History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays (Geological Society Special Publication)

History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays Geological Society Special Publications Society Book Editors R. J. PANKHURST...

Author: C. V. Burek | R. Wilding

73 downloads 708 Views 29MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays

Geological Society Special Publications Society Book Editors R. J. PANKHURST (CHIEF EDITOR) P. DOYLE F. J. GREGORY J. S. GRIFFITHS A. J. HARTLEY R. E. HOLDSWORTH

J. A. HOWE P. T. LEAT A. C. MORTON N. S. ROBINS J. P. TURNER Special Publication reviewing procedures The Society makes every effort to ensure that the scientific and production quality of its books matches that of its journals. Since 1997, all book proposals have been refereed by specialist reviewers as well as by the Society's Books Editorial Committee. If the referees identify weaknesses in the proposal, these must be addressed before the proposal is accepted. Once the book is accepted, the Society has a team of Book Editors (listed above) who ensure that the volume editors follow strict guidelines on refereeing and quality control. We insist that individual papers can only be accepted after satisfactory review by two independent referees. The questions on the review forms are similar to those for Journal of the Geological Society. The referees' forms and comments must be available to the Society's Book Editors on request. Although many of the books result from meetings, the editors are expected to commission papers that were not presented at the meeting to ensure that the book provides a balanced coverage of the subject. Being accepted for presentation at the meeting does not guarantee inclusion in the book. Geological Society Special Publications are included in the ISI Index of Scientific Book Contents, but they do not have an impact factor, the latter being applicable only to journals. More information about submitting a proposal and producing a Special Publication can be found on the Society's web site: www.geolsoc.org.uk.

It is recommended that reference to all or part of this book should be made in one of the following ways: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History ofPalaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241. CLEAL, C.J., LAZARUS, M. & TOWNSEND, A. 2005. Illustrations and illustrators during the 'Golden Age' of palaeobotany: 1800-1840. In: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,41-61.

GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY SPECIAL PUBLICATION NO. 241

History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays

EDITED BY

A.J. BOWDEN National Museums Liverpool, UK

C.V. BUREK University College, Chester, UK and

R. WILDING History of Geology Group, UK

2005 Published by The Geological Society London

THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

The Geological Society of London (GSL) was founded in 1807. It is the oldest national geological society in the world and the largest in Europe. It was incorporated under Royal Charter in 1825 and is Registered Charity 210161. The Society is the UK national learned and professional society for geology with a worldwide Fellowship (FGS) of 9000. The Society has the power to confer Chartered status on suitably qualified Fellows, and about 2000 of the Fellowship carry the title (CGeol). Chartered Geologists may also obtain the equivalent European title, European Geologist (EurGeol). One fifth of the Society's fellowship resides outside the UK. To find out more about the Society, log on to www.geolsoc.org.uk. The Geological Society Publishing House (Bath, UK) produces the Society's international journals and books, and acts as European distributor for selected publications of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG), the American Geological Institute (AGI), the Indonesian Petroleum Association (IPA), the Geological Society of America (GSA), the Society for Sedimentary Geology (SEPM) and the Geologists' Association (GA). Joint marketing agreements ensure that GSL Fellows may purchase these societies' publications at a discount. The Society's online bookshop (accessible from www.geolsoc.org.uk) offers secure book purchasing with your credit or debit card. To find out about joining the Society and benefiting from substantial discounts on publications of GSL and other societies worldwide, consult www.geolsoc.org.uk, or contact the Fellowship Department at: The Geological Society, Burlington House, Piccadilly, London W1J OBG: Tel. +44 (0)20 7434 9944; Fax +44 (0)20 7439 8975; E-mail: [email protected]. For information about the Society's meetings, consult Events on www.geolsoc.org.uk. To find out more about the Society's Corporate Affiliates Scheme, write to [email protected]. Published by The Geological Society from: The Geological Society Publishing House Unit 7, Brassmill Enterprise Centre Brassmill Lane BathBA13JN,UK (Orders: Tel. + 44 (0) 1225 445046 Fax+ 44 (0)1225 442836) Online bookshop: http://bookshop.geolsoc.org.uk The publishers make no representation, express or implied, with regard to the accuracy of the information contained in this book and cannot accept any legal responsibility for any errors or omissions that may be made. © The Geological Society of London 2005. All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission. No paragraph of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted save with the provisions of the Copyright Licensing Agency, 90 Tottenham Court Road, London W1P 9HE. Users registered with the Copyright Clearance Center, 27 Congress Street, Salem, MA 01970, USA: the item-fee code for this publication is 0305-8719/04/$ 15.00. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN 1-86239-174-2 Typeset by Servis Filmsetting Limited, Manchester, UK Printed by Cromwell Press, Trowbridge, UK

Distributors USA AAPG Bookstore PO Box 979 Tulsa OK 74101-0979 USA Orders: Tel. + 1 918 584-2555 Fax + 1918 560-2652 E-mail [email protected] India Affiliated East-West Press Private Ltd Marketing Division G-l/16 Ansari Road, Darya Ganj, New Delhi 110 002 India Orders: Tel. + 91 11 2327-9113/2326-4180 Fax+ 91 112326-0538 E-mail [email protected] Japan Kanda Book Trading Company Cityhouse Tama 204 Tsurumaki 1-3-10 Tama-shi, Tokyo 206-0034 Japan Orders: Tel. + 81 (0)423 57-7650 Fax+ 81 (0)423 57-7651 E-mail [email protected]

Contents BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. History of Palaeobotany: an Introduction The beginnings WILDING, R. From the rise of the Enlightenment to the beginnings of Romanticism (Robert Plot, Edward Lhwyd and Richard Brookes, MD) TORRENS, H.S. The Moravian minister Rev. Henry Steinhauer (1782-1818); his work on fossil plants, their first 'scientific' description and the planned Mineral Botany The early 19th century CHALONER, W.G. & PEARSON, H.L. John Lindley: the reluctant palaeobotanist CLEAL, C.J., LAZARUS, M. & TOWNSEND, A. Illustrations and illustrators during the 'Golden Age' of palaeobotany: 1800-1840 The later 19th century and into the 20th century ANDERSON, L.L Hugh Miller: introducing palaeobotany to a wider audience PEARSON, H.L. Baron Achille de Zigno: an Italian palaeobotanist of the 19th century THOMAS, B.A. The palaeobotanical beginnings of geological conservation: with case studies from the USA, Canada and Great Britain SIMKISS, W. & BOWDEN, A.J. Palaeobotanical studies and collecting in the 19th century, with particular reference to the Ravenhead collection and Henry Hugh Higgins CHALONER, W.G. The palaeobotanical work of Marie Stopes HOWELL, A.C. James Lomax (1857-1934): palaeobotanical catalyst or hindrance? WILDING, R. D.H. Scott and A.C. Seward: modern pioneers in the structure and architecture of fossil plants MARSHALL, I.E.A. Arthur Raistrick: Britains's premier palynologist BUREK, C.V. & CLEAL, C.J. The life and work of Emily Dix (1904-1972) The fate of three university schools of palaeobotany/palynology LISTON, J.J. & SANDERS, H.L. The 'other' Glasgow Boys: the rise and fall of a school of palaeobotany WATSON, J. One hundred and fifty years of palaeobotany at Manchester University WELLMAN, C.H. Half a century of palynology at the University of Sheffield From other continents OTTONE, E.G. The history of palaeobotany in Argentina during the 19th century SUN, Q.-G. The rise of Chinese palaeobotany, emphasizing the global context Index

1

5 13 29 41 63 85 95 111 127 137 153 161 181

197 229 259 281 293 299

This page intentionally left blank

History of Palaeobotany: an Introduction A. J. BOWDEN1, C. V. BUREK2 & R. WILDING3 1

National Museums Liverpool, UK (e-mail: [email protected]) 2 University College, Chester, UK 3 History of Geology Group, UK

This volume concentrates on selected historic aspects of palaeobotany that are, perhaps, hard to find elsewhere. In writing historical accounts it is often of much greater value to provide fresh material concerning little known personages and events rather than re-invent the wheel by going over welltrodden paths more expertly tackled in other works. Therefore we have not endeavoured to include all those who have made substantial contributions to the science, so that there are inevitable gaps and omissions. Instead, we hope that the compilation presented in this volume will be of interest to those who wish to explore some of the byways of our palaeobotanical heritage. A full history of 'Palaeobotany' has yet to be written, but we hope that this volume may help to spur such future activity. The history of palaeobotany contains fascinating insights into scientific endeavour. In the past it has been too easily dismissed as the 'Cinderella' of palaeontological studies in which many of the early workers were pursuing personal interests rather than a full-time career. This publication falls into several broad sections with a couple of minor themes occurring throughout. The first two papers serve as an introduction into the early developments of selected aspects of palaeobotany. Wilding briefly examines the work and setting of Robert Plot and Edmund Lhwyd, who laid down foundations for what would eventually become the sciences of Palaeontology and Palaeobotany. Torrens looks at the life and work of the Moravian minister, Reverend Henry Steinhauer, who became a disciple of William Smith's stratigraphic methods. Steinhauer's tragic premature death from consumption in 1818 may have contributed to his subsequent obscurity. Early 19th century developments are covered by Chaloner & Pearson in their account of some of the work of John Lindley. Lindley was a pioneer in the true sense of the word, combining experimental technique with meticulous description. Together with William Hutton, John Lindley published the much-acclaimed Fossil Flora of Great Britain. Aspects of Lindley's pioneering work in palaeobotany remain topics of active research today. Cleal et al. examine the role of 'Illustrations and Illustrators' during the early 19th century. Their accounts of the works by Schlotheim, Sternberg and Brongniart demonstrate the importance of collaboration

between taxonomists, artists and illustrators in raising the awareness of the value of palaeobotanical material amongst the larger scientific community. The later 19th century and 20th century developments are covered by a number of papers that examine the lives of individuals and their contributions to the advance of palaeobotany. Anderson provides a preliminary assessment of Hugh Miller's contribution to the discipline. Miller travelled extensively throughout Scotland and these forays, plus his local knowledge, helped to uncover fresh sources of fossil plant material. Miller was a great communicator of science and religion who wrote extensively for the general public, and was thus instrumental in helping the public to appreciate the concept of deep time and the complexities of past, long-vanished worlds. Anderson explores the contribution made to the popular understanding of fossil plants by Miller in his published works, as well as presenting an appendix of the type and figured palaeobotanical material in the Hugh Miller collection, held in Edinburgh by the National Museums of Scotland. Pearson examines the work of the Italian palaeobotanist Baron Achille de Zigno who wrote extensively on the early Mesozoic floras from the Venetia region of Italy. This 19th century work has been of importance in the investigation of a rare Middle Liassic flora that has helped to elucidate the palaeobiogeography of the Tethys area in Lower Jurassic times. Thomas looks at the manner in which the discovery of spectacular plant fossils in the USA, Canada and Great Britain acted as a spur to early efforts in geoconservation. In a similar vein, Simkiss & Bowden look at the role that two amateur collectors played in the rescue collecting of fossil plant material from the Ravenhead site and its subsequent taxonomic status following Kidston's revisions. The loss of some of this material during the Liverpool Blitz in 1941 highlights an issue that raised its head during the production of the papers for this publication, namely the importance of conserving collections. This is shown as a very real problem with many key specimens being lost or inaccurately curated and only a few subsequently found (Torrens et al, 2000; Burek 2003). Without properly curated and conserved specimens how will the next generation of palaeobotanists fare? They will be without

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,1-4.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

2

AJ.BOWDENetal.

the type specimens so vital to our understanding of biostratigraphy. We must look back in time and learn by our mistakes, especially in conservation. This is especially true of a field-based science like palaeobotany where key sites disappear at the drop of a hat. A recurrent theme has been the substantial contribution made by females to the advancement of palaeobotany. Originally botany was not considered of interest to women, whereas mathematics, astronomy and geology were. However, as the following quotes show, this changed in the 18th century, when botany was regarded as a suitable feminine science since 'plants are placid like females'. Rousseau agreed in 1762 that it 'required nothing but patience to begin' so let women pursue it (Schiebinger 1989). However, the first botany book actually aimed at women and written by a woman (Mrs Priscilla Wakefield) was not published until 1796. This book, 'An Introduction to Botany', reached its llth edition in 1841 (Phillips 1990), showing the popularity of the subject. By the end of the 19th century botany had replaced geology and entomology as a leading subject of interest for women, and palaeobotany emerged as the natural link between them. The late arrival of women into higher education in the UK during the 1880s meant that it was only during the 20th century that there appeared professionally recognized female palaeobotanists with a university education, such as Marie Stopes. The role of women and the significant impact they have had on the development of the discipline has often been understated and many of the problems they have faced both in the past and at present underplayed. Some of these are outlined in the papers on Emily Dix (Burek & deal), Marie Stopes (Chaloner) and the Manchester department (Watson). Howell examines the work of James Lomax and his business techniques. Lomax was an example of an amateur palaeobotanist who developed this interest commercially as a professional fossil and thin section preparator, founding the Lomax Palaeobotanical Company Limited in 1906. Wilding provides an introductory paper giving a brief overview of the life and work of Dukenfield Henry Scott and Sir Albert Charles Seward, forerunners in the great growth of palaeobotanical work in the 20th century. Marshall examines the life and work of Arthur Raistrick who undertook pioneering work on the pollen analysis of peat. He used the knowledge so gained to successfully correlate Carboniferous coal seams using quantitative spore profiles. Raistrick's work became widely adopted by many coal laboratories in the UK and overseas, forming the foundation for the modern development of the discipline. Another recurrent theme throughout the book is the rise and fall of various departments over time. The problems of maintaining research facilities in universities, especially in the modern era, reveal an

absence of a national UK strategy to preserve centres of excellence in an avowedly specialist area. This probably reflects the nature of science and changing fashions within university and museum administration/funding and fashion. The histories of three different UK university Schools of Palaeobotany are outlined. Liston & Sanders examine the development of the Glasgow 'School of Palaeobotany' centred on the university's Botany Department. Watson looks back over 150 years of palaeobotany at Manchester University, whilst Wellman reviews half a century of palynology at Sheffield University. Although this publication has a predominantly UK focus, two interesting studies outline the history of palaeobotanical work in Argentina and China. Ottone provides an overview of the development of palaeobotany in Argentina during the 19th century. Many of the early fossil plant records resulted from visits of 19th century naturalist explorers such as Azara, d'Orbigny, Darwin, de Moussy, Burmeister and Bonpland. This, in turn, led to primary geological investigations by German geologists. The early work on paleaobotany in Argentina was also primarily by European scientists. It took a while for a 'home grown' Argentinian School, of Palaeobotany to develop, flourishing under the guidance of Alberto Castellanos and his disciples during the 20th century. Qi-Gao Sun provides an account of the rise of Chinese palaeobotany and places it into a global context. Chinese records indicate that notification of fossil plants was recorded as early as 1068 during the Song dynasty by Shen Kuo, who probably made the first palaeoecological determination based on plant fossils. However, the real development of Chinese palaeobotany took place during the 20th century. The first half of the 20th century saw a primarily geological approach adapted to palaeobotanical studies that was applied to the needs of economic development, whilst a more biological approach was adopted from the 1940s onwards. This Special Publication of the Geological Society arose as a result of a joint meeting held at the Linnean Society in October 2000. The meeting was organized by the Linnean Society Palaeobotany Specialist Group (LSPSG) and the History of Geology Group of the Geological Society (HOGG). Thanks are due to Dr J.C. Marsden, Executive Secretary and Miss G. Douglas, Librarian and Archivist, and other members of staff of the Linnean Society, also to Dr I. Poole, University of Utrecht and of LSPBSpG, all of whom did much to help organize the conference on which much of this book is based. The task of the editorial team has been greatly eased by the willing assistance and expertise of the referees. The subdiscipline of Historical Palaeobotany is a small field in the UK, and this is perhaps reflected in the choice of referees who had the necessary expertise to comment usefully

HISTORY OF PALAEOBOTANY: AN INTRODUCTION on the papers sent for peer review. Much of the reviewing process has been internal to this volume for this very reason. To all contributors and referees we thank them for their patience and forbearance during the lengthy gestation period of this Special Publication. In particular we wish to thank Prof. W. Chaloner, Prof. B. Thomas and Dr C. Cleal for their guidance and generous assistance with our queries. Other referees were Dr R. Cleevely, Dr J. Edmondson, Dr J. Hilton, Prof. R. Howarth, A. Howell, Dr M. Kolbl-Ebert, J. Liston, Dr A. MacGregor, Dr J. Marshall, Dr C. Page, H. Pearson, Dr G. Tresise and Dr C. Wellman. To all referees we extend our grateful thanks for their time and patience.

3

References BUREK, C.V. 2003. Time to take responsibility for collections. Earth Heritage, 20,22-23. PHILLIPS, P. 1990. The Scientific Lady. Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London. SCHIEBINGER, L. 1989. The Mind has no Sex. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. TORRENS, H., BENAMY, E., DAESCHLER, E.B., SPAMER, E.E. & BOGAN, A.E. 2000. Etheldred Benett of Wiltshire, England, the first lady geologist - Her fossil collection in the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, and the rediscovery of 'lost' specimens of Jurassic Trigoniidae (Mollusca, Bivalvia) with their soft anatomy preserved. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 150, 59-123.

This page intentionally left blank

From the rise of the Enlightenment to the beginnings of Romanticism (Robert Plot, Edward Lhwyd and Richard Brookes, MD) RICHARD WILDING History of Geology Group, Twickenham, Surrey TW2 7NL, UK (e-mail: [email protected]) Abstract: The 17th and 18th centuries were periods when all the sciences began to develop and men of science showed an interest in what began later to grow into significant ways of looking at the Earth, the composition of its crust and the life forms inhabiting it. The political, social, economic and religious events of those times acted as helping influences on the way that all knowledge grew and developed, but also provided some limitations on the ways that scientific knowledge was pursued. The 18th century became widely known as 'the Age of Enlightenment', as it marked the ending of ignorance and darkness, but there were developments in 17th century European culture and knowledge that foreshadowed this. This paper concentrates on the work of two men of 17th century science who assisted the rise of interest in those evidences of the past life on our planet that would later become the sciences of Palaeontology and Palaeobotany. Robert Plot and Edward Lhwyd were the first custodians of the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford, and their work demonstrates that such institutions did much to advance our scientific knowledge. Although three of their contemporaries, Robert Hooke, Nicolaus Steno and John Woodward, firmly believed that fossils were of organic origin, both Plot and Lhwyd opposed these views and developed their own explanations, yet, nevertheless, produced some accurate descriptions of fossils from both animal and plant sources. Lhwyd, in particular, was very hardworking and successful in his early attempts at classification. Later in the 18th century, Richard Brookes, MD used much of their work in a highly successful compilation of current knowledge, a six-volume work on Natural History. In this he was assisted by one of the literary geniuses of his time, Oliver Goldsmith. This was an important advance in the popularization of Natural Science

To study the history of science - any science - the social, religious, political and economic history of the times being studied is always of great relevance to the student, as science never occurs in a vacuum of its own making, but always depends on contemporary events and ideas. As events have causes, and ideas develop from previous notions and philosophies, there is always the problem of where to begin. For example: the English Reformation resulted eventually in the English Civil War, which led to the Commonwealth and the Protectorate that, in turn, led to the Restoration of the Monarchy. Side by side with the political, social and religious developments of these events, science moved in unison. So, in theory, to get the complete picture, one could begin almost anywhere. But perhaps Francis Bacon would be a very good start.

Francis Bacon and Robert Hooke Francis Bacon (1561-1626), not so much a scientist as an early propagandist for science, saw and was involved in many of the events of the English Reformation, and also influenced later developments in science. He stressed the necessity of experimentation, an important prerequisite for, and part of, scientific observations. Bacon also pointed out

the importance of language in science. He was truly the father of the Royal Society, founded in 1662 after the Restoration, which ended that experimental period when puritanism was an essential part of government. Yet, it is a mistake to assume that the puritan interest in experimental science was nonexistent. We find that Cromwell's army chaplain, John Webster, earlier demanded that laboratories as well as libraries be provided in universities, 'and that they put their fingers in the oven, so that they get familiar with the wonders of chemistry' (Webster 1654; Hooykaas 1972, p. 94). The Royal Society, in its early days, gave that great deviser of useful scientific apparatus, Robert Hooke (1635-1703), the opportunity to use his great genius for constructing instruments and apparatus to assist scientific observation. Hooke's inventions were not only useful in his own times, but had their uses and developments for posterity. His inventions included an air pump, a watch controlled by a spring instead of a pendulum, the iris diaphragm for telescopes, a wind gauge, a sealed thermometer, a weather clock, a hygrometer, the wheel barometer, a universal joint and apparatus for depth-sounding. But, perhaps, his most useful invention for the life sciences was his compound microscope with a new technique of illumination (Fig. 1). His resulting publication Micrographia (Hooke 1665) contained some wonderfully innovative pictures of micro-

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,5-12.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

6

R. WILDING

Edward Lhwyd were to prove of some importance to the early days of the study of fossil plants.

The Enlightenment

Fig. 1. Robert Hooke's compound microscope, with a new technique of illumination (from his Micrographid).

scopic life. He experimented and lectured on physics, chemistry and biology, amongst other subjects. His work on fossils later earned him the title of The First English Geologist' (Rossiter 1935). He believed that fossils were of organic origin and suggested that they could be time markers, and could be used to erect a chronology.

Journal des Savants and the Philosophical Transactions The early years of the 17th century were dubbed 'the republic of letters' by Denis de Salo, who founded his Journal des Savants in 1665. (Rappaport 1997, p. 7). This journal was a means of exchanging information in the world of learning (which embraced scholarship of all kinds, especially science) to keep abreast of developments. Previously, such exchanges had been brought about by private correspondence; still of importance after this and other journals were founded. The Royal Society's journal Philosophical Transactions became an important vehicle of communication, useful for Fellows who had little time to meet in London, such as Robert Plot, Edward Lhwyd, Martin Lister and John Ray, and helped to create an international 'republic' of scientists. Universities and museums were also to play their part. The content and use of collections held by these institutions was somewhat limited, due mainly to the difficulties of travel and the generally bad state of the roads. Yet, the problems began to be lessened during the 17th century. Here the works of Robert Plot and

Those trends in 18th century thought and literature in Europe and the Colonies in the Americas before the French Revolution were referred to by many of the writers of that period as 'The Age of Enlightenment', for they were convinced that they were emerging from centuries of ignorance and darkness into a new age that was enlightened by reason, science and a new respect for humanity. Isaac Newton's discovery of universal gravity and his other discoveries were very influential here, as was the earlier work of Copernicus and Galileo. Their discoveries of the laws of nature assisted the growing belief in the power of human reason. The early rationalist philosophers, such as Descartes, Leibnitz and Spinoza, together with the political philosophers, Hobbes and Locke, influenced very much the thought and science of that century. Most of the thinkers of the Enlightenment rejected many of the intricacies of the Christian religion, but without renouncing religion altogether. They still believed in the existence of God and of a hereafter, but rather emphasized the proposition that the improvement of life on Earth was more important than concentrating on the next world. Worldly happiness was placed above religious salvation. The Church was seen as a suppressor of the free exercise ofreason. As the Enlightenment was more of a way of thought than a set of fixed ideas, the resulting diversity not only increased the directions in which thought was to develop, but enriched the whole of human activity. Science was thus one of the main benefactors. The Enlightenment was, by its nature, a very cosmopolitan movement with representatives throughout Europe and the American colonies: David Hume in Scotland; Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson in America; and in Germany Christian Wolff, Gotthold Lessing and Emmanuel Kant. In France, the home ofthephilosophes, where it was a very self-conscious movement, such names as Charles de Montesquieu, Denis Diderot and, the most significant, Voltaire were important influences. Voltaire popularized the science and philosophy of his age in his varied works, and was a great model for many writers throughout Europe. France was also the home of that other great original, JeanJacques Rousseau, whose works stressed the social nature of a person and helped to refute the charge that the Enlightenment exalted cold reason at the expense of emotion. In the first half of the 18th century the philosophes waged an uphill struggle against censorship, attacks

THE RISE OF THE ENLIGHTENMENT

7

by the Church and even imprisonment. By the 1770s, they had become more of an influence; for through books and newspapers their views had attained a wide readership. They were welcomed at the courts of many of the 'enlightened despots' of Europe, such as Frederick II of Prussia, Catherine the Great of Russia and Joseph II of Austria, who found many of their ideas useful. They were admirers of the American Revolution and the Declaration of Independence, which they saw as the beginnings of their ideas rinding political form. Yet, the Age of the Enlightenment is said to have ended in 1789 with the French Revolution. If to many it was too radical and to the Romantics too soulless, it had an influence that persisted into the 19th and 20th centuries. It was a real influence on the growth and development of the sciences. Yet, the Enlightenment owed much to its 17th century predecessors, especially those who worked at the sciences. Here the names of Robert Plot and Edward Lhwyd were of some importance

Robert Plot (1640-1696) Plot was born at Borden, Kent in 1640, educated at the free school at Wye and matriculated at Oxford from Magdalen Hall in 1658. He graduated with a BA in 1661, MA in 1664 and DCL in 1671. He later entered as a commoner at University College, Oxford, having already directed his attention to the study of natural history and antiquities. In 1677 he published The Natural History of Oxford-shire, dedicated to Charles II and illustrated with a map and 16 plates by Burghers. This seems to have earned him the Secretaryship of the Royal Society in 1682: he had been elected a Fellow in 1677. Burghers' fossil illustrations were later borrowed by Richard Brookes, MD for his Natural History (Brookes 1763). They demonstrate very well the descriptions, by Plot and other naturalists of his time, of what were called 'formed stones', and labelled after whatever parts of plant or animal forms they most strongly resembled (Fig. 2) (Bassett 1982). In 1683,12 cartloads of Tradescant's rarities came from London to Oxford. John Tradescant, the younger, had left this collection, known as Tradescant's 'Ark', collected by himself and his father and housed at South Lambeth Road in London, to Elias Ashmole, antiquarian and scientist. In his turn, Ashmole offered the 'Ark' to the university, who built a new museum for the collection near the Bodleian Library and named it the Ashmolean after its benefactor. It has the distinction of being the first museum in Britain that was open to the public, both as a private and as a university institution. After many further donations and bequests, a new

Fig. 2. Robert Plot's illustrations of 'Formed Stones' from Richard Brookes's Natural History. (Labelled, following Plot, according to their resemblances.)

Ashmolean was later built in 1899. The Old Ashmolean is now the Museum of the History of Science, whilst the University Museum of Natural History, with the Pitt Rivers Museum, houses the natural history and ethnographical exhibits. The New Ashmolean houses the university's extensive art and archaeological collections. Robert Plot was appointed the first custos of the Ashmolean Museum in 1683, the year that Tradescant's 'Ark' arrived. This was a little over 2 years before he published The Natural History of Stafford-shire (Plot 1686), which was dedicated to James II and was more attractively written than its forerunner. The plates were again by Burghers. It was certainly Plot's original intention to proceed to cover the whole of England and Wales, county by county, (Eyles 1973, p. 4.) The project did not progress, but his successor, Lhwyd, in part continued the process for Wales.

8

R. WILDING

Plot and his contemporaries were, of course, limited in their abilities to assess the nature of fossils by the current beliefs concerning the nature of the world and how it came into existence. The Western World firmly believed in the Biblical teachings, which were accepted as 'Gospel Truth'. After all, the varied versions of the Protestant faiths were based on newly acquired Bible translations and interpretations. The Noachian Deluge was regarded as a major event in Earth history. Although there were differences of opinion on such matters as whether or not it was responsible for the presence of fossil shells found in rocks, even high up in mountains, the truth of the event was unquestioned. After all, it was not many years since Archbishop Ussher had calculated, using the best scholarship of his time, that the Earth had been created by God in 4004 BC (Ussher 1650-1654; Fuller 2001). Nicolaus Steno (1638-1696) had asserted in two books published in 1667 and 1669 that fossils were truly animal remains, for he believed that nothing but a shark could make sharks' teeth. Previously, fossilized specimens of these were popularly thought of as 'tongue stones' (glossopetrae) that represented the tongues of serpents or birds (Steno 1667). These books were certainly the first geological treatises and he was the founder of geological science. Plot was acquainted with the views of Steno, but strongly opposed them: he described the 'formed stones' of Oxfordshire, and Burghers illustrated them with such a degree of accuracy that we can still recognize and identify the different species represented in the fossils. While rejecting the idea of the organic origin of fossils, Plot saw that to do so caused many problems, but worked hard to formulate a plausible alternative. In opting for a form of crystallization, i.e. the 'plastic force' that made fossils, he found fewer difficulties in following that hypothesis than in following Steno. Sollas later observed 'Geology required a prophet, and she found him in Steno, but she also required a critic, and in Plot she met with one of the most penetrating intellect and uncompromising spirit' (Sollas 1905,239). Plot's description of fossils begins with those that appear to have some connection with the heavenly bodies such as sun-stones, of which none were found in Oxfordshire, moon-stones or Selenites, and starstones or Asteria, having a pentagonal shape in cross-section, such as in the stems of crinoids. He experimented with these by steeping them overnight in vinegar and thus separating individual columns from one another. He also defined what he called Astroites or starry-stones, which were mainly part of fossil corals, adorned with constellations of stars. He followed the common belief that the pointed internal guards of fossil belemnites were generated in clouds as 'thunderbolts' (Bassett 1982,7).

As in the Burghers drawings borrowed later by Brookes, his formed stones from the vegetable kingdom in Plot's Oxford-shire are named according to their resemblances. Figure 2 from Brookes is named directly according to the descriptions for Plot's plate 6. As Challinor pointed out, Plot gives full and careful descriptions, with localities (Challinor, 1953-1954, p. 134). This was not yet the beginning of palaeobotany; the word had not yet been invented. Both Plot and his successor were merely the heralds of later developments. They were each instrumental in encouraging the necessity of collections made in as many places as possible. Others were to follow and local collectors would, eventually, be recognized as being of great importance in adding to our knowledge of Earth processes. Perhaps it was Edward Lhwyd, who took over from Plot, who is the more likely candidate for the title of 'Father of Palaeontology'.

Edward Lhwyd (1660-1709) Lhwyd was born at Glan Ffraid in the parish of Llanfihangel Geneu'r in Cardiganshire. He entered Jesus College, Oxford in 1682. He did not proceed to a degree, but in 1684 was appointed Underkeeper of the recently established Ashmolean, and when Plot resigned in 1690 became the Head Keeper. His keepership was distinguished by frequent travel for the purpose of collecting natural history and other specimens. Edmund Gibson, later Bishop of Lincoln, employed him in 1693 to collect materials in Wales for a new edition of Camden's Britannia, which was published in 1695. Lhwyd issued a circular inviting subscriptions to enable him to take an extended 5 year-tour of Wales to collect both antiquarian and scientific material (Gunther 1945, p. 13). A public subscription was opened in 1697; and to assist this request for financial aid, Lhwyd issued a syllabus, entitled 'Parochial queries in order to a Geographical Dictionary, a Natural History, & c., of Wales' (Gunther 1945, p. 17). He visited every Welsh county, made extracts from manuscripts, copied inscriptions and collected curiosities. In Montgomery, in 1698, he began the preface to his first published work: 'Lythophylacii Britannici ichnographia; . . .' (Lhwyd 1699). This contained some of his drawings of fossil plants (Fig. 3). Contrary to Lhwyd's expectations, and although it contained a methodical catalogue of the Ashmolean's fossils, the work obtained no printing costs from the university. These were paid for by Sir Hans Sloane, and others of his learned friends, including Sir Isaac Newton. As Lhwyd was absent from Oxford at the time of printing, the first edition

THE RISE OF THE ENLIGHTENMENT

9

Fig. 3. Edward Lhwyd's plant fossils from his Lythophylacii Britannici ichnographia. (a) Fossil plants of the genus Neuropteris: 188, N. schlehani Stur; 189, N. heterophylla Brogniart; 191, 197, 186, Neuropteris sp. (b) 184b, Cordaites sp. 201, Annularia sp.; 202, Annularia sphenophylloides Zenker; 184a, ? Pecopteris sp.; 190 ? Neuropteris tenuifolia Schlotheim.

was full of inaccuracies. The second, corrected, edition was not published until 1760, after his death. In 1699 he visited Scotland, and the following year he went to Ireland and Cornwall. In 1701 he visited Brittany, where he was arrested as a spy and spent 18 days in prison and was only released on condition that he left the country forthwith. Lhwyd was created an MA on his return to Oxford by the 1701 Convocation, on condition he should read a yearly lecture on 'Natural History' every year for 6 years. He spent a few years arranging the results of the research carried out on his travels. There were delays from the printers, so the first part of what was to have been a very comprehensive work, entitled Archaeologia Britannica, did not appear until 1707. This first part was all that was published and, unfortunately, the subject matter of this volume was 'Glossography', an elaborate 'comparative etymology' of the Celtic languages: Welsh, Irish, Cornish and Breton. Other planned subjects remained unpublished, including his collected antiquarian, natural history and geological material (Gunther 1945, pp.

