inicio >
english
Next, you can read an to english articles
The first one it is witen by the Spanish Science ant Tecnology Fundation and it is about Geography in Spain and the Landscape Studies. The other article is from the Journal Geographical Review (Vol. 91, nº 1-2, January-April, 2001, pp. 353-363) and was writen by Josefina Gómez Mendoza.
If you want you can can download the digital version of both:
FECYT_20004_Geography_Spain.pdf
(99 Kb)
JGM_2001_fieldwork_in_madrid_geographical_circle.pdf
(160 Kb)
Only in the last fifteen years has geography become a fully-fledged degree course in its own right in Spain. There may be a number of reasons for this, though the most logical conclusion is that this science, hitherto included among the humanities for reasons of tradition or academic inertia, has recently undergone an interesting evolution forcing it to draw up its own framework of research and methodology. This is a period of consolidation for geography in Spain which, because of its specific characteristics, has many original contributions to make within the framework of international geographic studies. In this respect the work of several geographers has been and continues to be of fundamental importance, not least the contribution made by Josefina Gómez Mendoza at the Autonomous University of Madrid which deserves special mention The research carried out in the last five years has made inroads into previous lines of investigation developed by this geographer and her team, often in co-operation with other Spanish and international teams. An underlying characteristic of her endeavours in the encouragement of teamwork in a field traditionally based on individual contributions.
Not only have landscape studies, as such, been consolidated in Spain, but they also represent a good example of larger teams working together in networks. This is in line with the objectives of the European Landscape Agreement signed by Spain in Florence in the year 2000 and which came into force in March 2004. Parliamentary ratification of the agreement in still pending, Gómez Mendoza’s team, along with teams of other European countries where these studies are particularly developed, such as France, the Netherlands and Great Britain, has made an enormous contribution to the recognition of landscape studies. These studies cover a wide range of issues, from suburban agriculture and its advantages in terms of prowimity to urban areas to the most complex relationships between natural, politicall, economic, cultural and historical issues related to landscape. Perhaps one of the most significant contributionss of Spanish geography in the field of landscapes has been the production of an atlas of Spanish landscapes. These are defined and classified according to the most recent concepts of the term landscape, which is now understood as a working concept for the organisation of territory and the maintenance of natural and cultural heritage. Thus the atlas serves as a meeting point for the exchange of knowledge about Spanish landscapes and those of other European countries.
Similarly forests, the evolutions of forestry as a science, its administration, management and associated cultural elements, constitute another important area of research. Of special interest in this respect are studies on the silviculture plantations in Spain and their role in the evolutions of forests, as well as studies on the age-old problem of forest fires. In addition, a new and promising line of research relates to the knowledge and diagnosis of the urban development. The results gives due recognition of the help provided by forestry and urban resources in the correct interpretation of the work done on the forestry ecosystems and their transformation, as well as the integration of this sectorial work in more consistent and less fragmented territorial policies.
Studies on the history of geography and environmental and territorial issues make a notable contribution to the scientific and professional consolidation of geographers. They also have the effect of improving the profile of Spanish geography at national and international level and facilitate its due recognition among other schools and disciplines. They also have the effect of improving the profile of Spanish geography at national and international level and facilitate its due recognition among other schools and disciplines. Furthermore, its contribution in creating and understanding of the geographical variables involved in the creation of the new regional political map is of great practical interest. So too is its contribution to the making of policies with a strong territorial element at cross-border, regional and sub-regional level.
I am a trained historian. I confess, still today I am fascinated by deciphering and interpreting the past, still revel in the solitude and reflection of the archive and the library, I am still passionate about the facts revealed to us by writings of a former age. Fortunately, the practice of geography has not only not deprived me of those satisfactions, but has allowed me to give them new meaning, to adjust my outlook. And it has added a fresh dimension, with the discovery and the satisfaction of the geography trip and fieldwork.
If my experience is of any interest, it is as a modest part of the wide, genuine and central development of field work of the Madrid circle of the Spanish Geographical School. This school was organised at the end of the 1960’s around the master Manuel de Terán by the second generation of his disciples, of which the most important were Eduardo Martínez de Pisón and José Antonio de Zulueta. These were the final years of the dictatorship (Franco died in December 1975), the first economic boom in Spain, still within the restraints of the political structures of the system. In the universities, protest was gaining momentum, there were the beginnings of a certain freedom, and the scientific isolation of decades was finally being breached. New fields of knowledge, new curricula emerged, among them, from 1968 on, the second cycle of geography, a branch of the common trunk of geography and history in the Humanities Faculties. The General Education Law of 1970 paved the way for impressive growth in the number of Spanish universities and students. Following the introduction in 1990 of geography studies with a minimum of 300 credits, there are now over twenty-five public universities offering degrees in geography.
