DOCSLIB.ORG

Amanz Gresslys Role in Founding Modern Stratigraphy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Amanz Gresslys Role in Founding Modern Stratigraphy Amanz Gressly’s role in founding modern stratigraphy Timothy A. Cross* Department of Geology and Geological Engineering, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado 80401 Peter W. Homewood Elf Exploration Production, 64018 Pau cedex, France ABSTRACT rary stratigraphic thought include: (1) the files. He recognized the coincidence of particular stratigraphic process-response system con- fossil morphologies with particular facies, and This paper discusses Amanz Gressly’s serves mass; (2) sediment volumes are differ- distinguished “facies fossils” from those that had (1814–1865) fundamental contributions to entially partitioned into facies tracts within a time value and that were useful for biostratig- stratigraphy in three areas: facies concepts space-time continuum as a consequence of raphy (“index” or “zone” fossils). He discussed and applications, stratigraphic correlation, mass conservation; (3) cycles of facies tract the equivalency of vertical facies successions and paleogeographic reconstruction. To facil- movements laterally (uphill and downhill) through a series of strata and lateral facies transi- itate access to his discoveries, we present an across the Earth’s surface are directly linked tions along a bed, developing the same principle English translation of his 1838 paper on facies to vertical facies successions and are the basis that later became known as Walther’s Law of the and stratigraphic correlation. We discuss ex- for high-resolution correlation of strati- Correlation of Facies. He distinguished between cerpts from this translation, which demon- graphic cycles; (4) stratigraphic base level is the time value of strata and properties that reflect strate that many of the fundamental princi- the clock of geologic time and the reference their genesis, and introduced specific terms to re- ples of modern stratigraphy were understood frame for relating the energy of space forma- flect this distinction. He used this understanding and expressed by Gressly. We put this into the tion with the energy of sediment transfer; and to show how stratigraphic successions should be context of subsequent development and re- (5) facies differentiation is a byproduct of sed- correlated across different facies tracts. Gressly finement of current stratigraphic principles. iment volume partitioning. supplied the concepts that replaced the founder- Gressly explained the genesis of sedimen- ing paradigm of Wernerian Neptunism, and he tary facies by processes operating in deposi- INTRODUCTION established many tenets of modern stratigraphy. tional environments. He demonstrated regu- His insights were relevant as much to the fields of lar lateral facies transitions along beds, which While other geologists were attempting to paleontology, paleobiology, paleoecology, and he interpreted as mosaics of environments solve the structure of the Jura Mountains, Amanz evolution as they were to stratigraphy. along depositional profiles. He recognized the Gressly (1814–1865), a Swiss geologist, was One purpose of this paper is to increase coincidence of particular fossil morphologies intent on unraveling the paleogeography of the awareness of Gressly’s contributions to the foun- with particular sedimentological facies, and deformed strata. In doing so, Gressly discovered dations of stratigraphy. To this end, we present distinguished “facies fossils” from those that and stated many of the principles that are the an English translation of his 1838 paper on facies had time value and that were useful for bio- foundations of modern stratigraphy. Despite and stratigraphic correlation. We also summarize stratigraphy (“index” or “zone” fossils). He numerous obituaries, short historical discussions, his statements about and understanding of fun- discussed the equivalency of vertical facies and fuller biographies—principally in German damental stratigraphic principles, and place successions through a series of strata and lat- and Swiss literature and principally focused on them into the context of contemporary strati- eral facies transitions along a bed, developing the history of the region in which he lived and graphic thought. With a knowledge of the the same principle that later became known as worked—his fundamental contributions are not philosophies and methods Gressly imparted to Walther’s Law of the Correlation of Facies. well known to earth scientists. This paper focuses geologists of his time, we can identify the few He distinguished between the time value of on his contributions to stratigraphic science in subsequent additions to Gressly’s “Laws” that strata and properties that reflect their genesis, three areas: facies concepts and applications, completed the foundation of stratigraphic sci- and introduced specific terms to reflect