41-44). He did, however, touch on these subjects in papers for the Royal Society (Lhwyd, 1712,1713). Lhwyd was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1708, despite opposition from Dr John Woodward with whom he had quarrelled over the origin of marine fossils that Woodward had ascribed to the Biblical Deluge. Lhwyd was firmly against the idea that the Biblical Flood could account for fossils (Gunther 1945, pp. 381-396). John Woodward, on the other hand, had developed a somewhat complicated hypothesis. He imagined that all of the materials of the Earth's crust were either dissolved or held in suspension at the time of the Deluge and were then deposited in layers according to their densities when the waters receded. It was as if God had switched off the normal process of gravity, and then switched it back on again, when the layers settled in order of increasing density (Woodward 1695, pp. 29 and 74). Although it was clear to many that strata and their contained fossils were not arranged in order of specific gravity, that theory did much to advance the long-standing belief that the Noachian Deluge was

10

R. WILDING

an important event in Earth history; a belief that con- easily be wash'd down by the rain into the depth here required' (Gunther 1945, p. 390). tinued well into the 19th century. It was natural that Lhwyd should have been In the spring of 1609 Lhwyd was elected Superior Beadle of Divinity, an appointment that would have searching for some generally accepted process to done much to alleviate his financial problems if he account for the presence of fossils in rocks. His predhad lived longer, but towards the end of June of that ecessor, Plot, postulated some process akin to crysyear he caught a chill which led to his death from tallization. Lhwyd postulated a development of the pleurisy, complicated with asthma. Unfortunately, natural growth process: from fish roe, in the case of Lhwyd died in debt, for his income as Keeper of the marine fossils; from plant seeds, in the case of plant Ashmolean never exceeded £50 per annum, and as fossils. All of the naturalists of this time can be seen as he had received insufficient subscriptions to finance struggling with the question of explaining the foshis journeys these left him very much out of pocket. His manuscripts were later sold by the university, silization process. Although only Hooke, Steno and and ended up in private hands, some were later Woodward correctly believed in their organic origin, destroyed by fire (Gunther 1945, pp. 553-557). His the theorizing of such as Plot and Lhwyd still played fossil collections were similarly not well enough important parts in the movement of scientific looked after; by 1925 only two specimens of his his- thought towards the eventual rise of the disciplines toric collection were known to have survived of palaeontology and, indeed, of the separate study of palaeobotany. So their contributions are very (Gunther 1945, p. 558). However, Gunther rediscovered at Oriel College worthy of study. Library a number of small fossils, with names, localities and serial numbers in Lhwyd's hand. Gunther deduced that this was a duplicate collection, assem- Richard Brookes, MD (c. 1750) bled by Lhwyd himself for sale to persons interested in geology, and published photographs of this Almost nothing is known about Richard Brookes, important collection of specimens (Gunther 1945, except for a few slight biographical details in some of his writings. We don't even know the dates of his pp. 560-570). Lhwyd recorded, in his published books, very birth and death, except that he died before August little on his ideas about fossils. We have to look at his 1763. He is often confused with others with the same correspondence with his contemporaries, Martin surname. G.T. Bettany in his short entry on Brookes Lister, Richard Richardson and John Ray to see how in the Dictionary of Natural Biography (1886) has his opinions changed and developed. Earlier in his him down as the translator of two books from the contributions to Gibson's edition of Camden's French: The Natural History of Chocolate by Quelus ''Britannia' he had observed: (1730) and The General History of China by Du Halde (1736), both of which were actually translated It will not perhaps be unacceptable to the Curious, if we by a Rev. Richard Brookes, MA, Rector of Ashney, take notice here of some delineations of the leaves of Northamptonshire (died 1737) (Rogers 1972, p. Plants, that are found upon sinking new Coal pits in the 156). Township of Leeswood in this parish (Mold). These... are Our Richard Brookes produced a large number of probably found in most other parts of England and Wales, books on many subjects, including one on angling, where they dig Coal... I shall venture to affirm, that these but mainly medical. All were mostly compilations Plants (whatever may be their origin) are distinguishable from the works of others. His most lasting compilainto species, as those produced in the Surface .. . amongst tion was his General Gazetteer, published by John these Plants, we find the majority not reconcileable with Newberry (1762), which was a very popular work, those produced in this country; and many of them totally perhaps because of a growing interest in the discovdifferent from all Plants whatever, that have yet been ery of new lands and the beginnings of colonization. described (Camden 1695, p. 827). It went into many editions for the rest of the 18th In a later letter to John Ray, he toyed with the idea century and well into the 19th century. The work was that marine fossils 'might be partly owing to fish- revised by A.G. Findley, in 1842, 1851, 1852 and spawn, received into the chinks and other meatus's 1863, and by J.A. Smith in 1868 and 1876. There of ye earth in the water of the Deluge .. .'(Gunther were also many American editions over the years 1945, p. 389) In the same letter he observed 'these (Rogers 1972, p. 159). mineral plants... are but mere delineations or superBrookes, A New and Accurate System of Natural ficial resemblances, nor yet could such representa- History (1763) was in six volumes, covering: I, tions be owing to the impressions of plants, since 'Quadrupeds'; II, 'Birds'; III, 'Fishes and Serpents'; consumed, because... they are little rays'd above the IV 'Insects'; V, 'Waters, Earths, Stones, Fossils, surface of the stone and not impress'd' (Gunther Minerals'; and VI, 'Vegetables'. This lengthy work 1945, p. 388). So, as with fish-spawn, 'seeds may was compiled with the aid of one of the great names

THE RISE OF THE ENLIGHTENMENT

11

Romanticism and 'the Heroic Age of Geology'

Fig. 4. Oliver Goldsmith (1728-1774).

in the history of English Literature, Oliver Goldsmith (Fig. 4). Goldsmith is mainly known from a mere handful of his works: two great poems, The Traveller' and 'The Deserted Village', one great novel, The Vicar of Wakefield, and one great play, 'She Stoops to Conquer'. His only other play The Good Natured Man' was turned down by David Garrick and was a flop when it was produced by Coleman. Goldsmith, who also trained as a doctor, wrote a great deal of other work, but it was mostly what we would call nowadays 'hackwork'. He would turn his writing talents to writing anything for money as he was always hard up, in part due to a weakness for gambling, but mostly because he was always most generous to helping others in need. He died £2000 in debt. Goldsmith wrote the prefaces to the first four volumes of Brooke's Natural History, but also wrote notices to promote it, and a review of it. As one writer puts it, he was employed 'not only to prepare Brooke's book for the public, but also to prepare the public for Brookes's book' (Rogers 1972, p. 160). This Natural History may seem very unscientific by our modern standards, and as a compilation it contained little in the way of original observations. Volume V, which deals with fossils amongst other things, is plainly a rehashing of the work of Plot and others. Yet, it was an important precursor to a great period of growth of interest in the sciences in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. The work sold well and went into a second edition, so it helped to advance the study of natural history.

Amongst historians of English Literature, Goldsmith's poem, The Traveller', opens the period of Romanticism. Romanticism, following a period of Neo-Classicism that was part and parcel of the Enlightenment, was very much involved with an increased growth of interest in nature, and in the natural and physical sciences. The Romantic poets were very much Nature poets, and many had more than a passing interest in the natural world from a scientific viewpoint. It is no coincidence that the Romantic period coincided with what von Zittel called 'the Heroic Age of Geology' - the Age of Hutton, William Smith and the early Lyell. Science and the arts were not then divided into what C.R Snow was later to label The Two Cultures'. Together they were part of a growing culture that tried to describe and understand the world, not only with respect to its life and physical composition, but also the human condition. In the history of the natural sciences, Richard Brookes is a more important representative of his times than is superficially apparent. He, like his predecessors Plot and Lhwyd, is very worthy of our attention.

References BASSETT, M.G. 1982. Formed Stones', Folklore and Fossils. National Museum of Wales, Cardiff. BROOKES, R. 1763. A New and Accurate System of Natural History. Six volumes. J. Newbery, London. CAMDEN, W. 1586. Britannia. Radulph Newberry, London. CAMDEN, W. 1610. Britannia. First English edition. HOLLAND, P. (transl.). Phileman Holland, London. CAMDEN, W. 1695. Britannia. GIBSON, E. (ed.). A. Swale and A. J. Churchill, London. CHALLINOR, J. 1953-1954. The early progress of British geology. Annals of Science, Volumes 9 and 10. Taylor & Francis, London. EYLES, V.A. 1973. Introduction. (Facsimile) of John Woodward's (1696 ) 'Brief Instructions for Making Observations in all Parts of the World'. Arno Press, New York, London. FULLER, J.G.C.M. 2001. Before the hills in order stood: the beginning of the geology of time in England. In: LEWIS, C.L.E. & KNELL, S.J. (eds) The Age of the Earth from 4004 EC to AD 2002. The Geological Society, London. GUNTHER, R.T. 1945. Early Science in Oxford, Volume XIV. Life and Letters of Edward Lhwyd. Printed for subscribers, Oxford. HOOKE, R. 1665. Micrographia. Royal Society, London. HOOYKAAS, R. 1972. Religion and the Rise of Modern Science. Scottish Academic Press, Edinburgh. LHWYD, E. 1699. Lithophylacii Britannici ichnographia. Printed for its subscribers, London. LHWYD, E. 1707. Archaeologia Britannica. Printed at the Theatre for the author, Oxford.

12

R. WILDING

LHWYD, E. 1712. Observations on the Antiquities and Natural History of Ireland Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, xxvii, 503,524. LHWYD, E. 1713. Observations in Natural History and Antiquities, made in travels through Wales and Ireland. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, xxviii, 93-103. LHWYD, E. 1760. Lythophylacii Britannici ichnographia. Editio Altera (HUDDESFORD, W). Clarendon Press, Oxford. PLOT, R. 1677. The Natural History of Oxford-shire. Printed at the Theater for the author, Oxford. PLOT, R. 1686. The Natural History of Stafford-shire. Printed at the Theater, for the author, Oxford. RAPPAPORT, R. 1997. When Geologists were Historians 1665-1750. UP, Cornell. ROSSITER, A.P 1935. The first English geologist: Robert

Hooke (1635-1703). Durham University Journal, 29. STENO, N. 1667. Dissection of a Shark's Head. Stella, Florence. (GARBOE, A. (transl.) 1958. St. Martin's Press, London.) STENO, N. 1669. De solido intra solidum naturaliter contento dissertationis prodromus. ex typographia sub signo stellae, Florence. USSHER, J. 1650-1654. Annales Veteris etNovi Testamenti. ex officina J. Flesher & prostart apud J. Crook & J. Baker, London. WEBSTER, J. 1654. Academiarum Examen. Giles Calvert, London. WOODWARD, J. 1695. An Attempt Towards a Natural History of the Earth . . . With an Account of the Universal Deluge: and the Effects that it had Upon the Earth. Wilkin, London.

The Moravian minister Rev. Henry Steinhauer (1782-1818); his work on fossil plants, their first 'scientific' description and the planned Mineral Botany HUGH S. TORRENS Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, UK Present address: Lower Mill Cottage, Furnace Lane, Madeley, Crewe, Cheshire CW3 9EU (e-mail:[email protected]) Abstract: Henry Steinhauer (born in 1782 at Haverfordwest, UK; died in 1818 at Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, USA) was the son of a Moravian minister and teacher. He attended their Yorkshire school from 1789 and then trained for their ministry in Germany. He returned to teach at Fulneck from 1801 to 1811. Moravians particularly encouraged the study of, and participation in, music and natural history, and Fulneck school had a museum for the latter by 1795. At Fulneck Steinhauer came across the fossil plants found in nearby coal mines. By 1811 he was suffering from consumption. To improve his health he moved temporarily to London where he tried to encourage James Sowerby to undertake a 'Mineral Botany' project to parallel Sowerby's one on fossil shells, Mineral Conchology. Sadly, this failed to come to fruition. Next Steinhauer moved to Bath, where he became a disciple of the stratigraphic methods of William Smith. In 1814 he received a call to teach at the new world Moravian settlement of Bethlehem in Pennsylvania, USA. He set off late in 1815 and there presented his only palaeobotanical paper to the American Philosophical Society in May 1817. This gave scientific descriptions of 10 species of English fossil coal plants and introduced valid binomial nomenclature for such fossils. His large collection of stratigraphically arranged fossils from all over England, and its detailed manuscript catalogue all predating his 1815 departure, survive in Philadelphia. His work has largely been lost sight of because of his early death and the tragic separation of this fine collection from its place of origin. He deserves to be better known.

John Walton's (1895-1971) review article (Walton 1959) on 'Palaeobotany in Great Britain' passed straight from James Parkinson's publication (Parkinson 1804) to Henry Witham's (Witham 1831), thus ignoring the significant work carried out in England between at least 1811 and 1815 by Henry Steinhauer. Of this the American H.N. Andrews wrote:

from the Yorkshire and Somerset coal fields' (Andrews 1980, p. 178).

Steinhauer's origins

If the duty of the historian 'is to understand and not to judge' (Ellenberger 1988, back cover), we clearly first need to:

Henry Steinhauer was born at 9 o'clock in the evening on 28 February 1782 at Haverfordwest, Pembrokeshire, UK (Haverfordwest Moravian Church Registers, Public Record Office, London, RG4 4076). He was the second son of German-born John Steinhauer (1732-1804), Moravian minister there from 1777 to 1792, and his second wife (they married on 5 April 1774) Anna Mary Gambold (1746-1809), the daughter of Bishop John Gambold (1711-1771 - see the Dictionary of National Biography, hereafter DNB) and his wife Elizabeth nee Walker (1719-1803). They had five children, all, except the first two, born at Haverfordwest:

•

(1)

Although Henry Steinhauer (1818) is usually given credit for being the first to use binomials in describing fossil plants it seems a rather insignificant matter in view of the distinct superiority of Schlotheim's work; he did use binomials in 1820 [but who, unlike Steinhauer, had earlier used non-binomials!], and all but two of the twenty-nine plates are devoted to fossil plants. (Andrews 1980, p. 53.)

• •

learn more of Steinhauer and ask why his work had to be limited to this single publication; ask why Welsh-born Steinhauer's work became 'the earliest significant American publication on fossil plants'; why 'this was something of a paradox in that apparently [in fact actually] all the fossil plants he dealt with . . . were from England, chiefly

(2)

(3)

John Ignatius (1775-?) MD, Edinburgh University 1799; Mary Agnes (1777-?), born at Bristol (where John Steinhauer may have been serving as minister between Fulneck and Haverfordwest); » Daniel (1779-1785); as well as the two most mentioned in this paper

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,13-28.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

14

H.S. TORRENS

(4) Henry, their second surviving son; and (5) his botanist brother, Joseph Daniel Steinhauer, known as Daniel (1785-1852; although his year of birth is as given in the Moravians' meticulous register of births and baptisms, his gravestone at Bethlehem wrongly states it as 1784). Useful biographic data on the family are given in a printed document preserved in the Fulneck archives (Anon. 1784, pp. 23 and 41). For details of the Moravian community in Haverfordwest and the Steinhauer role in it see Jenkins (1938), Jones (1946) and Roberts (1978). Five of John's letters, written here between 1783 and 1790 and published by Roberts (1962, pp. 163, 169, 171-173 and 177), describe their situation there. The Moravians, United Brethren or Herrnhuters were 'a fanatical sect which sprung up in Upper Lusatia [eastern Germany] towards the beginning of the last [18th] century' . . . where they 'were soon joined by a number of proselytes from Moravia . . . Particular attention was paid to the education of youth, in which a greater part of their worship consisted in singing. All matrimonial contracts are subject to the direction and approbation of elders' (see the 1811 entry 'Herrnhuters' in Rees (1802-1820), where there is a also a better balanced view in 1818 under 'Unitas Fratrum'). They were also exempt, with Quakers, by Act of Parliament from compulsory military service (Steinhauer was specifically exempted in 1810 at Fulneck - but recorded as Henry Stineham: Hutton 1953, p. 26). They were also enthusiastic missionaries of their own philosophy all over the world. This gave them unprecedented access to new material throughout the realms of natural history. Henry Steinhauer's education Moravians paid great attention to the education of their children and some of the letters cited above already refer to the safe delivery of some of the Steinhauer children to Fulneck, now a suburb of Leeds, in Yorkshire. Here was the main English seminary for schooling Moravian children and training their priests, and Steinhauer attended the Male Seminary here from 26 March 1789 to 1795 (List of Boys at Fulneck, Fulneck School archives). In July 1792 his father, who had first arrived there as a teacher from Germany in 1763, was selected as Headmaster of Fulneck School. Here he continued until 1797 (Waugh 1909; Hutton 1953, p. 28). He was then moved to Ballymena in Northern Ireland, at a troubled time in Irish history, as minister of their Gracehill Moravian Church Congregation (Waugh 1909, p. 35), where he founded a success-

ful school for girls in 1798 (Hamilton & Hamilton 1967, p. 211 - but who wrongly claim this of Henry Steinhauer; Hanna 1967, pp. 120-127). Here John died in May 1804 ('on 9 May 1804 we received the affecting account', extract of Fulneck Diary for 1801-1805, Fulneck archives). His widow then left Ireland and moved to Liverpool (Vaughan 1931, p. 86), perhaps to live with her eldest son, John, who was a doctor. Children at Moravian schools were introduced to the study of natural history and the creations of God at an early age. The examination scheme in use at Fulneck in May 1795 shows how Henry Steinhauer played a major role in this study of natural history, while still a pupil there. Thirteen year-old Steinhauer is named as then being examined in Writing, Book keeping, Geometry and Logarithms (in which he had had private mathematical instruction), English Grammar and Poetry, Greek, Latin and Latin Poetry, Geography, French and Natural History (Public Examination of the Boys in Fulneck Oeconomy in Presence of all the members of the Elders Conference, 21 May 1795, manuscript in Fulneck School archives). In the last subject, Natural History, Steinhauer recorded during a joint dialogue with his fellow pupils Thomas and John Binns (these two came from Bath), B. Angell and J. Hinchclife and their teacher Brother Holmes, how: Natural History has always been a favourite study of mine, and it is with the sincerest gratitude that I acknowledge the opportunity given us of being instructed in this most agreeable, and I might add, most useful science. . . . Anything that conduces to the improvement of the understanding must be acknowledged useful, and that which does this the most effectually may be deemed of the greatest utility. And nothing I think (if we except mathematics) can be more serviceable in this respect than Natural History. By this we are made acquainted with the effects and causes of a great many objects of which we should otherwise remain ignorant. [He ended his discourse] I still beg leave to return our warmest acknowledgements to all those friends who have in any wise assisted us in the collection of our Museum, which is a very great requisite for the more effectual instruction in Natural History.

This gives clear evidence, from school archives, that their School Museum was in existence from at least 1795. It was later recorded by: a friend of the brethren writing in 1801 [how] a museum has lately been opened by Mr Steinhauer [senior at Fulneck] for public inspection and as it is well supplied by the Brethren's Missionaries abroad, it exhibits a tolerable collection of valuable curiosities. Concerts are regularly performed every week and having been more once present, I can safely say that the musical performance exceeded my warmest expectations. (C— 1887.)

HENRY STEINHAUER AND MINERAL BOTANY

Music was also especially encouraged in Moravian circles (Ingram 1982). The, sadly now former, existence of this museum was recalled to me by the school's historian (letter from Robin Hutton to H.S. Torrens, 29 August 1985): I remember this museum well. It was in glass cupboards at the back of one of the class rooms and was only removed comparatively recently - perhaps twenty years ago [c. 1965] when, as I remember it, the contents were simply thrown away - things like South Sea Island Shells [sent back, no doubt, by Moravian missionaries there] and fossils [no doubt including many of Henry Steinhauer's collection].

Both this museum (despite its recent destruction) and Steinhauer's personal collections of fossils must have greatly benefited from the fossil treasures to be found in the local coal and iron mines. Steinhauer next studied at the German seminaries of the Moravians at Barby and Niesky in eastern Germany between 1795 and 1801. Barby lies a few kilometres SE of Magdeburg and Niesky many kilometres to the east, close to the Polish border, NE of Dresden. At both, a great deal of attention was again paid to natural history and to creating museums. That at Barby has received fascinating recent attention from Augustin (1994). Having finished his education in Germany, Henry Steinhauer was appointed as a teacher back at the Boys' Moravian School at Fulneck, where he arrived on 3 October 1801 (extract of Fulneck Diary for 1801-1805, Fulneck School archives). His re-acquaintance with this part of Yorkshire between Leeds and Bradford could now start in earnest.

Steinhauer's first interests in science Steinhauer was clearly already interested in general science and his first recorded writings are three short articles or letters on hieroglyphics, minerals and meteorology, written from Fulneck, in William Nicholson's Journal of Natural Philosophy (Steinhauer 1804, 1806, 1807: the last records a meteorological observation he made in June 1805 at sea off the coast of North Wales). In June 1808 Steinhauer was appointed principal tutor, or first teacher, of the: Institute called the New Academy or Paedagogium in distinction from the Boarding School itself. Here the higher branches of learning as mathematics, algebra, natural philosophy should be taught in the same manner as in the Paedagogicum at Niesky. (Extract of Fulneck Diary from 1806 to 1808, Fulneck School archives.)

This was where candidates for the Moravian ministry could be trained (Hamilton & Hamilton 1967, p. 212). A later writer noted how:

15

Our connection with our German congregations secured a supply of well-educated classical and mathematical teachers . . . far beyond what was at that time usual in the majority of private schools in England. Among many gifted teachers of these times, the universal testimony of those who were then pupils points to the name of Br. H[enry] Steinhauer, who inheriting his father's zeal, and endowed with extraordinary acquirements in most departments of science . . . enabled this institution to afford a more liberal education than most others. (Anon. 1855, p. 46.)

Henry Steinhauer's interest in fossils and, especially in fossil plants, had certainly been first stimulated in the Fulneck area. Fulneck was a village 4.5 miles west of Leeds. Within 1.5 miles to the SE then lay the Low Moor ironworks, near Bradford (Dodsworth 1971). These had been founded in 1788, just as Steinhauer arrived there at school, using both the Black Band Coal Seam and the valuable overlying Carboniferous ironstones. By 1795 James Watt Junior could note of these works 'better forged work I never saw, nor better castings' (Firth 1977, p. 134). These works were controlled by the non-conformist minister Rev. Joseph Dawson (1740-1813), who had first realized the value of the coal that occurred here with iron. He soon made Low Moor the most renowned ironworks in Yorkshire (Morrell 1985). Dawson was an enthusiastic collector of geological objects, but these were nearly all mineralogical, unlike Steinhauer's collection. A large proportion of them still survive, with their original catalogue, in Bradford City Museum (Pacey 2003). It is important to record that Henry was also, like his better known brother Daniel, a very competent field botanist. He seems to have published nothing in this field, but seven specimens from him are preserved in the herbarium of Jonathan Salt (1759-1815) (Holland 1837, pp. 198-199), now at Sheffield City Museum (Riley 1982, pp. 84-85), whose help Henry also later acknowledged in his 1818 paper. All are from New Holland, or Australia, for example 'Native Specimen from New Holland, Dr Smith, Communicated by Mr H. Steinhauer, Fulneck'. These all derive from Dr James Edward Smith (1759-1828), first president of the Linnean Society of London, who thus had many chances of distributing such new found material. Steinhauer was able to return the compliment, as Smith's own herbarium contained botanical material from Labrador that Henry had obtained for him from Moravian missionaries working there (Savage 1963, p. Iviii - citing items 807.72 and 839.10; see also 839.8). These are all from 'Labrador [from] Mr Steinhauer by James Sowerby', who had clearly acted as intermediary here. These last must thus derive from Henry's time in London after 1811.

16

H.S. TORRENS

William Martin and palaeobotany Others were also now busy on the fossil plants found in England. The most important was William Martin (1767-1810) 'comedian and writing-master', who married Mrs Mary Adams 'an unfortunate but interesting young widow . . . and actress' at Stoke-onTrent in April 1797 (Hull 1812, p. 560). In 1809 Martin issued a notice recording that: Mr W. Martin is preparing for the press, to be published by subscription, the second volume of his Petrificata Derbiensia, or Figures and Descriptions of Purifications collected in Derbyshire of which the first volume has just appeared [Martin 1809]. A considerable portion of the plates in the second volume will be appropriated to the illustration of specimens collected in coal soils, and particularly of such species of Reliquiae [fossils] as have not hitherto been figured or described by English Authors. (Anon. 1809.)

Steinhauer's own copy of Martin (1809) survives (but this is apparently one purchased by him in America) in the library of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia - hereafter ANSP. It carries his interesting annotations. Plate 1 for example, figuring fossil wood from Derbyshire, he records was 'in the collection of Mr W. Watson of Bakewell [see below]. The remainder of the log was sent to the Empress of Russia'. The goniatite figured on plate 7 is correctly noted as being a 'cast from the interior of the shell. The outside is marked with fine striae (Mr Sowerby's specimens)' [again, see below]. The coral figured on plate 44 Figure 5, he thought 'from the examination of numerous specimens had misled Martin'. He also comments on trilobites and some fossil plants that Martin had also figured here. Sadly, Martin was soon to die of the scourge of consumption in Macclesfield on 31 May 1810 and so his intended second volume on fossil plants was never published. This is one reason why Martin's work on the fossil plants of the Carboniferous has, like Steinhauer's, been so forgotten, although Challinor (1948) made a brave attempt to record his importance. A more significant reason is that Martin did not use binomial nomenclature for those fossils he did describe and so none of his works satisfy the later rules of the International Commissions of either Zoological or Botanical Nomenclature (see MuirWood 1951; Stubblefield 1951).

Henry Steinhauer's travels in the north of England Steinhauer was active as a naturalist while in the north of England and clearly travelled a good deal while based at Fulneck. His visit to Sheffield on 9 January 1811, where 'through a community of botan-

ical tastes, and admiration for a man of remarkable native capacity, he was greatly attracted by Jonathan Salt', was noted by T.A. Ward (Bell 1909, p. 166). Steinhauer was the 'late friend of mine, highly gifted with genius' who was recorded by James Montgomery (1771-1854 - see DNB\ his fellow Moravian, as being Salt's close botanical collaborator whenever Steinhauer visited Sheffield (Anon. 1889, pp. iv-v). At some stage, and surely before August 1811 when he visited Northumberland, Henry Steinhauer must also have become involved with the Newcastle Literary and Philosophical Society, which, between March 1816 and March 1817, elected him an Honorary Member (Anon. 1817, p. 7). Later, in 1811, Steinhauer subscribed to the Derbyshire geologist White Watson's (1760-1835) book on the strata of Derbyshire as 'of Fulneck, Yorkshire' (Watson 1811). But Steinhauer too, like Martin, had now become a victim of the scourge of consumption and he now suffered a relapse in his health at Fulneck. In August 1811 it was reported: that Henry Steinhauer who had protracted his excursion to Northumberland in hopes of receiving benefit from a change of air and from exercise, returned in a poor state of health. [Then on 15 September 1811] Br. Reichel . . . [who] had purposely come from Dublin to see him once more, expecting him to be near his end, which however was not the case. [On 19 September 1811 Steinhauer] having been advised by the Physicians, to try the London air for the recovery of his health and intending to set out this evening addressed the children once more at their morning meeting and took an affecting farewell of them. (Extracts of the Fulneck Congregation 1811-1812, Fulneck School archives.)

London and the Mineral Botany project with James Sowerby In London Henry Steinhauer soon became involved with the recently formed (November 1807) Geological Society of London and soon met William Smith's friend James Sowerby (1757-1822), who was busy working on his soon-to-be-published multi-volume Mineral Conchology (Sowerby & Sowerby 1812-1846), of which the first part was issued in June 1812. Seven volumes of this were finally published to illustrate British fossil shells and their stratigraphic distributions. This was in large part to demonstrate the significance of Smith's stratigraphic work. Steinhauer contributed many specimens for illustration and description in this pioneering venture and these appeared from Volume 1, part 3 (p. 80**, October 1813) right up to Volume 5 (September 1825), well after Steinhauer had died in America. The full list of Steinhauer's pecimens is worth recording here: his specimens are cited on the following pages:

HENRY STEINHAUER AND MINERAL BOTANY

•

Volume 1 - 80**, 91, 101, 132, 196, 197, 199, 218; Volume 2-4,20,26,28,78,180,181,219-220; Volume 3 - 5,7,11,46,64,78,172; Volume 4-36; Volume 5-11,67,164; a specimen of fossiliferous (carboniferous) limestone was cited in British Mineralogy, Volume 5,98 (1817).

On 3 April 1812 Henry Steinhauer was introduced as a visitor to the Geological Society meeting in London (manuscript Minutes of the Geological Society of London ordinary and general meetings) by George Bellas Greenough (1778-1855), the then current President (Woodward 1907, p. 286). Steinhauer's 'Notice relative to the Geology of the Coast of Labrador' was then read for him (Steinhauer 1814) and relevant specimens then donated to that Society's museum (Anon. 1814, p. 541). The material he then described from here was based on observations and collections made by Moravian missionaries who had long been active there (Hamilton & Hamilton 1967, pp. 148-9). In this paper Steinhauer described (Steinhauer 1814, pp. 493^1-94) a huge cave on the extreme north point of the eastern coast of Labrador, which the Eskimos had declared was the devil's habitation. This was later named The Steinhauer Cavern' - 'after the man who first drew attention to it' (Gibb 1860, p. 171). By August 1812 Steinhauer was 'out of employment and he is now engaged by the Society for the furtherance of the Gospel in London in re-editing the Greenland history. He is much improved in his health but cannot bear much publick speaking' (Minutes of the Provincial Elders Conference, Moravian Church House archives). This Greenland history must refer to the 1820 edition of David Cranz, (1727-1777) book, which was at least in part clearly updated by Steinhauer (Steinhauer 1820). In the summer of 1812 James Sowerby projected another periodical to accompany his now wellknown Mineral Conchology (on which good progress was soon made). This other project was first noted by another friend of Smith's, John Farey (1766-1826) Senior - see DNB, who reported in July 1812: This able naturalist proposes soon to commence a periodical work, expressly for illustrating Mineral Botany [fossil plants], by coloured plates and descriptions; Number 1 of his periodical work on Mineral Conchology has appeared, in which it will continue to be his first care to give accurate coloured plates, and descriptions of all the numerous species of shells found in the Highgate Tunnel [now Archway, London]. (Farey 1812.)

This Mineral Botany project was intended to document the palaeobotany of British strata. It had been similarly inspired, as had Mineral Conchology, by

17

William Smith's recently re-announced ordering of British strata (Farey 1811; Parkinson 1811) after the formation of the Geological Society. This had convinced many, but not the leaders of the Geological Society (Torrens 2001, pp. 74-77), that this ordering of strata constituted a major scientific breakthrough. A series of letters between Steinhauer and Sowerby show that Steinhauer was the prime mover in this whole Mineral Botany project. The major causes for its failure to appear must have been because of • •

Henry Steinhauer's illness; and his emigration to North America;

as well as the financial problems then facing all such publications. We have details of this publication from five manuscript letters from Steinhauer to Sowerby that survive both in Bristol (four in the Eyles Archive, Bristol University Library) and London (one in Natural History Museum archives). The first, of 3 September 1812, notes how on an excursion to Hampton Court, Steinhauer had noted that the floor beneath the left-hand great staircase proved to be 'of red and grey flagstones similar to those at Chelsea Hospital, I found that they abounded in Orthoceratites to the full as beautiful as those in the latter place'. He continued: with regard to Fossil Botany or whatever other title you purpose to give to your new publication, in case you wish me to assist and think that my assistance would be of service to you, I would propose instead of the introduction which I prefixed to the paper which I showed you [presumably an early draft of Steinhauer (1818)], to write one applicable to this whole branch of natural history, distinguishing its object and province, its subdivisions and an account of what little has been done as far as has come under my observation. (Steinhauer to Sowerby, Natural History Museum archives.)