Terán (1904-1994) belonged to the Spanish liberal and anti-Franco tradition. He had been personally linked with the Institución Libre de Enseñanza (ILE), a profound movement for regeneration in education at the end of the nineteenth and start of the twentieth centuries, which rose up against the emptiness of official education, and whose influence can still be seen in the best initiatives of this change of millennium. Terán was, before the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939), teacher at the Instituto-Escuela, one of the educational initiatives linked to the ILE, abolished like so many other things after the victory of Franco. Many of us –Nicolás Ortega, Eduardo Martínez de Pisón, Ángel Cabo, I myself - have written about the educational value of the ILE. I only have time here to mention, as part of my argument, the fact that in the “educational naturalism” of this organisation, and specifically of its founder, Francisco Giner de los Ríos, the excursion or field trip was a central part of the educational process. And it was this idea that, many years later, Terán was able to transfer to the teaching of geography.
The radical reform of educational methods proposed by the ILE sought to replace the sterile teaching of geography from books with lessons on concrete things, and field trips, geography out in the open air. "In order for the teaching of Geography to be about things, not words and terms repeated without understanding them, the student must be able to see the types and forms these terms refer to, the teacher must explain in situ", said Rafael Torres Campos in a conference he gave at the Madrid Geographical Society back in 1882 (Torres Campos, 1882, re-edited, 1990-91). But this philosophy went far beyond simply “teaching in the open air”, it defended teaching about things, but also education in all areas of life.
"School outings”, said Manuel B. Cossío, the leading disciple of Giner, “an essential element in the intuitive process, have, since its inception, been one of the characteristics of the ILE (…) What the student learns in terms of concrete knowledge is very little, if we compare it with the vast spiritual horizon which opens up as we contemplate people and places (…) with the serenity of spirit, the freedom of manner, the richness of resources, the self-awareness and control, the physical and moral vigour which result from effort, from overcoming obstacles, suffering setbacks, unexpected incidents and adventures; in short, with the world of social education which is acquired as impressions vary, characters clash, in the close solidarity of free and friendly contact between teachers and students."(Cossío, 1908, 22-23. in Ortega, 1988, 72).
This is the idea of the excursion that Terán learnt, and which, without a doubt, he transmitted first to his secondary school students, and later to his disciples at the university. Fieldwork which, in all areas and at all ages is, in addition to teaching and learning geography, “physical, moral and intellectual education” of men and women (Terán, 1977, 196, in Ortega, 1988, 72). Nicolás Ortega summed it up well when he said these "walks and excursions, short or long trips, provided the framework for experience, in which knowledge and feeling, communion and doctrine, intelligence and sight all come together." (Ortega, 1988, 68).
Returning to what teaching in the field meant for the group of geographers to which I belong, it is necessary to add two things about this first period. The first is that on trips, and in enjoying nature, Giner de los Ríos was very much aware of what he called “geological aesthetics”, the relation between the ground and the landscape, between geology and aesthetics (Giner, 1884, 1999 edition, 96-99). This emphasis on the terrain and the rock formations should be understood within the framework of the systematic study of the relief forms of the Iberian peninsula which at that time, at the end of the nineteenth century, was reaching completion. And it meant a geological naturalism which was continued by the great geographers of the post-war period, such as Juan Dantín Cereceda and Eduardo Hernández-Pacheco. "The landscape”, said Hernández-Pacheco, “is the result of the geographical environment and the geological milieu" (Hernández-Pacheco, 1934).
The second fact that should be taken into account, intimately related to the first, is the predilection shown by those of the ILE for the Guadarrama mountains in the Central Iberian System, more than any others the ‘mountain of Madrid’. Guadarrama was the favourite subject of study and excursions in the period before the war, and was also the first Spanish mountains to experience urban development (Martínez de Pisón, 1998). Something similar, though perhaps with less social significance, to what happened with the Pyrenees and the important field trip movement in Catalonia. This interest and this knowledge, in which again Manuel de Terán participated, were to influence the initial organisation of fieldwork programmes when university geography studies became established at the University of Madrid.