this stratigraphic correlation, and paleogeographic ence. Thus, a second purpose of this paper is to distinction. He used this understanding to reconstruction. show that many of the fundamental stratigraphic show how stratigraphic successions should be Although Gressly is widely credited with principles were established early in the practice correlated across different facies tracts. the first modern use and definition of “facies” of stratigraphy. Gressly derived an internally consistent, (Dunbar and Rodgers, 1957; Teichert, 1958), his logical, and comprehensive definition of a new contributions to stratigraphic principles are much PROVIDING A NEW PARADIGM TO stratigraphic paradigm, which was the basis broader and deserve greater appreciation. He ex- REPLACE WERNER’S NEPTUNIST for further developments and refinements. plained the genesis of sedimentary facies by CONCEPT The five remaining principles of contempo- processes operating in depositional environ- ments, and demonstrated regular lateral facies Gressly established a novel methodology and transitions along beds that he interpreted as philosophical approach to stratigraphic analysis *E-mail: [email protected] mosaics of environments along depositional pro- that replaced Werner’s Neptunist concept. Al- GSA Bulletin; December 1997; v. 109; no. 12; p. 1617–1630. 1617 Downloaded from http://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/gsa/gsabulletin/article-pdf/109/12/1617/3382620/i0016-7606-109-12-1617.pdf by guest on 23 September 2021 CROSS AND HOMEWOOD though the Neptunist concept already had been lished the following year (Gressly, 1837). In this the changes in environments across a geomor- challenged and abandoned by some of his con- paper Gressly gave a short definition of sedi- phic landscape. Rocks of the same types occur at temporaries (for example, see commentaries in mentary facies and related the facies he had ob- multiple stratigraphic positions, reflecting the Conkin and Conkin, 1984), Gressly offered the served to depositional environments. The first repetition of environments through time. Gressly alternative concepts and methods that were to be- part of Gressly’s major work, “Observations made his observations and derived his insights come the foundation of modern stratigraphy. géologiques sur le Jura soleurois,” was published from study of fossiliferous, shallow shelf and Kuhn (1962) argued that new paradigms in sci- in 1838, apparently with considerable help in reefal limestones. It is possible that the diversity ence follow a period of discomfort with the exist- composition and editing from his friends, partic- of facies and the abundance of the fossil assem- ing paradigm because of mismatches between ularly Thurmann. blages allowed Gressly to observe and to under- observation and theory; Gressly did his studies At the Solothurn meeting, Gressly also met stand the stratigraphic, paleoecologic, and geo- during such a period of discomfort. Louis Agassiz, the internationally respected pale- morphic significance of subtle variations in facies Gressly’s insightful departure from the exist- ontologist and geologist. Agassiz recognized the and their relations to time. ing paradigm contained three fundamental, re- novelty and importance of Gressly’s insights and To emphasize the originality of Gressly’s lated concepts. First, he recognized that the sedi- command of lithostratigraphic and biostrati- approach and his break from accepted strati- mentologic and paleontologic attributes of rocks, graphic data, and he encouraged Gressly to graphic practices, Wegmann (1963) and Teichert “facies,” reflected the processes of deposition continue with his work. After publication of the (1958) compared Gressly’s concept of facies within specific geomorphic environments. Sec- first part of the “Observations,” Agassiz pro- with that of his contemporary, Constant Prévost. ond, he understood that facies occur indepen- moted Gressly’s work by circulating the paper Both Gressly and Prévost distinguished between dently of time, and that time and rocks must be widely. In evidence, during the session of the the origin and physical attributes of a rock versus treated with separate concepts and vocabularies. French Geological Society on November 20, its age. Prévost, a rationalist, reached this conclu- Third, he established that there are predictable 1837, Marquis de Roys (a good friend of Prévost) sion using logical deduction, whereas Gressly patterns of facies relationships. He documented reported on his work on terrains of the southwest followed an empirical path and observed the dif- that facies occur in regular patterns of lateral tran- Paris basin, ending with a comment that the ferences. In publications dating a few years after sitions along a bed, and that these lateral transi- facies
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Alexander Von Humboldt: Dilletante of Natural History Or Oracle of Modern Science?