He then continued with many other suggestions for the planned first and second issues. These included 'I wish you could have the descriptions of the fossil ferns by Dr [J.E.] Smith; they will, if they are to be classical which I could wish them, require a hand intimately acquainted with the phraseology of botany as applied to the description of the Filices'. Steinhauer's next letter of 14 December 1812 from Bath reads: How do your plates of Mineral Botany proceed? I am very eager to see them; as soon as you can send me proofs, pray do it, & you shall have my remarks reduced to the most suitable form that I am able . . . [Steinhauer then asks Sowerby for dried ferns] which I am very anxious to obtain in order to acquire some extended knowledge of that family upon which the explanation of so many of the remains [fossils] in the Coal strata must depend. (Steinhauer to Sowerby, Eyles archive.)

18

H.S. TORRENS

But sadly this project was never published, nor were Steinhauer's contributions, at least in England. One of the reasons was certainly the fluctuating state of Steinhauer's health.

Henry Steinhauer moves to Bath, Somerset These walls adorned with monument and bust. Show how Bath waters serve to lay the dust. (Henry Harington (1727-1816) MD on regarding the walls of Bath Abbey.)

Bath was then an oasis at which to seek medical aid. Much such advice was widely available in this area, as evidenced by the long lists of physicians, surgeons, dentists and apothecaries that appear in the Bath directories of the period. This helps explain one of their cynical comment's quoted above (Torrens 2002, chap. 3, p. 218). By September 1812 Steinhauer's health had improved and so, on 23 October 1812, he had been moved to Bath to try and improve it further. Here he first lived in Princes Street, off Queen Square. He was now to act as an assistant to the aged Moravian minister then in Bath, Rev. Christopher Gottfried Clemens (1742-?). Steinhauer occasionally also served the congregation at Bristol (Minutes of the Elders Conferences at Bath and Bristol, Moravian Church house archives, London). The congregation at Bath including two of Steinhauer's old Fulneck school friends, Thomas and John Binns (1782-1818), booksellers in Bath. John's wife Ann Eastcott Hazard (1781-1848) was the eldest daughter of Samuel Hazard (died 1806), who was another Bath-based Moravian. He was a well-known bookseller there and 'the best English printer in his day' (Anon. 1806). After Hazard's death, John Binns, who had come from Dublin, took over the business (Peach 1894). Such contacts would have been useful to Steinhauer's scholarly aspirations now he was away from London. There was another consumptive student of fossils who lived near Bath, at Heytesbury, Wiltshire. This was William Cunnington (1754-1810), who died just before Henry Steinhauer arrived there. In 1804 Cunnington had reported that in 1802 his two doctors, Dr Anthony Fothergill (17327-1813) based in Bath and Dr Thomas Beddoes (1760-1808) in Bristol, had 'told me I must ride out [in the fresh air as much as possible] or die' (Cunnington 1975, p. 5). Thomas Beddoes was a famously philanthropic physician, based in nearby Bristol, who specialized in treating consumption or pulmonary tuberculosis, which then could account for a quarter to a half of recorded deaths (Stansfield 1984, pp. 146-152, 180-182 and 214). His advice to seek fresh air and exercise became the driving force behind Cunnington's impressive archaeological and geological researches. Probably, Steinhauer was also advised to follow the same regimen.

In Bath Steinhauer certainly much expanded his fossil collections. The earliest letter to Sowerby from this new location was, as we have seen, dated 14 December 1812. Apart from discussing Mineral Botany, it noted that bad weather and bad health had restricted his ability to gather more Bath fossils for Sowerby. But Steinhauer had already devoted special attention to fossils from the Lias and Oolite rocks at Bath. He was intrigued, as were many later, by the problem of repetitious occurrences of oolitic facies in the rocks here. Steinhauer's next letter to Sowerby was dated 8 November 1813. It records that his brother and sister, presumably Daniel and Agnes, had moved to Bristol that summer, and that Henry's health had also 'very materially benefitted - I may say [been] reinstated by my stay in Bath'. Steinhauer had now been busy collecting 'coal petrifications' from the nearby Somerset Coalfield. He had devoted a good deal of time that summer to the study of geology and fossils but 'though the latter abound in our Strata, it is not easy to obtain tolerably perfect specimens'. He asks to hear 'what has been going on in your [Sowerby's] Museum, how the dry rot comes on - or rather goes off (I hope like [Napoleon] Bonaparte at present) and whether you have done anything more to Mineral Botany'. Steinhauer's letter also reported that, in September 1813, he had made a visit to Hembercombe, Blackdown, Devon to study the Greensand fossils then found so abundantly there (see Fitton 1836, p. 238). But he 'could only stay one day at the pits, and as the fossils are by no means very abundant and eagerly sought after by numerous visitors, you are thrown on the mercy of the workmen, who had been recently stripped of their stores'. Finally, he comments on the new craze for fossil 'crocodiles', which the ichthyosaur-to-be discovery that had just been made by the Anning children at Lyme Regis had stimulated in 1812 and 1813: I have not been at all successful in getting, or catching Crocodiles, they are at present very rare here - but I saw a fine head 3 feet long though wanting snout and back part in Mr Johnson's collection in Bristol, from Charmouth. I also got a drawing of two tolerable specimens belonging to Mr Day of Hinton [Charterhouse, near Bath] from the same place. I have been lately examining Mr Geo. Cumberland's collection. [He concluded] a small cabinet of Fossils was lately sold in Bath which I had an eye upon, expecting it would go for nothing, but was much surprised to find it run up to 21 guineas. Does this indicate increase of love to science or decrease of love of money? (Steinhauer to Sowerby, Eyles archive.)

This letter crossed with one from Sowerby of the same date so Steinhauer wrote again on 17 November 1813. He had now sent Sowerby another box of Coal Measure plant fossils from Radford, a

HENRY STEINHAUER AND MINERAL BOTANY

new colliery near the Paulton Basin, just off the Somerset Coal Canal. As some of the some specimens from here were unique, he asked that they should be returned to him 'when you have done with them'. He had also now visited Rev. Joseph Townsend and seen his fine Smithian-ordered collection. Steinhauer sent fuller details of the puzzling stratigraphy and fossil collecting possibilities that he had seen at Blackdown among the silicosis sufferers who mined scythe stones there. These were poignant observations from a fellow consumptive (Steinhauer to Sowerby, Eyles archive). Steinhauer returned to Devon and Cornwall in the spring of 1814. By 13 January 1815, the date of his last known letter to Sowerby, Henry had moved to 9 Mount Beacon, Bath. He first congratulated Sowerby on the completion of his 36-volume English Botany, which he had published with Dr James Edward Smith (1790-1814). It may have been the need to complete that work that had held up the Mineral Botany project. But Steinhauer now thanked Sowerby for some proof plates Sowerby had made for this, including Phytolithus verrucosus. He then noted: You perhaps remember the MSS observations on the unknown vegetable reliquia which I once showed to you. I have been looking these over with a wish to correct them. Would they be of service to you - or shall I send them to the Geol. Soc.? I do not wish them to be lost and I cannot expect to be able to add much to them. If they should be worth printing, in which case they might perhaps spare you some little trouble in compiling letter press to your plates, I should be glad to have a few copies, else I want neither emolument or fame from them. I believe you have some drawings of mine still? . . . The originals (Ironstone petrif.) with the exception of one or two which I may select at a future opportunity, you are very welcome to add to your collection, if they are an addition to it, as they would be too ponderous an appendage to my collection, which stands the chance of having to travel to some distance about next Midsummer. (Steinhauer to Sowerby, Eyles archive.)

So it is clear from this letter that at least some illustrations of Steinhauer's fossil plants intended for Mineral Botany had reached proof stage.

Steinhauer's personal fossil collection Henry Steinhauer's fossil collecting activities in the Bath area are abundantly proved by the many Bath area localities represented in the surviving 170 page catalogue of his fossil collections (now MSS 358 at ANSP), and in the materials from all round this area that he sent to James Sowerby and which were illustrated in Mineral Conchology. These included the phallic shaped Orthoceras steinhaueri Sowerby, published in June 1814, from north of Halifax, since 'whose merit in research deserves esteem and remem-

19

brance'. On this topic, Steinhauer could cheekily reply on 13 January 1815 to Sowerby, 'thank you for the honor of dedicating an Orthocera to me. As I am not yet married, the compliment cannot be misunderstood' (Steinhauer to Sowerby, Eyles archive). In the 3 years from October 1812 until his departure for America late in November 1815, Steinhauer became closely involved with the many Bath fossil collectors that William Smith's earlier activities there had so fostered (Torrens 2002, chap. 3). The catalogue of his fossil collections (MSS 358 at ANSP) is now labelled 'Steinhauer on Fossils - J.P. W.[etherill]'. It records the names of 13 local collectors and one dealer in fossils with whom he was there in contact. These include in alphabetical order: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

George Weare Braikenridge (1775-1856) of Brislington (see Stoddard 1981); Rev. William Daniel Conybeare (1787-1857) of Batheaston (see DNB); George Cumberland (1754-1848) of Bristol (see Keynes 1970); Samuel Skurray Day (1787-1816) of Hinton Charterhouse (see Howe et al 1981, p. 12); Rev. Peter Hawker (1773-1833) of Woodchester (see Howe et al 1981, pp. 9-10); James Johnson (c. 1764-1844) of Bristol (see Howeetal. 1981, pp. 12-15); Thomas Meade (1753-1845) of Chatley (see Meade 1956) who was an original Honorary Member of the Geological Society elected in 1807. He was in particularly close contact with Henry Steinhauer. After Steinhauer had made his visit to Blackdown, Devon in 1813 to study the abundant Greensand fossils there, Meade wrote to Greenough on 14 December 1813:

I should have been very actively employed with Steinhauer who has been indefatigable. His map of Strata is the most correct I believe of any that exists, as far as it goes, and he makes an immense geological collection. (Meade to Greenough, 14 December 1813, University College, London archives.)

Sadly, this pioneering MSS Geological Map, another inspired by William Smith's soon-to-be published larger versions from 1815 on, is apparently lost but Henry Steinhauer's 'immense collection' still survives in large part as we shall see; (8)

Danzig-born John Samuel Miller (1779-1830) of Bristol, soon-to-be-curator of the Philosophical Institution there (see DNB); (9) Rev. Benjamin Richardson (1758-1832) of Farleigh Hungerford (see Phillips 1844; Torrens & Winston 2002, pp. 300-301); (10) Henry Shorto (1778-1864) of Salisbury, (see Torrens 1990a, p. 182);

20

H.S. TORRENS

(11) Rev. Joseph Townsend (1739-1816) of Bath and Pewsey, Wiltshire (see DNB; Phillips 1844; Torrens 19900, pp. 175-176. Henry Steinhauer's heavily annotated copy of Townsend's 1813 magnum opus on geology also survives in the ANSP library; (12) 'Dr' Charles Hunnings Wilkinson (1763/1764-1850) who was a scientific and medical writer and lecturer, and who had settled in Bath as proprietor of the Kingston Hot Baths. He played an important part in disseminating Smith's results here (Wilkinson 1811). However, his foundation of a third Bath Philosophical Society in December 1815, occured just after Steinhauer had left that city for America (Torrens 1990£, pp. 180 and 184); (13) Jacob Wilkinson (1773-1844) of Springfield House, Bath. He was one of the first Honorary Members (1807) of the Geological Society (but wrongly recorded by that society as Joseph and whose premature death was also wrongly reported by it as occurring in 1827). His 'collection of fossil bones is, perhaps, the finest private one in England' (Warner 1811, p. 177). In addition, Henry's catalogue cited material he had bought from (14) the local Bath fossil dealer James Duffield; or had seen preserved in (15) the Baptist Academy's Museum in Bristol, which was set up in 1784 (see Torrens 2002, chap. 3, p. 232). Other collections/collectors mentioned in this catalogue are (16) William Bullock (c. 1773-1849) the London museum-keeper, showman and auctioneer (see Howeetal. 1981, pp. 12-14); (17) John Farey (1766-1826) mineral surveyor of London (see DNB; Torrens 2002); (18) Sir Everard Home (1756-1832) surgeon and anatomist at the Royal College of Surgeons Museum, London (see DNB); (19) Ashurst Majendie (1784-1857) FRS (see Montgomery-Massingberd 1972, Vol. 3, p. 602), barrister and one of the founders of the Royal Geological Society of Cornwall in 1814; (20) William Martin (1767-1810) of Macclesfield (see above); (21) James Sowerby (1757-1822) of London (see above). In my personal copy of the plates from Sowerby's Mineral Conchology, plate 500, Fig. 1, the smaller 'Ammonites humphresianus' has been anonymously annotated in MSS 'also Bradford [Yorkshire],

Steinhauer', showing that Steinhauer material was available to other collectors; (22) White Watson (1760-1835) of Bakewell. As we have seen, Steinhauer was also a subscriber to Watson's book (Watson 1811); (23) The Fulneck Catalogue. This was a catalogue of museum material then held at his old School (for details of which see earlier). Professor William Buckland's (1784-1856) archive in Oxford University's Museum of Natural History contains a manuscript, watermarked 1811 but otherwise not dated, 'List of Mr Strinawer [sic], 9 Mount Beacon, Bath'. This lists the strata found round Bath from the 'Chalk with flints' down to the 'Mountain Lime'. Such an ordering of strata must date, from the address given, from between November 1813 and late 1815. It shows Steinhauer's influence in spreading the word of the results of Smith's ordering of the strata round Bath to Oxford University. But in October 1814 Henry Steinhauer was now called by the Moravian community to new service, as inspector of the Girls' Boarding house at Bethlehem in Pennsylvania, 50 miles from Philadelphia in North America. This was the 'distant travel' of which Steinhauer had warned Sowerby in January 1815. Such a position demanded that Henry should be married, so a frantic search was started to find him a wife, who, according to Moravian tradition, had to be one agreed by lot within their community. After four potential wives had turned him down (details of whom are recorded in Bath Moravian minutes), on 21 September 1815 he married Ann Mary Child (1787-?) from Fulneck at Birstall Church, near Leeds (The Iris, or Sheffield Advertiser, 10 October 1815). She was the eldest daughter of fellow Moravian, James Child (1746-?), a wool stapler of Fulneck who had married Hannah Mirfield (1760-?) on 6 November 1786. Mary had earlier also attended Fulneck School (Moravian Church House archives, London).

Henry Steinhauer in America On his arrival in America on 17 February 1816, Henry Steinhauer became Principal of the Bethlehem Moravian Girls' Boarding School, or seminary for young ladies (Reichel 1858, pp. 188-199). Here he again encouraged the study of natural history among his new charges, who by April 1818 had reached 150. But his only publication in America was understandably that on the British Carboniferous fossil plants that he had brought with him. This was clearly based on all the work he had done for James Sowerby's abortive Mineral Botany project. Part of his paper was read to the American Philosophical Society (hereafter APS) by its English-born librarian

HENRY STEINHAUER AND MINERAL BOTANY

21

This paper, of 32 pages and four plates, is important: • • •

it introduced valid binomial nomenclature for fossil plants for the first time and it was the first American publication to both: directly espouse Smithian stratigraphic methods and results; and to concern fossil plants.

It is nice to learn that offprints, at least, were available in April 1818 for Steinhauer to send out. One at least has survived, dedicated 'with the Author's respects' to G.B. Greenough (Geological Society of London library). Another reached George Cumberland according to his letter to G.B. Greenough announcing Henry Steinhauer's death; which commented that 'he was a patient enquirer and a very worthy man' (University College, London, Greenough archives, letter of 28 September 1818).

Henry Steinhauer's tragic last year and death Fig. 1. Henry Steinhauer c. 1816 (from Reichel 1858).

John Vaughan (1756-1841) on 2 May 1817 (Phillips 1885, p. 47), to which society, based in Philadelphia, Henry was duly elected a member on 17 October 1817 (Phillips 1885, p. 474) on the nomination of Zaccheus Collins (1764-1831), scientist and philanthropist, and Abbe Jose Francisco Correia da Serra (1751-1823) Portuguese-born botanist and refugee (see Diogo & Carneiro 2001). Steinhauer's paper was sent out to three referees, Zaccheus Collins, William Maclure (1763-1840), the so-called 'father of American Geology' (see Morton 1841) and his fellow refugee from England, the radical Dr Thomas Cooper (1759-1839), who had earlier gone to North America soon after Joseph Priestley (1733-1804). He became Professor of Chemistry at the University of Pennsylvania (Greene 1984). Their referees report survives. It recommended that the paper, as a: very full and accurate description of many varieties of vegetable impressions on schistose and other kinds of Stone..., deserves to be inserted in the Society's volume as being well calculated to assist in the future classification of these interesting remains. (APS archives, 15 May 1817, Report of Committee.)

It (Steinhauer 1818) was duly published in April 1818, according to Steinhauer's letter to Zaccheus Collins of 25 April 1818 (ANSP archives).

Steinhauer's Bethlehem school was very successful and he certainly hoped to continue his work in natural history there. As he explained in a letter of 26 May 1817 to Zaccheus Collins from Bethlehem: I am much obliged to you for your favourable opinion on my paper on extraneous fossils [Steinhauer 1818]. The subject and the correctness of the observations which have not been made in haste must be the excuse for the manner [in which you received it]. I wrote the whole under the influence of violent headache, at a time that I was, and indeed because I was, unfit for any other mental exertion . . . I should be very glad to pursue the subject in this country when opportunities offer, but it requires personal and patient investigation. I have more hopes to do something with another branch, the fossil filicites [ferns] of the coal strata - the subject is not so new but in this country / believe nothing has been done. I have specimens of a good many British species some nondescript [not yet described]. I am expecting V. Schlotheim's work on the German species [Schlotheim 1804] and received when last in Phil[adelphi]a 3 or 4 species of the Rhode Island impressions of ferns which, with some sent over to England by Dr [William] Meade [c. 1765-1833, MD Edinburgh University 1790; see Silliman 1833, 1834] of Boston, convince me how much is to be done. The advantage in this part of the science of petrifactions is, that a single tolerable specimen is frequently sufficient to place a species beyond doubt, where as with the unknown caudical remains [those relating to stems] I well remember that I for two years made nearly 30 species out of the two first mentioned in my paper. (ANSP archives, Philadelphia.)

22

H.S. TORRENS

Fig. 2. Plate 4 from Steinhauer (1818). Figures 1-6 are of Phytolithus verrucosus. This was the fossil that was to have formed the first plate of the intended Mineral Botany project.

We learn more of Steinhauer scientific activities in America from some letters to John Le Conte (1784-1860) of New York that survive in the University of Michigan Herbarium library. Two are from botanist Lewis David von Schweinitz (1780-1834), the head of the Moravian community in America. Both are from Salem, North Carolina. The first was dated 18 November 1816, the second 15 September 1817. They mainly concern 'geologically recent' botanical matters. The third letter was from Henry Steinhauer himself and dated 24 January 1818. This too at the end deals with botanical matters and tells Le Conte of his delight in 'finding Schweinitz in Bethlehem... after 16 years separation'. He now also hopes to see his 'brother Daniel here this spring, a zealous field botanist from whose exertions I promise myself many acquisitions'. Much new light on Steinhauer's purely botanical activities in North America and his final correspondence with Zaccheus

Collins right up to the end of his short life has been shed by McKinley (1994, pp. 62-67 and 89-90). However, Steinhauer's above letter to Le Conte had opened by recording the several crises that had hit the Steinhauer family since August 1817. The first had left Henry and his wife 'childless'. In early September 1817 they were struck by their first tragedy. This is revealed in God's Acre, the Moravian cemetery at Bethlehem (which I was able to visit in 1992). The gravestone here, for Henry and Mary'sfirstchild, reads - in Quaker-like simplicity 'Henry Daniel Steinhauer, born 18 December 1816 at Bethlehem, departed 2 September 1817'. After this Henry and his wife had travelled to Philadelphia for a 'change of scene'. Here he: was seized with a remitting fever on the road which confined me for eight weeks to my room... In November I was conveyed in a close carriage [back] to Bethlehem but the

HENRY STEINHAUER AND MINERAL BOTANY

23

Fig. 3. The gravestones for the Steinhauer's two children in God's Acre, the Moravian Burial Ground at Bethlehem, in 1992.

exertion had been too much for Mrs S.'s state. On the 17th she was safely delivered of a boy who survived only 3 hours, however thank God the mother recovered rapidly and is now perfectly restored . . . I am able to walk about the room and when the weather permits take the air in a carriage so that I think with Mrs S.'s good nursing, I may be kept alive till spring which I look forward to as the best doctor.

Near the first grave is this second child's gravestone. It reads 'Gambold Steinhauer, born 17 November 1817, departed 18 November 1817'. Henry's own consumption had now returned with a vengeance. His botanist brother Daniel Steinhauer (1785-1852), on hearing of his illness and these tragedies, came across the Atlantic as soon as he could to help, but, after his arrival in February 1818, there was little that could be done (although he later made a notable contribution himself to American botany; see Stuckey 1967). Then just after Henry's fossil plants paper had been published by the APS, and he had received his offprints, he too died, on 22 July 1818, of consumption at the age of only 36. His own, more corroded, gravestone reads 'Henry Steinhauer, born 28 February 1782, at Haverfordwest, South Wales, England [sicl], departed 22 July 1818'. Steinhauer's death was duly reported in a local newspaper at great length. Paulson's American Daily Advertiser (27 July 1818, p. 3) noted he had died of: pulmonary consumption, after trying in vain to recover his health by a journey to a more genial climate [i.e. America]. He was a man of profound knowledge and erudition, an honor to society and to his country. He was deeply skilled in the Natural Sciences, particularly in Botany, which was his favourite study, and in the pursuit of which he assiduously laboured.

It then printed additional notices in the form of letters from his friends. One of these is known to have been written by his fellow Moravian minister and missionary, Rev. John Heckewelder (1743-1823 - see Dictionary of American Biography hereafter DAB) to lawyer Peter S. Duponceau (1769-1844 see DAB), as the original manuscript survives (APS, Heckewelder letters, 497.3: H350, 23-30 July 1818).

Henry Steinhauer's posthumous reputation The extent of Steinhauer's influence on American science still needs to be evaluated and researched but, during his short time in America, he was certainly in contact with Benjamin Silliman (1779-1864), Professor of Chemistry and Natural History at Yale University from 1802 and editor of the American Journal of Science (Wilson 1979). Silliman recorded him as the 'friend to whom in a letter I described this [New Haven] basin' (Silliman 1820). But he wrongly described Steinhauer as having been 'a missionary among the Esquimaux of Labrador', although such a mistake is understandable. In 1822 Conybeare & Phillips noted his 1818 work, as a 'very valuable but perhaps occasionally rather fanciful memoir', in their influential book on the Geology of England and Wales (1822, pp. 333-336). But they took exception to some of the attitudes Steinhauer suggested these plants had had in life. Steinhauer's fine stratigraphically arranged collection of over a 1000 choice English specimens of fossils that he had carefully taken with him to America must also have largely survived, with its

24

H.S. TORRENS

very careful and comprehensive catalogue (ANSP MSS 358). This was the first such collection of fossils arranged according to Smithian stratigraphic methods to reach the Americas (Torrens 1990c). These 'one thousand British fossils, being the entire collection' had by 1826 passed to John Price Wetherill (1794-1853) who then deposited them in the ANSP (Morton 1831, p. 14). Ruschenberger correctly noted that it 'was made about 40 years ago [i.e. c. 1812] and is particularly rich in fossil plants, from the coal basin of Yorkshire, and in testacea and zoophytes from the lias, oolitic and cretaceous formations of various parts of Great Britain' (Ruschenberger 1852, p. 37). This collection must still survive for it is housed in the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia (see Spamer 1988 for an valuable initial assessment of all the so-far known Henry Steinhauer fossil plant type specimens), and after the remarkable treasures rescued there from the Etheldred Benett collection (Torrens et al. 2000) we can only hope that it can be more fully restored in the future. In 1831 Lindley & Hutton described Stigmaria ficoides Brongniart. This was the species that Steinhauer had intended to be the first species and plate to appear in Sowerby's aborted Mineral Botany, but as Phytolithus verrucosus (see Fig. 2). Lindley & Hutton noted this was 'one of the most common, if not the most common, of the fossil vegetables of the Coal Formation'. They noted that Steinhauer's 'ingenious paper' in 1818 'although erroneous in some respects, is by far the best account of the plant that has yet appeared' and duly reproduced his description (1831-1837, Vol. 1, pp. 94-103). In their second volume they added 'although we must suppose the great length assigned to the leaves by that intelligent observer to have originated in some error of observation . . . it gives us pleasure thus further to confirm the views originally taken by him, of this singular tribe of plants' (1831-1837, Vol. 2, p. xv). In 1825 Kaspar M. Sternberg (1761-1838) had renamed two of Steinhauer's species Phytolitus sulcatus and P. notatus (1818, plate 5, Fig. 1 and plate 7, Fig. 3) as Catamites steinhaueri and Rhytidolepis steinhaueri (see Kvacek & Strakova (1997, p. 142). In 1838 Henry Steinhauer was rather inappropriately honoured by the new genus Steinhaueria, with several constituent species. This was named after him by the Czech, Karl Borivoj Presl (1794-1852), but from the Miocene of Bohemia, in Sternberg (1838), see Kvacek & Strakova (1997, pp. 24, 102-103, 111 and 145-146), who designate a lectotype for the type species. In 1840 in Canada William Logan had recorded how 'no one has given a fuller account' of Stigmaria ficoides than Steinhauer's description of it in 1818, adding 'his description is so applicable

to the condition of the plant in coal strata that I shall quote a part of it' (Logan 1842, pp. 493-494). In 1876 the American J.P. Lesley considered that Steinhauer's memoir was 'of considerable importance in the history of the Geology of Pennsylvania and of the United States'. But he remained puzzled by the 'curious but an important fact; that the author never alludes to American coal measures in a memoir read . . . in the capital of the coal trade of the continent in 1817' (Lesley 1876). Why Henry Steinhauer had failed to do so should now be clear.

Henry Steinhauer and binomial nomenclature or when were fossil plants first scientifically described? In Germany Count Kaspar M. Sternberg had taken till after 1822 (when the works of Conybeare & Phillips 1822 and Rhode 1821/1822 had drawn his attention to it) to obtain a copy of Steinhauer's American 1818 publication. He then noted that 'Herr Professor [Johann Gottlieb] Rhode [1762-1827] in Breslau war der erste, der eine Klassifikation der Abdriicke unter sich nach der schon friiher von Steinhauer bemerkten Verschiedenheit derselben, zur Spache brachte'. Then in 1825 Sternberg added, as some 'supplementary information'; Heinrich Steinhauer war eigentlich der erste, der eine Entheilung der Planzenabdriicke in Vorschlag brachte. Sein Werk wurde in Teutschland erst durch die Aufnahme in die Verhandlungen der Philosophischen Gesellschaft von Philadelphia bekannt; die Originalauflage ist selbst in England ausserst selten (Sternberg 1825, pp. 27-28). (See Appendix, Quote 3).

Claudia Schweizer, who provided this information, also kindly tells me that Sternberg was from 1821 an honorary member of the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia so he and/or Rhode may have obtained this American Philosophical Society publication in that way. Which ever way, this should additionally remind us of the real difficulties then facing scientific communications. These would not have helped any, now postmortal, claims that Steinhauer might have had to any 'priority'. Sternberg then added his own comments in some detail on the specimens figured and described by Steinhauer in 1818 (see above). In 1828 Adolphe Theodore Brongniart (1801-1876) noted in his Histoire that Steinhauer had been among 'les noms des savans dont les travaux ont le plus contribue aux progres de cette branche de 1'histoire naturelle'. He continued:

HENRY STEINHAUER AND MINERAL BOTANY M. Steinhauer introduisit le premier [sic] dans cette branche des sciences des noms systematiques et une terminologie semblable a celle adoptee pour le reste de 1'histoire naturelle(l = Transof the American philos. Society, torn I)', mais sa classification, presque entierement conforme a celle des anciens auteurs, est encore tres-imparfaite; plus recemment, M. de Steinberg d'un cote (2 = Versuch einer Geognostich-Botanischen darstellung der flora der vorwelt, 4 fasc. fol. Leipzig, 1820-1826) et moi-meme de Fautre (3 = Sur la classification et la distribution des vegetaux fossiles, Mem. de mus. d'hist. naturelle, torn. VIII), presqu'a la meme epoque et sans avoir connaissance de nos travaux respectifs, nous cherchames a etablir de veritables divisions generiques et specifiques. (Brongniart 1828, pp. 4-5.) (See Appendix, Quote 1).

Despite this William Buckland could soon write in 1837 how: we owe to the labours of Schlotheim, Sternberg and Ad. Brongniart [only] the foundation of such a systematic arrangement of fossil plants, as enables us to enter, by means of the analogies of recent plants, into the difficult question of the Ancient Vegetation of the Earth. (Buckland 1837, Vol. 2, p. 454.)

If it is certain that Steinhauer was among the first, if not the first, to introduce systematic binomial names to palaeobotany, we have to wonder why this priority has not been maintained. It certainly was by Edward A.N. Arber (1870-1918). In his posthumous survey, Arber recorded how 'the Scientific Period [in palaeobotany] begins with the adoption of the binomial system and the foundation of systematic stratigraphy'. Henry Steinberger was quite clearly a pioneer in both. Arber next reported how Schlotheim's Beschreibung merkwurdiger KrduterAbdrilcke und Pflanzen-Versteinerungen of 1804 belonged to the prescientific period. As a result, when, in 1820, Schlotheim binomially named those plants which he had earlier described in that 1804 memoir: the interval of sixteen years [had] cost Schlotheim the honour of being actually the first to apply the binomial system to fossil plants. . . . The scientific period of fossil botany dates from the year 1818, when Steinhauer first described binomially certain British Coal Measure plants in a memoir published in America. (Arber 1921, pp. 479-480.)

This position has been more recently maintained in Germany, even more a true home of palaeobotany, by Wolfhart Langer in 1966. He then wrote: eine giiltige Nomenklatur fuhrte hier erstmals Henry Steinhauer ein, der in Bethlehem/Pennsylv. als Geistlicher wirkte. In einem Aufsatz: [Steinhauer 1818] beschrieb er Pflanzenreste aus dem englische Oberkarbon, vorwiegend aus der Gegend von Leeds. (Langer 1966, p. 34.) (See Appendix, Quote 2).

25

One can feel sure that the reason why Steinhauer's work has been so ignored lies first in the obvious obscurity of an early American work that dealt only with English fossils. But the preponderance of botanists and palaeobotanists over historians in the postal ballots organized by International Commissions on Botanical Nomenclature starting in 1950 has caused other problems. These finally decided in 1954 that the date from which priority in palaeobotany should be taken was not 'within the year 1820' as first decided in 1952 (7th International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, Stockholm 1952, p. 19 (Lanjouw 1952)) but should be from 31 December 1820 (10th International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, Edinburgh 1952, p. 13 (Lanjouw 1966)). This was so that Schlotheim's partly, non-binomial, work (Schlotheim 1804, 1820) could all be excluded. But by this decision, Steinhauer's forgotten, but wholly, binomial work, was also excluded. There have been half-hearted attempts since then to bring the starting date forward again to allow Schlotheim (1820) to once more become a valid publication in terms of its date (Daber 1970; Storch 1981, 1982; Kvacek 1982), but none for the forgotten Henry Steinhauer. It is now clearly too late to attempt any such action, but if historians had been more involved among those asked to vote in the 1950s, perhaps the end result might have been to allow both Steinhauer (1818) and Schlotheim (1820) in (despite the problem of their generic diagnoses see Kvacek & Strakova 1997, p. 5) as equally valid binomial publications. If so, we might now take 1818 as the starting date for valid binomial nomenclature throughout palaeobotany and have remained less ignorant of Henry Steinhauer's troubled, tragic and sadly short life. Any search lasting nearly 20 years for a man, even with such a geological name as 'stone hewer', born in Wales of German ancestry who died in America, is bound to incur a large numbers of debts. I owe grateful thanks to the National Science Foundation of America that granted funds to allow me to work at the ANSP. E. Spamer at the ANSP was a constant source of help and hospitality. I thank A. Armstrong (Bradford), K. Beam (Ann Arbor, MI), El. Benamy (Philadelphia, PA), F. Blandford (Chipping Sodbury), the late G. Birtill, B. Carroll (Philadelphia, PA), R. Cleevely (South Molton), R. Ehrenberg (Washington, DC), J. Halton (London), R. Hutton (Ilkley), B. Lambert (Concord, MA), W Langer (Bonn), J.A. Meade (Nova Scotia), D. McKinley (Albany), W. Mortimore (Fulneck), V. Nelson (Bethlehem, PA), A. Pacey (Ilkley), S. Pierce (Wincanton), T. Riley (Sorede, France), C. Spawn (Philadelphia, PA.), K. Stevens (Philadelphia, PA), the late J. Thackray, C. Schwiezer (Vienna) and H. Walters (Aberystwyth) for their kind help. The letter in the University of Michigan archives is quoted by kind permission. My memories of working in the wonderful Fulneck School archives to the strains of their original Snetzler organ will remain.

