It would be desirable to have terms which should accurately express the several great divisions of geography, though we fear none can be proposed which will be universally received. There cannot, however, be much difference of opinion as to the propriety of admitting the following divisions of the subject, we say nothing of the names, which naturally arise out of the considerations already stated.

I. Topothesy; the determination of the latitude and longitude of points on the earth's surface *.

II. Actography; the special description of the form and nature of coasts. The outline of them is determined by No. I.

III. Hypsometry; the determination of the elevation of the earth's surface in general. It treats both of the elevation of level surfaces, and the depression and elevation of irregular surfaces.

IV. Orography; the description of mountains, is a branch of No. III.

V. Potamography; the description of rivers and freshwater lakes.

It has been suggested that other divisions should be inade, to render the determination of the form of the earth's surface complete. What data a man can ask for beyond I, and III., we are unable to conjecture.

It

To these five heads we think it advisable to add— ·VI. Climatography; the description of climate. depends mainly on I. and III., modified by numerous local circumstances. Climatologyt is geographical me

Tozoria is used by Cicero ad Attic. I. 13, as synonymous with rozogapia. But the word properly means what in the text is intended by it.

We prefer the compound climatography for reasons sufficiently obvious. For the same reason we distinguish between anthropology and anthropography.

teorology, or the study of the properties of the atmosphere in the various parts of the globe: it is consequently a part of physical geography.' (Schouw, Beiträge zur vergleichenden Klimatologie, 1827.) The business of observing temperature, winds, rain, magnetic phænomena, &c., are distinct pursuits, and this branch of knowledge is only to be improved by long continued and often by simultaneous observations made in many places. But it appears to us to be the business of the geographer to collect and compare the results of such observation made at various points on the earth's surface, and to endea. vour to deduce from them general laws. If the geographer, who has continually to do with astronomical position and elevation, does not attend to this branch, we do not see whose business it is. A geographer may be an observer, or not, of the astronomical phænomena which determine position; he may measure the heights of mountains, or he may learn these isolated facts from others but it is his special business to collect all facts bearing on his science, to subject them to the tests of comparison with other known facts, and to determine their relative value before classifying them or drawing general conclusions from them. We think the critical part of geography is hardly enough insisted on. Till facts are in some way so marked as to show their relative value, we do not see how geography can become more exact. As the leaving of large blanks in maps indicates our ignorance, and is a better plan than putting in rivers and mountains of which we know nothing; so in the geographical description of countries, it should be stated, of what parts we know little, of what parts we know nothing; and the points about which knowledge is wanting should be particularly enumerated.

Beyond the six heads above enumerated, the geographer, in our opinion, should not go; and we think they will furnish him with ample employment. It is not the business of the geographer to look under the surface of the earth; he leaves that to the geologist. Nor is it his business to treat of the distribution of animal and vegetable life over the globe: this, we think, belongs to the botanist and zoologist, and though it is a brauch in which writers on botany and zoology are not always very exact, it is desirable that they should labour to improve a subject which belongs to no other branch of knowledge so closely as theirs. On this point, however, there is much difference of opinion. Some think that the distribution of plants and animals is an important part of geography; and indeed, if any geographer will undertake to treat this department satisfactorily without neglecting the rest, he will do good service. But we apprehend that it will be found very difficult for any one man, in the present state of our knowledge, to treat all of them as completely as could be wished. It is from a conviction of the necessity of limiting the objects of geographical study, that we venture to suggest the omission of this branch.

There is one animal whose geographical distribution is a subject of great interest-the animal Man; and it has often been remarked, that countries are generally interesting in proportion as they are connected with his history; but particularly with the history of civilized man: the history of the man whom the races calling themselves civilized stamp with the name of barbarian and savage, is not generally considered to possess much interest. This is true to a certain extent; we all feel that those parts of the world which have been the scene of

great historical events recommend themselves much more strongly to the imagination than newly-discovered countries inhabited by men usually termed savages. But with the increase of our knowledge, the means that open on us for mental gratification increase also. The inquirer into nature finds something new in every portion of the world, however wild and desolate; and even the barbarous inhabitants of our globe furnish us with abundant materials of curious inquiry. We contemplate man as the highest in the series of animals, zoologically considered, and when viewed with reference to his situation on the earth, his physical characteristics, his habits, and his language, as furnishing an unbounded field for inquiry and speculation. This branch of inquiry has not yet assumed among us, in ordinary acceptation, the distinctness of a separate subject, which is one reason why the numerous facts already known are very imperfectly arranged, and why curiosity is less actively directed towards the accumulation of new ones. This branch of knowledge has hitherto been generally left to geographical description; but it is evident that it can only acquire any systematic shape and value by being made a distinct subject of inquiry.

The term Anthropology, which is familiarly used in Germany, has for its proper subject man considered as an intellectual and moral being. It would be taking only a part of the subject of anthropology, and giving an undue extension to this part, if we were to make it include what we propose to denominate Anthropography. Anthropography should treat of the varieties of the human race, as at present existing, and as determined *See Immanuel Kant's Anthropologie in Pragmatischer Hinsicht, p. 303, &c.

by those physiological characters in which the best judges agree; it should mark out the countries in which they now dwell, the migrations of undoubted authenticity which have taken place among them, and the consequent mixtures of races: it should also attempt a classification of languages, marking such common points as are observable in two or more languages, when the proof of original identity is imperfect: it should not confound under one race or class, different races which, owing to various causes, have now a common language: it should describe those domestic habits, such as marriage, &c., and those religious ceremonies, which are most indicative of national character. It is almost superfluous to remark, that an infinite variety of facts, not easily reducible to any general head, would be collected in a system of Anthropography-all tending to make us better acquainted with the various capabilities and the strangely-diversified character of the animal man.

The study of the division of the world into political communities, the description of political boundaries, of cities, towns, roads, canals, commerce, &c., which forms the main subject of our crdinary books of geography, should in our opinion be taught under the head of Statistics. It seems to us that, to transfer all the mass of knowledge of this description, a great part of which is capable of a tabular form, to the province of Statistics, should not be looked upon as an innovation merely to help system-making every subject gains in precision and utility, when we find it occupying the place and embracing the matter which are clearly its due. The term Political Geography has been generally used to comprehend the kind of description and the collection of facts just alluded to, and to distinguish them