Geology Of America Research Articles

Lyell in America—His Lectures, Field Work, and Mutual Influences, 1841-1853

Charles Lyell visited North America four times in the twelve years from 1841 to 1853. Except for the last visit, he both lectured and travelled widely to study geology. In 1841 he opened the second season of Lowell Lectures in Boston, and in early 1842 he gave essentially the same lectures again at Philadelphia and New York. In 1845 and 1852, Lyell lectured only at Boston. In 1853, he returned briefly as a British representative at the New York Industrial Fair. The New York lectures were published verbatim, and Lyell's incomplete notes for his lectures, newspaper accounts, and his wife Mary's correspondence from America provide some insight about the others. During 25 months of travel spanning a dozen years, the Lyells saw more of the United States and southeastern Canada—from the Atlantic coast to the lower Mississippi and Ohio Rivers and from the St. Lawrence Valley to the Gulf Coast—than had most citizens of the New World. After the first two visits, Lyell published two travel journals, which contain much material about American geology, geologists, and general natural history, as well as perceptive commentaries upon most aspects of life in the two young nations. The lectures and journals together provide important insights into the development of geology in America and of Lyell's thinking. In spite of the fact that Lyell was a poor speaker, the lectures were great successes with the public. American geologists, however, gave more qualified assessments. Major topics covered by the lectures, which reflected the major current issues of the science, included during an eleven-year span: Crustal movements and the earth's interior; Uniformity of processes through geologic time; Coral reefs; Carboniferous conditions and coal formation, as well as the early appearance of land animals; Origin of the drift and the Sinking and submergence of land; Biogeography; and the Uniformity of an organic plan, including negative commentary about progression and transmutation. Lyell's use of examples from both America and abroad gave the subject a cosmopolitan aspect, and his use of many large diagrams was much acclaimed. Geology was becoming well established in the New World, and Lyell participated in the third annual meeting of the American Association of Geologists and Naturalists in 1842. For field work, he followed his well-honed tactic of seeking experts as guides for efficient learning about local geology and grilling them incessantly. Although initially enthused and open, American geologists soon became apprchensive about Lyell's acquisitiveness for their data. Eventually Lyell's bibliography was enhanced by more than 30 titles on American geology in addition to two travel books, the first of which included a colored geologic map of most of the then United States and adjacent Canada. His other books, Principles of Geology and Elements of Geology, also benefited from countless American examples and from the publication of American editions. Lyell's reputation was enhanced by his American adventures, for, like Darwin and Murchison before, his travels attracted much attention both in the London Geological Society and in the British press. But the visits also enhanced the stature of geology in the New World, and Lyell made several significant original contributions to the understanding of American geology. Moreover, the visits by Charles and Mary Lyell produced a positive impression of America abroad, for they were very captivated by their friendly and industrious hosts and spoke well of them in Britain. On balance, it would seem that the visitors and hosts benefitted about equally.

John Ruskin and Artistical Geology in America

John Ruskin and Artistical Geology in America

Geology - Two Hundred Years of Geology in America. Proceedings of the New Hampshire Bicentennial Conference on the History of Geology. Ed. by Cecil J. Schneer. Hanover, New Hampshire: University Press of New England, 1979. Pp. xvii + 385. $20.00.

Geology - Two Hundred Years of Geology in America. Proceedings of the New Hampshire Bicentennial Conference on the History of Geology. Ed. by Cecil J. Schneer. Hanover, New Hampshire: University Press of New England, 1979. Pp. xvii + 385. $20.00. - Volume 14 Issue 2

Two Hundred Years of Geology in America. Cecil J. Schneer

<i>Two Hundred Years of Geology in America</i>. Cecil J. Schneer

Geology in Retrospect: Two Hundred Years of Geology in America . Proceedings of a conference, Durham, N.H., Oct. 1976. Cecil J. Schneer, Ed. Published for the University of New Hampshire by the University Press of New England, Hanover, N.H., 1979. xiv, 386 pp., illus. $20.

Geology in Retrospect: <i>Two Hundred Years of Geology in America</i> . Proceedings of a conference, Durham, N.H., Oct. 1976. Cecil J. Schneer, Ed. Published for the University of New Hampshire by the University Press of New England, Hanover, N.H., 1979. xiv, 386 pp., illus. $20.