26

H.S. TORRENS

Appendix Quote 1 (translation) Among the names of experts whose works have most contributed to progress in this branch of natural history and M. Steinhauer was the first to introduce systematic names into this branch of science, with a terminology like that adopted for the rest of natural history but his classification, almost entirely conforming to that of previous authors, is still very imperfect, more recently M. de Sternberg, on one hand, and myself, on the other, have at almost the same time and without knowing of each other's works, both sought to establish true generic and specific divisions.

Quote 2 (translation) Henry Steinhauer introduced a valid nomenclature here [in palaeobotany] for the first time. He worked as a priest in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. In his essay [Steinhauer 1818] he described plant remains from the English upper Carboniferous, predominantly from the neighbourhood of Leeds.

Quote 3 (translation) Professor Rhode in Breslau was the first to discuss a classification of [fossil plant] prints, according to the differences previously noted between them by Steinhauer and Henry Steinhauer was actually the first to suggest a classification of plant impressions. His work first became known in Germany through its appearance in the publications of the Philosophical Society of Philadelphia. The original edition is, even in England, extraordinarily scarce.

References ANDREWS, H.N. 1980. The Fossil Hunters: In Search of Ancient Plants. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY. ANON. 1784. Fulneck Tontine. An Abstract of the Deed. . . An Annuity . . . by way of Tontine . . . with benefit of Survivorship. Established 25 March 1784. No place of publication given. ANON. 1806. Death of Samuel Hazard. Monthly Magazine, 22,416. ANON. 1809. Literary intelligence - Mr W. Martin. Gentleman's Magazine, 79 (2 -August 1809), 727. ANON. 1814. List of donations. Transactions of the Geological Society of London, 2,541. ANON. 1817. Twenty Fourth Year's Report of the Literary and Philosophical Society of Newcastle upon Tyne. Hodgson, Newcastle. ANON. 1855. Celebration of the Centenary Jubilee of the Congregations of the United Brethren in Wyke, Mirfield, Gomersal and Fulneck. Fulneck Jubilee Committee, London. ANON. 1889. List of Plants Collected Chiefly in the Neighbourhood of Sheffield by Jonathan Salt. Sheffield Literary and Philosophical Society, Sheffield. ARBER, E.A.N. 1921. A sketch of the history of palaeobotany. In: SINGER, C. (ed.) Studies in the history and

method of Science, Volume 2. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 471-489. AUGUSTIN, S. 1994. Das Naturalienkabinett der Evangelischen Briider-Unitat am Theologischen Seminar in Barby, 17607-1809. In: GROTE, A. (ed.) Macrocosmos in Microcosmo. Leske+Budrich, Opladen, 695-706. BELL, A.B. (ed.). 1909. Peeps into the Past being passages from the Diary of Thomas Asline Ward. W.C. Leng, Sheffield. BRONGNIART, A. 1828-1837. Histoire des vegetaux fossiles, Volume 1. G. Dufour et E.d'Ocagne, Paris. BRONGNIART, A. 1837-1838. Histoire des vegetable fossiles, Volume 2. G. Dufour & E. d'Ocagne, Paris. BUCKLAND, W. 1837. Geology and Mineralogy considered with reference to Natural Theology, 2nd edn (two volumes). Pickering, London. C-—, E.M. 1887. A Short Sketch of the Work Carried on by the Ancient Protestant Episcopal Moravian Church in Yorkshire. Printed for the author, Leeds (copy in Hailstone Collection, York Minster). CHALLINOR, J. 1948. The beginnings of scientific palaeontology in Britain. Annals of Science, 6,46-53. CONYBEARE, W.D. & PHILLIPS, W. 1822, Outlines of the Geology of England and Wales, Part 1. Phillips, London. CUNNINGTON, R.H. 1975. From Antiquary to Archaeologist: A Biography of William Cunnington 1754-1810. Shire Publications, Aylesbury. DABER, R. 1970. E.F. von Schlotheim und der Beginn der wissenschaftlichen Fragestellung un der Palaobotanik vor 150 Jahren. Wissenschaftliche Zeitschift der Humboldt-Universitdt m Berlin, MathematischNatunvissenschaftliche Reihe, 29, 249-255. DIOGO, M.P. & CARNEIRO, A. 2001. The Portuguese naturalist Correia da Serra (1751-1823) and his impact on early nineteenth-century botany. Journal of the History of Biology, 34, 353-393. DODSWORTH, C. 1971. The Low Moor Ironworks, Bradford. Industrial Archaeology, 8,122-164. ELLENBERGER, F. 1988. Histoire de la Geologie, tome 1. Technique et Documentation - Lavoisier, Paris. FAREY, J. 1811. General View of the Agriculture and Minerals of Derbyshire, Volume 1. Board of Agriculture, London. FAREY, J. 1812. Mr Farey in reply to M. De Luc. Monthly Magazine, 33,513-517. FIRTH, G. 1977. The origins of the Low Moor Ironworks, Bradford 1788-1800. Yorkshire Archaeological Journal, 49,127-139. FITTON, W.H. 1836. Observations on some of the Strata between the Chalk and Oxford Oolite. Transactions of the Geological Society, London, Series 2, 4, 103^00. GIBB, G.D. 1860. On Canadian caverns. The Geologist, 3, 161-179. GREENE, J.C. 1984. American Science in the Age of Jefferson. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA. HAMILTON, J.T. & HAMILTON K.G. 1967. History of the Moravian Church. Moravian Church in America, Bethlehem, PA. HANNA, S.G. 1967. The origin and nature of the Gracehill Moravian Settlement. Transactions of the Moravian Historical Society, 21,1-153.

HENRY STEINHAUER AND MINERAL BOTANY HOLLAND, J. 1837. The Tour of the Don, Volume 1. Groombridge, London. HOWE, S.R., SHARPE, T. & TORRENS H.S. 1981. Ichthyosaurs: A History of Fossil 'Sea-dragons'. National Museum of Wales, Cardiff. HULL, J. 1812. An account of the life and writings of the late Mr. William Martin, F.L.S. Monthly Magazine, 32 (January 1812), 556-565. HUTTON, R.B.M. 1953. Through Two Centuries. Moravian School, Leeds. INGRAM, J.S. 1982. Music in American Moravian Communities. Communal Studies, 2,39-51. JENKINS, R.T. 1938. The Moravian brethren in North Wales. YCymmrodor, 45,137-142 and plate opp. 124. JONES, D.J.O. 1946. Y Morafiaid ym Mhenfro IV. Y Drysorfa, 116,187-190. KEYNES, G. 1970. Some uncollected authors XLIV; George Cumberland. Book Collector, 19,31-65. KVACEK, J. & Strakova, M. 1997. Catalogue of Fossil Plants described in Works of Kaspar M. Sternberg. National Museum, Prague. KVA£EK, Z. 1982. Against the newly proposed starting date in Palaeobotany. Taxon, 31,317. LANGER, W. 1966. Ernst Friedrich von Schlotheim 1164-1832, ArgumentaPalaeobotanica, 1,19^0. LANJOUW, J. (ed.), 1952, International Botanical Congress (7th - 1950: Stockholm, Sweden); International code of botanical nomenclature', adopted by the Seventh International Botanical Congress, Stockholm, July 1950; Series: Regnum vegetabile; volume 3, Utrecht: International Bureau for Plant Taxonomy and Nomenclature. LANJOUW, J. (ed.), 1966, International Botanical Congress (10th - 1964: Edinburgh); International code of botanical nomenclature', adopted by the 10th International Botanical Congress, Edinburgh, August 1964; Series: Regnum Vegetabile; volume 46, Utrecht: International Bureau for Plant Taxonomy and Nomenclature of the International Association for Plant Taxonomy. LESLEY, J.P. 1876. Historical Sketch of Geological Explorations in Pennsylvania and Other States. For the second Geological Survey, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. LINDLEY, J. & HUTTON, W. 1831-1837. The Fossil Flora of Great Britain (three volumes). Ridgway & Sons, London. LOGAN, WE. 1842. On the characters of the beds of Clay immediately below the Coal-Seams of South Wales. Transactions of the Geological Society, London, Series 2,6,491-497. MARTIN, W. 1809. Petrificata Derbiensia; or, Figures and Descriptions of Petrifactions Collected in Derbyshire. Lyon, Wigan. McKiNLEY, D. 1994. Anna Rosina (Kliest) Gambold (1762-1821), Moravian missionary to the Cherokees, with special reference to her Botanical Interests. Transactions of the Moravian Historical Society, 28, 59-99. MEADE, J.A. 1956. Thomas had Two Wives; Taken from the Diaries of Thomas Meade (1753-1845). Privately printed, Victoria, B.C. MONTGOMERY-MASSINGBERD, H. (ed.). 1965-1972. Burke's Landed Gentry, 18th edn (three volumes). Burke's Peerage, London.

27

MORRELL, J. 1985. Wissenschaft in Worstedopolis: Public Science in Bradford 1800-1850. British Journal for the History of Science, 18,1-23. MORTON, S.G. 1831. Notice of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 2nd edn. Mifflin and Parry, Philadelphia, PA. MORTON, S.G. 1841. Memoir of William Maclure. Collins, Philadelphia, PA. MUIR-WOOD, H.M. 1951. The Brachiopods of Martin's 'Petrificata Derbiensia'. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 12,97-118. PACEY, A. 2003. Emerging from the Museum: Joseph Dawson, mineralogist, 1740—1813. British Journal for the History of Science, 36,455^69. PARKINSON, J. 1804. Organic Remains of a Former world, Volume 1. Robson, London. PARKINSON, J. 1811. Observations on some of the strata in the neighbourhood of London. Transactions of the Geological Society, London, 1, 324-354. PEACH, R.E.M. 1894. The Old Bath Booksellers, no. V. Hazard etc. Bath Chronicle, 22 December 1894, 8. PHILLIPS, H. (ed.). 1885. Old minutes of the Society from 1743 to 1838. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 22,1-875. PHILLIPS, J. 1844. Memoirs of William Smith, LL.D., author of the 'Map of the Strata of England and Wales'. Murray, London. (Reprinted in 2003 by the Bath Royal Literary and Scientific Institution.) REES, A. (ed.). 1802-1820. Articles 'Herrnhutters' (1811) and 'Unitas Fratrum' (1818). In: The Cyclopaedia, (45 volumes), unpaginated. Longman, London. REICHEL, WC. 1858. A History of the Rise, Progress, and Present Condition of the Bethlehem Female Seminary . . . 1785-1858. Lippincott, Philadelphia, PA (later editions in 1870,1881,1901). RILEY, T.H. (ed.). 1982. Sheffield City Museums: Natural Sciences Section. Biology Curators' Group Newsletter,3,ll-W6. RHODE, J.G., 1821/1822, Beitrage zur Pflanzenkunde der Vorwelt. Nach Abdriicken im Kohlenschiefer und Sandstein aus Schlesischen Steinkohlenwerken. Lief. 1-2, Grafs, Barm und Comp., Breslau. ROBERTS, G.M. 1962. Selected Trevecka Letters (Trevecka Records Series No. 3). Calvinistic Methodist Bookroom, Carnarvon. ROBERTS, G.M. 1978. Y Morafiaid yn Neheudir Cymru. National Library of Wales Journal, 20,273-299. RUSCHENBERGER, WS.W 1852, A Notice of the Origin, Progress and Present Condition of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. Collins, Philadelphia, PA. SAVAGE, S. 1963. Catalogue of the Smithian Herbarium, Volumes 1 (index)-6. MSS at the Linnean Society, London (published as microfiche IDC 5073-4, Zug, Switzerland in 1964). SCHLOTHEIM, E.F., VON. 1804. Beschreibung merkwurdiger Krduter-Abdrucke und Pflanzen-Versteinerungen. Bin Beitrag zur Flora der Vorwelt, Band 1. Becker, Gotha. SCHLOTHEIM, E.F., VON. 1820. Die Petrefactenkunde. Becker, Gotha. SILLIMAN, B. 1820. Sketches of a tour in the counties of New Haven and Litchfield in Connecticut. American Journal of Science, 2, 201-235.

28

H.S. TORRENS

SILLIMAN, B. 1833. Obituary of William Meade. American Journal of Science, 25, 215-216. SILLIMAN, B. 1834. Collection of William Meade. American Journal of Science, 26,209. SOWERBY, J., 1804-1817, British Mineralogy: or, Coloured figures intended to elucidate the mineralogy of Great Britain, Five volumes, R. Taylor and Co., London. SOWERBY , J. & SOWERBY, J., DE C. 1812-1846. The Mineral Conchology of Great Britain (seven volumes). Sowerby, London. SPAMER, E.E. 1988. Catalogue of type specimens of fossil plants in the Academy of Natural Sciences. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 140,1-17. STANSFIELD, D.A. 1984. Thomas Beddoes M.D. 1760-1808: Chemist, Physician, Democrat. Dordrecht, Reidel. STEINHAUER, H. 1804. Account of an ancient Egyptian sculpture and hieroglyphics, supposed to relate to astronomy [with a note on Mineralogy]. [William Nicholson's] Journal of Natural Philosophy, 10,4-5. STEINHAUER, H. 1806. A letter from Mr H. Steinhauer [on Astronomy by his friend Dr Okely]. [William Nicholson's] Journal of Natural Philosophy, 13, 284-285. STEINHAUER, H. 1807. Extract of a letter from Mr H. Steinhauer [on Meteorology seen in North Wales]. [William Nicholson's] Journal of Natural Philosophy, 16,237. STEINHAUER, H. 1814. Notice relative to the geology of the Coast of Labrador. Transactions of the Geological Society, London, 2,488-194. STEINHAUER H. 1818. On fossil reliquia of unknown vegetables in the coal strata. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society (new series), 1, 265-297, plates 4-7. STEINHAUER, H. (ed.). 1820. The History of Greenland Including an Account of the Mission Carried on by the United Brethren in that Country . . . with a Continuation to the Present Time [by David Cranz (1723-1777)] (two volumes). Longman, London. STEPHEN, L. (ed.) 1885-1990, Dictionary of National Biography, 63 volumes, Smith Elder, London. Since this paper was written the new DNB has been published, which also see, MATTHEW, H.C.G. & HARRISON, B., (eds), 2004, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, 60 volumes and online, Oxford University Press, Oxford. STERNBERG, K.M. GRAF, VON. 1825, Versuch einer Geognostisch-botanischen Darstellung der Flora der Vorwelt, Band 1,1 (4), Ernest Brenck, Regensburg. STERNBERG, K.M. GRAF, VON. 1838. Versuch einer Geognostisch- botanischen Darstellung der Flora der Vorwelt, Band 2. Volume II (7-8). G. Hasse Sohne, Prague. STODDARD, S. 1981. Mr Braikenridge's Brislington. City Museum and Art Gallery, Bristol. STORCH, D. 1981. Der Startpunkt der Palaobotanischen Nomeklatur. Taxon, 30,209-218. STORCH, D. 1982. Ernest Friedrich von Schlotheim, seine wissenschaftshistorische Bedeutung und die palaob-

otanische Nomenklatur. Abhandlungen und Berichte des Museums derNatur Gotha, 11,23-30. STUBBLEFIELD, C.J. 1951. The Goniatites named in Martin's 'Petrificata Derbiensia, 1809'. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 12,119-124. STUCKEY, R.L. 1967. Daniel Steinhauer, early Ohio Plant Collector and his correspondence with the Botanist Schweinitz. Bartonia, 36,1-24. TORRENS, H.S. 19900. A Wiltshire Pioneer in Geology and his Legacy: Henry Shorto III (1778-1864), Cutler and Fossil Collector of Salisbury. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, 83,170-189. TORRENS, H.S. 1990£. The four Bath Philosophical Societies 1779-1959. In: ROLLS, R. & GUY, J.R. (eds) A Pox on the Provinces. Bath University Press, Bath, 180-188. TORRENS, H.S. 1990c. The transmission of ideas in the use of fossils in stratigraphic analysis from England to America 1800-1840. Earth Sciences History, 9, 108-117. TORRENS, H.S. 2001. Timeless order - the 2000 William Smith lecture. In: LEWIS, C.L.E. & KNELL, S.J. (eds) The Age of the Earth from 4004 EC to 2002 AD. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 190,61-83. TORRENS, H.S. 2002. The Practice of British Geology 1750-1850. Ashgate, Aldershot. TORRENS, H.S. & WINSTON I.E. 2002. Eliza Catherine Jelly 28 September 1829-3 November 1914: pioneer female bryozoologist. In: WYSE JACKSON, P.N. & SPENCER JONES, M.E. (eds) Annals ofBryozoology. International Bryozoology Association, Dublin, 299-325. TORRENS, H.S., BENAMY, E., DAESCHLER, E.B., SPAMER, E. & BOGAN, A.E. 2000. Etheldred Benett of Wiltshire, England, thefirstlady geologist - her fossil collection in the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, and the rediscovery of 'lost' specimens of Jurassic Trigoniidae (Mollusca, Bivalvia) with their soft anatomy preserved. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 150,59-123. VAUGHAN, H.M. 1931. From Anne to Victoria: Fourteen Biographical Studies Between 1702 and 1901 [including John Gambold (1711-1771)]. Methuen & Co., London. WALTON, J. 1959. Palaeobotany in Great Britain, pp. 230-244 In: TURRILL, W.B. (ed.) Vistas in Botany, Volume 1. Pergamon Press, London. WARNER, R. 1811. A New Guide Through Bath and Its Environs. Cruttwell, Bath. WATSON, W. 1811. A Delineation of the Strata of Derbyshire. Todd, Sheffield. WAUGH, W.T. 1909. A History ofFulneck School. Jackson, Leeds. WILKINSON, C.H. 1811. Analytical Researches into the Properties of the Bath Waters. Wood & Cunningham, Bath. WILSON, L. (ed.). 1979. Benjamin Silliman and his Circle. Science History Publications, New York. WITHAM, H. 1831. Observations on Fossil Vegetables. Blackwood, Edinburgh. WOODWARD, H.B. 1907. The History of the Geological Society of London. Geological Society, London.

John Lindley: the reluctant palaeobotanist WILLIAM G. CHALONER1 & HUGH L. PEARSON2 1

Geology Department, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey TW20 OEX, UK 2 Claydon High School, Church Lane, Claydon, Ipswich, Suffolk IP6 OEG, UK Abstract: John Lindley (1799-1865) is best known among palaeobotanists for having written, together with William Hutton, the three volumes of The Fossil Flora of Great Britain (1831-1837; published by James Ridgeway, London). He only published three other works on fossil plants, two short appendices on European Tertiary material and a list of fossil plants from the Culm of Devon. The Fossil Flora served to catalogue many of the fossil plants recognized by the 1830s from Britain, ranging in age from Carboniferous to Pleistocene. Together with contributions from Henslow, Murray and Williamson, Lindley and Hutton described, illustrated and, in some cases, emended almost 300 species, with many of their type and figured specimens having survived. By giving the first illustrated account of the microscopic structure of a fossil cuticle together with discussions about the origin of coal, prehistoric climates, experimental taphonomy and plant evolution The Fossil Flora was much more than a catalogue of fossil plants. Although orchidology, his work at University College London and numerous other activities came to fill his time after finishing The Fossil Flora, John Lindley must surely rank amongst his palaeobotanical contemporaries for having pioneered aspects of the science that remain topics of active research into the third millennium.

John Lindley has been described as 'a man endowed with an extraordinary capacity for work and a restless aggressive untiring intellect, who attained distinction in all his activities. Lindley was among the most industrious, many-sided and productive of nineteenth-century botanists' (Stearn 1999&). As Steam records there, 'Lindley as administrator, professor, horticulturalist, taxonomist, editor, journalist and botanical artist used to the full his time, his abundant energy and his remarkable talents, with lasting beneficial results in many fields of botany and horticulture. Orchids were, however, his great botanical love'. Indeed, palaeobotany really formed only a minor part of the output of this remarkable and versatile man. Stearn has given a very full account of Lindley's life (Stearn 1999&), and other aspects of his diverse botanical work are covered by other authors in the volume celebrating the bicentenary of Lindley's birth, edited by Stearn (Stearn 1999a). We accordingly concentrate in this paper on his palaeobotanical work alone, and particularly on The Fossil Flora of Great Britain that he wrote jointly with William Hutton, a geologist from Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

Writing of The Fossil Flora Lindley had been appointed to the Chair of Botany at University College London (then the 'University of London') in 1828. A major part of his responsibilities there was the teaching of botanical systematics to medical students, that they might be able to identify drug-yielding plants, the prime source of medication at that time. Shortly after his appointment to the Chair he published a note (Lindley 1829) on a

flora of Eocene age associated with lignite deposits at Fuveau near Aix-en-Provence, France. This was an appendix to a memoir by Murchison & Lyell (1829). Lindley's note consisted of a plate illustrating the plant macrofossils, with brief descriptions. Of the eight plants on which he offers notes, he assigns four to extant genera (Podocarpus, Thuja, Laurus and Buxus) and offers possible species assignments, or the names of similar living species, cited with a query. He then remarks that these species now have widely separated occurrences, in India (Podocarpus macrophylla, Laurus dulcis), Buxus balearica of the Mediterranean and Thuja articulata from North Africa. According to Mitchell (1972) P. macrophylla is a Chinese species, which makes Lindley's French Eocene flora even more eclectic than he suggests. But Lindley seems to have found nothing especially worthy of comment in this biogeographic diversity of the living equivalents of his fossils. In 1835, with the publication of The Fossil Flora already well under way (Volume II was completed that year), Lindley published a further note on some Miocene fossil leaves. This was, again, included as a note (pp. 288 and 289) within a paper by Murchison (1835), on a fossil fox found in the same formation, the Miocene freshwater deposits at Oeningen, Switzerland, close to the Bodensee. As with the Eocene fossils, Lindley suggests assignment of the leaf fossils to three extant genera, Fraxinus, Populus and Acer. The Oeningen Miocene flora later came to receive much attention from several continental palaeobotanists, most notably Oswald Heer (1855-1859). In 1834 De la Beche read a paper to the Geological

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,29-39.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

30

W.G. CHALONER & H.L. PEARSON

Society of London, claiming to have found plant fossils of Coal Measures type in the 'Grauwacke' (equivalent to the Silurian of later usage). These plants had been identified by Lindley, although Lindley's list of names was not published until six years later. (Lindley in Sedgwick & Murchison (1840, pp. 681-683); in this work Lindley, of course, makes reference to the species concerned cited in The Fossil Flora.) The plants are, indeed, of characteristic Coal Measure types, including species of Asterophyllites, Calamites, Neuropteris and Pecopteris. Following De la Beche's paper (De la Beche 1834), a controversy ensued that lasted for several years concerning the age of the Culm Measures of Devon, a group that included the rocks from which De la Beche's plant fossils had come. This controversy is well covered in McCartney (1977) and Hallam (1989). Arber (1905) later reviewed and revised Lindley's determinations, illustrating many of the specimens, and confirmed the Westphalian (Upper Carboniferous, Pennsylvanian) age of the rocks containing them. Lindley's collaboration with Murchison (President of the Geological Society, and a geologist of great renown), which had apparently started with the French Eocene fossils in 1829, was to be an important element in Lindley's involvement with The Fossil Flora. Newman & Chatt-Ramsey (1988) suggest that the start of The Fossil Flora lay in a letter of July 1829 from Murchison to William Hutton, a geologist with great interest in the Carboniferous and, particularly, Coal Measure plants. Murchison reports in that letter that Lindley (already seen as a botanist of some standing) had been approached, and 'was willing to help'. Murchison's role in the launching of the enterprise is made clear in the dedication of the first volume to him, with the citation that the work 'owes its origin to his suggestion, and its existence to his support'. Lindley wrote to Hutton in that same year, 'when I consider how new the study of fossil botany is, how small the number of subjects is known, and how imperfect our knowledge of every one of these subjects is, I feel confident that we shall succeed in producing something which will be both instructive to readers and useful to science'. In the Introduction to the first volume, the authors write that for geologists 'overcoming the difficulties that offer themselves to a strict examination of fossil vegetable remains has come to be an object of indispensable necessity'. This was clearly a prime objective in writing The Fossil Flora. The geological fraternity was to be educated palaeobotanically - this was a kind of botanical noblesse oblige for the new Professor of Botany of London University. It seems that Hutton as the geologist was to be primarily responsible for obtaining the fossil material a field in which he already had considerable experi-

ence - while Lindley would describe and interpret the fossils. Hutton had an added role in gathering the names of sponsors, to assure the publishers of an adequate readership. For Lindley was able to write to Hutton in April 1831 that 'the first part of the Fossil Flora will appear on 1st. of July. The assurance that you have an hundred names upon your list has overcome the scruples of the Booksellers' (Chaloner 1999). 'An hundred' turned out to be an underestimate as the number of sponsors reached 121 in time for Volume I in 1831, with 27 more cited in Volume II in 1833. Most of them were individuals and institutions in Britain, but one was from Bonn, and more remarkably, one Captain W. Sage of the 48th Regiment in Bengal! (Lindley & Hutton 1831, pp. liii-lix, 1833, p. iii). Howse (1890) in his account of the history of the Hutton Collection writes that 'it seems to have been agreed that Mr Hutton should collect the specimens and have drawings made from them; and that these drawings should be sent to London, with the specimens occasionally, and any remarks that Mr. Hutton wished to make along with them'. The artists employed were Thomas Abel Prior and one Johnson (Newman & Chatt-Ramsey 1988), with other plates based on illustrations by William Crawford Williamson, C. Conway, Professor John Stevens Henslow, James de Carle Sowerby, Professor John Phillips and, notably, Miss Sarah Anne Drake, whom Stearn (1999Z?) described as 'John Lindley's principal botanical artist from 1832 to 1847'. This strategy seems to have been generally followed, so that in a number of cases Lindley saw only the drawing, and never actually examined the fossil himself. In the case of the Yorkshire Jurassic specimens (nearly a quarter of all the fossils described in the flora) most of these were drawn in Scarborough by the young W.C. Williamson (1816-1895) (later to become an outstanding palaeobotanist in his own right) and in some cases his descriptions, as well as his drawings, appear in The Fossil Flora. As Newman & Chatt-Ramsey (1988) remarked, not having seen certain of the described specimens resulted in some difficulties for Lindley and Hutton. So, for example, regarding the Jurassic bennettite that they called Taeniopteris vittata, first described by them from Gristhorpe, Yorkshire in 1833, Lindley & Hutton (1835, plate 176B) made the following confession about an apparently conspecific fossil from Stonesfield, Oxfordshire: This is apparently the very specimen figured by Steinberg, and upon which the species is founded. Is it really the same as the plant from the shale of the Gristhorpe bed, and already figured vol. 1. tab. 62. of this work ? We suspect not; We have, however, no positive means of judging . . . A further examination of the Stonesfield slate will alone decide the point'.

JOHN LINDLEY: RELUCTANT PALAEOBOTANIST

The contents of The Fossil Flora The Fossil Flora was to appear on a more or less quarterly basis in separate parts each of about 10 plates, and was then subsequently grouped into the three volumes in which it is normally bound. Each volume then came out over a period of 2 years, Volume 1, 1831-1833, Volume 2, 1833-1835 and Volume 3, 1835-1837. The dates of publication (sought out with characteristic perseverance and care by William Steam) are given in Chaloner 1999. The Fossil Flora includes some 230 plates, illustrating 200 species of fossil plants. More than half of them are Upper Carboniferous, mainly from the Newcastle area, along with specimens from other named English, Welsh and Scottish coal-mining areas. Nearly a quarter of the species dealt with are from the Middle Jurassic of Yorkshire; many of these were collected in the vicinity of Scarborough by W.C. Williamson, who was later to encounter Lindley when he embarked on a medical degree at University College (Williamson 1896). The remainder include various Scottish Lower Carboniferous plants and individual specimens from the Permian Magnesian Limestone. In addition to the Yorkshire Jurassic specimens, The Fossil Flora also includes a few plants from the New Red Sandstone, further Jurassic specimens from Dorset and the English Midlands, plus some Lower Cretaceous material from the Isle of Wight. Some other plant fossils that Lindley believed to be Cretaceous, viz. plates 125 and 226A of Pityostrobus macrocephalus (L. & H.) Seward are now regarded as of Palaeogene age. Apart from the small number of Recent plants (e.g. plate 127 of extant conifers) that were included for comparative purposes, the only acknowledged Cainozoic plants in The Fossil Flora are a supposedly Tertiary pine cone from Spain and a pair of Middle Pleistocene conifer cone fragments from Norfolk. The Fossil Flora includes at least one doubtful fossil animal, a Carboniferous specimen that they interpreted as a fungus, Polyporites bowmanni (Lindley & Hutton 1835, plate 65). As Lindley and Hutton themselves concede, this fossil may well have been a fossil fish or reptile scale; or possibly even a bivalve (lamellibranch or brachiopod); see Dennis (1969). Many of the specimens figured in The Fossil Flora are preserved in the Hancock Museum in Newcastle, and a very comprehensive catalogue of them is given in Newman & Chatt-Ramsey (1988). They also catalogue those specimens illustrated in The Fossil Flora that are housed in a number of other museums, most particularly the Jurassic plants collected by W.C. Williamson, many of which are now in Scarborough Museum. Others are in the University Museum, Oxford, the Sedgwick Museum in Cambridge and the Natural History Museum, London. The Jurassic

31

specimens in Scarborough may, indeed, never have made the journey to London, and never been seen by Lindley. The specimens of Stenopteris williamsonis (Brongniart) Harris figured in plate 131, Volume II, of The Fossil Flora, and now in the Scarborough Museum, were drawn by W.C. Williamson, who then sent the drawings to Lindley who wrote the text discussing its affinity, which appears in The Fossil Flora (pp. 139 and 140). As Lindley writes, 'the drawings were communicated by our indefatigable correspondent Mr. Williamson Jnr.' with the specimens presumably remaining in Yorkshire. The quality of the drawings came under criticism from Kidston (1891) who wrote in his review of the Carboniferous fossils dealt with in The Fossil Flora that 'the point where Lindley and Hutton's fossil flora breaks down under critical examination is the inaccuracy of the plates; and this charge cannot be brought, but in a slight degree, against their contemporary workers. It is a point difficult to excuse, and has led to much confusion'. While this is undoubtedly true in some degree, we are fortunate that so much of the type material has been conserved, in the several museum collections mentioned above, with a clear link to the original figures through sound curating. The existence of the type material, where it exists, reduces our dependence on the quality of the original drawings for our concepts of the species described by Lindley and Hutton. In addition to the plates and descriptions, we have in The Fossil Flora a Preface to each of the three volumes, in which the authors discuss some general problems concerning what we would now call evolutionary change, on the nature of coal seams and their formation, and on the relative proportions of different plant groups in the Carboniferous as an indication of climate. As these throw more light on Lindley and Hutton's thoughts about several important palaeobotanical issues than their descriptions of the individual species, we consider them further below.

Evolution and environmental change Probably the greatest problem that confronted Lindley and Hutton in offering an interpretation of the diversity of fossil plants that they observed was their rejection of any idea of evolutionary change through geological time. As Albert Long remarked with characteristic forthrightness (quoted in Andrews 1980, p. 83), 'Lindley knew only extant plants, and his knowledge was almost an encumbrance impeding the correct interpretation of the fossils'. In Volume III of The Fossil Flora (1837, pp. 136-37) the authors discuss whether dicotyledons (angiosperms) 'would be found in beds below the Chalk'. They conclude that 'for ourselves we are persuaded that geology offers no ground for assuming

32

W.G. CHALONER & H.L. PEARSON

the exclusion of Dicotyledons from the primitive flora; on the contrary, nothing opposed to the present design of the creation has yet been seen in any part of the flora of even the most remote periods'. Indeed, in the Preface to Volume 1 (1833), where the authors had been discussing the evidence for plants living in the past at high latitudes, they write (p. xvii): 'Of a still more questionable character is the theory of progressive development [meaning essentially, evolution], as applied to the state of vegetation in successive ages. The opinion, that in the beginning, only the most simple animals and plants were created, and that in succeeding periods, a gradual advance took place in their degree of organization, till it was closed by the final creation of warm blooded animals, on the one hand, and of Dicotyledonous Trees on the other, is one that very generally prevails. How far this may be admissible in the animal world, it is for Zoologists to determine; but in the Vegetable Kingdom, it cannot be conceded that any satisfactory evidence has yet been produced upon the subject'.

