Eich: Charlotte Hibbert sketches...

Charlotte Hibbert provided the pictures and made the map for the study by Samuel Hibbert (1832) of the Extinct Volcanos(sic) near Neuwied.  This is the village of Eich, in the loess region. The map was the first(?) to show loess anywhere. [see Loess Letter 67 for real words by Hibbert on loess - at www.loessletter.msu.edu ]

 

Charlesworth encounters the Steinsohle

"A pebbly base, the Steinsohle of German geologists, is common in north Germany, especially near the Mittelgebirge, and is general in Mississippi and Missouri basins where it may be 10-15 ft (3-4.5m) thick."  (p.515)

 

Charlesworth cites Hardcastle

This was unexpected; reference 159 in the Charlesworth loess section includes a mention of John Hardcastle (inventor of loess stratigraphy, father of palaeoclimatology, hero of Timaru). The amazing thoroughness of JKC is revealed again, but there is the dawning apprehension that he was too thorough- that the reader is buried in data, that JKC might have been better advised to have fewer references and more discussion..

We reproduce reference 159 as it appears in JKC vol.1 (the vol.1 references refer to the vol.2 references- all will become clear).

159  679,  367;  1246,  240; 1633, VII (3), 31;  L.Cockayne & R.M.Laing, T.N.Z.I.  43, 1910, 344;  J.Hardcastle,  ibid. 22, 1890, 406;  R.Speight,  ibid. 40, 1908,  16;  A.Heim,  Njahrsbl. 1905, 1.

Now- the italics belong to JKC, the JH emphasis is ours. Italic numbers are references in the reference list in vol.2:

679  J v Haast  1879  Geology of the Provinces of Canterbury and Westland

1246  Park J  1910  Geology of New Zealand

1633  G Steinmann  1910-1950  Handbuch der Regional Geologie

TNZI is the Transactions and Proceedings of the New Zealand Institute, and the Hardcastle reference is to his paper on the Loess of Timaru- not to his other famous paper on Loess as a Climate Register. It looks like 159 was a catch-all reference to all aspects of loess in NZ. Its a pity that JKC did not see the relevance of the JH work- but the oversight is totally excusable (to read the JH paper go to Loess Letter 72 www.loessletter.msu.edu  ..)

 

Steppenheidetheorie (via JKC 1957)

Early in the Charlesworth chapter on Loess we encounter 'Steppenheidetheorie' which JKC obviously thought was important. In the text, on pp.511-512, the word Steppenheidetheorie always appears in italics.

"On both the Steppenheidetheorie and the theory which believes oak forests grew on loess, the distribution in central Europe of Neolithic peoples is linked with the loess- the blackearth of central Germany, Bulgaria and Rumania however was free of Neolithic settlements...
The loess-covered valley of the Danube provided a highway across central Europe by which the Neolithic invaders and Beaker Folk from the Black Sea diffused their civilisation into Bohemia  and by the Elbe, Neckar, Main and Rhine into Belgium and north-west Europe. The Slavonic languages may have taken shape on the loess of the Carpathian region and radiated thence eastwards and westwards."

"The Steppenheidetheorie is, however, strongly contested since among other things it may take insufficient account of man's clearance of previous forests. Man's preference for loess soil may be connected with its fertility, its ease of working with primitive implements, its dryness and suitability for pit dwellings and its level surface. Forests may formerly have grown on the loess of the U.S.S.R.

Loess is supremely important too because of the light it sheds upon the climate of the Glacial period and upon the succession of glacial and inter-glacial epochs and their relation to human cultures and animal life (see chapters 37, 39)."

 

Loess in 'The Quaternary Era' (Charlesworth 1957).

Loess in 'The Quaternary Era': a study of 'a study of'' by J.K.Charlesworth.  It seems amazing that all aspects of the Quaternary might be included in one book (even a vast 2 volume work like JKC's amazing opus).  Maybe that was just possible in 1957; it would be hard to achieve now, 60 years later in 2017.

J.K.Charlesworth 1957. The Quaternary Era: with Special Reference to its Glaciation. in 2 vols.  Edward Arnold London .
[LPB 177]  Loess in vol.1 pp.511-558, 709 references

Some of the references are multiple so there are in fact probably about 1000 references attached to the Loess section- this is one of the most interesting loess bibliographies. Loess-A Partial Bibliography [LPB] (Smalley 1980) which is totally devoted to Loess has just over 1000 references. Actually a comment is required at this point. The Charlesworth reference system is ridiculous; using it was an absolute mistake and its use may have reduced the appreciation and effectiveness of the great volumes.

The Loess section is complex and full of detail. It has not been fully appreciated- there are treasures therein which have still to be unearthed. This blog is a relatively unstructured poking of the Loess section, to increase appreciation and to provide a view of loess scholarship at the mid-1950s. This is a sort of 2nd order loess history. 1st order loess history is a study of KCvL and Charles Lyell and other pioneers; 2nd order loess history concerns people looking at the development of studies on loess and loess history. TQE shows that Loess was considered important in 1957; it shows Loess relative to other aspects of the Quaternary..

"Loess, by far the most important periglacial accumulation, was first recognized and given its rightful prominence in the valley of the Rhine where it is well developed in the Kolner Bucht and Neuwied basin.
Here A. Braun (1842) accurately described it- the name, which belongs to the peasants and brickworkers of this region, came into the scientific literature about twenty years earlier (Leonhard 1823, p.722, cf G.Dubois & F.Firtion. B.Sv.Carte.G.Als.Lorr. 3, 1936, 21)"

These are the opening words of the Loess section. JKC opts for a distinctly glacial approach to loess (emphasis added).  The references have been tweaked. It is surprising that JKC cites Braun as the opening reference- why have Braun (1842) as the basic reference? this is a very difficult to find paper and it deals with snails rather than loess. Had JKC actually read it? it seems doubtful..

Braun, A.[Alexander] 1842.  Vergleichende Zusammenstellung der lebenden und diluvialen Mollusken fauna des Rheinthals mit der tertiaren des Mainzer Beckens.
Amtlicher Bericht uber die Versammlung Deutscher Naturforschung und Artze (zu Mainz im September 1842) 20, 142-150.
reprinted in Loess Letter 69 (see www.loessletter.msu.edu) April 2013

 Here is Braun on the nature of the Loess (LL translation):
"Loess forms the gulf between the present epoch and the geologists diluvial period, and was deposited in extremely large quantities from a high ascending but transient flood (not from a permanent water basin)."

His Leonhard reference should be 1824 rather than 1823, but this is not a real error, he simply refers to vol.1 of CdF rather than vol.3 where loess is discussed (see LL67 for the Leonhard material)
The Dubois and Firtion reference is eccentric; what is the function of this reference?

Dubois,G et Firtion, F. 1936. Esquisse de l'extension des limons loessiques en France. Bulletin du Service de la carte geologique d'Alsace et de Lorraine 3, 21-26.  [World List 11754]