The founding of geology in America: 1771 to 1818: Discussion and reply

Research Article| November 01, 1975 The founding of geology in America: 1771 to 1818: Discussion and reply: Reply ROBERT M. HAZEN ROBERT M. HAZEN 1Department of Geological Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138 Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Author and Article Information ROBERT M. HAZEN 1Department of Geological Sciences, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138 Publisher: Geological Society of America First Online: 01 Jun 2017 Online ISSN: 1943-2674 Print ISSN: 0016-7606 Geological Society of America GSA Bulletin (1975) 86 (11): 1616. https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1975)86<1616:TFOGIA>2.0.CO;2 Article history First Online: 01 Jun 2017 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Search Site Citation ROBERT M. HAZEN; The founding of geology in America: 1771 to 1818: Discussion and reply: Reply. GSA Bulletin 1975;; 86 (11): 1616. doi: https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1975)86<1616:TFOGIA>2.0.CO;2 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Refmanager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentBy SocietyGSA Bulletin Search Advanced Search Abstract No Abstract Available. This content is PDF only. Please click on the PDF icon to access. First Page Preview Close Modal You do not have access to this content, please speak to your institutional administrator if you feel you should have access.

The founding of geology in America: 1771 to 1818: Discussion and reply

Research Article| November 01, 1975 The founding of geology in America: 1771 to 1818: Discussion and reply: Discussion EDMUND M. SPIEKER EDMUND M. SPIEKER 1Department of Geology and Mineralogy, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210 Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Author and Article Information EDMUND M. SPIEKER 1Department of Geology and Mineralogy, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210 Publisher: Geological Society of America First Online: 01 Jun 2017 Online ISSN: 1943-2674 Print ISSN: 0016-7606 Geological Society of America GSA Bulletin (1975) 86 (11): 1615. https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1975)86<1615:TFOGIA>2.0.CO;2 Article history First Online: 01 Jun 2017 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Search Site Citation EDMUND M. SPIEKER; The founding of geology in America: 1771 to 1818: Discussion and reply: Discussion. GSA Bulletin 1975;; 86 (11): 1615. doi: https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1975)86<1615:TFOGIA>2.0.CO;2 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Refmanager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentBy SocietyGSA Bulletin Search Advanced Search Abstract No Abstract Available. This content is PDF only. Please click on the PDF icon to access. First Page Preview Close Modal You do not have access to this content, please speak to your institutional administrator if you feel you should have access.

The Founding of Geology in America: 1771 to 1818

Geological research in North America developed from a few isolated inquiries in the eighteenth century to a mature descriptive science by 1818. In 1771, the study of earth science in America was limited to a few observations on diverse subjects. Systematic investigation and classification of rocks, minerals, and fossils was unknown. Several European and American scientists recognized the need for a standardized nomenclature and unambiguous identification methods in the earth sciences. Thus by 1818, through the efforts of Werner and Maclure in field geology, Cuvier and Brongniart in paleontology, and Cleaveland in mineralogy, systematic classification of geological materials had been introduced to America. These contributions established the science of geology in the United States and enabled the next generation of earth scientists to describe fully the natural history and resources of North America.

Teaching of geology as related to research

Introduction During the past three years it has fallen to my lot as a member of the Committee on Geology and Geography and of the Committee on EducaC tional Relations of the National Research Council to make a study of the strength of the present geological brotherhood and of the ability of educational institutions to supply the needed recruits. Discussion of the Fundamental Facts This examination of the status of geology in America reveals two fundamental facts: 1. A surprisingly small number of colleges and universities offer courses in geology. 2. A relatively low value is placed on geology, both as an educational factor and as a practical contribution, by college presidents, deans and faculty; by men of affairs; by Army officers; and by civil engineers. Statistics and comments supporting these conclusions were given at the Baltimore meeting[2][1] and need not be repeated. They do not compose an alluring picture. . . . [1]: #fn-2