The civil war and the post-war period of repression destroyed many things in Spain. Specifically, it meant the abolition of the Junta para Ampliación de Estudios e Investigaciones Científicas (Board for Extension of Studies and Scientific Research) which, promoted by outstanding heirs of the ILE, had, in the 1920’s achieved a first time of glory for Spanish science. To replace it, the Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científucas (CSIC :Scientific Research Council) was set up, a centralised research body which still exists, and under its auspices, The Juan Sebastián Elcano Geography Institute ("el Elcano", as it was dubbed by Spanish geographers). Its promoters intended the Elcano to perform a geopolitical mission, the study of the "land of the home country and the empire ", "the physical heritage of the Nation ". But those in positions of responsibility at the Institute, with Terán at the head, managed to avoid any political temptations and escape the straitjacket of sectarian patriotism (Gómez Mendoza, 1997,143).
To do this, they introduced a programme of studies on the reality of local and regional Spanish geography, the central instruments of which were fieldwork and rigorous archive documentation. Initially, it was a question of contrasting political proclamations with facts “hewn from the rocks of reality”, transferred to monographic research studies based on direct exploration in the field (Gómez Mendoza, 1997, 114). The result was an invaluable series of monographs, in the French style, which were the dissertations or doctoral theses of their authors, and which were published in Estudios Geográficos, the journal of the Instituto Elcano. This journal was published continuously from 1940 on, though naturally subject to the changes in orientation determined by the convulsions in geography studies, beginning with that which took place in 1968, as well as by the appearance of many other geographical journals with the rapid growth of universities in the 1980’s.
Three aspects this period of the 1940’s seem to me to be of interest in relation to the experience and validity of fieldwork. The first is that, from that time on, the modernising trend in university geography studies has taken place within the Arts Faculties; this facilitated relationships with historians, anthropologists or art historians, but meant complementary study in physical geography was necessary, a task enthusiastically undertaken by Spanish geographers. On the “geography trips” organised by the Elcano Institute in its early years, geologists sympathetic to geography and to this institute took charge of helping participants learn how to read the geological map, how to recognise types of relief in the field, how to draw block diagrams and land sketches, etc. I am thinking, above all, of the relevant teachings of the director of the Barcelona headquarters of the Elcano Institute, and professor of physical geography, Luis Solé Sabarís.
Later, prolonged field trips by each investigator in his area of study generally did the rest. These stays were not always easy, given the hardships and the difficulties in travelling in the ruined post-war Spain. And at times they were exposed to the dangers of a repressive state: one geographer who wrote his thesis in the 1940’s told me in the sixties, how the police would often monitor his movements, at a time when there were still rebels in hiding, especially in mountain areas. Salvador Llobet enigmatically refers to this in his book on the Catalan mountain Montseny: "For agricultural and livestock matters, (I have made) visits to homes in order to determine the characteristic types, ways of life, etc.; I have made frequent investigations among the people of the country, if the informers were open to this; and also often imitating the innocent questions of the mountaineer, so as not to arouse suspicion in these times of economic interventionism (sic)"(Llobet, 1947, 2).
The second question to which I refer is that the French work model came to dominate almost absolutely, for a number of different reasons, in the Spanish regional geography programme, and with it the requirement of methodological fieldwork. But this influence also had its negative aspects and limitations. The predominance of French text books (Derruau, Gourou, Papy, etc.) led to explanations of the Spanish reality being plagued with anachronistic examples and even with foreign classification terms. Apart from the classic bocage, combe and cluse, I remember for example the use of demoiselles coiffées for the modelling of conglomerates, or fontaines de Vaucluse for karst resurgences. And this despite the efforts to adapt of translators and teachers.
Thirdly, the study of Spanish regional geography in the classical period was limited, both by the method and the programme, to their own territory. I pointed this out on another occasion, and it has also been said of the French school of the middle of the twentieth century. "The regional geography programme, carried out in a community without sufficient maturity or the necessary means to compare and contrast results, (though it did achieve its aims of modernity and methodological rigour), led the Spanish school of geography to close in on itself and its own reality."(Gómez Mendoza, 1997, 146).
This situation gave rise to fieldwork exclusively within the borders of our country, at least until the 1980’s. This fieldwork, which for the researcher was a necessity, and for students a requirement that began to be incorporated into geography studies in the 1970’s, was of many different types though, at least in the 1960’s and 70’s, there was a clear preference for geomorphologic analysis and mapping. But Terán himself opened the way to many other possibilities.