Yet, they seem to accept the idea that the animal fossil evidence points to major changes through the course of geological time. They write in Volume 1 (p. ix) that 'long anterior to the creation of man, this world was inhabited by races of animals, to which no parallels are now to be found'. So for the authors of The Fossil Flora, it seems that while evolutionary change may have taken place in the animal kingdom, plants had remained substantially unchanged through geological time. Yet, there are odd contradictions to this theme. In the Preface to Volume 1 (p. xi) they write that: 'in the New Red Sandstone formation, the characters of vegetation appear to be altered by the disappearance of the gigantic Cactaceae or Euphorbiaceae, by a diminution in the proportion of ferns, and by the appearance of a few new tribes'. It is not really clear whether this implied that such new tribes had appeared from elsewhere at that time, or whether they were referring to their arising de novo, as it were. Similarly they say, on the same page, 'in the Lias and Oolite formations, an entirely new race of plants covered the earth . . . Coniferous plants [which for Lindley and Hutton were, a little confusingly regarded as flowering plants] were still plentiful, but they were of species which did not exist in an earlier period'. By p. xiv in the same volume, they consider the idea that there might have been a time before the grasses had existed, and interpret the problem in rather teleological terms: 'It may, indeed, be conjectured, that before the creation of herbivorous animals, Grasses and Sedges were not required, and, therefore, are not to be expected in any beds below the [Jurassic] Forest Marble, and Stonesfield Slate; it is difficult to conceive how the animals of the upper Tertiary beds could have been fed, if Grasses had not then been present'. This sug-

gests that despite what had been said previously, Lindley and Hutton consider that the grasses did not appear in the geological record until some time between the mid-Jurassic and the Tertiary. Despite these rather contradictory suggestions of an unchanging botanical world, the authors of The Fossil Flora have interesting ideas on changes in atmospheric composition. In the same Preface to Volume I (p. vi) they write: 'the probable condition of the atmosphere at the most remote periods - what gradual changes that climate may have undergone since living things first began to exist whether there have been, from the commencement, a progressive development of their organization - all these are questions which it is either the peculiar province of the Botanist to determine, or which his enquiries must, at least, tend very much to elucidate'.

But, sadly, at the end of the three volumes no particular elucidation of these problems is offered.

Differential preservation; an experiment in taphonomy In his 'Prodrome', Brongniart (1828) had suggested that the ratio of ferns and fern-allies ('Cellulaires' or flowerless plants of Lindley & Hutton 1833, pp. xlvi-li) to seed plants ('Vasculaires or flowering plants', Lindley & Hutton 1833, pp. xxxvii-xlvi) was a reflection of the climate under which any particular fossil flora had grown. Modern floras of warm, humid environments had a higher proportion of ferns than those of cooler, drier habitats. The fern to phanerogam (seed plant) ratio was at its highest in tropical oceanic islands (as illustrated by the West Indies and St. Helena). Brongniart believed that the composition of the European Carboniferous floras reflected a warmer and more humid climate than that of the present day in those areas. This, and the problems associated with the fact that many 'ferns' of the Carboniferous were subsequently shown to be seed plants, is discussed in Chaloner (1999). But Lindley had another interest in the interpretation of the composition of Carboniferous floras. As he conceived the Carboniferous flora as substantially drawn from the same range of plants as are present in the modern flora, he was anxious to explain the obvious differences as a result of selective preservation of certain types of plants against others. In other words, he wished to demonstrate that 'taphonomic bias' was a major factor in the kinds of plants that we now see fossilized in Carboniferous rocks. Lindley states his case clearly in the Preface to Volume III (p. 4) in saying 'I was led to suspect that possibly the total absence of certain kinds of plants, the as constant presence of others . . . might be accounted for by a difference in the capability of one plant beyond

JOHN LINDLEY: RELUCTANT PALAEOBOTANIST

another of resisting the action of water'. Contemporary taphonomists (e.g. Hemsley 2001) might refer to the differences in terms of resistance to the action of microbial biodegradation of the plant material, rather than the action of water per se. But Lindley's underlying idea was an important and fundamental one. Lindley set up an experiment which ran from 21 March 1833 to 22 April 1835, in which he placed 177 species of plants in an iron tank of water that was topped up over 2 years, at the end of which time he attempted to ascertain which had survived in a recognizable state. Figure 1 shows the table that they drew up summarizing the results of that experiment (Lindley & Hutton 1835, p. 11). Conifers and cycads seemed to survive the immersion best, while dicotyledons 'in general are unable to remain for two years in water without being totally decomposed'. This seems to have encouraged Lindley in his belief that the absence of dicotyledons in the Carboniferous flora was a preservational effect rather than a result of their not being present in the contemporaneous flora. On the interpretation of climate from the ratio of ferns to other plants, he wrote in Volume III (Lindley & Hutton 1837, p. 12) that 'the numerical proportion of different families of plants found in a fossil state throws no light whatever upon the ancient climate of the earth

Fossil cuticles Lindley & Hutton (1835, 105-109, fig. 121) were the first to describe the preparation of fossil cuticles from a plant compression fossil using nitric acid maceration, and to illustrate its microscopic structure (Chaloner 1999). However, at this point it is appropriate to note the involvement of Dr Peter Murray of Scarborough in the story. Prior to the publication of The Fossil Flora, Murray (1828) had already produced an illustrated account of some Jurassic plants collected at Gristhorpe Bay, near Scarborough, and had compared them to several extant genera of ferns and Equisetum. The quality of the drawings by Baynes and the engravings by E. Mitchell makes it clear that they are recognizable species of Jurassic plants described in later work (see, for example, Van Konijnenburg-Van Cittert & Morgans 1999). Murray (1828) records that: 'The vegetable nature of these curious impressions is remarkably shown by the scarcely fossilized state of one of the varieties, apparently a fern allied to the genus Isoetes, which when detached from the embedding stony mass, still retains elasticity and flexibility, and burns like a piece of charred wood. Others yet preserve, even in their clay bed, much of their original colour, a dull red resembling that of some fuci; and portions of such leaflets may be peeled

33

away... and are actually semi-transparent and striated, and afford most curious and pleasing objects for a microscope'.

In his account of modes of preservation of plants as fossils, Seward (1898, p. 87) quoted from an unpublished letter from Murray to Hutton, written in 1833 and preserved at Durham: 'Reverting to the Oolitic plants, I have again and with better success been experimenting upon the thin transparent films of leaves, chiefly of Taeniopteris vittata [now Nilssoniopteris vittata (Brongniart) Florin] and Cyclopteris [probably C. digitata Brongniart, later regarded as a species of Ginkgo by Harris and others] which from their tenacity offer fine objects for the microscope'. But although Murray evidently looked at these fossil plant cuticles, occurring in varying degree in what may be called a naturally macerated state, he did not himself attempt any acid maceration of his fossils to enhance their quality as microscopic objects. Lindley and Hutton open their account of Solenites murrayana with a note from Murray, who had collected the fossil and sent it to them: The plant now sent is from the rich deposit of Gristhorpe Bay, near Scarborough, occurring in the shale of the upper sandstone, belonging to the Oolitic formation; and is so slightly mineralized as to retain flexibility and even in a certain degree combustibility [Murray's italics]. The plant appears to me, most analogous to a Fern, and to the genus Isoetes ... Still it can hardly be our Isoetes lacustris.'

Lindley and Hutton go on to describe their maceration of Murray' s material: 'Considering, however, their flexible state, it occurred to us that if it were possible to separate the tissue from the carbonaceous matter . . . the transparency of the specimens might be restored and some insight obtained into their anatomical structure. Accordingly, upon plunging them into boiling nitric acid, in a few moments a dark crust peeled away in flakes, and presently the centre part became amber coloured and transparent; when washed and placed beneath a microscope it was found t h a t . . . the parts were become little less conspicuous than in a fresh specimen . . . and the sides [i.e. the two cuticles] were evidently composed of prismatical cellular tissue....'

In this description and in their illustration of the cellular detail seen on the cuticle (plate 121, fig. E) Lindley and Hutton may fairly be said to have produced by acid maceration and illustrated the first preparation of a fossil cuticle. Lindley and Hutton realized that the bubbles seen in the cuticular tube of their fossil were gas-filled cavities rather than the series of air chambers seen in the living Isoetes leaf. But they suggest that 'the manner in which air collects in the fossil after having been acted upon by the acid, (may) be thought to indicate the existence of transverse partitions'. They

W.G. CHALONER & H.L. PEARSON

34

General Result oftJie preceding Experiment, Number of Recognizable Species submitted to afterwards. experiment.

ACOTYLEDONES.

Fungi

.

.

.

3 3 1

. . .

. .

. .

6 6 1

,

Lichenes . Hepaticse . Musci . Filices . Lycopodiaceee Equisetaceas

3 0

10

22

DlCOTYIEDONES APETAL^.

3 1 6 0 0 2 12

2 13 4 7

2 16 8 12

Cycadeae . . Coniferse . Amcntacese Miscellaneous *

0

0 0 6 1 0

2

Total

Not to bo traced.

0 3 4 5

Total

38

26

12

DlCOTYLEDONES PoLYPETALJE

45

2

43

DlCOTYLEDONES MoNOPETALJH

41

6

35

MoNOCOTYLEDONES.

0 19

1 11

1 30

Palmsc . Miscellaneous . Total

31

12

19

Total

177

56

121

Fig. 1. The table published in Volume III of The Fossil Flora showing the results of Lindley's experiment in differential preservation of different plant groups. He had placed 177 species of plants (left-hand column) in an iron tank that was kept topped up with water over a period of 2 years, after which he sought to determine which had survived in a recognizable state (middle column) or were simply not to be found at all (right-hand column). One feature of his results that was particularly striking was the poor survival rate of the bulk of what would now be regarded as dicotyledonous angiosperms (his Dicotyledones Polypetalae and Monopetalae) compared with that of the cycads, conifers and monocotyledons.

JOHN LINDLEY: RELUCTANT PALAEOBOTANIST

argue 'supposing that this fossil is admitted as more nearly allied to Isoetes and Pilularia, than to anything else now known . . . it must nevertheless be remarked, that it was distinct as to species at least'. They go on to say that 'We therefore distinguish it as a peculiar genus, for which the name Solenites has been suggested, by its fistular structure. Dr. Murray is fully entitled to have it bear his name in addition [as Solenites murrayana], in commemoration of his having been both the discoverer of the fossil, and the determiner of its affinity'. Harris et al. (1974) later transferred Solenites to a group of Mesozoic gymnosperms, the Czekanowskiales, on the basis of its obvious similarity to the leaves of the genus Czekanowskia, of which he demonstrated the gymnospermous reproductive structures. He also reverted to the epithet vimineus used by Phillips as Flabellaria ? viminea, which was apparently regarded by Lindley and Hutton as a synonym of their newly described fossil; indeed, it is a little odd that they offered a new specific epithet for it, since they treated Phillips' species as a synonym under Solenites murrayana on p. 105 of The Fossil Flora. But, of course, the concept of nomenclatural priority was not always strictly followed before the advent of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature. So that, although the epithet murrayana was lost from Solenites, Lindley and Hutton had been fully justified in honouring Murray in that way, for having led them to see in such material the potential for microscopic examination and the observation of cellular detail in coalified material. Many years were to elapse before Lindley and Hutton's maceration technique came to be applied in studying similar fossil plants. They seem never to have attempted cuticle preparations of any of the other Yorkshire plants, later shown by Nathorst, Halle, Hamshaw Thomas, Harris and many others some 70 years later, to yield excellent cuticle material on maceration (see Andrews 1980).

Lindley tires of palaeobotany Even while the second volume of The Fossil Flora was in preparation, Lindley wrote to Hutton in November 1833: 'I am now in want of materials for the next number of the F.F. and shall be glad of any you may have to send'. So although there were at that time only some 80 species described in The Fossil Flora, there was no suggestion of a large number of specimens awaiting investigation and description. A gentle sense of urgency in the production line continued; in November 1834 he wrote to Hutton: 'I have again got notice from the engraver that the plates for the next number of the Fossil Flora must be put in hand immediately because of the vicinity of Xmas, when the workmen fall behind, are lazy and feasting'.

35

As the second volume neared completion, Lindley seems to have been feeling the strain of the production, in the face of his many other activities. He wrote to Hutton in December 1835: 'I am sorry to say that it is becoming so much more difficult than ever for me to pay the necessary attention to the work [on The Fossil Flora] that I shall be compelled to give up my share of it after the next number which will complete the second volume'. Despite these misgivings, Lindley continued gamely with the enterprise, and saw the three volumes completed by July 1837. There is a sense at this point that Lindley was growing tired of palaeobotany, rather than that he felt the compilation of a fossil flora of Britain was in any sense completed. British Tertiary plants had in particular only a very trivial place in the volumes that had appeared. Yet, it was only 3 years later that James Bowerbank (1840) was to publish his account of the pyritized fruit and seeds of the Eocene London Clay, illustrated by 17 plates, and the existence of this material must surely have been known to Lindley. But in June of 1837 Lindley wrote to Hutton: 'I have at last put an end to Fossil Flora by completing volume III ... I am drudging at the index just now'. By July of that year, his feeling about The Fossil Flora were evidently resolved, for he wrote of it to Hutton: 'I have fairly washed my hands of it; and so resolved am I to keep my resolution of discontinuing the subject that I have sent away everything that I possessed in illustration . . . I shall sell my books relating to the subject and you may have them if you like at your own price'. W.C. Williamson, in his own memoirs (Williamson 1896), gives a rather different picture of the closure of The Fossil Flora production. He writes, '. . . the issue [of the quarterly parts of The Fossil Flora] ceased, because, as Mr Lindley himself told me, the geologists did not give the work that financial support which he had hoped, whilst he as a botanist did not feel called upon to spend his money upon a publication that, after all, was mainly a geological one'. In hindsight it seems a little odd that Lindley should have come to regard that compilation of descriptions and illustrations of fossil plants as being essentially geological in nature, rather than botanical. But perhaps his remarks to Williamson were made some years after the abandonment of The Fossil Flora project, when he had come to see the whole thing in a rather different light from that of his July 1837 letter to his geological colleague Hutton. Lindley's production in other areas of botany continued unabated; in the year following the publication of the final part of The Fossil Flora, Lindley published five botanical works of note, not least his Flora medica 'a botanical account of all the more important plants used in medicine in different parts of the world' (Steam \999b).

36

W.G. CHALONER & H.L. PEARSON

Fig. 2. John Lindley aged 40, a lithograph made some 2 years after the completion of The Fossil Flora. Reproduced by kind permission of the Royal Horticultural Society, Lindley Library.

It seems that with the folding of The Fossil Flora a number of illustrations and, in some cases, notes were left, which were later brought together by G. A. Lebour and published in 1877, 12 years after Lindley's death. This work was entitled Illustrations of Fossil Plants; An Autotype Reproduction of Selected Drawings Prepared Under the Direction of Dr Lindley and W. Hutton between 1835 and 1840. Presumably Lindley was not closely involved in the selection after 1837! This work of Lebour's has received little attention in later palaeobotanical literature, and it goes unmentioned in Andrews' (1980) history of palaeobotany. The drawings were found, according to Lebour, 'among a large collections of drawings and papers which had belonged to the late William Hutton'. Perhaps these included the items that Lindley had referred to in saying that he had 'sent away' everything that he possessed in illustration, in the letter cited above. In any event, it is pretty clear why at least some of the illustrations in Lebour were not used in The Fossil Flora. Plate XLIV, identified only with a question mark, has Lebour's note

on it 'another very vague specimen which Lindley declined to name, his memorandum respecting it being "too imperfect"' (Lebour 1877).

The assessment of posterity Andrews (1980) in his history of palaeobotany records fairly that The Fossil Flora 'has been variously maligned by later workers', but adds charitably that 'I am inclined to think that, in the context of the times, it deserves somewhat better treatment'. The Cambridge palaeobotanist Newell Arber (1921) wrote 'it unfortunately remains to this day the one illustrated British book containing a general account of our Coal Measure plants'. Fortunately, this is no longer the case. Arber criticized it for, among other things, the lack of exact locality data; Kidston (1891) was more concerned with the inaccuracy of the drawings, as noted earlier in this paper. Seward (1898) offered the rather obtuse praise that 'if we look back through a few decades and peruse the

JOHN LINDLEY: RELUCTANT PALAEOBOTANIST

37

Fig. 3. John Lindley, a drawing by one of his daughters, c. 1845. He is reading galley proofs of the Gardeners' Chronicle. Reproduced by permission of the British Columbia Archives, #PDP4736.

pages of Lindley and Hutton's classic work on the Fossil Flora of Great Britain, a book which is indispensable to fossil botanists,... and finally take stock of our present knowledge . . . we realise what enormous progress has been made in palaeobotanical studies'. In closing it might be noted that, despite this criticism of The Fossil Flora, Lindley was honoured in the names given to various fossil plants by a number of later 19th and 20th century palaeobotanists. Witham (1833) described Pence lindleiana (reassigned by Hartig (1848) to Tiloxylon, and by Stopes (1916) to Planoxylon), while Hartig (1848) named another German Tertiary wood for Lindley as

Closteroxylon lindleyanum Hartig. Steinberg (1838) described Pecopteris lindleyana and Schimper (1869) named two Liassic plants for Lindley, a ginkgoalean leaf, Jeanpaulia lindleyana, and a conifer, Trichopitys lindleyana. Saporta (1862) reassigned the French Tertiary Podocarpus from Fuveau near Aix, figured by Lindley in Murchison & Lyell (1829), to P. lindleyana. As mentioned earlier in this paper, Lindley had compared the fossil to the living P. macrophylla, and apparently Saporta's reassignment was expressly to avoid attributing that Eocene fossil to an extant species. Finally, Carruthers (1872) named a Carboniferous seed Cardiocarpon lindleyi (later reassigned to Cordaitanthus).

38

W.G. CHALONER & H.L. PEARSON

Very much later, Harris (1979) made a new genus, Lindleycladus, based on Zamia lanceolata described in Lindley & Hutton from the Yorkshire Jurassic. Harris reassigned that fossil, interpreting the pinnae attached to the rachis as seen by Lindley and Hutton as individual leaves of a conifer, which he assigned to the Podozamitaceae. Ironically, the fossil was probably never handled by Lindley himself, as the figure and description given in The Fossil Flora were produced by W.C. Williamson in Scarborough and sent to Lindley in London, who, of course, acknowledged the source of the description and figure. It is easy for those of us living in a later age to look back on these early 19th century pioneers, and to draw attention to their shortcomings and mistakes rather than the foundations that they laid for later progress. While Lindley and Hutton's systematic assignment of some of their fossils may now fairly be called to question in the light of later knowledge, what is far more important is their perception of the problems that were to be the substance of future palaeobotanical research. Their thoughts on changes in world climate, on the composition of the atmosphere, the nature and origin of coal, their pioneer experiment in differential preservation and their development of the maceration technique for fossil cuticles - all these touch on issues that are still very alive in contemporary palaeobotany. Lindley & Hutton's Fossil Flora deserves recognition for those elements, despite any shortcomings it may have had as a purely systematic compilation.

References ANDREWS, H.N. 1980. The Fossil Hunters. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY. ARBER, E.A.N. 1905. The fossil flora of the Culm Measures of north-west Devon, and the palaeobotanical evidence with regard to the age of the beds. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 6197,291-325. ARBER, E.A.N. 1921. A sketch of the history of palaeobotany. In: SINGER, C. (ed.) Studies in the History and Method of Science, Volume 2 Clarenden Press, Oxford, 412-489. BOWERBANK, J.S. 1840. A History of the Fossil Fruits and Seeds of the London Clay. John Van Voorst, London. BRONGNIART, A. 1828. Prodrome d'une histoire des vegetaux fossiles. Dictionaire des Sciences Naturelles, 57, 16-212. CARRUTHERS, W. 1872. Notes on fossil plants. Geological Magazine, 9,55. CHALONER, W.G. 1999. Lindley and Hutton's Fossil Flora of Great Britain. In: STEARN, W.T. (ed.) John Lindley 1799-1865. Antique Collectors Club in association with the Royal Horticultural Society, Woodbridge Suffolk, 160-174. DE LA BECHE, H.T. 1834. On the anthracite found near

Bideford in North Devon. In: Proceedings of the Geological Society of London, 2,136. (Title only.) DENNIS, R.L. 1969. Fossil mycelium with clamp connections, from the Middle Pennsylvanian. Science, 163, 670-671. HALLAM, A. 1989. Great Geological Controversies, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford. HARRIS, T.M. 1979. The Yorkshire Jurassic Flora 5: Coniferales. British Museum (Natural History), London. HARRIS, T.M. MILLINGTON, W. & MILLER, J. 1974. The Yorkshire Jurassic Flora 4: I, Ginkgoales, 2, Czekanowskiales. British Museum (Natural History), London. HARTIG, T. 1848. Beitrage zur Geschichte der Pflanzen und zur Kenntnis der norddeutschen Braunkohlen-Flora. BotanischeZeitung,6,137-146,166-172. HEER, O. 1855-1859. Flora Tertiaria Helvetiae, Volume 1 (1855); Volume 2 (1856); Volume 3 (1859). Winterthur, Zurich, Switzerland. HEMSLEY, A.R. 2001. Comparison of in vitro decomposition of bryophytic and tracheophytic material. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 137, 375-384. HOWSE, R. 1890. Contributions towards a catalogue of the Flora of the Carboniferous System of Northumberland and Durham. Part I. Fossil Plants from the Hutton Collection. Natural History Transactions of the Northumberland, Durham and Ne\vcastle-on-Tyne Natural History Society, 10,19-151. KIDSTON, R. 1891. Notes on the Palaeozoic species mentioned in Lindley and Hutton's Fossil Flora. Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society, Edinburgh, 10, 345-391. LEBOUR, G.A.(ed.). 1877. Illustrations of Fossil Plants: An Autotype Reproduction of Selected Drawings Prepared Under the Direction of Dr. Lindley and W. Hutton Between 1835 and 1840. Northern England Institute of Mining and Mechanical Engineers, Newcastle, 1-139. LINDLEY, J. 1829. Description of the plants alluded to in the preceding memoir. Edinburgh New Philosophical Journal, 7, 298. LINDLEY, J. & HUTTON, W. 1833-1837. The Fossil Flora of Great Britain, or Figures and Descriptions of the Vegetable Remains Found in a Fossil State in this Country: Volume 1 (1833); Volume 2 (1835); Volume 3 (1837). James Ridgeway, London. MCCARTNEY, PJ. 1977. Henry De la Beche: Observations of an Observer. Friends of the National Museum of Wales, Cardiff. MITCHELL, A.F. 1972. Conifers in the British Isles. Forestry Commission Booklet No. 33. HMSO, London. MURCHISON, R.I. 1835. On a fossil fox found at Oeningen near Constance. Transactions of the Geological Society, series 2,3, 277-290. MURCHISON, R.I. & LYELL, C. 1829. On the Tertiary Freshwater Formations of Aix, in Provence, including the coal-field of Fuveau, with a description of the fossil insects, shells and plants, contained therein; by John Curtis, J. de C. Sowerby and J. Lindley. Edinburgh New Philosophical Journal, 6,287-298. MURRAY, P. 1828. Account of a Deposit of fossil plants, discovered in the Coal Formation of the Third Secondary Limestone, near Scarborough. Edinburgh New Philosophical Journal, 5,311-317.

JOHN LINDLEY: RELUCTANT PALAEOBOTANIST NEWMAN, A. & CHATT-RAMSEY, J. 1988. A Catalogue of the Specimens Figured in 'The Fossil Flora' by John Lindley (1799-1865) and William Button (1797-1860) Held by the Hancock Museum, Newcastle upon Tyne, Including a biography of William Button. The Hancock Museum, Newcastle upon Tyne. SAPORTA, G. 1862. Etudes sur la vegetation du sud-est de la France a Fepoque tertiare. Annales Scientifiques Naturelles, Botanique, series 4,17, 191-311. SCHIMPER, W.P. 1869. Traite de Paliontologie Veg&ale ou laflore du mondeprimitif, I. Bailliere, Paris. SEDGWICK, A. & MURCHISON, R.I. 1840. On the physical structure of Devonshire, and on its subdivisions and geological relations of its older stratified deposits. Transactions of the Geological Society, London, 5, 633-703. SEWARD, A.C. 1898. Fossil Plants, Volume I. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. STEARN, W.T. (ed.) 1999a. John Lindley 1799-1865. Antique Collectors Club in association with the Royal Horticultural Society, Woodbridge, Suffolk.

39

STEARN, W.T. I999b. The life, times and achievements of John Lindley 1799-1865. In: STEARN W.T. (ed.) John Lindley 1799-1865. Antique Collectors Club in association with the Royal Horticultural Society, Woodbridge, Suffolk, 15-72. STERNBERG, K.M., VON. 1838. Versuch einer geognostischen-botanischen Darstellung der Flora der Vorwelt, Volume II: Parts 7 and 8. Hasse, und Sohne Prague. STOPES, M.C. 1916. An early type of Abietineae (?) from the Cretaceous of New Zealand. Annals of Botany, 30, 111-125. VAN KONIJNENBURG-VAN CITTERT, J.H.A. & MORGANS, H.S. 1999. The Jurassic Flora of Yorkshire. The Palaeontological Association, London. WILLIAMSON, W.C. 1896. Reminiscences of a Yorkshire Naturalist. George Redway, London. WITHAM, H.T.M. 1833. The Internal Structure of Fossil Vegetables Found in the Carboniferous and Oolitic Deposits of Great Britain. Adam & Charles Black, Edinburgh.

This page intentionally left blank

Illustrations and illustrators during the 'Golden Age' of palaeobotany: 1800-1840 CHRISTOPHER J. CLEAL, MAUREEN LAZARUS & ANNETTE TOWNSEND Department of Biodiversity and Systematic Biology, National Museums and Galleries of Wales, Cathays Park, Cardiff CF10 3NP, UK Abstract: Three works from the early 19th century stand out as having influenced the development of scientific palaeobotany: Schlotheim's Beschreibungen merkwurdiger Krauter-Abdriicke (1804, printed by Becker, Gotha), Sternberg's Flora der Vorwelt, [Volume I: 1820-1821, (Parts 1 and 2), printed by F. Fleischer, Leipzig; 1823-1825 (parts 3 and 4), printed by E. Brenck's Wittwe, Regensburg: Volume II: 1833 (Parts 5 and 6), printed by J. Spurny, Prague; 1838 (Parts 7 and 8), printed by G. Hasse und Sohre, Prague] and Brongniart's Histoire des vegetaux fossiles (1828-1837, 1837-1838, printed by G. Dufour & E. d'Ocagne, Paris). The text of all three works contains important insights into the nature of plant fossils and how they relate to modern-day vegetation. Significantly, however, they are also among the first published works to include accurate images of plant fossils, and thus raised the awareness of the scientific community as to the importance of such fossils. Schlotheim's illustrations were based on his own drawings and were reproduced as etchings by the well-known botanical illustrator Johann Capieux of Leipzig. Sternberg's illustrations were based on original artwork prepared by various artists, many of whom were essentially landscape and portrait artists. The final illustrations were again reproduced as etchings, prepared by another eminent botanical illustrator Jacob Sturm of Nuremberg. Brongniart's illustrations are quite different, being lithographs, prepared by Mme Ve Noel, L. Houloup and Thierry freres'. They were based on drawings by various artists, although most were, in effect, copies of originals prepared by Brongniart.

Prior to the 17th century, those people who took any notice of fossils tended to regard them as 'sports of nature' - interesting curios with perhaps some aesthetic interest, but not really meriting serious scholarly attention. During the 18th century, however, a number of natural historians started to take more serious notice of them and started to consider what they really represented. By the start of the 19th century, the general consensus was that they were the remains of past life and therefore had an important message to give as to what life was like in the past. This in turn laid the foundations for the Darwinian revolution in the mid-19th century, from which most aspects of modern palaeontological and biological science has subsequently grown. Critical during this early history was the communication of information. Scholars interested in palaeontology were not numerous and were widely dispersed, mainly around Europe. As with most sciences, books and the early journals provided a means of disseminating ideas. However, palaeontology is not a metaphysical subject - its ideas are firmly rooted in physical objects (i.e. the fossils and the rocks in which they are found). It was vital, therefore, for the growth of the subject that these fossils themselves were illustrated in the early literature. Descriptive text can only partly fulfil this role; to be able to show what the fossils really looked like, it was essential that they were illustrated.

Today we take for granted the importance of good-quality illustrations in palaeontological literature, mainly through photography. Photography is now a relatively easy technique that can produce what was for long regarded as an objective record of an object. In the early 19th centuries, however, illustrations had to be produced using techniques that had more in common with art. The accuracy of the illustration thus had to depend on the skill of the illustrator and the refinement of the method used to transfer that image onto the printed page. In this paper we will look briefly at some of the illustrators who were producing the images being used by three of the key players in the development of scientific palaeobotany during the first part of the 19th century: Ernst von Schlotheim, Adolphe Brongniart and Kaspar von Sternberg. We will also compare some of the printing techniques being used at that time, to see how they affected the accuracy of the final printed image. This is not just of historical interest, as 1820 marks the starting point for palaeobotanical taxonomic nomenclature (ICBN Article 13; Greuter et al 2000). Many of the common palaeobotanical species were first described at this time and a proper understanding of these species requires the type specimens to be analysed. In many cases, this still has to be based on the original illustrations, especially where the original specimens have been lost.

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,41-61.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

42

C.J.CLEALetal.

Ernst Friedrich von Schlotheim (1764-1832) Schlotheim was a student of one of the founding fathers of geology, Abraham Werner of Freiberg, Saxony (Zittel 1901; Langer 1966). However, he also had close links with various botanists and zoologists, such as J.R Blumenbach and S. von Bridel, which no doubt helped him in his later palaeobotanical studies. He held various posts, mainly in Saxony, and ultimately (from 1822) became curator of the Library, Art and Natural History Collections of the Duke of Saxony, in Gotha. Schlotheim's two principal palaeobotanical studies dated from 1804 and 1820. They are based on specimens in his private collection, much of which ultimately found its way to the Museum fur Naturkunde in Berlin, where it is still housed (Daber 1970). The fossils originated mainly from the Carboniferous of Saarland and France, and the Lower Permian of Thuringia. The two studies are rather different in textual presentation. The 1804 volume was mainly concerned with making exhaustive comparisons between the fossil plants and living plants. He found the nearest comparisons with plants growing today in 'southern' floras (i.e. tropical vegetation), which is interesting in view of our current understanding of Late Palaeozoic palaeoclimates in Europe. However, the obvious discrepancies in detail from modern species made Schlotheim reluctant to name the fossils, even to the generic level. Consequently, the 1804 study includes extensive descriptions but no formal names. In contrast, his 1820 study concentrated more on comparing fossils with fossils. This allowed him to develop a binomial nomenclature, with genera intended exclusively for use with fossils (e.g. Filicites, Carpolithes). Unfortunately, none of the genera was diagnosed, being one of the reasons why Schlotheim (1820) is regarded as having been published prior to the formal starting point of palaeobotanical nomenclature (ICBN Article 13 - see Storch 1981; Kvacek 1982). It was, nevertheless, an important development for palaeobotany, especially in Germany where this style of nomenclature had not previously been used for plant fossils. The published plates, on which Schlotheim placed great importance, were copper-plate etchings, as can clearly be seen by a careful examination of the lines. They were printed on paper that was approximately quarto size (300-305 X 225-230 mm). The final engravings were prepared by Johann Stephan Capieux (1748-1813), who was drawing master at the University of Leipzig (see Fig. 1). Capieux had close contacts with many of the botanists working then at Leipzig, and he illustrated several of the finest botanical publications of the time (e.g. Hedwig 1782; Dreves & Hayne 1802). It was perhaps through

Fig. 1. Part of Schlotheim (1804, plate 1) showing a terminal portion of leafy calamite shoot (Asterophyllites equisetiformis Brongniart) clearly showing the 'naive' style of drawing used by Schlotheim. Also visible is the signature of the engraver Capieux.

Schlotheim's botanical acquaintances that he obtained the services of such an eminent botanical illustrator. Schlotheim repeatedly emphasized that he regarded the factual evidence provided by the descriptions and illustrations of the fossils as being central to his work. This probably explains why he went to the effort of obtaining the services of such an eminent engraver to illustrate his work. Brongniart (1822) was critical of much of Schlotheim's work, including the illustrations. In particular, he noted that the illustrations showing the whole specimen were not accompanied by close-ups showing details, such as venation. According to Langer (1966), the illustrations were based on Schlotheim's own drawings but, unfortunately, the current whereabouts of the originals is unknown (S. Schultka pers. comm. 2002). However, two stylistic points stand out from the published etchings. First, the individual images are not particularly well arranged on each plate, such that there is rather a lot of wasted space (e.g. Figs 2 and 3 of this paper). They do not compare well with the plates in Brongniart (1828-1838 - see Figs 9-11 later in this paper) each of which usually contains illustrations of far more fossils. Without seeing the original drawings, it is difficult to see who was responsible for this: Schlotheim or Capieux. The second and rather more important point is that the drawings are in a rather unsophisticated, almost 'naive', style and detailed structures are not particularly well represented (e.g. Fig. 1).