    Geophysical Research Abstracts Vol. 21, EGU2019-3798, 2019 EGU General Assembly 2019 © Author(s) 2019. CC Attribution 4.0 license. Alexander von Humboldt: Dilletante of Natural History or Oracle of Modern Science? A.M. Celâl ¸Sengör ITU Eurasia Institute of Earth Sciences, Turkey ([email protected]) When the German satirist and journalist Alexander Moskowski interviewed Einstein in 1920 and implied that in Einstein’s Valhalla of scientific geniuses Alexander von Humboldt surely had a place, he was taken aback with the surprising denial: ‘At least Alexander von Humboldt I do not count among the geniuses. One has to realise that when we today look back upon the great discoverers, Humboldt hardly comes to mind.’ Writing to his friend Joseph Dalton Hooker, Darwin was more appreciative, but essentially made the same point: ‘I believe that you are fully right in calling Humboldt the greatest scientific traveller who ever lived. His Geology is funny stuff; but that merely means that he was not in advance of his age. I should say he was wonderful, more for his near approach to omniscience than for originality. Whether or not his position as a scientific man is as eminent as we think, you might truly call him the parent of a grand progeny of scientific travellers, who, taken together, have done much for science.’ Was Humboldt, the greatest geographer ever, only a wandering dilletante who amassed a vast amount of knowledge or did Darwin and Einstein miss something in him that made him a true oracle of modern science, a genius who saw farther than others in his time? Darwin did not live long enough to be able to read Suess’ Face of the Earth and Einstein probably never perused it as it was too far afield for him.
    [Show full text]
  • From: John Mcphee Basin and Range EXCERPT on AN
    From green meadow beside it, and dry russet uplands rising behind. I said I thought that was lovely. He said yes, it was Basin and Range lovely indeed, it was one of the loveliest angular by John McPhee unconformities I was ever likely to see. © 1980, 1981 The Noonday Press, New York The river turned in our direction after bending by a wall of its canyon, and the wall had eroded so unevenly [Excerpt on an “Angular Unconformity” that a prominent remnant now stood on its own as a steep and some history of the founding six-hundred-foot hill. It made a mammary silhouette of the Science of Geology] against the sky. My mind worked its way through that image, but still I was not seeing what Deffeyes was seeing. Finally, I took it in. More junipers and rubble and minor Interstate 80, in its complete traverse of the North creases of erosion had helped withhold the story from my American continent, goes through much open space and eye. The hill, structurally, consisted of two distinct rock three tunnels. As it happens, one tunnel passes through formations, awry to each other, awry to the gyroscope of young rock, another through middle-aged rock, and the the earth—just stuck together there like two artistic third through rock that is fairly old, at least with respect to impulses in a pointedly haphazard collage. Both the rock now on earth which has not long since been formations were of stratified rock, sedimentary rock, put recycled. At Green River, Wyoming, the road goes under a down originally in and beside the sea, where they had lain, remnant of the bed of a good-sized Cenozoic lake.
    [Show full text]
  • Hutton S Geological Tours 1
    Science & Education James Hutton's Geological Tours of Scotland: Romanticism, Literary Strategies, and the Scientific Quest --Manuscript Draft-- Manuscript Number: Full Title: James Hutton's Geological Tours of Scotland: Romanticism, Literary Strategies, and the Scientific Quest Article Type: Research Article Keywords: James Hutton; geology; literature; Romanticism; travel writing; Scotland; landscape. Corresponding Author: Tom Furniss University of Strathclyde Glasgow, UNITED KINGDOM Corresponding Author Secondary Information: Corresponding Author's Institution: University of Strathclyde Corresponding Author's Secondary Institution: First Author: Tom Furniss First Author Secondary Information: All Authors: Tom Furniss All Authors Secondary Information: Abstract: Rather than focussing on the relationship between science and literature, this article attempts to read scientific writing as literature. It explores a somewhat neglected element of the story of the emergence of geology in the late eighteenth century - James Hutton's unpublished accounts of the tours of Scotland that he undertook in the years 1785 to 1788 in search of empirical evidence for his theory of the earth. Attention to Hutton's use of literary techniques and conventions highlights the ways these texts dramatise the journey of scientific discovery and allow Hutton's readers to imagine that they were virtual participants in the geological quest, conducted by a savant whose self-fashioning made him a reliable guide through Scotland's geomorphology and the landscapes of
    [Show full text]
  • 3. Historical Evolution of Descriptive and Genetic Knowledge and Concepts
    3. Historical Evolution of Descriptive and Genetic Knowledge and Concepts By W.C. Pat Shanks III 3 of 21 Volcanogenic Massive Sulfide Occurrence Model Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5070–C U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2012 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Shanks III, W.C. Pat, 2012, Historical evolution of descriptive and genetic knowledge and concepts in volcanogenic massive sulfide occurrence model: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5070 –C, chap. 3, 6 p. 25 Contents Hydrothermal Activity and Massive Sulfide Deposit Formation on the Modern Seafloor ..............27 References Cited..........................................................................................................................................31 Figures 3–1. Map of seafloor tectonic boundaries, metalliferous sediment distribution, locations of seafloor hydrothermal vents and deposits, and distribution of U.S. Exclusive Economic Zones ...............................................................................................28 3 –2.