When I was a student of Manuel de Terán, he no longer personally went on trips with students. He had however done so previously, not systematically but fruitfully. Ángel Cabo, one of his first-generation disciples speaks of this in an emotive evocation of the teaching and the geography of “walking and seeing” that they practiced: "The memory of Terán immediately comes to mind, climbing up the Ameal de Pablo to explain to Antonio López Gómez, Jesús García Fernández and me – his disciples and at that time young assistants, who followed him up to the summit of that mountain – the morphology of Gredos, after a uncomfortable night spent in a tent by the shore of the Laguna Grande. And I remember him climbing down, from rock to rock, from Peñalara to El Paular, when the four of us had suffered a sleepless night in which a gale had several times blown the tent down on top of us, and as we descended our rucksacks, packed with instruments, the tent and tinned food, dug painfully into our backs ".(Cabo, 1988, 138).
Again the Sistema Central: Gredos, and especially Guadarrama, the Lozoya valley, the monastery of El Paular, places of worship and culture. “I have learnt about Nature from two schools, the Pyrenees in Aragon, and Guadarrama. These have subsequently served as models against which to compare all other landscapes I have explored " said Martínez de Pisón in 1988 in an introduction to the work of Concepción Sanz on the central Guadarrama.
But Terán, with his intelligent, wide-awake look, and little given to locking himself away in his ivory tower (Gómez Mendoza, 1987, 35-47), explored many other landscapes. He had a particularly extensive knowledge of rural ones, and an excellent understanding of urban ones, especially small historic cities, but also the bustle and complexity of major urban centres like Madrid. Some of his descriptions of landscapes are memorable. Just two examples: the final image of Ribamontán al Mar, a coastal region in the province of Santander. "From high up on the Alto de Galizano, we contemplated for the last time the panorama of Ribamontán al Mar. For many days we have observed, from different vantage points, a landscape which has become familiar; we have lived alongside its people, watching them as they went about their work, walked along the many paths; we have been inside a number of houses, and now the entire panorama, which stretches out below us, seems full of life and sensations; all its forms and colours are expressive features of its physiognomy, and the landscape of Ribamontán reveals its most intimate secrets, like the face of a friend whose life, spirit and mystery have become transparent to us." (Terán, 1951, 108).
This evocative translation of sight into words can also be found at the end of Terán’s comparative study of two very different Madrid streets, Alcalá, bureaucratic and residential, and Toledo, populous and down-to-earth. "More mature and aged, more conservative in nature, tradition and aspect, more homogenous along its entire length, the Calle de Toledo. Discontinuous in time and space, the Calle de Alcalá; its ground plan and elevation many times revised in a continuous process of growth and renewal which has, at all times, reflected the preoccupations and metamorphoses of the capital, it is a street that runs through time, from baroque palaces to the financial and banking district, and space, from the magnificence of polished stone, golden bronze and marble, to the tiny, humble brick around the tile factories of Las Ventas". (Terán, 1961, 375). This is the final image of a study whose basic instrument is to follow the route of a given street to produce a kind of urban transect.
Nonetheless, Terán warned of the risks of basing teaching on local surroundings. The local context only makes sense in light of the general, and in local geography a considerable measure of prudence is required.
After this long digression, I return to my first experiences of field trips. I hope I have successfully conveyed the keys to our identity as a group, and the importance we placed in field work. At the time when university geography studies were first being organised, field work took two directions: the geomorphologic and the regional.
The first type, a brilliant practitioner of which was -and is- Eduardo Martínez de Pisón, consisted of “seducing” by means of geomorphologic interpretation. Recently, a biologist remarked to me that he uses some cases of biological attraction and appeal to awaken enthusiasm for life in both children and adults. He called it “biological seduction”. I can confirm that the geomorphologic explanation was equally useful in those glory years I speak of. I remember my first trips, my ‘initiation’, with Martínez de Pisón to the limestone canyons of the relief folds at the edge of the Iberian Meseta. I especially remember studying the canyon formed by the river Duratón in Sepúlveda, a Castilian city that still today has managed to conserve its disdainful energy. The young students and assistants followed Eduardo along the canyon, studying the series of Mesozoic limestone folds, in an attempt how this spectacular modelling, this deep canyon could have been formed. Then, allowing time to create suspense, Eduardo revealed the intrusive behaviour of the underlying, softer materials.
These years also marked the beginning of the field geomorphology courses organised by Jesús García Fernández, another of Terán’s disciples and professor at the University of Valladolid, first in the south of the Cantabric Range, and later in the north of the Iberian Range. They have continued now for some twenty-five years, and have been the most important geography fieldwork school in Spain. But these courses are the subject of another article in this issue, by my friend and colleague Valentín Cabero.
