On the nature and limits of explanation in urban geography : with specific reference to the spatial structure of Victorian Edinburgh

• Main Author: Graham, Elspeth
• Published: Durham University 1977
• Online Access: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.457136

The thesis is an enquiry into the nature of urban geography, into how we are properly to understand and explain the patterns we find within a city. In Part I the characters of both human geography and scientific method are explored and the question, "Can we study human geography scientifically?" is posed. The answer given is a negative one and much of the discussion is devoted to making plain the way in which it is arrived at. The implications of not adopting a scientific mode of thought in the study of urban and human geography are then traced. The use of models and analogies as theoretical tools is examined and the essentials of theory formulation explored. Part 2 is concerned with the particular problems of the urban geographer - how he is to determine his object of study and what use he can legitimately make of quantitative techniques. It ends with the positive recommendation that urban geography be studied historically for, it is argued, urban geography is urban history. Lastly, Part 3 is devoted to Victorian Edinburgh between the years 1851 and 1891. It is an illustration of how the historical account of a city is to be constructed. The nature of historical explanation is further explored in the context of this specific example.