History and Geography are two related subjects, or, at least, it seems
unlikely that history would make much sense unless in a geographic context.
While history might be considered a chronological causal sequence of events
("linear"), geography gives it contemporary spread ("lateral").
It is only by a study of the past that we can really understand the
present, and predict the future.
"Those who ignore the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them" -
might be true, but even so, learning such lessons is no guarantee of
non-repetition, "human nature" being what it is.
History is, or should be, factual - there is only one set of past events
which match the reality; it is determining the full picture of the past
which can be difficult. Partial viewpoints, such as gender, indigenous,
national, religious, etc, while having some value, are not as important as
the Full view. "Special pleading" is a temptation, and the subjective
should give way to the objective.
Can history lead to "generalisations"? Is Human Nature such that the
motivation for war, for example, can let us predict what is likely given
similar conditions?
Geography is relevant to human history, as the history of world
exploration demonstrates; as too, colonial conquest, history of monarchy,
and nation states. The history of science, and invention of means of
determining latitude and longitude, the search for gold and other mineral
wealth...
Of most importance in the modern world is - to view our own species, Homo
Sapiens, with as much dispassionate objectivity as possible. Are we little
more than a Human Plague which has spread across Planet Earth, chomping away
at our environment? And what are the consequences?
History thus leads to Current Affairs, and to Futurology. The Rise - and
Fall - of the Human Species?
It was HG Wells who wrote "An Outline of History", and similar attempts at
a world view have been made since. The next step is the objectivity just
mentioned.

Archived from group: aus>education