Later, Martínez de Pisón became an expert on mountain reliefs at international level, a frequent visitor to the Himalayas. He is also a recognised specialist in volcanic and glacier reliefs. But he continues to seduce our students with visits to nearby sites, such as the Duratón canyon. Not long ago, he complained that in this canyon, one of nature’s laboratories and an open-air school for so many generations, has now been designated a nature park, and permission is needed to enter it with students. Paradoxes of nature conservation which has become weighed down with bureaucracy. Paradoxes, as Pisón himself said in his most recent book on mountains, of conservation that, faced with increasing urban development, creates more and more reserves: "if this treatment of our territory continues to its logical end, in the distant future there will remain only protected islands of nature in a sea of built-up areas. Drop by drop, we are losing so many landscapes, and the shadow of the risk of spoiling them is being cast over chosen areas.·"(Martínez de Pisón, 2000, 256).
At the beginning of the 1970’s, with Pisón and Zulueta, we sowed the seed of what regional geography was to become. Field trips lasting several days, carefully prepared and documented, tracing and studying landscape units and elements of culture, spending time when necessary on interviews and visits, as well as using and abusing the land. That is why we travelled around, among others, the Tierra de Plasencia, in Extremadura, the Iberian mountain ranges of Albarracín and Cuenca, and many other areas.
At the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, field work was, from the very start, recognised as a necessity. Zulueta is still one of the fieldwork teachers most appreciated by students. His excursion to the Basque Country has become a classic, as has that on which, along with his agrarian colleague, Rafael Mata, they travel to Andalusia and Extremadura to compare the varied landscapes of those regions. Though not with the same continuity, the teaching of Spanish geography has taken also us to Asturias, Catalonia, Valencia, etc.
We defend the need for these trips to different regions, if anything even more so now that the decentralised organisation of the Spanish State has paradoxically led to reduced mobility of students and teachers. However anachronistic it may appear, the system of Autonomous Communities has, on occasions, created barriers and ignorance between regions. There are now students who are more familiar with distant landscapes than those regions closest to them.
I want to conclude with a final reference which bears out my conviction that contact with the geographical reality is an invaluable teaching resource. For a number of years now I have been teaching theory and methodology of geography. This can at times be a very dry subject, and students react to it in very different ways, some enthusiastic, others distant, unengaged by it. I have found ways, looked for opportunities to relate the texts we are studying in class to the real landscapes explored and studied by the authors. One of the most fruitful experiences was, for example, a visit to the ‘huertas’, the market gardens of Aranjuez, a former Royal Residence near Madrid, on the banks of the Tagus, an island of fertility in an unpromising region, with the enormous cultural wealth of huertas whose edges are marked by avenues lined with centuries-old sicomoros: a real colonisation in the form of a “programmed market garden”. In 1948, Terán devoted to this phenomenon a wonderful study on historical geography. And many others have since recognised the change in use, each one taking a different epistemological focus: structuralist, planning, conservationist…I can vouch for the extent to which a visit to such a singular landscape has helped students when it comes to reading a whole range of texts, or to fully grasp texts they have previously read.
It has been thirty years since those first attempts to define and organise fieldwork of which I have spoken here. Thirty years in which some of my best moments in really understanding geography have been shared experiences in the field. Perhaps that is because I have been fortunate in having had exceptional companions. Very rarely has the experience been frustrating, and those because the work was badly programmed, or because the weather appallingly bad, etc.
Fieldwork is now, if anything, even more vital. An essential part of good geography teaching, good in the sense that it follows a sensible, progressive programme. I know for a fact that students classify teachers into those who “can do fieldwork" and those who can’t. And I don’t need to tell which ones they prefer.
And fieldwork is even more vital in research. Obviously, with different resources and different aims from when we first began. But, participating in recent years in the preparation of an atlas of Spanish and Iberian landscapes, directed by my colleagues at the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Rafael Mata and Concepción Sanz, has entailed making long trips around all the regions of Spain. These are essential in evaluating and weighing up prior knowledge, the dynamics of the landscapes, the criteria of homogeneity and rupture, and even for drawing up criteria for interpretation and cataloguing.
But, above all, they are essential if you are to continue your personal dialogue with nature and landscapes, make your own personal reading of them. Martínez de Pisón expressed, in a particularly apt and emotive way in his recent Cuadernos de montaña (Mountain Notebooks, his dialogue with nature, "which is quite simply the image, outside yourself, of an internal dialogue. (…) Landscapes are like mirrors that merely reflect those who look into them " (Martínez de Pisón, 2000, 43-44).