ILLUSTRATIONS AND ILLUSTRATORS: 1800-1840

43

Fig. 2. Schlotheim (1804, plate 2) showing specimens of Asterophyllites equisetiformis Brongniart (Fig. 3), Sphenophyllum schlotheimii Brongniart (Fig. 24) and Laveineopteris tenuifolia (Schlotheim ex Sternberg) Cleal et al. (Fig. 25). This is a good example of how the specimens are rather widely spaced on the plates.

Nevertheless, the illustrations provide a very faithful impression of the overall morphology and size of the specimens. The hand colouring, in particular, is very skilfully and accurately executed, suggesting that it was done under close supervision by Capieux, if not by Capieux himself. There is little question as to which specimen in Schlotheim's collection is represented in each illustration. As pointed out by Langer (1966) they are better than virtually all previously published illustrations of plant fossils. This is not to say that they are always exact copies of the specimens. For instance, Schlotheim (1804, plate 11, Fig. 22; reproduced in the present paper in Fig. 3) repre-

sents the holotype of Alethopteris lonchitica Sternberg with pinnae from both sides of the hand specimen shown on the same surface of the rock (Zodrow & Cleal 1998). However, this does not detract from the scientific accuracy and value of the plate, and arguably enhances the information that it provides.

Kaspar Maria von Sternberg (1761-1837) Sternberg was the third son of Jan Nepomuk Graf von Sternberg, the head of a wealthy, aristocratic

44

CJ.CLEALetal.

Fig. 3. Schlotheim (1804, plate 11) showing specimens of an indeterminate mariopteroid pteridosperm (Fig. 20) and Alethopteris lonchitica Steinberg (Fig. 22). The latter image shows pieces of fossil from both sides of the hand specimen, reproduced as though they occurred on the same surface (see Zodrow & Cleal 1998).

family with extensive property in Bohemia, including a 'palace' in Prague. As was common with younger sons of aristocratic families, Kaspar was directed by his parents towards a career in the clergy. On the face of it, a highly successful political career in the Catholic clergy seemed likely and he was eventually appointed to a senior position under the Archbishop of Mainz. When his father died in 1798, his elder brother Joachim became head of the family (the eldest brother, Jan Nepomuk, had died earlier in 1789). However, when Joachim also died less than 10 years later (1808), Kaspar became head of the family and he left the clergy. A brief account of Steinberg's life, with references to more complete biographies, can be found in Kvacek & Strakova (1997) and Kvacek & Patova (1998). Sternberg had a long-standing involvement in natural history, partly influenced by his brother Joachim, who had become interested in geology. He was a widely recognized expert on the botany of

Saxifraga on which he published a major monograph (Sternberg 1810, 1822, 1831). However, palaeobotany was his major passion. This was initiated during one of his journeys around Europe, when he saw a copy of Schlotheim's (1804) account of fossil plants (although the two apparently never met) and the illustrations reminded him of items in his brother's collection. This started him on the study of fossil plants and to build up a substantial collection. This collection eventually formed part of the Narodniho Muzea, Prague, which he helped to found in 1818. It was one of the most important palaeobotanical collections of its time and included specimens, not only from Bohemia, but from throughout Europe, the latter acquired through his extensive network of contacts among the academic community. A catalogue of the collections has been published by Kvacek & Strakova (1997) and its importance has been discussed by Kvacek & Kvacek (1992). Steinberg's work culminated in the publication of the two volumes known as Flora der Vorwelt (1820-1838), which included his ideas as to the classification and interpretation of plant fossils, as well as 127 large plates which included illustrations of the best examples from his collection (plus seven plates of living plants, for comparison). Sternberg funded the publication himself and, with his personal resources, there was no stinting in its production. Both illustrations and text were published in folio volumes (400 X 250 mm). They were printed on thick laid paper of very high quality, with pages showing one or other of two distinctive watermarks. One simply gives the names 'C & I Honig'; the other shows a coat of arms with a lion rampant beneath a crown, with the words ' Vryheid' below the lion, and the words 'Pro Patria Eiusque Libertate' in a circular band around the lion. This is the mark of a Flemish firm of papermakers that was well known for producing high-quality paper in the 18th and early 19th centuries. Four different printers were used: F. Fleischer of Leipzig (Parts 1 and 2), Ernst Brenk's Wittwe (widow) of Regensburg (Parts 3 and 4), Johann Spurnny of Prague (Parts 5 and 6) and Gotlieb Hasse Sohne (Sons) of Prague (Parts 7 and 8). All the engravings were by Jacob Sturm (1771-1848) of Nuremberg. He was part of a dynasty of botanical illustrators, his father Johann Georg (1742-1793) having been an engraver of botanical illustrations, as were his sons Johann Heinrich Christian Friedrich (1805-1862) and Johann Wilhelm (1808-1865). However, it was Jacob that became the best known, mainly through his work on the monumental Deutschlands Flora, published between 1798 and 1862. This was probably the most influential early flora to cover all of the German lands, having been produced in a small format (page size 130 X 90 mm) to encourage wide circulation.

45

ILLUSTRATIONS AND ILLUSTRATORS: 1800-1840

Table 1. Artists who contributed illustrations to Sternberg's Flora der Vorwelt, showing how many plates they provided.

Johann Daniel Preyssler E. Anton Auinger C. Zetter M.A. Nicholson Mary Morland James Sowerby Franz Both DC Berghes Christ. Hohe Jurgend Schmelda Joseph Zehner F. Simon Jos. Rossert August C.J. Corda Unattributed TOTAL

Parti

Part 2

5 4

11

Part 3

Part 4

Parts 5 and 6

Part 7 and 8

22* 1 1

3

1 1 3 2 3

14

1 1

4 13

2 13

3 13

4 20

2 26

7t 15 20 45

*Schmelda's name is given on the original artwork for Plate 12, but not on the published plate, ^ossert's name is given on the original artwork for Plates 31 and 32, but not on the published plates.

Also, despite the small size, Deutschlands Flora is notable for the high quality of the illustrations (Rix 1981; Blunt & Stern 1994). Sturm had contacted Steinberg after the publication of the first part of his Saxifraga monograph (Sternberg 1810) and had asked him to contribute text on that group of plants for the Deutschlands Flora (Sturm 1812, 1813). He later provided the illustrations to the supplements to the Saxifraga monograph (Sternberg 1822, 1831). It is perhaps not surprising, therefore, that Sternberg looked to Sturm for a high-quality engraver for his palaeobotanical monograph. Sturm prepared the plates from original artwork by various artists. A comparison of the artwork (stored in the Ndrodniho Muzea, Prague) with the published plates shows that Sturm reproduced the former with great fidelity. The unevenness in style between the plates (e.g. contrast Figs 4-6) reflects the differences in the original artwork, rather than unevenness in Sturm's work. In some cases, he simply copied a painting showing one or more fossils. Often, however, he had to deal with a composite, made up of paintings of different fossils, each evidently cut out from larger original paintings and glued on to a piece of paper, presumably by Sternberg. In some cases, individual figures would be crossed-out in pencil and an alternative image provided, either an improved painting of the same fossil, or a painting of a better-preserved fossil. Sturm was also in some cases expected to 'complete' details of repetitive structures in certain types of fossil, such as the helically arranged leaf-scars in arborescent lycophytes. An excellent example is plate 6 in Volume 1 (see Fig. 4 of this paper) of the

type specimens of Lepidodendron aculeatum Stbg and L. obovatum Stbg, where the original painting only has details of five or six of the leaf cushions in each specimen, and Sturm has 'filled-in' the rest. The specimens that were in Sternberg's own collection, and which are now housed in the Narodniho Muzea, Prague, were drawn by at least five artists (Table 1).

Johann Daniel Preyssler (1768-1839) Preyssler was a mining engineer who had taken Sternberg to collect fossil plants, and who had helped with the curation and display of the latter's dead brother's (Joachim) geological collection at Bfezina Castle. He was also a well-known entomologist. An example of his work is shown on Figure 4 of this paper.

E. Antonin Auinger (c. 1800-1821) He was a young painter from Rokycany (near Sternberg's castle Bfezina) who had studied at the Prague Academy. He was the main contributor of illustrations in Part 2. It is noticeable that, after his premature death in 1821, no further illustrations of his were included in Flora der Vorwelt. This tends to indicate that the illustrations were being produced as the work was being progressively published, rather than there having been a set of illustrations available at the start. A representative example of his work is shown in Figure 5 of this paper.

46

CJ.CLEALetal.

Fig. 4. Sternberg (1820, plate 6) showing the type specimens of Lepidodendron aculeatum Sternberg and Lepidodendron obovatum Sternberg. Based on original artwork by D. Preyssler. Photographs of parts of these specimens can be found in Thomas (1970, plate 29, Figs 1 and 2).

ILLUSTRATIONS AND ILLUSTRATORS: 1800-1840

47

Fig. 5. Sternberg (1821, plate 17) showing Lepidodendron selaginoides Sternberg (Fig. 1), Catamites nodosa Sternberg (Fig. 2) and Artisia sp. Based on original artwork by E. A. Auinger. Photographs of these specimens can be found in Kvacek & Strakova (1997, plate 22, Fig. 5; plate 38, Fig. 1; plate 50, Fig. 1).

48

CJ.CLEALetal.

Fig. 6. Sternberg (1823, plate 35) showing lAlnus spp. (Figs 1 and 2) (= Phyllites juglandiformis Sternberg and Phyllites lobatus Sternberg - see comments in Kvacek & Strakova 1997, pp. 91 and 97), Sphenophyllum cuneifolium (Sternberg) Zeiller (Fig. 3) and Widdringtonia graminea (Sternberg) Knobloch (Fig. 4). Based on original artwork by FJ. Both. The Sphenophyllum specimen is figured as a photograph by Kvacek & Strakova (1997, plate 37, Fig. 2); the other specimens are reported by Kvacek & Strakova (1997) to be lost.

ILLUSTRATIONS AND ILLUSTRATORS: 1800-1840

Frantisek 'Franz' Jan Both (born 1792) After the death of Auinger, Both took over as the main artist for the Flora der Vorwelt. He had been born in Boumov and was a well-known painter and engraver in Prague. Plate 35 is attributed to 'Franz Roth', but there can be little doubt that this is a misspelling of Franz Both (this plate is reproduced in Fig. 6 of this paper).

Ignac 'Jg.'Schmelda (1797-1839) Schmelda, who was born in Prague, took over from Both as the main illustrator for the Flora der Vorwelt during the 8-year interregnum between the publication of Volumes 1 and 2 (1825-1833). He was a portrait painter who had studied at the Prague Academy. The original artwork is dated, one from 1830, 10 from 1831, four from 1832, and three from 1833. Four others are composites made up from parts that were cut from larger originals and from which the dates are mostly missing (only plate 14 has dates, one part from 1830, another from 1832). An example of Schmelda's work is shown in Figure 7 of this paper.

August Karl Joseph Corda (1809-1849) Corda was the zoological curator at the Narodniho Muzea in Prague from 1835. He worked closely with Sternberg and was largely responsible for completing the last part during the latter's last illness. After Steinberg's death, Corda's position at the museum became insecure and he applied for a number of positions elsewhere (Kvacek & Strakova 1997). However, he was unsuccessful in this and remained in Prague until 1849, when he took part in an expedition to Texas (Andrews 1980). This ended in tragedy when the ship that he was travelling in was wrecked in the Atlantic, resulting in the loss of his life and all his collections. A few of Corda's illustrations are similar in style to those of his predecessors such as Schmelda. However, Corda also wrote some of the text in this last part of Flora der Vorwelt, in particular sections detailing the cellular anatomy of the fossils (Steinberg's poor eyesight had prevented him doing such microscope work). Corda's illustrations dealing with this anatomical evidence are inevitably quite different in style from the others in the book (Fig. 8). Two other artists contributed one plate each to Volume 1 of the work - C. Zetter (plate 27) and De Berghes (plate 49). Most of the specimens illustrated by Zetter and Berghes are reported lost, but one is

49

reported to now be in the Sternberg Collection (Kvacek & Strakova 1997). It is possible, therefore, that these two pieces of artwork were commissioned directly by Sternberg. However, why these artists were not used further in this project is unknown. In addition to specimens from his own collection, Sternberg figured many plates of fossils that had been provided by colleagues. Dean William Buckland (1784-1856), Professor of Mineralogy at Oxford University, supplied plates of fossils from the Jurassic of Britain, mainly from the Stonesfield Flora (Oxfordshire, UK - see Cleal & Rees 2004). Correspondence from Buckland dated 11 February 1822, still in the Narodniho Muzea, Prague, records that he had seen proofs of illustrations in the French edition of Steinberg's work and had been much impressed by their quality (Kvacek 2000). Significantly, he compares them very favourably against those being published by Adolphe Brongniart (given the date of the letter, presumably those in Brongniart's 1822 paper). Three of the illustrations sent by Buckland were the work of Mary Morland (1797-1857), the wife of William Buckland. Morland was a well-established palaeontological illustrator before she met and married Buckland, and had contributed illustrations to various monographs by William Conybeare, George Cuvier and her future husband (Kolbl-Ebert 1997). One of the figures on plate 33 is attributed to 'Imances Buckland' the meaning of which is unclear. Another two plates are inscribed with the name James Sowerby. There were, in fact, two James Sowerby, father and son, who were noted illustrators of natural history specimens. However, it seems most likely that it was the son, James de Carle Sowerby (1787-1871), who provided the illustrations for Sternberg. He was better known for his illustrations of fossil shells but, as noted by Buckland when awarding him the Geological Society of London Wollaston Fund (1840), he also illustrated some fossil plants (Anon. 1871). Buckland asked that the plates were returned to him when 'copies' had been prepared. He also asked that they were always kept under glass to ensure that they were not damaged (Kvacek 2000). According to a list by J. Sowerby of the illustrations of fossils provided by Buckland (Kvacek 2000 p. 95), there were originally eight paintings, whereas Sternberg only included five plates in the published work. Unfortunately, the original artwork is not in the archives of the Geological Museum of Oxford University (P. Powell pers. comm.) and its present location is unknown. Without being able to see the originals, it is therefore difficult to relate the list to the Steinberg's plates. Plates 1, 3 and 8 in Sowerby's list are probably those shown in Steinberg's plates 38,30 and 39, respectively. Sowerby's plate 5 probably represents figures 2-3 in Steinberg's plate 33,

50

CJ.CLEALetal.

Fig. 7. Sternberg (1833, plate 19) showing Neuropteris plicata Sternberg (Figs 1 and 3), Neuropteris obovata Steinberg (Fig. 2) and Neuropteris acutifolia Brongniart (Fig. 4). Based on original artwork by J. Schmelda. The specimens are figured as photographs by Kvacek & Strakova (1997, plate 36, Fig. 6; plate 40, Fig. 5; plate 41, Fig. 2; plate 61, Fig. 3).

ILLUSTRATIONS AND ILLUSTRATORS: 1800-1840

Fig. 8. Sternberg et al (1833, plate 54) showing hand specimens and thin sections of Catamites stems.

51

52

CJ.CLEALetaL

but it is difficult to identify figure 1 in Steinberg's plate (a Ptilophyllum) unless it is that on Sowerby's plate 7. It is difficult to relate any of the fossils in Steinberg's plate 37 to the list, nor is any mention apparently made of the Early Jurassic specimens figured there. Sternberg clearly did not illustrate the plate of 'ensiform leaves', which presumably belong to Pelourdea and which is one of the most distinctive components of the Stonesfield Flora (Cleal & Rees 2004). There is also a plate of Carboniferous specimens that are now in the Natural History Museum, London, and which was based on drawings by M.A. Nicholson. Sternberg makes no comment on Nicholson other than attributing the drawing to him, and we have been unable to find out anything definite about him. H. Torrens (pers. comm.) has pointed out that there was a Nicholson family in the Bristol area, some of whom took an interest in natural history. There was, for instance, a Reverend Mark Nicholson (1770-1838), and a number of his descendants used the middle name Alleyne, so it is possible to speculate that he was Mark Alleyne Nicholson. However, we have no clear evidence that he was interested in natural history and so might have been a candidate for the artist of Steinberg's plate. A plate of Mesozoic fossils from Germany (Volume 2, plate 21) is attributed to F. Simon. Five of the fossils are Equisetites from the Triassic of 'Wurtenburg' (presumably Wurttemberg), which had been provided by G.F. Jaeger, a well-known natural historian of Stuttgart. A sixth specimen is of a possible alga from Solenhofen, then in the collections of the University of Freiburg Museum (presumably Freiburg-im-Breisgau in Baden-Wurttemberg) but now reported lost (Kvacek & Strakova 1997). Although there is no record of it, it seems likely that Simon's artwork for the plate was provided by Jaeger. A plate of fossils from the Miocene of Romania (Volume 2, plate 11) was provided by Partsch (the fossils are now in the Natural History Museum, Vienna - see Kovar-Eder 1990). The artwork is attributed to Joseph Zehner. Of the other artists of central European origin, little has been discovered except for Christian Hohe (1798-1869) of Bavaria, who was a noted portrait and landscape painter and lithographer, who had studied at Munich. He illustrated a single plate (plate 58) of Late Carboniferous plant fossils. Two of the fossils came from Eschweiler in Saarland, Germany, and are now in the Sternberg Collection in Prague. Kvacek & Strakova (1997) record that they were presented by Herr Graser, the director of the mine presumably where they were found, although Sternberg records that the specimen in Figure 2 was presented by Herr Sack of Bonn. The third figure

shows a group of ovules (now reported lost) presented by Herr Noggerath, a senior mine supervisor also from Saarland. It seems likely, therefore, that the artwork had been prepared in Germany before the specimens were donated to Sternberg. The seven plates by Jos. Rossert display a variety of Mesozoic and Tertiary fossils, mostly from Germany. Many are reported by Kvacek & Strakova (1997) to be lost but, of those that can still be located, some are in the Sternberg Collection in Prague, whilst others are in the Bavarian State Museum for Palaeontology and Historical Geology, Munich. In some cases they are stated to be from the collection of Georg Graf zu Minister (1776-1844) of Bayreuth, from Bamberg. Significantly, the signature on the original artwork is 'Rossert de Bamberg'. It is reasonable to assume, therefore, that this artwork was prepared on behalf of Graf Miinster and then sent to Sternberg. When viewed overall, it has to be said that the quality of the artwork is somewhat variable through the volume. All of the plates undoubtedly had an attractive appearance, helping to fulfil Steinberg's aim of raising general awareness as to the importance of plant fossils. As pointed out by Kvacek & Strakova (1997), the colours tend to be very faithfully reproduced, but the shape and contours of the rock are often stylized, which can make difficulties when trying to match specimen to illustration. It is when the details of the fossils are examined that the unevenness in quality becomes evident. The plates based on the work of Preyssler and Corda stand out as being of the highest quality, and it may not be a coincidence that these were both active palaeontologists who understood the fossils. Preyssler's now well-known illustrations of the holotypes of Lepidodendron aculeatum Sternberg and Lepidodendron obovatum Sternberg (Fig. 4 of this paper) clearly show considerable attention to detail and significantly includes a scale bar (compare them with the photographs of these specimens figured by Thomas 1970, plate 29, Figs 1 and 2). The plates provided by his foreign colleagues, especially those provided by Buckland, are also of high quality, again probably reflecting the fact that they were produced by artists experienced at working with fossils. However, the plates based on the work of the young portrait and landscape painters employed by Sternberg are, in many cases, of lower quality. Schmedla's paintings are generally quite good, especially in the surface details of the fossils, but those of Auinger and Both are, in many cases, somewhat stylized. Auinger's representations of the morphology was often rather simplified (e.g. Fig. 5 of this paper), whilst Both seems to have paid as much attention to the detailed texture of the rock surface as to the plant fossil (e.g. Fig. 6 of this paper).

ILLUSTRATIONS AND ILLUSTRATORS: 1800-1840

Adolphe Brongniart (1801-1876) Although Brongniart belonged to a younger generation than Schlotheim and Sternberg, he was publishing on palaeobotany at about the same time as them. Brongniart was the son of the eminent French geologist Alexandre Brongniart and, although not of as wealthy and aristocratic extraction as Sternberg, was comfortably well off. He became a doctor of medicine by the age of 25, but was already deeply immersed in the study of palaeobotany (e.g. Brongniart 1822). During his 20s and 30s, he travelled extensively throughout Europe and met many of the leading geologists of his day (no doubt often aided by an introduction from his eminent father). In 1831, Brongniart was appointed to a position at the Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, and thereafter was able to commit himself full time to the study of palaeobotany. According to Andrews (1980), he was the first person to be able to devote himself full time to this subject; presumably, Andrews meant in a professional sense. The published work for which Brongniart became best known dates from about this time - the Histoire des vegetauxfossiles (Brongniart 1828-1837,1837-1838). The first four of the 15 parts of this work were, in fact, published before Brongniart had been formally appointed to the museum, suggesting that he had close contacts with the institution well before this time. A further nine parts were planned but never published, and the last published part ends in mid-sentence. Unlike the works of Schlotheim and Sternberg, the Histoire was not based on a private collection, but on the collection of a large institution, the Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris. It was one of the largest (if not the largest) collection of plant fossils of its day and provided Brongniart with a vast resource for his studies. It is not surprising, therefore, that the specimens figured in this work are often far larger and more complete than those figured by the others. Brongniart also had the advantage of the resources of a large institution to finance the publication. The Histoire includes 199 plates printed on paper of approximate quarto size (293 X 215 mm). They present an interesting combination of printing techniques. The history of printing of the plates falls into two periods. Plates for the first nine parts were mostly lithographs by L. Houloup, of 22 and 24 rue Dauphine, Paris. For the first four of those parts, Mme Ve Noel produced the lithographic plates. On some plates she gives her address as 26 rue Dauphine, on others the same address as the printer. In Part 5, however, some of the lithographic plates are attributed to L. Houloup himself, and thereafter Noel's name ceases to appear. The second period covers the publication of parts 10-15. Again, most of the plates are lithographs, but

53

the plates are now produced by 'Thierry freres, succrs Englemann'. The name of a printer is not given on any of these plates and it may be assumed that Thierry was also responsible for the printing. There is no obvious change in style between Houloup's work and that of Thierry, and the reason for the change is not clear. However, the change clearly had an effect on the production schedule of the Histoire. For most of the 10 years that it was being published, a new part was normally produced at least every 12 months, sometimes more frequently. However, there was a gap of more than 2 years between the appearances of parts 9 and 10, presumably representing a hiatus as a new printer was sought. All of the fossils illustrated in the Histoire were reproduced as uncoloured lithographs. On first viewing, they seem rather drab in appearance and are certainly not as immediately impressive as the engravings in Steinberg's book. Nevertheless, they give a very realistic impression of what the fossils looked like, especially in the fine detail, such as the veining of foliage. Lithography also has the great advantage of allowing much longer print runs, as lithographic stones are much harder and thus have a longer life than the copper plates used in engravings and etchings. Lithographs also have the great advantage of not requiring colouring, which in the early 19th century was very labour intensive and thus costly, as it had to be carried out by hand. Brongniart was also anxious to show specimens of living plants, with which to compare the fossils. Curiously, however, the plates of living plants are mostly reproduced as simple line illustrations, showing details such as the of venation and position of the sporangia of ferns, but not making any attempt to make them look life-like. One series of these plates (plates 28-36) are clearly engravings, as the plate mark can be seen around the edge of the illustration, and the blunt line endings suggest that they were from etched plates. No information is given on these as to either printer or engraver, but they are clearly in quite a different style to the other plates and it seems unlikely that Houloup or Thierry produced them. One of the few exceptions to this is plate. 37 bis (a plate showing stems of living ferns see Fig. 9 of this paper), which is recorded as a lithograph by Thierry, and this is very close in style to the plates showing fossils. Plates 82A and 82B are superficially similar, showing line-illustration remains of living ferns. They both have the inscription 'Vielle sculpt.' possibly indicating that they are engravings. However, 82A also has 'Lith. de L. Houloup', indicating that they are, in fact, lithographs. This is also indicated by the absence of a plate mark around the edge of the illustrations, although this is not conclusive as sometimes such marks can be removed by trimming the paper.

54

CJ.CLEALetal.

Fig. 9. Brongniart (1837, plate 37bis) showing stems of extant ferns for comparison with the fossils. Based on an original by A. Riocreux.

ILLUSTRATIONS AND ILLUSTRATORS: 1800-1840

Plates 8-11 of Part 2 of the Histoire present a difficulty. They represent anatomical studies of modern club mosses and Psilotum, and many appear to be engravings. They were produced by a different printer to the others in the volume, L. Letronne of 15 quai Voltaire. One, in fact, is even inscribed 'Annedouche sc.' in the lower right-hand corner. However, there is no plate mark, and the term 'sc.' or 'sculpt' can sometimes be misleading; it cannot always be regarded as definitive evidence that it is an engraving. These are possibly pen lithographs, and can be compared with plate 12 of the same part of the Histoire, which is also almost certainly a pen lithograph, produced by Thierry. We have been able to find out very little more about the lithographers and engravers used in the Histoire. We investigated other geological books published by the same firm (G. Dufour & Ed. d'Ocagne of Paris and Amsterdam) but this did not help. The plates in Cuvier (1830, 1836), which mainly represent animal fossils, are all unattributed engravings. Cuvier & Brongniart (1822) has 17 lithographs of geological sections and some fossils including plants, but most are unattributed or the lithographer's name is illegible in the copy that we have seen. Only three plates have legible names (Mantoux and Benard) that are clearly different from the lithographers of the Histoire plates. Table 2 shows the artists that contributed the artwork from which the lithographic or engraving plates in the Histoire were produced. In the early parts, Brongniart himself provided many of the drawings. However, after 1831, when he became a member of the museum staff, the lithographs were based on drawings by other artists. Ten such artists are named, but five clearly contributed more than the others: Meunier (mainly Parts 2-5), Jouy and Oudard (Parts 6 and 7), Courtin (Parts 7-13) and Alfred Riocreux (Part 14).

E Boullemier The plates in Brongniart's (1822) paper were prepared by Boullemier. He provided only a single plate to the Histoire, showing Calamites, but this is of much better quality than the illustrations in the 1822 paper. Nothing further is known about him. An example of his work is shown in Figure 10 of this paper.

55

had natural history images on show at the Jardin des Plantes in Paris (Vollmer 1930). An example of his work is shown in Figure 11 of this paper.

Charles Louis Malapeux The single plate attributed to 'Malapeux' is almost certainly by Charles Louis, a well-known lithographer who managed a salon in Paris between 1834 and 1867 (Thieme 1913).

RL Oudart According to Stafleu & Cowan (1976), the plates signed 'Oudard' and 'Houdart' were probably by PL. Oudart, but no further information was given.

F. Courtin Again, no initial is given but the plates attributed to 'Courtin' were almost certainly by F. Courtin, a lithographer who specialized in portraits (especially of actors) but also in botanical subjects (Thieme 1912).

Alfred Riocreux A well-known scientific illustrator of the time, providing many illustrations of plants for the Jardin des Plantes in Paris. Later he became curator of the Musee de la Ceramique at the Sevres porcelain factory, and in 1870 became Chevalier de la Legion d'Honneur. He contributed many of the originals of extant plants included in the Histoire, as well as of a number of fossil lycophytes, especially the Sigillaria barks. He was the son of a well-known porcelain flower painter, Denis Riocreux (1791-1872), who worked at Sevres (Vollmer 1934).

Joseph Decaisne (1807-1882)

Jean-Baptiste Meunier (1786-1858)

The botanist Decaisne was born in Belgium but moved to Paris as a young man to join the Museum d'Histoire Naturelle, and ultimately became director of Jardin des Plantes. He supplied a single plate of microscope drawings showing the cellular structure of Recent Lycopodium.

Although no initial is given on the plates, those attributed to 'Meunier' may have been by JeanBaptiste Meunier. He was principally a miniature painter in aquarelle, but he is also reported to have

Nothing is known about the other four illustrators named in Brongniart's plates. Of those for whom we do have information, however, three things become clear. First, many of the artists had some contact with

Table 2. Artists who contributed illustrations to Brongniart's 'Histoire des vegetaux', showing the number of plates provided and the part they appeared in. Figures in parentheses represent the number of plates based on artwork that had been redrawn from an original by Brongniart. Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Ad. Brongniart F. Boullemier Meunier Malapeau Jouy Oudard Courtin Mathis Betremieux A. Riocreux Decaisne Unattributed

10

5

1

1

Total

15

13

14

14

4 1

7

8

6(2)

Part 5

Part 6

Part 7

Part 9

Part 10

Part 11

Part 12

Part 13

1

1

12(2)

Part 8

13(13) 1(1)

6(5) 3(3)

3 1

3(1)

6(5) 2(1) 5 (5) 1(1) KD

12 (12)

Part 14

10 (9)

12(4)

12

16(4)

9(1)

1 7

1 1 9

10

13

2 12

15

13

11

1

2(2)

1

14

Part 15

14

12

17

11

ILLUSTRATIONS AND ILLUSTRATORS: 1800-1840

Fig. 10. Brongniart (1828, plate 17) showing various specimens of Catamites. Based on an original by F. Boullemier.

57

58

CJ.CLEALetal.

Fig. 11. Brongniart (1830, plate 52) showing the holotype of Lyginopteris hoeninghausii (Brongniart) Gothan. Based on an original by J.-B. Meunier.

ILLUSTRATIONS AND ILLUSTRATORS: 1800-1840

either the Museum d'Histoire Naturelle and/or the Jardin des Plantes in Paris. Presumably this is how they became involved in the project to illustrate Brongniart's work, and suggests that they had some experience at botanical illustration, if not working with fossils. Secondly, unlike Steinberg's work, there is no evident correlation between the artist and the provenance of the fossils. Even when the fossil was not in the Museum d'Histoire Naturelle, the illustration was usually based on an original drawing made by Brongniart, usually when he visited where the fossil was stored (e.g. the Stonesfield fossils in the University of Oxford - Cleal & Rees 2004). The exceptions are where direct copies were made of illustrations from the published work of other palaeobotanists. In some cases the source of the copy was acknowledged, for instance the illustrations of the holotypes of Paripteris gigantea (Sternberg) Gothan (plate 69) and Corynepteris angustissima (Sternberg) Nemejc (plate 120, Fig. 4) are acknowledged as being copies from Part 2 of Flora der Vorwelt (Sternberg 1821). The illustration of the holotype of Calamites steinhaueri Brongniart (plate 18, Fig. 4) is an acknowledged copy from Steinhauer (1818, plate 5, Fig. 1). In other cases, however, the copy is unacknowledged. For instance, although he does not say so, Brongniart's (1828, plate 3, Fig. 104) figures ofFucoides are direct copies from Parts 2 and 4 of Sternberg (1821, plate 26, Fig. 3; 1825, plate 48, Fig. 1); and Brongniart's (1837, plate 141) figures of Lepidodendron are copies of Sternberg (1820, plate 4, Fig. 2; 1823, plate 28). Brongniart's (1828, plate 17, Fig. 5; plate 18, Figs 1 and 2) figures of Calamites are also unattributed copies of figures in Artis (1825, plates 2 and 13). Finally, in many cases it is clearly stated that the artist was working from an original drawing or sketch, usually by Brongniart or (in Parts 11-15) by Riocreux. This gave a much tighter control on the accuracy of the illustration; the artist did not have to interpret the plant from the fossil, which might have presented difficulties for an artist with no previous experience of working with fossils. It also presumably explains the consistency in the style of illustrations throughout the work, despite the fact that they had been produced by different artists and lithographers (compare the three example plates reproduced in Figs 9-11 of this paper). The plates in Brongniart's book are by far the best illustrations of plant fossils that were published during the first part of the 19th century, and rank among the best non-photographic illustrations of such material ever produced. In many cases, they are objects of great beauty, such as the illustration of the type of Lyginopteris hoeninghausii (Brongniart) Gothan (reproduced in this paper as Fig. 11); the original of this would surely grace any wall.

59

However, they also show great attention to detail and, in many cases, there are close-ups showing critical details of the fossils such as enlargements of pinnules (Fig. 11); none of the other works reviewed in this paper included such detail. The arrangement of the individual elements in each plate is also far superior to that in Schlotheim's and Steinberg's works. Excellent examples are the plates reproduced here in Figures 9 and 10, where there is very little wasted blank space on the page, but the plates still do not look cluttered.

