Charles Lyell and the loess deposits of the Rhine valley

2015 ◽  
Vol 372 ◽  
pp. 45-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Smalley ◽  
Tivadar Gaudenyi ◽  
Mladen Jovanovic
Keyword(s):  
Charles Lyell ◽  
Rhine Valley ◽  
Loess Deposits

scholarly journals Two critical books in the history of loess investigation: ‘Charakteristik der Felsarten’ by Karl Caesar von Leonhard and ‘Principles of Geology’ by Charles Lyell

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 447-451
Author(s):  
Ulrich Hambach ◽  
Ian Smalley
Keyword(s):  
Charles Darwin ◽  
Charles Lyell ◽  
The Third ◽  
Worldwide Distribution ◽  
The World ◽  
Short Piece ◽  
History Of ◽  
Rhine Valley ◽  
Principles Of Geology ◽  
Short Section

Abstract The two critical books, launching the study and appreciation of loess, were ‘Charakteristik der Felsarten’ (CdF) by Karl Caesar von Leonhard, published in Heidelberg by Joseph Engelmann, in 1823-4, and ‘Principles of Geology’ (PoG) by Charles Lyell, published in London by John Murray in 1830-3. Each of these books was published in three volumes and in each case the third volume contained a short piece on loess (about 2-4 pages). These two books are essentially the foundations of loess scholarship. In CdF Loess [Loefs] was first properly defined and described; section 89 in vol. 3 provided a short study of the nature and occurrence of loess, with a focus on the Rhine valley. In PoG there was a short section on loess in the Rhine valley; this was in vol.3 and represents the major dissemination of loess awareness around the world. A copy of PoG3 (Principles of Geology vol. 3) reached Charles Darwin on the Beagle in Valparaiso in 1834; worldwide distribution. Lyell and von Leonhard met in Heidelberg in 1832. Von Leonhard and Heinrich Georg Bronn (1800-1862) showed Lyell the local loess. These observations provided the basis for the loess section in PoG3. Lyell acknowledged the influence of his hosts when he added a list of loess scholars to PoG; by the 5th edition in 1837 the list comprised H.G. Bronn, Karl Caesar von Leonhard (1779-1862), Ami Boue (1794-1881), Voltz, Johann Jakob Noeggerath (1788-1877), J. Steininger, P. Merian, Rozet, C.F.H. von Meyer (1801-1869), Samuel Hibbert (1782-1848) and Leonard Horner (1785-1864); a useful list of loess pioneers. The loess is a type of ground that has only recently been established, and it seems, the peculiarity of the Rhine region, and of a very general but inconsistent spread.” H.G. Bronn 1830

scholarly journals Leonard Horner in Bonn 1831–1833, finding loess and being incorporated into Lyell’s Loess Legion

Geologos ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-170
Author(s):  
Ian Smalley
Keyword(s):  
Charles Lyell ◽  
Geological Map ◽  
Rhine Valley ◽  
Principles Of Geology

AbstractLeonard Horner (1785–1864) was a pioneer in the study of loess. His 1836 paper on the geology of Bonn contained detailed descriptions of loess in the Rhine valley. He identified and presented loess as an interesting material for geological study. He investigated loess in the crater of the Rodderberg with Charles Lyell in 1833. He presented the first significant paper on loess in Britain in 1833, but it was not published until 1836. With the assistance of G.A. Goldfuss and J.J. Noegerath he conducted early studies of the Siebengebirge and published the first geological map of the region, and the first picture of loess, at Rhondorf by the Drachenfels. He became the eleventh person to be included in the list of loess scholars which Charles Lyell published in volume 3 of the Principles of Geology. These were Leonhard, Bronn, Boue, Voltz, Steininger, Merian, Rozet, Hibbert in 1833, Noeggerath, von Meyer in 1835, Horner in 1837. Horner arrived after the publication of his studies on the loess at Bonn in 1836.

scholarly journals Development of Accurate and Reliable 14C Chronologies for Loess Deposits: Application to the Loess Sequence of Nussloch (Rhine Valley, Germany)