    [Show full text]
  • ESCI-1510: Historical Geology 1
    ESCI-1510: Historical Geology 1 ESCI-1510: HISTORICAL GEOLOGY Cuyahoga Community College Viewing: ESCI-1510 : Historical Geology Board of Trustees: February 2019 Academic Term: Fall 2021 Subject Code ESCI - Earth Science Course Number: 1510 Title: Historical Geology Catalog Description: Historical geology focuses on the evolution of land forms and life-forms through geologic time. The course includes a study of evolutionary changes occurring in plant and animal life as documented by fossil remains and the interpretation of geologic forces by means of topographic and geologic maps. Topics include plate tectonics, relative and absolute dating, fossils and fossilization, rocks and their significance as indicators of the environmental past. Emphasis will be placed on North America, dealing with the growth of continents and mountain building. To fulfill the laboratory science requirement, students should also enroll in a Historical Geology laboratory course. Credit Hour(s): 3 Lecture Hour(s): 3 Lab Hour(s): 0 Other Hour(s): 0 Requisites Prerequisite and Corequisite ENG-0985 Introduction to College Literacies, or appropriate score on English Placement Test; and ESCI-1410 Physical Geology or ESCI-1310 Physical Geography. Note: ENG-0980 Language Fundamentals I taken prior to Fall 2021 will also meet prerequisite requirements. Outcomes Course Outcome(s): Apply the principles of geology to understand the Earth's history. Essential Learning Outcome Mapping: Critical/Creative Thinking: Analyze, evaluate, and synthesize information in order to consider problems/ideas and transform them in innovative or imaginative ways. Objective(s): 1. Recognize that the Earth system is characterized by change over a variety of time scales. 2. Explain the use of minerals and rocks to decipher the Earth's history.
    [Show full text]
  • The Discovery of Deep Time Sketches of Geologic Development
    Theories of the Earth The Discovery of Deep Time Sketches of Geologic Development The descriptions and biographies below accompany the two page flow chart titled “Theories of the Earth”. They flesh out the positions and personages and their role in the discovery of the Earth’s history. They are listed in the order of class discussion. Myth of the Eternal Return: The notion that the world has no beginning, and no end C The notion that the universe is eternal and time is cyclical, with events repeating over and over again - like the beating of a heart, the waxing and waning of the Moon, the cycling of the seasons. The Babylonians developed a cosmic model based on periodicities of the planets in which each Great Year lasts 424,000 years; in the ‘summer’, when all the planets congregate in the constellation Cancer, there is a great fire, and the ‘winter’, marked by a gathering in Capricorn, is greeted by a great flood.. In a cyclical universe it was impossible even to frame the question of an age of the Earth - for it hadn’t a beginning. C “The Myth of the Eternal Return” was formulated by Mircea Eliade in 1974: This is the earliest and most important of Eliade's books on comparative religions. He traces through the many scripts and dogmas of the world's official and unofficial (i.e., primitive) religions the myth of the eternal return. C From Mesopotamia mythology: "But Ishtar is all this and more. She is the reborn. .. Know, O Prince, that death is the source of life, life is the cause of death.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Geology: Past Faith and Science Informing the Present
    History of geology: past faith and science informing the present Dr. David Campbell Gardner-Webb University [email protected] Pop “History” • Charles Darwin, Charles Lyell, William Smith, or James Hutton rejected the prevailing strict young-earth biblical literalism by introducing the idea of an old earth based on geology • Anyone in the 1700’s or 1800’s citing a widespread flood or catastrophes held modern young-earth flood geology ideas • Because of these, they are either heroes or villains None of those are true ? ? Real History of Geologic History • Gradual development from 1500’s-early 1800’s • Major Questions: – Pattern of history, Empirical or Philosophical approach – How do layers form? – How do you match corresponding layers? – Can we reconstruct the past? What are patterns of history? • Cyclic, infinite, relatively deterministic (discernable by philosophy): Classic Greek, Deist • Linear, finite, contingent (must study evidence): Chronologers (Ussher, Newton) – God’s thoughts are not our thoughts If earth history is evidence-based, what is the evidence? •Various things are found in rocks and layers – do they tell us about rock history, or might they form within the rocks? •Can layers and other geologic features be put in order? Why does that rock look like coral? Forces that generate life can also work in the earth to grow life-like forms inside the earth Forces and affinities that govern the universe produce similar forms everywhere Neoplatonic and Aristotelian ideas Why does that rock look like coral? •Mid-1600’s: More “natural” explanations become popular •Niels Stensen (Steno) distinguished crystal-style growth and biological growth It’s old coral, •Content of rocks tells us buried and about their formation! turned to rock.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Life?
