How Geography Differs From Geology

        Despite their similarities, geography differs from history in several important ways.  One is that history is about recorded events while geography describes where events happened.  They are related by being two dimensions of studying the progress of these events.  Because it is helpful to understand the places where past events took place, geography is important to understanding history to the same degree that history is important to understanding geography.  Geography can map the progress of history through spatial orientation, while history can document the progress of humans in geographic locations.
        Another difference is that geography has more of a physical dimension because you can’t fully understand a place or its history without knowing its environment.  The physical attributes of a place, such as climate, soil, and water content, can determine some of the behavior of its people, such as the ability to irrigate crops.  Therefore, it is crucial to understand the physical geography of a place if an historian is going to understand why events developed, particularly when it is related to economic activity. 
        There are also differences on an analytical level.  Geography examines spatial relationships while history examines the significance of past events.  Because history depends on what is recorded by humans, it is more supported by written documents, whereas geographic studies are more supported by spatial data.  Technically history doesn’t exist prior to the written document; all investigations into human behavior prior to written texts are better described by archaeology, which examines the physical remains of humans who did not leave written evidence.  Yet past events can be examined through geography far beyond even the archaeological age.  By inferring through continental drift, ice core samples, and evolutionary data, geographers have the power to map events as far back in time as geologists.
        An article about the past that helps differentiate these subjects is Borderlines: Maps and the Spread of the Westphalian State from Europe to Asia Part One – the European Context.  Though it takes place in the past and is based on a historical event, the article is more about geography because it describes the need for spatial awareness after the Treaty of Westphalia.  This 1648 treaty was arguably the most pivotal event in political geography.  Prior to the treaty, borders and nations were not recognized as sovereign entities (Pickering 1), thus they were not shown on any maps (ibid. 3).  After the treaty, cartography went through a paradigm shift when national borders needed to be shown on large scale maps.  Since there were more borders on maps, the first use of color showed areas on maps enclosed by national borders (ibid. 3). 
        Furthermore, the article illustrates the need for spatial data in the creation of maps.  When it comes to boundaries, data can be collected from international agreements on where the boundaries are.  In this case, that agreement is the Treaty of Westphalia.  Even when a boundary is disputed, or there is no claim, the cartographer may blend the boundary or their colors using several techniques.  An example provided is the Carta Marina (Pickering 5), which does not show borders but blends the two colors between countries where a boundary is thought to exist.  The article explains many techniques of using boundaries to communicate spatial awareness on maps after the 1648 treaty.
        In summary, the article is more about the evolution of cartography applied to new spatial data than about a past event impacting a significant portion of the population.  Though the Treaty of Westphalia helps explain some events in history, the article doesn’t describe what those events specifically are; only the ways it influenced spatial communication.  This type of communication is a cornerstone of geographic work.  Without cartography, the use of words to explain spatial data is as unhelpful as understanding history without words and only maps.
 
Pickering, S. (2013). Borderlines: Maps and the Spread of the Westphalian State from Europe to Asia Part One – the European Context. International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences., XL-4/W3, 111-116. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprsarchives-XL-4-W3-111-2013