Radiocarbon ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 43 (2B) ◽  
pp. 611-618 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Hatté ◽  
Luiz Carlos Pessenda ◽  
Andreas Lang ◽  
Martine Paterne
Keyword(s):  
Organic Matter ◽  
Organic Carbon Content ◽  
High Accumulation ◽  
Proxy Records ◽  
Global Environmental ◽  
Rhine Valley ◽  
Loess Deposits ◽  
Glacial Periods ◽  
Very High ◽  
Good Agreement

Due to very high accumulation rates, loess sequences are best suited archives for the continental paleoclimate of glacial periods. Accurate chronologies cannot be easily established by radiocarbon-dating, because of the lack of organic macrorests, the only material for reliable 14C dating so far. A chemical protocol is reported to extract the organic matter of loess (organic carbon content lower than 0.1% by weight) for accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) 14C dating. Sediments were taken from the loess sequence of Nussloch, for which a large dataset of luminescence ages (TL, IRSL/OSL) is available. The 14C chronology of the organic matter extracted from loess is in good agreement with the corresponding luminescence ages. It allows high resolution correlations with climatic proxy signals (magnetic susceptibility, malacological assemblages, δ13C on organic matter, etc.) derived from the loess sequence and global environmental proxy records.

Charles Lyell from 1832 to 1835: marriage, Principles, 2 trips to Heidelberg, snails and loess

2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Smalley ◽  
Slobodan Markovic ◽  
Ken O’Hara-Dhand
Keyword(s):  
Charles Lyell ◽  
Rhine Valley ◽  
Principles Of Geology

AbstractCharles Lyell, on his way to becoming a famous geologist, married Mary Horner in Bonn in July 1832; volume 3 of his ‘Principles of Geology’ was published by John Murray in London in May 1833. Between these two dates Lyell encountered the loess of the Rhine valley. The loess impressed Lyell and he included mentions of it in the Principles, first in 1833 and then, with some revised ideas, in volume 4 of the 4th edition published in 1835. Twelve editions of the Principles were published between 1830 and 1875 and it became one of the most important works in the development of geology, and made a major contribution to the worldwide spread of loess awareness. It is possible that Lyell was drawn to the loess because of its high molluscan content, he was particularly attracted to the study of shells.

scholarly journals An enthusiasm for loess: Leonard Horner in Bonn and Liu Tungsheng in Beijing

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 925-931
Author(s):  
Ian Smalley ◽  
Slobodan B. Markovic
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
Paradigm Shift ◽  
World Wide ◽  
Event Structure ◽  
Charles Lyell ◽  
The World ◽  
Great Scholar ◽  
Scientific Context ◽  
Loess Deposits ◽  
New Vision

Abstract Liu Tungsheng featured on the list of twelve notable loess investigators prepared for the great LoessFest meeting, held in Heidelberg and Bonn in 1999. He fully deserved his position on this list of eminent loess scholars; in fact it might be argued that his was the major contribution. His contribution was a true paradigm shift in the world of loess investigation.Obruchev and Richthofen had produced an earlier paradigm shift when they propagated the idea that loess deposits form by aeolian deposition- a paradigm shift away from the earlier Lyellian idea of lacustrine or fluvial deposition. But that was a fairly simple shift, a tweak of the sedimentological event structure. Liu, and his co-workers in China, produced a new vision, a new way of looking at loess, not so much a paradigm shift as a paradigm enlargement. Post-Liu the Quaternary era was a new land, a new place with a real chronology and a landscape of events and amazing happenings. Liu related to the amazing. We propose that he played a role in promoting and maintaining an enthusiasm for loess. Loess science has become very precise and the scholars are respected for their exact and insightful observations; but Liu offered an extra dimension, we need to recognize the dimension of enthusiasm; the realization that loess is a remarkable material and the need to propagate that fact. And in recognising Liu as the major loess enthusiast of the 20th Century we should acknowledge Leonard Horner, the first loess enthusiast. Karl Caesar von Leonhard named loess and placed it in a scientific context; Charles Lyell took the idea of loess and spread the science world-wide, but it was Horner, in those few years at Bonn (1831-1833), who recognised loess for the marvellous material that it was and gave us permission to be enthusiastic. Liu followed determinedly in these footsteps; a great scholar, and a great enthusiast. Loess scholarship needs careful and precise investigation and reporting but it also needs a broad sweep of enthusiasm, an appreciation of loess for the extraordinary material that it is.