    Life SC/NATS 1730, XXIX Life 1 What is Life? Problems: Complexity Replication Anthropocentrism SC/NATS 1730, XXIX Life 2 Life: The Viewpoint of the Three Traditions Organic: Aristotle’s Sublunar World Earth like a living being Everything grew and decayed Rocks and minerals took longer Magical: Secret or supernatural powers Explains creation Mechanist: Doesn’t seem promising SC/NATS 1730, XXIX Life 3 1 The Problem of Time Anthropocentrism: The Earth did not seem to have changed. When did the Earth begin? When did the heavens begin? The decline of Aristotle left a vacuum in satisfactory answers. SC/NATS 1730, XXIX Life 4 Revealed truth The Bible Became the authority where science had no answers. E.g., the Creation story in Genesis. Example of a popular work about nature, based on scriptural authority: Thomas Burnet’s The Sacred Theory of the Earth, 1684. SC/NATS 1730, XXIX Life 5 The Age of the Earth James Ussher (1581- 1656) Irish Archbishop Fixed the date of creation at October 23, 4004 B.C. 9:00 a.m. added later. Problems with the age of the Earth Fossils – something dug up Strata – layers, folding SC/NATS 1730, XXIX Life 6 2 Theories of the Earth Neptunism Abraham Werner (1749-1817) Professor of Mining at Freiberg Academy Famous teacher Stratigraphic Theory Layers indicate age, oldest are lowest Inclinations of strata due to precipitation on sides of containing vessels Later strata horizontal because waters less turbulent SC/NATS 1730, XXIX Life 7 Theories of the Earth, 2 Neptunism (contd.) Called “Neptunist” because of the role of water.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Development of Concept of Uniformitarianism, Catastrophism and Neptunism
    History of development of concept of Uniformitarianism, Catastrophism and Neptunism Dr. Surendra Kumar Uniformitarianism “Current geological processes are the same as those at work in the past” ✓ Uniformitarianism is a theory based on the work of James Hutton and made popular by Charles Lyell in the 19th century. This theory states that the forces and processes observable at earth’s surface are the same that have shaped earth’s landscape throughout natural history. ✓ The earth sculpting processes alluded to above are the processes of erosion, deposition, compaction and uplift. Although these processes are constant, they occur at extremely slow rates. ✓ As a farmer, Hutton realized that the rates of erosion were so slow that it would take an inconceivable amount of time to observe drastic changes in Earth’s landscape. ✓ The theory also states that these processes have occurred at constant rates throughout natural history. James Hutton explains this idea in his book entitled Theory of the Earth, “… we find no vestige of a beginning – no prospect of an end.” Hutton was the first scientist to conclude that the age of the Earth must be so incredibly old that the mind can’t begin to estimate its length. ✓ Charles Lyell even went to the Paris Basin to observe the rocks responsible for catastrophism, a theory in direct opposition with uniformitarianism. Based on catastrophism, the forces shaping the earth are not constant. However, when Lyell observed the mass extinction events in the fossil succession of the Paris Basin, he drew a very different conclusion. ✓ Lyell recognized that cyclical depositional environments and reoccurring extinctions show that there are controls that cause these processes to be recurrent.
    [Show full text]
  • Science Abandons Uniformitarianism?