And it is this dialogue that makes us people. Stoddart already expressed this opinion in his call to good geographers to abandon that other geographical study, increasingly trivial and tedious. We geographers must concern ourselves with the "real, tangible, palpable world, inhabited by real men and women who have transformed it. (...) That is precisely what geography is about: the diversity of lands, their resources, human survival on this planet " (Stoddart, 1987).
And in this, fieldwork continues to be the geographic means of communication par excellence. A few years ago we were told something that is very true: "The diagnostic experience is that most typically geographic exercise –a field trip. Regardless of speciality, nothing reminds geographers of how much they share –and how much geographers differ from colleagues in other disciplines –than a multidisciplinary transect through almost any landscape in the world. Historians, sociologists and political scientists will cluster in the back of the bus where they will chat in a desultory manner or sleep. Geologists may be roused into observational action by road cuts but will see little between them. Meteorologists will be helpless without their computers and models. Only the geographers –again regardless of speciality- will incessantly rubberneck, gawk, point, explain, speculate, and argue about what they are seeing, more or less, without regard to whether it is urban or rural, physical or anthropogenic, beautiful or hideous. In real places, much of what seems to separate geographers evaporates, and what unites them becomes vividly obvious”. (Abler, Marcus, Olson, 1992, 2).
I only hope that fieldwork will continue to unite geographers for many years to come.
Bibliography
Abler, R.F.,Marcus, M.G.,Olson, J.M.eds.1992. Geography's Inner Worlds. Pervasive Themes in Contemporary American Geography, New Brunswuck, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
Cabo, A.1988. Naturaleza y paisaje en la concepción geográfica de Manuel de Terán. In Gómez Mendoza, J., Ortega Cantero, N. et al. Viajeros y paisajes, Madrid, Alianza Universidad: 135-150.
Cossío, Manuel B. 1966 [1908]. Principios pedagógicos de la Institución. In Cossío, De su jornada (Fragmentos), Madrid.
Giner de los Ríos, F. 1999 [1886]. Paisaje. Boletín Institución Libre de Enseñanza, IIª época. Mayo, 34-35: 95-102.
Gómez Mendoza, J.1987. El pensamiento geográfico de Manuel de Terán. In La geografía española y mundial en los años ochenta. Universidad Complutense de Madrid: 35-47.
Gómez Mendoza, J. 1997. La formación de la Escuela Española de Geografía (1940-1952). Instituciones, revistas, congresos y programas. Ería. Revista cuatrimestral de Geografía, 42: 107-146.
Hernández-Pacheco, E. 1934. El paisaje en general y las características del paisaje hispano Boletín de la Institución Libre de Enseñanza, LIX.
Llobet, S. 1947. El medio y la vida en el Montseny. Instituto de Estudios Pirenaicos, Instituto Elcano (CSIC).
Martínez de Pisón, E. 1998. Madrid y la Sierra de Guadarrama. In Madrid y la Sierra de Guadarrama, Museo Municipal de Madrid, 13-33.
Martínez de Pisón, E. 2000. Cuadernos de montaña, Madrid, Edición Temas de hoy.
Ortega, N. 1988. La experiencia viajera en la Institución Libre de Enseñanza. In Gómez Mendoza,J., Ortega Cantero et al.Viajeros y paisajes, Madrid, Alianza Universidad, 67-88.
Stoddart, D.1988 [1987]. Altas miras para una geografía de final de siglo. In Gómez Mendoza, J., Muñoz Jiménez, J. y Ortega Cantero, N. [eds]. El pensamiento geográfico. De Humboldt a las corrientes radicales. Madrid, Alianza Editorial: 531-545.
Terán, M.de 1951. Ribamontán al Mar. Estudios Geográficos, 42: 77-110.
Terán, M.de 1961. Dos calles madrileñas: las de Alcalá y Toledo. Estudios Geográficos, 84-85:375-476.
Terán ,M.de 1977. El Instituto-Escuela y sus relaciones con la Junta para Ampliación de Estudios y la Institución Libre de Enseñanza. In En el centenario de la Institución Libre de Enseñanza, Madrid.
Torres Campos, R.1990-91[1882]. Conferencia sobre viajes escolares. Boletín de la Real Sociedad Geográfica, 231-281.
Josefina Gómez Mendoza - Departamento de Geografía - Universidad
Autónoma de Madrid
contador
-