The problem of the pre-Cambrian

Research Article| January 01, 1908 The problem of the pre-Cambrian CHARLES RICHARD VAN HISE CHARLES RICHARD VAN HISE Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Author and Article Information CHARLES RICHARD VAN HISE Publisher: Geological Society of America Received: 05 Feb 1908 First Online: 02 Mar 2017 Online Issn: 1943-2674 Print Issn: 0016-7606 © 1908 Geological Society of America GSA Bulletin (1908) 19 (1): 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1130/GSAB-19-1 Article history Received: 05 Feb 1908 First Online: 02 Mar 2017 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Search Site Citation CHARLES RICHARD VAN HISE; The problem of the pre-Cambrian. GSA Bulletin 1908;; 19 (1): 1–28. doi: https://doi.org/10.1130/GSAB-19-1 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Refmanager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentBy SocietyGSA Bulletin Search Advanced Search Abstract IntroductionFollowing the precedent of many scientific presidential addresses, I shall give a general review of one of the subjects which has occupied much of my time—the problem of the pre-Cambrian. Within an hour I can not consider the merits of the questions still in controversy, nor broadly cover the field mentioned; therefore I shall confine my review to the stratigraphy and nomenclature of the pre-Cambrian rocks.The Cambrian is defined as terminating below at the base of the well recognized Olenellus fauna. In general between the Cambrian and pre-Cambrian there is an unconformity. This unconformity for a large part of the United States is profound, being the break at the base of the great Cambrian transgression.In the early days of geology in America the name “primary” or “primitive” was given to the group of rocks under consideration. By the men who used these terms there was scarcely any . . . This content is PDF only. Please click on the PDF icon to access. First Page Preview Close Modal You do not have access to this content, please speak to your institutional administrator if you feel you should have access.

Section of the Manlius Limestone at the Northern End of the Helderberg Plateau

Previous articleNext article FreeSection of the Manlius Limestone at the Northern End of the Helderberg PlateauCharles S. ProsserCharles S. Prosser Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Journal of Geology Volume 15, Number 1Jan. - Feb., 1907 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/621369 Views: 60Total views on this site Citations: 1Citations are reported from Crossref PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Franklin W. Fessenden A PETROLOGIC INVESTIGATION OF THE MANLIUS AND COEYMANS LIMESTONES, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 84, no.88 (Dec 2006): 287–302.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1960.tb39144.x

Notes

THE recent meeting of the American Association at Boston was one of the largest and most successful in the history of the Association, the attendance numbering nearly one thousand members, representing almost every State in the Union. More than four hundred papers were read and discussed in the various sections, and a large proportion of them were of a very high order. The address of the retiring president, upon some points in theoretical chemistry, was referred to in last week's NATURE. Prof. Putnam, the new president, also delivered an address, and the following addresses were given by the sectional presidents:—Section A (Mathematics and Astronomy), development of astronomical photography, Prof. E. E. Barnard. Section B (Physics), on the perception of light and colour, Prof. F. P. Whitman. Section C (Chemistry), the electric current in organic chemistry, Prof. Smith. Section E (Geology and Geography), glacial geology in America, Prof. H. L. Fairchild. Section F (Zoology), a half-century of evolution with special reference to the effects of geological changes on animal life, Prof. A. S. Packard. Section G (Botany), the conception of species as affected by recent investigations on fungi, Prof. W. G. Farlow. Section H (Anthropology), the advance of psychology, Prof. Cattell. Section I (Economic Science and Statistics), the historic method in economics, Mr. Archibald Blue. The following officers were elected for the ensuing year:—President: Mr. Edward Orton, President of

Geology in America

I AM somewhat chagrined to find that I appear to you (vol. xi. p. 381) to say that the Geological Survey of Great Britain is especially to blame for the diminution of interest in geology in the country that has done the most for its advancement. My remarks were taken down by a reporter, and I have not seen them in print. The point I sought to make was to the effect that in all matters relating to geology, Massachusetts could not do better than to follow the lead of the British Survey. The only question to be considered was whether it was not open to criticism from an educational point of view. On this matter I expressed no individual opinion, but only restated doubts that I had heard expressed by more than one of your own masters in the science. I feel that geological science owes so much to your noble Survey, that none of its students should subject it to hasty criticism. If it is to have its methods questioned, it should be done by some one far better acquainted with its ways than any person from another country is likely to be. It seems to me, however, that the diminution in the number of geologists, compared with the students of other sciences, if not in absolute number, is clear on simple inspection of the field. It is true not only of Great Britain, but of France and America as well. Of mining engineers there is, I believe, a great plenty; but of men who are trained in field work, who can be trusted to unravel a set of rocks, or who care for the science as a science, and not as a means of winning a living, there are far too few.