differ...

There's a poem that enscribed on a rock in the middle of a piece of Dutch flood protection works which sums up the mindset beautifully. It roughly translates to:
Here the tide is ruled by the moon, the wind, and us.

Though I accept that we're the exception

I'm not sure how that means the land did not come first.

 

[Ban]

I'm not sure how that means the land did not come first.

Because it physically didn't. The "land" was sea, lake and swamp. here's another Dutch proverb: "God created the earth, but the Dutch created the Netherlands."

 

[pmmg]

I see...that isn't the point I made.

Whatever was there was there before man showed up and decided to change it.

Once people showed up, thats when everything went south.

That would be more addressing this, which....I meant to be funny. But...I did acknowledge that man showed up and then the equation changed. But as a chicken and the egg thing, land came first.

 

[Ban]

Sure, and before any given terrain changed human cultures, the human species already existed. I think that reasoning is a bit arbitrary personally. If the Dutch only changed what already lied dormant under water, so too the Netherlands only changed the pre-existing humans and their history.