scholarly journals Der Löß am unteren Mittel- und Niederrhein

1960 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Horst Remy
Keyword(s):  
Climatic Changes ◽  
Soil Zone ◽  
Rhine Valley ◽  
Loess Deposits ◽  
Lower Rhine

Abstract. In the Middle and Lower Rhine Valley the age of loess deposits is recognized by their relation to the Lower Middle Terrace of the Mosel and Rhine Rivers. Nearly all loess is regarded to be Würm-loess, which is separated by several soil zones. In the lower part of the Würm-period climatic changes are clearly indicated by thickly and well developed soil zones („Parabraunerde"). Later on soil zones become generally thin and less distinct („Naßböden"). In this later period, at some places, one soil zone is typical („kalkhaltige Braunerde"). In the profile of Metternich this horizon included artifacts (Gravettian).

Darwin's two competing phylogenetic trees: marsupials as ancestors or sister taxa?

2012 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. David Archibald
Keyword(s):  
Fossil Record ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Phylogenetic Trees ◽  
Charles Darwin ◽  
The Other ◽  
Charles Lyell ◽  
Single Origin ◽  
Molecular Studies ◽  
Richard Owen ◽  
First Time

Studies of the origin and diversification of major groups of plants and animals are contentious topics in current evolutionary biology. This includes the study of the timing and relationships of the two major clades of extant mammals – marsupials and placentals. Molecular studies concerned with marsupial and placental origin and diversification can be at odds with the fossil record. Such studies are, however, not a recent phenomenon. Over 150 years ago Charles Darwin weighed two alternative views on the origin of marsupials and placentals. Less than a year after the publication of On the origin of species, Darwin outlined these in a letter to Charles Lyell dated 23 September 1860. The letter concluded with two competing phylogenetic diagrams. One showed marsupials as ancestral to both living marsupials and placentals, whereas the other showed a non-marsupial, non-placental as being ancestral to both living marsupials and placentals. These two diagrams are published here for the first time. These are the only such competing phylogenetic diagrams that Darwin is known to have produced. In addition to examining the question of mammalian origins in this letter and in other manuscript notes discussed here, Darwin confronted the broader issue as to whether major groups of animals had a single origin (monophyly) or were the result of “continuous creation” as advocated for some groups by Richard Owen. Charles Lyell had held similar views to those of Owen, but it is clear from correspondence with Darwin that he was beginning to accept the idea of monophyly of major groups.

The status of Gideon Mantell's “first” Iguanodon tooth in the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa

1997 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 397-421 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOHN C. YALDWYN ◽  
GARRY J. TEE ◽  
ALAN P. MASON
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Charles Lyell ◽  
The Status ◽  
History Of ◽  
Gideon Mantell

A worn Iguanodon tooth from Cuckfield, Sussex, illustrated by Mantell in 1827, 1839, 1848 and 1851, was labelled by Mantell as the first tooth sent to Baron Cuvier in 1823 and acknowledged as such by Sir Charles Lyell. The labelled tooth was taken to New Zealand by Gideon's son Walter in 1859. It was deposited in a forerunner of the Museum of New Zealand, Wellington in 1865 and is still in the Museum, mounted on a card bearing annotations by both Gideon Mantell and Lyell. The history of the Gideon and Walter Mantell collection in the Museum of New Zealand is outlined, and the Iguanodon tooth and its labels are described and illustrated. This is the very tooth which Baron Cuvier first identified as a rhinoceros incisor on the evening of 28 June 1823.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document