Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-16T03:07:53.096Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

I.—On the Evidence for Desert Conditions in the British Trias

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

Extract

A paper by Mr. J. Lomas on “Desert Conditions and the Origin of the British Trias” appeared last year in the Proceedings of the Livepool Geological Society, and was reprinted, with some slight abridgement, in the November and December numbers of this Magazine. Valuable and suggestive as it is, I venture to think that its author, as is not unfrequent with enthusiastic advocates, is attempting to prove too much. I have more than once expressed my belief that the pebble beds of the Bunter, perhaps also its Upper and Lower Sandstones, were deposited on a lowland by mountain-fed rivers, and think it very probable that this lowland, in consequence of its temperature rather extreme, as is the case in Turkestan and parts of Persia; the occasional wind-worn sands being due to the one cause and the angular breccias to the other. But I think the Keuper Marls, on the whole, aqueous rather than æolian in origin, and the Lower Keuper Sandstones, with the Waterstones, indicative of the gradual setting in of inland sea conditions. From time to time, before the salt lake attained its greatest dimensions, the wind might blow the lowland dust into dunes or carry it away from the shore till much of it settled down beneath the water, but I still think that a large part of the material, which now forms the red marl, was brought down as river mud to this magnified Dead Sea, by the streams which had formerly transported sand and pebbles. In regard to this, however, we cannot at present speak dogmatically. More study is needed of the constituents of the Keuper Marl, of fluviatile, lacustrine, and even marine muds, as well as of the lighter æolian deposits, before we can determine what parts wind and water have respectively taken in making this member of the Trias. Here, however, I may remark that neither Professor Watts nor Mr. Walcot Gibson was the first to observe that in the Charnwood Forest region the Keuper fills up hollows in the older rocks.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1908

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 337 note 1 Proc. Liverpool Geol. Soc., 1906–7, p. 172.

page 337 note 2 See for instance Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. lvi (1900), p. 288.Google Scholar

page 337 note 3 See for a fuller statement Quart. Jorun. Geol. Soc., vol. lviii (1902), p. 201Google Scholar. [Also paper on Wind-worn Pebbles in the British Isles,” by Bather, F. A. M.A., F.G.S.: Proc. Geol. Assoc., vol. xvi (1900), pp. 396420, pl. xiCrossRefGoogle Scholar and text-figures (with numerous references to the literature of the subject).—Edit. Geol. Mag.]

page 337 note 4 See for a general statement of my views Proc. Yorkshire Geol. Soc., vol. xvi (1906), pt. 1Google Scholar, on the origin of the British Trias.

page 338 note 1 Lomas, , ut supra, p. 184, cf. 193Google Scholar. See Hill, & Bonney, , Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. xxxiii (1877), p. 754CrossRefGoogle Scholar. But it was also noticed by earlier writers.

page 338 note 2 See Reade, T. Mellard, Geol. Mag., 1895, p. 341Google Scholar, and Plate XI.

page 338 note 3 Since 1895 I have but seldom visited this moorland.

page 339 note 1 The height of Style Cop is 721 feet (the pit is slightly lower). The road by the Waterworks, a few feet below the second pit, is 418 feet above sea-level. I should estimate the altitude of the Satnall Hills pits to be about the same.

page 339 note 2 The measurements throughout these notes are only estimates. It would not always have been possible to apply a tape, and as the weather was cold it was not worth risking a chill for the sake of a useless precision.

page 339 note 3 In this pit my nephew, (now) Lieut. F. G. C. Wetherall, found that fossiliferous pieces of Carboniferous Limestone were less rare than usual.

page 340 note 1 A few of the largest stones even exceed 6 inches in diameter.

page 340 note 2 See Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. lvi (1900), p. 288Google Scholar; Proc. Liverpool Geol. Soc., 1901–2, pp.230–233.