Discussion These three major contributions to early palaeobotanical study provide interesting contrasts in how the images of plant fossils were presented. Schlotheim provided simple representations of the fossils in his private collection. They had been based on his own drawings, which, although rather unsophisticated, were, nevertheless, accurate representations of the form of the fossil. They were the kind of specimen that were relatively easy to find, and so the illustrations could be readily appreciated and understood by the average collector of his time. Sternberg used spectacular hand-coloured images of fossils both from his own and other people's collections. However, the illustrations were based on paintings of the fossils, many of which had been produced by artists not familiar with fossils. They were, therefore, not always as accurate as in the other contemporaneous publications, but they caught the eye and it is easy to see how they would have drawn the attention of someone not previously interested in palaeobotany. His book was, in essence, a tool for raising the profile of palaeobotany and potentially drawing in enhanced resources to the subject. We would today call it a 'coffee-table' publication. Brongniart's book was more of an institutional publication, illustrating fine specimens from arguably the greatest collection of plant fossils of its time. The images are monochrome and not as flamboyant as those illustrated by Sternberg, but are, nevertheless, often elegant. They are also extremely accurate, having mostly been based on original drawings by Brongniart himself or the eminent scientific illustrator Alfred Riocreux. Furthermore, unlike the other two works, most of the images were lithographs, which were cheaper to produce and thus allowed for a much longer print run (original copies of the Histoire are today much easier to find than the other two works). In the long run, therefore, Brongniart's work has reached a far wider audience and ultimately has had a much greater scientific impact. Whatever the differences, all three works have proved highly influential to the development of

60

CJ.CLEALetal.

palaeobotany, due at least in part to the fine illustrations that they contain. They are regularly consulted even to this day by palaeobotanists, and it is important that we are able to understand how the illustrations were produced if we are to continue to use them to their full potential. We are grateful to Dr J. Kvacek for permission to see the original Sternberg artwork at the Narodnftio Muzea, Prague, and for his insights into the history of Sternberg and his work. The reproductions of plates from Volume 2 of Steinberg's work were provided by Dr P. Davis and Mr C. Shute of the Natural History Museum (London). We also thank Dr D. De Franceschi and Mme V Van de Ponseele of the Museum Nationale d'Histore Naturelle, Paris, for providing information about some of the illustrators used by Brongniart. Dr S. Schultka (Museum fur Naturkunde, Berlin) provided information on Schlotheim's original drawings; Prof. H. Torrens (University of Keele) gave advice on M.A. Nicholson and the family of William Buckland; Mr P. Powell (Geological Museum, University of Oxford) searched for the original paintings that William Buckland sent to Sternberg; Dr C. Burek (Chester College) gave information on Mary Moreland; and Mrs C. Mackay (National Museums and Galleries of Wales, Cardiff) advised us on printing techniques and papers. Finally, we would like to thank J. Hilton and H. Pearson for constructive reviews of the manuscript.

References ANDREWS, H.N. 1980. The Fossil Hunters. In Search of Ancient Plants. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY. ANON. 1871. Obituary - James de Carle Sowerby. Geological Magazine, 8,478-479. ARTIS, E.T 1825. Antediluvian Phytology, Illustrated by a Collection of the Fossil Remains of Plants, Peculiar to the Coal Formations of Great Britain. Artis, London. BLUNT, W. & STERN, WT. 1994. The Art of Botanical illustration, new edition revised and enlarged. Antique Collectors' Club, Woodbridge, and The Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. BRONGNIART, A. 1822. Sur la classification et la distribution des vegetaux fossiles en general, et sur ceux des terrains de sediment superieur en particulier. Memoires du Museum d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, 8, 203-240, 297-348, plates 12-17. BRONGNIART, A. 1828-1837. Histoire des vegetaux fossiles, Volume 1: Parts 1 and 2 (1828); Part 3 (1829); Part 4 (1830); Parts 5 and 6 (1831); Part 7 (1833); Parts 8 and 9 (1834); Part 10 (1836); Parts 11 and 12 (1837). G. Dufour & E. d'Ocagne, Paris. BRONGNIART, A. 1837-1838. Histoire des vegetaux fossiles, Volume 2: Part 13 (1837); Parts 14 and 15 (1838). G. Dufour & E. d'Ocagne, Paris. CLEAL, C.J. & REES, P. McA. 2004. The Middle Jurassic flora from Stonesfield, Oxfordshire, UK. Palaeontology, 46,739-801. CUVIER, G. 1830. Discours sur les revolutions de la surface du globe, et sur les changements qu 'elles ontproduits dans le regne animal, 6th edn. d'Ocagne & Dufour, Paris.

CUVIER, G. 1836. Recherche sur les ossemens fossiles. Atlas. 4th edn. d'Ocagne, Paris (in two volumes). CUVIER, G. & BRONGNIART, A(LEXANDRE). 1822. Description geologique des environs de Paris. G. Dufour & E. d'Ocagne, Paris. DABER, R. 1970. E.R von Schlotheim und der Beginn der wissenschaftlichen Fragestellung in der Palaobotanik vor 150 Jahren. Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Humboldt-Universitat Berlin, MathematischNaturwissenschaftliche Reihe, 19, 249-255. DREVES, J.F. & HAYNE, EG. 1802. Choix des plantes d'Europe, decrites et dessinees d'apres nature. Voss et Compagnie, Leipzig. GREUTER, W, McNEiLL, J. et al. 2000. International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (Saint Louis Code). Koeltz Scientific Books, Konigstein. HEDWIG, J. 1782. Fundamentum historiae naturalis muscorumfrondosorum. A.S.L. Crusium, Leipzig. KOLBL-EBERT, M. 1997. Mary Buckland (nee Morland) 1797-1857. Earth Sciences History, 16, 33-38. KOVAR-EDER, J. 1990. Kataloge der wissenschaftlichen Sammlung des Naturhistorischen Museums in Wein, Heft 1. Typen der Geologisch-Paldontologischen Abteilung Palaobotanik. Natural History Museum, Vienna. KVACEK, J. 2000. Kacpar M. hrabc Sternberg a jeho styky s anglickcm paleontologem Williamem Bucklandem. Muzejni a Vlastivednd Prdce/Casopsis Spolecnosti PrdtelStarozitnosti, 108,90-97. KVACEK, J. & STRAKOVA, M. 1997. Catalogue of Fossil Plants Described in Works of Kaspar M. Sternberg. Narodniho Muzea, Prague. KVACEK, J. & PATOVA, R. 1998. Kaspar M. Graf von Sternberg. Naturwissenschaftler und Begrunder des Nationalmuseums. Narodniho Muzea, Prague (Also published in Czech.) KVACEK, Z. 1982. Against the newly proposed starting point in paleobotany. Taxon, 31, 319. KVACEK, Z. & KVACEK, J. 1992. Sternberkovo dflo Flora der Vorwelt, jeho vyznam a stav dokladove sbfrky. Casopsis Ndrodni Museum v Praze, Rada prirodoved, 158,31^2. LANGER, W. 1966. Ernst Friedrich von Schlotheim 1764-1832. Argumenta Palaeobotanica, 1, 19^40. Rix, M. 1981. The Art of the Botanist. Lutterworth Press, Guildford. SCHLOTHEIM, E.F. VON. 1804. Beschreibungen merkwiirdiger Krduter-Abdriicke und Pflanzen-Versteinerungen. Ein Beitrag zur Flora der Vorwelt. Becker, Gotha. SCHLOTHEIM, E.F. VON. 1820. Die Petrefactenkunde auf ihrem jetzigen Standtpunkte durch die Beschreibung seiner Sammlung versteinerter undfossiler Uberrest des Their- und Pflanzenreichs der Vorwelt erlautert. Becker, Gotha. STAFLEU, F.A. & COWAN, R.S. 1976. Taxonomic Literature. A Selective Guide to Botanical Publications and Collections with Dates, Commentaries and Dates, Volume I: A - G. Bonn, Scheltema & Holkema, Utrecht. STEINHAUER, H. 1818. On fossil reliquia of unknown vegetables in the coal strata. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, New Series, 1,265-297. STERNBERG, K.M., VON. 1810. Revisio Saxifragarum Iconibus Illustrata. H.F. A. Augustin, Regensberg.

ILLUSTRATIONS AND ILLUSTRATORS: 1800-1840 STERNBERG, K.M., VON. 1822. Revisio Saxifragarum Iconibus Illustrata. Supplementarum. Viduae Christ. E. Brenck, Regensberg. STERNBERG, K.M., VON. 1820-1821. Versuch einer geognostisch-botanischen Darstellung der Flora der Vorwelt, Volume I: Part 1 (1820); Part 2 (1821). F. Fleischer, Leipzig. STERNBERG, K.M., VON. 1823-1825. Versuch einer geognostisch-botanischen Darstellung der Flora der Vorwelt, Volume I: Part 3 (1823); Part 4 and Tentamen (1825). E. Brenck's Wittwe, Regensburg. STERNBERG, K.M., VON. 1831. Revisio Saxifragarum Iconibus Illustrata. Supplementum secundum. J.G. Calve, Prague. STERNBERG, K.M., VON. 1833. Versuch einer geognostischbotanischen Darstellung der Flora der Vorwelt, Volume II (5-6). J. Spurny, Prague. STERNBERG, K.M., VON, PRESL, K.B. & CORDA, A.CJ. 1838. Versuch einer geognostisch-botanischen Darstellung der Flora der Vorwelt, Volume II (7-8). G. Hasse und Sohne, Prague. STORCH, D. 1981. Der Startpunkt der palaobotanischen Nomenklatur. Taxon, 30,209-218. STURM, J. 1812. Deutschlands Flora in Abbildungen nach der Natur mit Beschreibungen. I. Abteilung. 9. Bandchen. Heft 33. Sturm, Niirnberg.

61

STURM, J. 1813. Deutschlands Flora in Abbildungen nach der Natur mit Beschreibungen. I. Abteilung. 9. Bandchen. Heft 35. Sturm, Nurnberg. THIEME, U. 1912. Allgemeines Lexicon der bildenden Kunstler von derAntike bis zur Gegenwart. Siebenter Band. Seemann, Leipzig. THIEME, U. 1913. Allgemeines Lexicon der bildenden Kunstler von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart. Achter Band. Seemann, Leipzig. THOMAS, B.A. 1970. Epidermal studies in the interpretation of Lepidodendron species. Palaeontology, 13, 145-173. VOLLMER, H. 1930. Allgemeines Lexicon der bildenden Kunstler von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart. Vierundzwanzigster Band. Seemann, Leipzig. VOLLMER, H. 1934. Allgemeines Lexicon der bildenden Kunstler von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart. Achtundzwanzigster Band. Seemann, Leipzig. ZITTEL, K.A. VON. 1901. History of Geology and Paleontology to the End of the Nineteenth Century. W. Scott, London. ZODROW, E.L. & CLEAL, C.J. 1998. Revision of the pteridosperm foliage Alethopteris and Lonchopteridium (Upper Carboniferous), Sydney Coalfield, Nova Scotia, Canada. Palaeontographica, Abteilung B, 247, 65-122.

This page intentionally left blank

Hugh Miller: introducing palaeobotany to a wider audience LYALL I. ANDERSON Department of Natural Sciences, Royal Museum, National Museums of Scotland, Edinburgh EH 1 1JF, UK (e-mail: [email protected]) Abstract: The Hugh Miller collection (mainly NMS G.1859.33) held at the National Museums of Scotland, Edinburgh, consists of 591 palaeobotanical specimens, 54 of which are of type and/or figured status. A preliminary assessment of this collection, in the light of renewed interest in Hugh Miller's works in the bicentenary of his birth (2002), has provided new insights into this remarkable Scottish geologist. Miller, through writing popular articles in both newspaper and book format, publicized the various subdisciplines of palaeontology including palaeobotany. His distinctive writing style promoted public understanding of the science, and helped his readers to grasp the concept of deep time and the intricacies of past worlds. An appendix of type and figured material based on Miller's collection is included.

Hugh Miller (1802-1856), Scottish newspaper editor, fossil collector and writer on geology amongst many things, primarily attracted the attention of the scientific community of his day through his discovery of Devonian fossil fish from various sites in the north of Scotland. Indeed, a number of these fish, at the time among the earliest known vertebrate fossils, were subsequently named in his honour (Agassiz 1844; Taylor 2002). This, coupled with his apparently unerring ability for finding new sites, through theory and fieldwork, marks him out as one of the important figures in the early history of Scottish palaeontology (Fig. 1). However, Miller's contribution to palaeobotany and invertebrate palaeontology in terms of the collection and recording of fossil material has, undeservedly, received far less recognition. He made extensive collections of plant fossils ranging in age from Devonian to Tertiary. Many of his sources were only available due to his local knowledge or his extended journeys of exploration through the Scottish landscape to otherwise remote localities. He also wrote extensively on the implications of these and other fossils for both science and religion (Miller 1857). The year 2002 marked the bicentenary of the birth of Hugh Miller. In this paper I highlight the breadth and importance of the Hugh Miller collection (NMS G.1859.33, G.1911.9 and G.1953.4) held in the National Museums of Scotland, Edinburgh, to our palaeobotanical knowledge of Scotland. First, I examine some factors that influenced Hugh Miller's fossil collecting. Secondly, I explore the contribution to the popular understanding of fossil plants by Hugh Miller in his published works; and, finally, I present an appendix of type and figured palaeobotanical material in the Hugh Miller collection.

Hugh Miller: the collector, his working life and his collection Early days Hugh Miller's early years were spent in the town of Cromarty in the north of Scotland (Fig. 2). Whilst he was growing up, Cromarty was experiencing a boom in commerce, trading and manufacture (Alston 1996). Fishing and farming both played prominent roles in the economy of the town, which was situated on the fertile soils of the Old Red Sandstone and by the entrance to the safe anchorage afforded by the Cromarty Firth. The young Hugh Miller therefore had an ideal adventure playground to occupy his time in the guise of the local shoreline. This provided an environment that eventually nurtured a lifelong love of natural history, undoubtedly influenced by one of his uncles, Alexander Miller or 'Uncle Sandy'. Miller (1854, p. 59) acknowledged this when he wrote: 'There are Professors of Natural History that know less of living nature than was known by Uncle Sandy'. This early grounding in practical investigation and familiarity with the natural environment eventually extended to his taking notice of the rocks, minerals and fossils of his local area. Miller (1854, p. 67) notes his proud discovery of preserved wood, hazelnuts and fragments of antlers in a peat deposit just to the east of Cromarty as a boy. His Uncle James helped identify the various objects and suggested that the antler fragment came from an elk, a species no longer extant in Scotland. Recent construction of a water treatment plant (in June 2002) and an accompanying road cutting in this area has once again exposed what may be the particular locality where Miller dug out these post-glacial remains. Such early introduction to the wonders of preserved remains from the past, served only to fire Miller's inquisitiveness further. Oldroyd

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,63-90.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

64

L.L ANDERSON

Fig. 1. Portrait of Hugh Miller reproduced from Bayne (1871) and originally from a painting by W. Bonnar.

(1996) notes that in his later years, Miller: 'always saw the geology of Scotland through spectacles furnished by his detailed local knowledge of the Cromarty District'. I would go further and say that these 'spectacles' helped focus his mind on both marine and plant life. Although certainly not a botanist, or observer of marine organisms to the same degree as his friends and contemporaries Robert Dick or Charles Peach, Miller had a working knowledge of the flora and fauna around him. The importance of the proximity of an accessible shoreline to the interests of the young Hugh Miller cannot be emphasized strongly enough. The interest in natural history instilled in the young Miller by his uncles served him throughout his whole scientific and travelling career. On a sea voyage north in 1847 from Granton, near Edinburgh, to Aberdeen, Miller (1858, p. 232) describes the varying land use and farm crops relating them to the underlying soils and local geology. Whilst sailing past Stonehaven, Miller noted:

The harvest had been early; and on to the village of Stonehaven, and a mile or two beyond, where the fossiliferous deposits end [Devonian and Upper Silurian] and the primary begin [Dalradian metasediments] . . . But the line of demarcation between the Old Red Sandstone and the granitic districts formed also a separating line between an earlier and later harvest

The same enthusiasm for a holistic approach to underlying geology and overlying land use is evident in some of the geological map slips completed by his son, Hugh Miller Junior, held in Murchison House (British Geological Survey, Edinburgh). These were a result of him being sent to re-survey the Old Red Sandstone familiar to his father in the countryside around Cromarty. The map slips clearly show the inclusion of crop types within the farm field boundaries. Obviously, the enthusiasm for collecting all available facts on the natural environment had passed from father to son.

HUGH MILLER AND PALAEOBOTANY

65

Fig. 2. Outline map of Scotland with the important collecting localities of Hugh Miller indicated. Eathie lies a few miles south of Cromarty. Burdiehouse is situated on the outskirts of Edinburgh to the south of the city.

Working life The young Miller began his career as an apprentice stonemason in February 1820, quarrying local building stone from an excavation near Cromarty. However, this work was soon abandoned, due to an unacceptable thickness of overburden, in favour of a quarry on the south side of the Black Isle near Eathie. Here an unusual set of geological circumstances juxtaposed what we now term Jurassic and Devonian sediments with metamorphic rocks of Moinian age, through the action of the Great Glen Fault. Although the sandstones quarried were of Devonian age, the foreshore hosts sediments of Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) age (Waterston 1951) and are covered by mid-tide. In breaks from work, and tide permitting, Miller explored this new shoreline and soon discovered for himself the palaeontological riches in close proximity to his

workplace. In fact, Miller (1841, p. 40) details his initial discovery as being an ammonite found during the first day the mason gang worked near Eathie. Why did Miller, upon discovering the Jurassic nodules bearing ammonites, bivalves and plant fragments, not by accident open any of the Devonian ones that also litter the beach there? Miller discovered his world-famous Devonian fish at Cromarty in 1830 before revisiting Eathie and proving the existence of the fish-bearing strata there also. This may be explained in terms of the search image that Miller had developed to aid him pick out likely candidates to interrogate with the blow of a hammer (Knell & Taylor 2003). Fieldwork and fossil collecting at Eathie Haven has revealed to my mind what these search images might have been. In the first instance, the Upper Jurassic nodules tend to be light grey in colour, smoothly rounded and occasionally exhibiting fragments of

66

L.L ANDERSON

ammonite shell material. They are heavily bio-eroded by a number of marine organisms including the common piddock (Pholas dactylus), boring sponges such as Cliona celata and the delicate bristle worm Polydora ciliata. The Devonian fish-bearing nodules, on the other hand, tend to be much flatter, more obviously laminated and yellow-brown in coloration once exposed to salt water. Although they are bio-eroded, they do not suffer to the same extent as the Jurassic concretions due to their lower carbonate content. Material from the fish bed can also take the appearance of amalgamated nodules forming laminar bodies of calcareous material. The geographical setting and stratigraphic level of the Devonian quarry in which Miller worked lend another possible explanation as to why he encountered the Jurassic fossils in the first instance. As the quarry was extracting stone for building work, through blasting by the use of gunpowder, it is likely that the low-lying 'orange sandstone' (as Miller named it) was being worked. This underlies some of the foreshore near the mouth of the Eathie burn. The orange sandstone contains occasional pebbles, but is quite distinct from the underlying pebbly conglomerate, and, of course, far more suitable for building purposes. At this level in the stratigraphy Miller would not have encountered the only fossiliferous beds of the Devonian sequence, the discrete 1.5 mthick fish bed unit. The orange sandstone lies at a level below this fish bed. The yellow saliferous sandstone, lying directly above the fish bed sequence, is once more markedly pebbly and forms the fossil sea cliffs to the NE of the mouth of the Eathie burn. As such, there would have been no reason for him to suspect that the Devonian sequence was fossiliferous, and the finding of a Jurassic ammonite on his first day there would most certainly have fully occupied his mind. The discovery of fish-bearing concretions of Devonian age was, as Oldroyd (1996) points out, theory driven based on his knowledge of Eathie, which made him search for similar strata on the other side of the South Sutor. He was looking for additional examples of Jurassic exposure and, instead, uncovered a sequence of Middle Devonian sediments. After a spell working in various localities in northern Scotland, Miller travelled south to the area around Edinburgh in 1824. There he worked at carving stone on site for the building of Niddrie House. The stone was supplied by local quarries, probably in the Carboniferous strata, where he encountered fossils that would foreshadow his future fieldwork. He mentions this in his autobiography My Schools and Schoolmasters (Miller 1854, p. 297): I was now for the first time located on the Carboniferous System: the stone at which I wrought was intercalated among the working coal-seams, and abounded in well-

marked impressions of the more robust vegetables of the period - stigmaria, sigillaria, calamitea and lepidodendra.

Bad health, perhaps brought about through a combination of the occupational hazard of inhaling stone dust coupled with poor living conditions, affected Miller's lungs to such an extent that he left the Lothians in 1825 and travelled back once more to Cromarty. Here he undertook work carving inscriptions on gravestones, for instance in Cromarty East Kirk, at Nigg and in the churchyard at Rosemarkie (S. Seright pers. comm. 2002). This allowed him to work up the finds that he had made so far in his spare time and prospect for new sites yielding Devonian fossil fish. When an opportunity came in 1834 to work in the newly established branch of the Commercial Bank in Cromarty, Miller accepted. He travelled to Linlithgow in West Lothian for training. Living in Linlithgow, Miller obviously had some opportunity to engage in geological investigation as both his written records and specimens in his collections demonstrate. In a series of lectures delivered before the Philosophical Institution of Edinburgh, and later collected together in Sketchbook of Popular Geology, Miller (1859, p. 372) describes the discovery of charcoal fragments in a block of the vitrified fort at Knock Farril, near Strathpeffer, Ross-shire. He compares their appearance and setting to a Carboniferous fossil he had previously collected in the neighbourhood of Linlithgow: On some other masses there was impressed, as if by a seal, the stamp of pieces of charcoal; and so sharply was the impression retained, that I could detect on the vitreous surface the mark of the yearly growths, and even of the medullary rays, of the wood... These last reminded me of specimens not unfrequent among the trap rocks [basaltic lavas] of the Carboniferous and Oolitic [Middle or Upper Jurassic] systems.

The last episode in Hugh Miller's varied working career began in 1840, when he was invited by Henry Dunlop and Robert Paul to become the editor of The Witness newspaper (Sutherland 2002, p. 61). They were members of what would become the Free Church of Scotland, opposed to the intrusion of ministers upon congregations through patronage. This particular Church conflict came to a head in 1843 with the Disruption, and the walking out of ministers from the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland. A parallel system of church buildings and social infrastructure had to be funded by the congregations. Miller reported the events of the day in the pages of The Witness, and was portrayed taking notes in the foreground of the 'Disruption Painting' by David Octavius Hill. This painting now hangs in the headquarters of the Free Church of Scotland on the Mound, Edinburgh.

HUGH MILLER AND PALAEOBOTANY

Even in Edinburgh, with a steady job, the Miller household moved around. Their first settled house was in Sylvan Place just to the south of the open parkland known now as 'The Meadows'. This was previously a remnant post-glacial lake called the Boroughloch that Miller wrote about in detail in a chapter of his posthumously published book Edinburgh and its Neighbourhood (Miller 1863, pp. 6-10). In 1854 the Miller family moved to the Victorian seaside resort of Portobello to the east of the city of Edinburgh, primarily on doctor's orders. Their home at Shrub Mount (much of which still exists between numbers 76 and 82 on Portobello High Street) included a small room at the back that Hugh converted into a museum and workshop for the arrangement and display of his various fossil finds. Miller, always voracious for copy, serialized many of his geological articles in the pages of The Witness, but, as Oldroyd (1996) points out, these made up only a minor component, perhaps as little as a tenth of 1 % of the total. The Old Red Sandstone, as well as Cruise of the Betsey, first appeared in the pages of The Witness before being published as books in their own right. Every year, he would take holiday time away from the newspaper office and press and go on his travels around Scotland, more often than not stopping by Cromarty to visit relatives. These weeks in the summer provided further opportunity to explore, geologize and write articles such as those that led to The Cruise of the Betsey and others. After Miller's death, his widow, Lydia Miller, strove to publish much of the material that remained in the 6 years following, for example Sketchbook of Popular Geology. This was to the detriment of her health and the subject is comprehensively dealt with in Sutherland (2002).

Collecting style Preliminary assessment of the fossil material in the Hugh Miller collection housed in the National Museums of Scotland, Edinburgh, provides a valuable insight into Miller's collecting drive. In the collection as a whole (vertebrate, invertebrate and palaeobotanical) it is apparent that Miller collected much of the available material from a site, not just the well-preserved or aesthetically pleasing specimens, as part of an on-going study. Where he travelled on foot, investigating the geology of an area without particular emphasis on the fossil remains, for example on the Killen Burn, near Avoch, he did not collect material merely for its own sake but in this case to provide stratigraphic correlation of a fish bed (Miller 1858, p. 331). Although Miller housed all of his fossil material in a small museum room at Shrub Mount,

67

Portobello, there is no evidence that he was collecting for show or prestige. This was very much a working collection, the factual database upon which he based many of his written articles. The same practical attitude to fossil collecting is demonstrated in written accounts of Miller's meeting with other collectors. One such incident occurred at the Gamrie Fish Bed (Miller 1858, pp. 240-241). While travelling through the country from Aberdeen to Cromarty, Miller passed by the village of Gardenstone on the Moray coast. Interested in visiting the Old Red Sandstone fish bed in the stream valley, he was called over by two men busily disinterring fish-bearing nodules from the exposure. After being asked whether he recognized any of the finds, and being able to name each and every one in detail, Miller discovered that the collectors': knowledge of the formation of the ichthyolites had been chiefly derived . .. from a certain little treatise on the 'Old Red Sandstone', rather popular than scientific, which he named. I of course claimed no acquaintance with the work; and the conversation went on.

There is evidence that Miller did exchange some specimens with other collectors. He did send fossil material for the appraisal of other scientists. He, by no means, hoarded his collection, but made it available for the scrutiny of others. That said, he did take some precautions to ensure the security of the collection. Bayne (1871) describes how Miller's neighbour in Portobello, Lord Kinnaird, supplied Miller with a humane (toothless) mantrap, to guard his ever-growing collection housed in the small museum and workshop at Shrub Mount. The Miller collection contains fossils from countries that he never visited in person. Fossil specimens in his collection from abroad (South Africa, Australia and Canada) were presumably sent to him as exchanges or gifts from people following his articles and books, perhaps through the network of Free Church of Scotland missionary and evangelical workers overseas. Miller bought at least some fossils to improve his collection, or to fill in gaps in the stratigraphic intervals to which his own investigations were focused. This may not account for a large proportion of the collection, but it does suggest at some point, perhaps later in his life, he had sufficient financial resources to take the opportunity to acquire fossil material that he did not have the time to collect for himself. Hugh Miller's attitude to fossil collecting was therefore one of deeming every specimen important, no matter how fragmentary or incomplete. Miller (1859, p. 180) identified collectors (and presumably included himself) as: 'a class of people sent into the world, to labour instinctively as pioneers in physical sciences, without knowing why'. He was gathering together scientific data rather than

68

L.I. ANDERSON

some decor collection of curiosities. Smiles (1878, p. 105) reproduced one of the letters between Hugh Miller and Robert Dick of Thurso where Dick talking about gentleman geologists said: They have repeatedly gone down to Thurso East and returned empty. And why? For this simple reason, they were afraid to fyle [dirty] their trousers!'. This suggests that to these two collectors, appearance was not everything; it was the material collected which was important. These were men familiar with the practicalities of fossil collecting in the field. After his death in 1856, Hugh Miller's fossil collection came up for sale. The collection was bought partly by public subscription for the forerunner of what is now the National Museums of Scotland (£500). The other half of the money was provided by the government on the grounds of the national importance of this collection, and so that it would stay in Scotland rather than go to an overseas bidder (Smith 1862). The list of subscribers makes for interesting reading with many luminaries of the geological and palaeontological world listed (Taylor & Gostwick 2003). Amongst these are Sir Roderick I. Murchison (Director of the Geological Survey), Sir Charles Lyell, Sir William E. Logan (Provincial Geologist of Canada), Robert Chambers (editor of Chambers's Journal and author of Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation', Chambers 1844.), Professor Simpson (pioneer of chloroform), Rev. Dr Guthrie (Minister of St John's Free Church, Edinburgh, where Miller attended for Sunday family worship), Robert Paul who invited Miller to take on the editorship of The Witness, Sir Philip Egerton (describer of fossil fish), the Very Rev. Principal Cunningham (Free Church College) and Archibald Geikie of the Geological Survey. Other notable subscribers were the Duke of Argyll (author of a paper in 1851 detailing the Tertiary plant beds of the Isle of Mull) and Lord Kinnaird (one of Hugh Miller's neighbours in Portobello).

Hugh Miller's fossil localities Hugh Miller's fossil collecting, by necessity, had to fit around his working life and this in itself restricted the areas to which he could travel. The preceding section demonstrates that, throughout his working life, he had a varying effective radius dependent on his circumstances at any one time. Of course, fossil collecting on a Sunday was not an option for this staunch Calvinist presbyterian, so he would have been restricted to times during the winters off from being a stonemason, the evenings and part of the weekend from his other jobs. Sutherland (2002, p. 66) quotes from Harriet Ross's journal in which she mentions that Hugh Miller, whilst living at Sylvan Place, to the south of the

Table 1. Stratigraphic breakdown of the Hugh Miller palaeobotany collection. Geological period

Number of specimens

Quaternary Palaeogene Jurassic Carboniferous Devonian

28 17 262

257 27

Meadows, would write at his desk all day and into the night. On Wednesday and Saturday afternoons he would go for a long walk in the country, and this is presumably the time he used for fossil-hunting expeditions. Miller was very much an early proponent of 'geology on your doorstep'. In his various writings he repeatedly turns his attention to the value of observations made around his hometown of Cromarty. To this extent it is obvious just how influential his childhood experiences there were. Although Miller travelled widely throughout Scotland, and ventured into England, he never strayed further than the shores of the United Kingdom. His travels through England during more than 2 months in the Autumn of 1845 are outlined in Miller (1847). The following section lists the plant-bearing localities that Hugh Miller collected from in their Stratigraphic context and gives details of their relative importance in the collection. Old Red Sandstone (Devonian) Miller's fossil-collecting forays around and about his home in Cromarty on the Black Isle led to the discovery of many of the fossil fishes for which he is rightly remembered. However, Lang (1925, p. 254) indicated that: 'Almost the first fossil plants to be described and figured from the Middle Old Red Sandstone were those discovered by Hugh Miller'. Along the shoreline, and in amongst the wooded 'dens' (incised stream valleys), Miller recorded the presence of occasional beds rich in what he termed Psilophyton. That said, Miller's Devonian fossils comprise only 4.5% of the total palaeobotanical content of his collection (Table 1). Does this reveal a collecting bias on Miller's part? Preliminary results from fieldwork conducted during summer 2002 suggests that the fossil remains at Miller's classic Black Isle Devonian sites are restricted to the fish bed lithologies, sediments representing relatively high water level in the Middle Devonian Lake Orcadie. Indeed, one plant specimen in the type and figured collection, NMS G. 1859.33.2101 (see the Appendix), occupies the

HUGH MILLER AND PALAEOBOTANY

69

Fig. 3. NMS G.I859.33.2123. Middle Devonian plant remains (?cladoxyl) from the Middle Devonian of Cromarty, Ross-shire, Scotland. The section was probably cut and polished by George Sanderson on behalf of Hugh Miller to reveal detail of internal structures. The scale bar is 10 mm.

centre of a split fish bed nodule from the foreshore locality just east of Cromarty. Plant remains in this setting are exceedingly uncommon and are outnumbered by far by the remains of the various acanthodian and arthrodire fish. Therefore, it appears that a preservational rather than a strictly collecting bias may explain this distribution of plant remains for the fish beds. Miller (1841, p. 117) comments on this distribution: The deposition seems to have taken place far from land; and this lignite, if in reality such, had probably drifted far ere it at length became weightier than the supporting fluid, and sank'. However, the Psilophyton beds (one of which occurs as beach worn slabs at Eathie Haven) are not as well represented as might be expected from Miller's writings. Perhaps this indicates a preoccupation with collecting fossil fish at this stage in his palaeontological career? It would certainly bear out the statement made by Miller (1854, pp. 163-164) where he said: But then, with magnificient ammonites and belemnites, and large well-marked lignites, to be had in abundance at Eathie just for the laying open and the picking up, how could I think of giving myself to disinter what seemed to be mere broken fragments of Zostera! [Zostera or eelgrass being an intertidal plant.]

