The naming of the Permian by Roderick Murchison in 1841 is well known. This is partly because he ‘completed’ the stratigraphic column at system level, but also because of the exotic aspects of his extended fieldwork in remote parts of Russia and Murchison's reputed character. Here, we explore several debated and controversial aspects of this act, benefiting from access to documents and reports notably from Russian sources. Murchison or Sedgwick could have provided a name for the unnamed lower New Red Sandstone in 1835 based on British successions or those in Germany, so perhaps the Imperial aim of naming time from British geology was not the urgent task some have assumed. Murchison has been painted as arrogant and Imperialistic, which was doubtless true, but at the time many saw him as a great leader, even an attractive individual. Others suggest he succeeded because he stood on the shoulders of local geologists; however, his abilities at brilliant and rapid geological synthesis are undoubted. Two unexpected consequences of his work are that this arch conservative is revered in Russia as a hero of geological endeavours, and, for all his bombast, his ‘Permian’ was not widely accepted until 100 years after its naming.Supplementary material:https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.5412079
Complex of methods to evaluate inhibiting properties of muds in relation to clay swelling rocks (at example of “reactive” clays of montmorillonite group of Kazanian, Tatarian ages in Permian system)