    Avondale College ResearchOnline@Avondale Science and Mathematics Conference Papers School of Science and Mathematics 12-2017 What a Catastrophe!― Science Abandons Uniformitarianism? Lynden Rogers Avondale College of Higher Education, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://research.avondale.edu.au/sci_math_conferences Part of the Physical Sciences and Mathematics Commons, and the Religion Commons Recommended Citation Rogers, L. (2017). What a Catastrophe!― Science Abandons Uniformitarianism?. In L. Rogers (Ed.), The Biblical Flood: The Context and History of Seventh-day Adventist Understanding. Paper presented at Avondale College of Higher Education, Cooranbong, 9-10 September (pp. 137-180). Cooranbong, Australia: Avondale Academic Press. This Book Chapter is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Science and Mathematics at ResearchOnline@Avondale. It has been accepted for inclusion in Science and Mathematics Conference Papers by an authorized administrator of ResearchOnline@Avondale. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 137 Chapter 5 What a Catastrophe!― Science Abandons Uniformitarianism? Lynden J. Rogers Introduction: the Uniformitarian Accusation Over the last century it has been frequently claimed by defenders of a traditional reading of Genesis that one of the main reasons why scientists are blind to data supporting a world-wide Noachian Flood is because geology is philosophically uniformitarian. By this it is implied that geologists regard the present as the only reliable key to the past and in order to explain geological history will invoke only those very slow, gradual processes which can be observed in operation today. While this accusation was voiced in the late nineteenth century it was not until 1902 that the young George McCready Price levelled this charge in recognisably scientific form.1 The argument changed very little over the next 70 years.
    [Show full text]
  • 18Th and 19Th Century Geology Debates About the Age of the Earth
    18th and 19th Century Geology Debates about the age of the earth and the processes of change Waseda University, SILS, History of Modern Earth and Life Sciences The age of the earth The age of the earth was a central question for 17th–19th century naturalists. Aristotle had argued for a very old, essentially eternal, earth, but Protestant thinkers had taken a much more literal reading of the Bible and argued for a rather young earth. In the 1640s, Archbishop James Ussher of Armagh, Ireland, had used the Bible to calculate that the Biblical creation started on 23rd October, 4004 BC. Enlightenment thinkers, such as Buffon, had argued that the earth was tens of thousands of years old – and been rebuked by the Church. By the mid 1700s, naturalists were broadly convinced that the earth was what they considered to be very old, and that geological strata could be used to set out a relative chronology for the production of various types of minerals, and so on. Georges Cuvier and other comparative anatomists demonstrated that fossils could also be used to set up relative chronologies. There was a growing sense that the earth was old. 18th and 19th Century Geology 1 / 32 W. Buckland, Geology and Mineralogy Considered with Reference to Natural Theology (1837) 18th and 19th Century Geology 2 / 32 History and development One of the major debates in 18th and 19th century geology was whether or not the change that the earth has undergone throughout time should be categorized as historical or developmental. History Historical change is characterized by chance events and contingency.
    [Show full text]
  • Scripture in the Hands of Geologists (Part Two)*
    Westminster Theological Journal 49 (1987) 257-304. Copyright © 1987 by Westminster Theological Seminary, cited with permission. SCRIPTURE IN THE HANDS OF GEOLOGISTS (PART TWO)* DAVIS A. YOUNG III. Concordism 1. Neptunism WE next trace the history of the concordist tradition. In general, concordists were more empirically minded than literalists and were willing to adopt more flexible inter- pretations of Scripture in order to harmonize with a devel- oping scientific picture of terrestrial history. The concordist tradition began with neptunism and came into full flower in the nineteenth century. Although diluvialism diminished by the end of the eigh- teenth century, other geological theories existed that could also be harmonized with Scripture. During the eighteenth and earliest nineteenth centuries one widely held theory, devel- oped primarily in France and Germany and later transported to the British Isles,91 was neptunism. For many continental naturalists the neptunist approach was the best way to explain the features in rocks. Where efforts were made to correlate neptunism with biblical data, the writers often showed little conviction regarding the truth of Scripture. Interpretations of biblical texts were generally far less literalistic than those of British diluvialists and were put forward in order to main- tain peace with the theologians. When transported into Great Britain, however, neptunism was defended on biblical grounds * [Part One, which appeared in WTJ 49 (1987) 1-34, surveyed the history of literalism in the interpretation of the early chapters of Genesis by Christian geologists. Part Two, focusing on the concordist tradition, concludes Dr. Young's essay.-Ed. ] 91 Some British neptunists, for example, Robert Jameson, learned their neptunism at the feet of the German scholar, Abraham Werner.
    [Show full text]