Miller's intimate familiarity with the Devonian flora and geological succession in the vicinity of Cromarty would have led to practical application had his good advice been available to one George, first Earl of Cromarty and a local landowner of many years before. Torrens (2003) discussed the early history of coal prospecting and exploration in the

UK, and explained some of the obstacles landowners had to face. At a time when the use of fossils as stratigraphic level indicators was in its infancy, the use of fossil beds to indicate relative ages of sediments was not lost on Hugh Miller. Miller (1841, p. 193) noticed that in one of the deeply wooded ravines close to the town, carbonaceous plant impressions were abundant. These would have been of the form he referred to as Psilophyton and may have been taken to indicate the presence of coal in the strata. This is not so far fetched a theory as the nearby coastal Brora coal (of Jurassic age) might have initiated the prospecting venture. However, by listing the likely strata that the miners would have encountered in their abortive borehole, Miller demonstrates an excellent understanding of the stratigraphic positioning of the fish bed lithologies. The site of the boring is now marked by the Coal-heugh well, that from that time until the present has discharged water which stains the stream bed with red iron oxide (Miller 1841, p. 194). Miller's observation on this venture of pouring money down a hole in the ground was suitably familiar in tone: 'In short, there might be some possibility of penetrating to the central fire, but none whatever of their ever reaching a vein of coal'! One Devonian plant specimen stands out and is worthy of further note and description. This is a section of an axis collected by Miller from the foreshore at Cromarty (Fig. 3). Indeed, this may be a portion of the fossil that Miller (1859, p. 201) mentions as one which had been ground down, polished and subjected to the lens:

70

L.L ANDERSON

Many years ago at Cromarty, I detected, in one of its oldest fossiliferous beds, a fragment of a cone-bearing tree, remarkable as being the oldest piece of wood ever found, that, when subjected to the microscope, exhibits the true lignaceous structure.

Preliminary examination by J. Hilton (formerly National Museums of Scotland) suggests that, although the outer surface resembles that of a cladoxyl, the lack of internal preserved anatomy does not indicate cladoxylopsid affinity. Throughout Miller's written work there are numerous references to his using optical instruments such as hand lenses and microscopes. He also describes having thin sections of both fish tooth and fossil wood prepared for him by a lapidary in Edinburgh (Morrison-Low & Nuttall 2003). Although Miller was not a pioneer in this field, he was at the cutting edge of using the newly developed technique to learn more about the fossil finds he made. Miller's location in Edinburgh meant that he was in touch with innovators such as William Nicol (Morrison-Low 1992). The remaining Middle Devonian plant fossils in the collection originate from the area around Thurso in Caithness, or the Bay of Skaill in Orkney. In Thurso, Hugh Miller was in contact with the baker, amateur geologist and botanist Robert Dick (Miller 1857, p. 347). Indeed, the two men evidently exchanged specimens, as well as visiting and collecting from sites together in quarries around Caithness. The material from Skaill originated from a fossil collecting trip detailed by Miller (1857, p. 424). However, in both cases, the fish and plant fossils were not restricted to concretions. The Skaill locality is an exposure of the Sandwick Fish Bed (Eifelian-Givetian boundary) (Cleal & Thomas 1995). It is now known that such finds are distributed throughout what Donovan (1980) refers to as 'Lithological Association A', indicative of a deep lacustrine setting perhaps with a degree of thermal stratification affecting the water column. The few Devonian plant fossils in the collection from the Midland Valley of Scotland originate from quarry workings around Carmyllie, near Arbroath, and include examples of Parka decipiens.

Carboniferous localities Exploitation of resources, such as limestone, oil shale, coal and fireclay for black band iron ore smelting, led to many excavations in Midlothian and West Lothian. Sandstone quarrying for the Edinburgh building boom also provided exposures and gave widespread opportunity to collect. Hugh Miller investigated many of these actively working sites and his collection reflects this.

The Lower Carboniferous Burdiehouse limestone. Situated to the south of the city of Edinburgh, and now lying just outwith the city bypass road, the limestone quarries of Burdiehouse, when active, provided a rich source of plant and animal fossils (Cleal & Thomas 1995). The very fine-grained freshwater limestone preserves palaeobotanical specimens in exquisite detail as delicate carbonaceous compressions. Most numerous amongst the assemblage are specimens of Sphenopteris affinis (Fig. 4a), Lepidophloios sp. and various species of Lepidostrobus, but uncommon forms such as Sphenophyllum tenerrimum and Sphenopteridium crassum are also represented (see the Appendix). The Burdiehouse limestone belongs to the Calciferous Sandstone Series (Oil Shale Group) and is Visean in age. Lyon (1866) details that at least some of the Burdiehouse material in Miller's collection, the fish remains in particular, were bought in from the collection of a (deceased) Mr Campbell. This may indicate that Hugh Miller did not have access to the site, perhaps Campbell had had exclusive collecting rights from the locality. Miller (1857) mentions the Burdiehouse plants on a number of occasions, and, in fact, based his reconstruction of Sphenopteris for the frontispiece of The Testimony of the Rocks on fossils from Burdiehouse, but he does not actually say whether or not he ever visited the site. Upper Carboniferous: Musselburgh. Fossil plant material from Musselburgh constitutes some 19% of the total palaeobotanical collection. This is surprising as the Burdiehouse fossils, perhaps due to their exquisite state of preservation, are far more widely known, yet numerically make up far less of the collection (see Table 2). The Musselburgh material is lithologically consistent and this suggests that it was all collected from a single site. Sutherland (2002), quotes Bayne in saying that Miller, after finishing his writing for the day, would 'saunter about the hills of Braid, or Arthur-seat, explore for the thousandth time the Musselburgh shore or the Granton quarries'. It seems likely that whatever locality the plant fossils came from, they were collected from the same site over a period, the duration of which we can only guess at. The fern Alethopteris decurrens (see Fig. 4b) dominates the collected flora, but Sphenopteris, Mariopteris and Neuropteris are also well represented.

Scottish Jurassic Miller investigated many of the Jurassic sites on the Moray Firth coastline of northern Scotland. The thin sliver of Jurassic rocks bordering the coastline is fault controlled, and is related to the Great Glen and Helmsdale fault lines (Trewin & Hurst 1993). They

HUGH MILLER AND PALAEOBOTANY

71

Fig. 4. Carboniferous plant fossils in the Hugh Miller Collection: (a) NMS G. 1859.33. 3235. Sphenopteris affine Lindley and Hutton from the Lower Carboniferous (Calcareous Sandstone Series, Oil Shale Group) Burdiehouse Limestone, Burdiehouse, Midlothian, Scotland. The scale bar is 50 mm. (b) NMS G.I859.33.3236. Alethopteris decurrens from the Upper Carboniferous (Lower Westphalian D) of Musselburgh, Scotland. The scale bar is 10 mm.

present particular obstacles to fieldwork in that many of the sites are tide-dependent and of limited exposure. Plant fossils are rare, but where they occur they do so in abundance (Fig. 5a-d). Seward (1911, p. 650) provides a useful summary of Miller's Jurassic finds. Eathie. Some of Hugh Miller's earliest fossil finds were made from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) strata on the foreshore of Eathie Haven, near Cromarty. He was first attracted to the beautifully preserved ammonites to be found held within hard calcareous nodules hosted by the black shales. However, at some point he discovered what he termed 'lignite' or fossil wood within the nodules (Fig. 6a and b). As well as the woody branches of

Jurassic vegetation, the fine tracery of foliage often came to light. Personal fieldwork and collecting at this locality suggests to me some clues as to what came to reside in Hugh Miller's collection and why. Ammonite-bearing concretions are round or ovoid in outline, the plant remains occur within large, elongate concretions. The majority of the ammonitebearing concretions show evidence of intense bio-erosion over the whole surface suggesting a relatively long residence time in the shingle. Concretions of a similar appearance are difficult to come by now, perhaps due to the systematic clearing of the site by Miller and subsequent collectors! The holotype of the enigmatic cone, Williamsonia scotica, originated from concretions such as these at Eathie. Oldroyd (1996, p. 103) outlines the story

72

L.L ANDERSON

Table 2. Locality breakdown of the Hugh Miller palaeobotany collection. Locality

Number

Helmsdale, Sutherland Eathie, Ross-shire Dalkeith, Midlothian Cromarty, Ross-shire Airdrie, Lanarkshire Brora, Sutherland Gilmerton, Midlothian Granton Isle of Sheppey, Kent Musselburgh, Midlothian Newcastle-u-Tyne Portobello, Midlothian Sguirr of Eigg, Isle of Eigg Wardie Burdiehouse, Midlothian Caithness Carmyllie, Angus Edinburgh Kiltorcan Joppa Linlithgow, West Lothian Shetland Loanhead, Midlothian Midland Valley Orkney Rotherfield Prestonhaugh Shandwick Thurso, Caithness Water of Leith, Midlothian Unknown

218 35 2 5 1 9 1 2 1 109 1 30 16 2 95 1 1 15 1 3 3 1 1 1 9 1 1 1 4 11 10

Total

591

behind this particular specimen and identifies it as possibly belonging to the class Cycadeoidea. The true cycads sit within the class Cycadopsida and this reflects the taxonomic opinion that from Miller's time to the present Williamsonia scotica is still of uncertain affinities. Helmsdale. Although the Eathie plants are relatively well known, they are by no means numerous. The plant material collected from the coast near Helmsdale, Sutherland, forms the greatest proportion of the Jurassic material. Typical examples are illustrated in Figure 5a-d. The strata exposed on the shoreline NE of the village of Helmsdale consist of a sequence of Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) deep-water argillaceous sediments interrupted periodically by influxes of coarse clastic material. These sediments form the classic 'boulder beds' sequences described by Bailey & Weir (1932). The sequence is interpreted as having formed as a result of sediment being periodi-

cally swept off a narrow coastal shelf, down the face of a faulted underwater escarpment and into relatively deep water where anoxic shale rocks were being deposited. Plant fossils identified in Miller's collection from Helmsdale are all carbonaceous compression fossils (rather than the nodular preservation typical of Eathie), preserved in a finely laminated light blue-grey carbonate-cemented mudstone. The remarkably consistent thickness of the slabs bearing the plant remains suggests that all this material originated from one horizon. Cladophlebis denticulata is the most numerous plant species represented. Fieldwork led by the National Museums of Scotland (October 2003) on the coastline to the north of Helmsdale suggests that the sequence is predominantly clastic in nature, but occasional beds containing plant fossils do occur and are represented by orange-stained calcareous cobbles in the shingle. Van der Burgh & Van Konijnenburg-Van Cittert (1984) described a varied and rich floral assemblage from a site to the south of Helmsdale, near Allt na Cuile and Lothbeg Point. The material here originated from fissile sandstones and shales interbedded with porous quartzose sandstones (Trewin & Hurst 1993, p. 27). The Helmsdale and Lothbeg Point localities therefore appear to be quite distinct, based purely on lithological grounds. Seward (1912) records collections of plant fossils from Culgower Bay to the south of Helmsdale, made by Marcus Gunn, and this is also worth considering as a likely source for Miller's fossils. In addition to the carbonaceous compressions from this bed, the shingle on the shoreline north of Helmsdale yielded, and continues to yield, permineralized portions of trees. Miller (1857, p. 375) relates how at one time these Oolitic fossils were so numerous that they were collected along with the large rolled colonies of the coral Isastrea and burnt in kilns for lime! Miller (1859, p. 247) mentions subjecting the permineralized Jurassic wood material to some scrutiny: My microscope, a botanist's, was of no great power; but by using its three glasses together, and carefully grinding down small patches of the weathered wood until it began to darken, I could ascertain with certainty, from the structure of the cellular tissue . . . that they all belonged to the coniferae.

Bayne (1871, p. 360) reproduced one of Miller's letters to his wife Lydia, in which he talked about spending the whole day from 9 o'clock in the morning to 5 o'clock in the afternoon on the beach at Helmsdale, and discovering a very large permineralized log. However, in this account there is no mention made of collecting from the plant-bearing limestone bed.

HUGH MILLER AND PALAEOBOTANY

73

Fig. 5. Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) plant remains from Helmsdale, East Sutherland, Scotland (all scale bars are 10 mm), (a) NMS G.I859.33.4357 Cladophlebus denticulata (Brongniart). Note the Recent bio-erosion typical of these calcareous beds, in this case circular Pholas borings, (b) NMS G.I859.33.4356. Part of the frond of a fossil cycadalian. (c) NMS G. 1859.33.4361 Brachyphyllum sp. (d) NMS G.1967.35.11. Leafy shoot of a fossil conifer.

Brora. Plant fossils from the vicinity of Brora, East Sutherland, are easily recognizable within the Hugh Miller collection. They are all preserved as threedimensional internal casts within a fine, pale cream coloured sandstone. The Jurassic sequence here is slightly older than at both Helmsdale and Eathie Haven. Sandstone from Clynelish quarry belongs to the Brora Arenaceous Formation and is uppermost

Callovian-early Oxfordian (Upper Jurassic) in age. Miller (1859, p. 257) describes the working at Braambury quarry, near Brora in Sutherland, and in his terminology refers to it as Upper Oolite. Wearing two metaphorical hats, he first describes the fine fossils preserved in the sandstone, and then points out how annoying these inclusions are to the quarrymen hewing building stone from the area.

74

L.I. ANDERSON

Fig. 6. (a) and (b) NMS G.I859.33.4359. Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) permineralized conifer wood from Eathie Haven, near Cromarty, Ross-shire, Scotland. The fossil is three-dimensionally preserved in a calcareous concretion. (The scale bar is 20 mm), (b) As above, but viewed in end section. The scale bar is 10 mm. (c) NMS G. 1859.33.5020. 'Pinites' eiggensis wood Palaeogene (Palaeocene) from the Sgurr of Eigg, Isle of Eigg, Scotland. The scale bar is 10 mm.

Bramberry Hill [GR 895 049 (Brora Sheet NC 80/90)] sits to the NW of the town of Brora. Two quarries are indicated on the side of the hill on the OS map. Only future fieldwork in the area will determine the more likely site from which Miller collected his fossils.

Scottish Tertiary Miller's collections of what we now recognize as Palaeogene (Palaeocene) age conifer wood (Fig. 6c) made on the Isle of Eigg were only possible at the

time through his visiting and staying with his childhood friend, the Rev. John Swanson, Free Church minister to Eigg and the other Small Isles. Swanson and Miller had shared fossil collecting expeditions back in their home town of Cromarty. Swanson's floating manse, 'The Free Church Yacht Betsey', provided a somewhat unusual combined field vehicle and study base for Hugh Miller as documented in the book The Cruise of the Betsey (Miller 1858). Hudson (2003) describes in detail Hugh Miller's visits to the Isle of Eigg and the reader is referred to this work for more information, particularly with regard to localities and stratigraphic sequences.

HUGH MILLER AND PALAEOBOTANY

The main palaeobotanical interest on the Isle of Eigg came from the preservation of silicified wood in conglomeratic strata underlying the famous Sgurr of Eigg, a pitchstone flow infilling Palaeogene landscape topography. During Miller's time, it was thought that the whole sequence was Jurassic in age, rather than the younger Tertiary that it is now thought to be. The previous discovery of fossil wood from below the Sgurr of Eigg seems to have drawn Miller to investigate the site. Hudson (2002) suggests that the value of this Palaeogene wood has still not been adequately explored and points out that Miller's discussion of tree rings anticipates their modern use as investigative tools of ancient climates. Furthermore, Hudson (2003) discusses the importance of 'Pinites' eiggensis, and hints that other plant species may yet be identified from material collected from under the Sgurr. We also gain an appreciation of the techniques Miller was trying out to assist in understanding the fossils he collected. Miller mentions having prepared glass-mounted thin sections of the wood, and quotes the work of Witham, and Lindley and Hutton. In Sketchbook of Popular Geology (Miller 1859, p. 138): In the first place, the annual rings themselves told me, when exposed to transmitted light in the microscope, that the winters of that time gave vegetation as decided a check as our winters now. The tender woody cells were first dwarfed and thickened in their formation, by the strengthening of the autumnal cold, and then for a season they ceased to form altogether.

Post-glacial clay deposits. Throughout his career Hugh Miller never neglected the investigation of the action and agency of ice in the geological record. His landscape descriptions rarely missed out some reference to the last Ice Age, be it through the description of erosion, deposition or its effect on changing sea level. The last of these was obviously of interest to someone who had grown up by the seashore, had observed the ebb and flood of the tides, and knew what even a modest rise in average sea level would mean for the present coastline and its inhabitants. At Portobello, Joppa and South Queensferry (all localities around the Firth of Forth), near Edinburgh, Miller collected a variety of fossils from the postglacial clays. In particular, the brick pits surrounding the Figgate Burn near Portobello received significant attention. Again, the geography of these collecting trips is worth noting. These sites were extremely close to his house in Portobello, no more than a 5 minute walk away. He collected many examples of fossil tree branches from the clays as well as the more typical shelly faunas, including examples of the mollusc Scrobicularia. In what is one of the most detailed descriptions of the post-glacial deposits of

75

Portobello, Miller (1863) describes the basin as being about 1 mile in length and in breadth with a maximum thickness of over 100ft at the Figgate Burn estuary. His account reveals that he had actually sought permission from the owner of the Portobello brick clay pit, a Mr Allan Livingstone, to work the fossil beds. At this site he found trunks of oak and alder, and continues (p. 100) by talking about how fossil deposits such as these could be used as evidence for the presence of indigenous species to the British Isles, rather than those introduced subsequently by man. Miller then points to trace fossils in the form of circular borings in the wood as evidence of the presence of wood-boring grubs thousands of years ago. In the closing remarks to this chapter (p. 106) Miller uses a combination of fossil evidence and sedimentology, coupled with knowledge of tidal effects, to suggest relative height of sea level at the time of deposition.

Other localities Much of the rest of Hugh Miller's palaeobotanical collection is made up of solitary specimens from sites, perhaps representing an afternoon browse, rather than the systematic search and collection programme that Miller seems to have employed at other times. There are few plant specimens from outwith the UK, a pattern that is repeated in both the vertebrate and invertebrate portions of the collection. These were probably sent to Miller either in exchange or by readers of his articles, keen to supply him with new material from their own areas (Table 2).

The palaeobotanical legacy of Hugh Miller's work Visualization and mass media Scattered throughout much of Miller's written work are extremely vivid word pictures as he strives to explain and demonstrate what past environments looked like in his 'minds eye': visions which he wished to share with his readership. Oldroyd (1996), for this reason, identifies Miller as writing in a highly personal style with the educated lay public as his audience in mind. He also points out that Miller wrote to promote understanding through everyday experience, presumably garnered from his vast body of experience of natural history. Miller's imaginary stroll through the Catamites forests of the Carboniferous is one of the most powerful of these word pictures. It occurs in the collection of lectures published as Sketchbook of Popular Geology (Miller 1859, p. 84):

76

L.L ANDERSON

From a foreground of weltering sea I could mark a scattered archipelago of waste uninhabited islands, picturesquely roughed by wood and rock; and near where the Scottish capital now stands, a submarine volcano sent forth its slim column of mingled smoke and vapour into the sky. And then there rose in quick succession scenes of the old Carboniferous forests: long withdrawing lakes, fringed with dense thickets of the green Calamite, tall and straight as the masts of pinnaces . . . or glades of thickest verdure, where the tree-fern mingled its branch-like fronds, with the hirstute [sic] arms of the gigantic club-moss . . . .

He continues this theme in a later lecture (Lecture Four) but this time refers to imagining the scene from the point of view of one of the Lilliputians in Swift's Gullivers Travels (Miller 1859, p. 173): And while I thus thought, or rather dreamed, for my Lilliputian companions, I became for the time a Lilliputian myself, - saw the minute in nature as if through a magnifying-glass, - roamed in fancy under ferns which had shot up into trees, - and saw the dark cones of the Equisetaceae stand up over their spiky branches some six yards or so above my head.

In the third lecture, Miller describes a Palaeogene forest setting where the amber entombment of plants and animals is taking place: The hot sun is riding high over the recesses of one of these deep woods, never yet trodden by human foot, and lighting up the waved green . . . where the forest terminates in a brown primeval wilderness, the sunbeams fall with dazzling brightness on the trunk of a stately tree, just a little touched with decay; and it reflects the light far and wide, and gleams in strong contrast with the gloom of the bosky recesses beyond . . .Tis a decaying pine of the stateliest size, bleeding amber. The insects of the hour flutter around it; and when, beguiled by the grateful perfume, they touch its deceitful surface... and by dying they become immortal

Such ability to conjure up pictures in the readers' or listeners' mind is one reason why Miller's work held such appeal, both in his own time and in subsequent generations. At a time when mass media consisted of nothing more than the newspaper and magazine printing presses, these fantastic journeys into the past history of the Earth must have enthralled his readership, as television programmes on natural history (both past and present) do today. Stevenson (20020, p. 91) points out that Miller was an educationalist, opening people's minds to the visible world, and the way in which he did this was through the written word. Oldroyd (1996, p. 103) states that Miller gave increasing attention to palaeobotany in his later writings. These were intended for a wider audience than the technical scientific journals of the day would have reached and he certainly did not neglect

palaeobotany. As well as collecting, figuring and describing fossil plants, he had also started developing ideas about the distribution of plants. This is reflected in some work which he mentions in The Cruise of the Betsey (Miller 1858, p. 73). However, as in many instances in Miller's writing, we cannot be sure whether this is an idea that he has developed through his own observation, or whether it is in fact something which he had read, agreed with and reproduced in his article without formal reference to the original source. Here Miller explains Arctic floral survivors in terms of glaciers, 'island' communities and the last Ice Age: It seems at first a curious problem, difficult of solution, that widely separated mountain summits should possess the same alpine plants . . . while not a trace of them appears on the lower elevations between. But it simplifies the case to conceive of these alpine plants as the vegetable aborigines of the country, compelled by climatal invasion to shelter in its last bleak retreats

Natural theology Hugh Miller expounded natural theology, the study of God through created works. Footprints of the Creator first published in 1849 was Hugh Miller's response to the anonymously published Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation and other Writings with its obvious neo-Lamarckian, progressionist evolutionary arguments. This publication was later ascribed to Chambers (1844). Testimony of the Rocks (Miller 1857) further underlined Miller's standpoint, also clearly expressed in Sketchbook of Popular Geology (p. 54) when he states: We can now no more hold, as geologists, that the plants and animals of the existing creation came into being only a few hours or a few days previous to man, that the world itself came into being only six thousand years ago . . . .

In Footprints of the Creator Miller (1857, pp. 212-229) devotes a chapter to the discussion of the consequences of the Lamarckian hypothesis of the origin of plants. Although believing in Divine Creation, Miller was obviously no Biblical literalist and recognized that geological time was required to explain the evidence around him both in terms of rock structure and enclosed flora and fauna. He begins his argument by pointing out that 20 years previously (the 1830s) it was generally believed that there was no evidence of a fossil record for trees further back than the Liassic [Miller's Jurassic]. The Carboniferous vegetation of Brongniart consisted of gigantic ferns and clubmosses, which had not suffered what Miller termed 'degradation', a reduction in their size as a consequence of a fall from their perfectly created state.

HUGH MILLER AND PALAEOBOTANY

Miller's reading of the developing knowledge of the fossil record demonstrated that trees could be traced back through various Upper and Lower Carboniferous strata and localities. He uses a particularly everyday image here appealing directly to his readership: It seems strange to one who derives his supply of domestic fuel from the Dalkeith and Falkirk coal-fields, that the Carboniferous flora could ever have been described as devoid of trees. (Miller 1857, p. 182.)

The Testimony of the Rocks Miller completed the proofs to his book The Testimony of the Rocks the day before his death in 1856. Consequently, it was published posthumously through the efforts of his widow, Lydia Miller, with the assistance of Professor Fleming (Professor of Natural History at the Free Church College). The book consists of 12 lectures, all of which are aimed at providing answers to the various questions being furiously contested in debates (at the time and by some people to this day) about the science of Geology and the Bible. These were primarily concerned with Biblical literalism, dealing with the Creation account of Genesis, the Flood (or Noachian Deluge) and the age of the Earth. Miller examined these on the basis of the geological evidence that he had collected himself and had read about throughout his lifetime. As the Rev. Philip Foster states in his editorial preface to the recently reprinted edition in 2001, some of the anti-geologist arguments are still being used today in some modern religious books in the United States. Hugh Miller's response to these arguments still has great relevance, and this was one of the reasons that prompted the issuing of this reprinted edition. Miller illustrates his various points using fossil flora and fauna, as well as the rock record. In the first of the lectures he discusses the palaeontological history of plants. This begins with a discussion of the classification of living organisms, both plants and animals, and then goes on to discuss the development of schemes of botanical classification. He then discusses the classification system of Lindley and points out how this classification fits neatly with the sequence revealed in the geological history of the Earth. After a similar potted history of the classification of animals up until the time he was writing, Miller goes on to describe the various first occurrences of plants in the fossil record from the Silurian until the present day. He dallies on the plants of the Coal Measures, presumably through familiarity with the fossils he was able to collect in the Lothians of Scotland, before launching off into the palaeobotany of the Oolitic (Mid to Upper Jurassic) rocks.

77

The chapter closes with a discussion of the plants of the Tertiary and a practical exercise in the use of palaeobotany in large-scale stratigraphic dating. Miller shows how he deduced the age of an unknown fossil wood brought to him by Dr John Wilson, a missionary of the Free Church working in India. By determining a dicotyledonous character, he infers that the enclosing sediments must be at least Tertiary in age. Miller ends his lecture by pointing out to the reader that the Earth, no matter how immeasurably old in his time, was not fit for human habitation until the advent of modern (Tertiary) floras: Not until we enter the Tertiary periods do we find floras amid which man might have profitably laboured as a dresser of gardens, a tiller of fields, or a keeper of flocks and herds.

Presumably, this is the evidence needed to explain why human remains are not found throughout the whole of the geological record as would be required were the account of Creation taken literally. Such successive catastrophes and creations eventually fitted the Earth for human life; quite a commonly held view at the time of writing. In later chapters Miller discusses the implication of geological studies and then moves on to talk about the Biblical Flood. He states that it could not be taken literally as a global event and discusses the point that theologians had taken the presence of a universality in the tradition of a Flood story in many cultures as indicating a universality in the distribution of the Flood. He defended a partial flood in the area with which the observers were familiar and indicated that they would have had no way of knowing to what extent the deluge continued in time and space. Miller's other lines of evidence for this localized event rather than a truly global one within the span of human history are gathered from many fields including his observations on sea-level change since the last ice age. The llth and 12th chapters of The Testimony of the Rocks form the portion of the work most relevant to palaeobotany. In these, Miller describes the information he has gathered together over his various travels, geological observations and readings. He points out that Scotland has four fossil floras, those of the Old Red Sandstone (Devonian), Carboniferous, Oolitic (Jurassic) and Tertiary. He describes many of the Old Red Sandstone plants as 'fucoids', where, in fact, they are now known to be truly terrestrial plants. In turning his attention to the distribution of Devonian plants in Scotland Miller comments on the different floras present in the Old Red Sandstone of the Caithness flagstones and those of the Arbroath flagstones in the Midland Valley of Scotland. The floras are quite different, but he did not take this as an indication of differing age, merely of different environments.

78

L.I.ANDERSON

Discussing the Oolitic [Jurassic] floras of Scotland, Miller (p. 397) mentions the similarity in the Scottish flora to that of one collected in Virginia by Prof. W.B. Rogers. He also discusses the similarities and differences between the Scottish and Yorkshire floras of Lindley and Hutton and concludes that the Scottish Jurassic flora most closely resembles that presently seen on New Zealand.

Scientific illustration and the advent of photographic techniques Miller's early works such as the Old Red Sandstone contain a few scattered illustrations in the form of drawings of specimens. However, by the time The Testimony of the Rocks was produced, it was liberally sprinkled with figures of both plants and animals. His involvement in the Free Church of Scotland and his post as editor of The Witness meant that his circle of friends contained many of the leading scientific minds of Edinburgh at the time. Amongst these was one of the pioneers of a photographic technique termed the calotype, Mr David Octavius Hill (Stevenson 20020, b). As well as posing for a number of these calotypes himself (Stevenson 20020, p. 99), Miller (1870, p. 180) wrote enthusiastically in The Witness newspaper about the potential use of the process in book illustration: Could aught seem less able than that the forms of the external world should be made to convert the pencils of light which they emit into real bona fide pencils of light and commence taking their own likenesses? Improbable as the thing may have seemed, however, there were powers in nature of potency enough to effect it, and the newly discovered art of the photographer is simply the art of employing these.

In his Preface to Footprints of the Creator, Miller (1849) mentions that the woodcuts for the book were drawn and cut by a Mr John Adams of Edinburgh. Although Miller was quite capable of producing drawings of his fossils, he left this job to others, probably through pressure of time. Miller would undoubtedly have seen the benefits of using the calotype or a similar photographic representation of fossil materials over conventional drawings to illustrate his books, and also to convey accurately to a place remote from the specimen, the morphological information contained therein. Famously, one calotype of a fossil survives: the Triassic vertebrate Stagonolepis robertsoni (Andrews 1982). The fossil was discovered by a quarryman and handed to Patrick Duff of Elgin, one of Miller's friends. In fact, Hugh and his wife Lydia stayed with Patrick Duff during their honeymoon in 1837. It is, indeed, likely that, as Andrews (1982) suggests, Duff and Miller met again in Edinburgh in

1844 when the former visited Hill to have two calotypes taken, one of the fossil and the other of Duff holding the fossil. One question begs to be asked. With the close association and friendship of the newspaperman and the calotype maker, why were more fossil finds not recorded in this manner? The vast bulk of the calotypes still in existence are posed portraits of people. Landscape and architectural subjects make up the rest. Perhaps the calotype process was relatively expensive in terms of time and materials to be used indiscriminately on fossils unless, of course, they were highly unusual one-offs or had perceived rarity such as Stagonolepis. To Miller, there may have been no reason to capture the image of other, more numerous and commonly occurring fossils when there were still sufficient to collect and exchange with interested parties. Sara Stevenson (pers. comm. 2003) suggests that perhaps Hill and Adamson used this merely as a demonstration of what their technique could do rather than make hundreds of record shots. Alternatively, it may be that the equipment utilized by Hill and his business partner Adamson was unable to resolve a small enough field of view with sufficient illumination to make the calotype process work in the size range typical of fossils. The calotype of Stagonolepis consists of the fossil itself in the centre of the picture sitting on a table. The wide margins all around suggest a relatively wide field of view. Hill and Adamson relied on good natural light to take their calotypes, and often used the southfacing garden of their studio for their work. It may be that there was a restriction in the size of subject that they could successfully image. Stevenson (20020, p. 41) makes reference to a solar microscope being used to magnify and image wood, but, again, this would be at one end of the size scale whilst portraiture would be at the other. Had more interest been taken by the geological community at the time, there might have been some demand to develop suitable technology to address this challenge.

In conclusion Miller's various writings provide excellent travelogues of his Scottish tours and in some places still remains the only geological guide to the area. His descriptions of the landscape, flora and fossils are still relevant, and provide added guidance and enjoyment to visiting the fossil localities today. Although some of the science and language is now rather dated, the observational skills of Miller and his ability to translate these observations into readable text ensure that his works remain a source of extremely useful information. Taylor (2002) identifies Hugh Miller as one of the pantheon of great Victorian popular science writers and deservedly so. Miller's writing

HUGH MILLER AND PALAEOBOTANY

on fossil plants must have brought palaeobotany to a much wider audience than the strictly scientific articles of the day at a time when no-one else was attempting this and as such gives us an interesting insight into the early development of the science. The Hugh Miller collection, held at the National Museums of Scotland in Edinburgh, contains fossil plants from many now classic sites, and a proportion is of type and/or figured status. Much of the rest is representative of Scotland, but the full scientific value of the collection remains to be exploited. Hugh Miller was a great proponent of self-improvement and self-learning, a champion of the supposedly new idea of 'lifelong learning'; in fact, an ancient Scots ideal. As such, he teaches us many valuable lessons regarding the place of the enthusiast in science. In his biographical work, Leask (1896, p. 152) identified Hugh Miller as: 'A man of the people, he was understood by the people; and he wished it to be so'. However, it is only apt that the last word on the subject is Miller's, and his comment on the science of palaeobotany was that: 'We see only detached bits of that green web which has covered our earth since the dry land first appeared ...' (Miller 1857, p. 402). I wish to thank the following particular people for their assistance and useful discussions on Hugh Miller: M.A. Taylor and A. Morrison-Low (National Museums of Scotland), J. Hilton (University of Birmingham), S. Stevenson (Scottish National Portrait Gallery) J. Hudson (University of Leicester) and S. Seright (Groam House Museum, Rosemarkie). G. McKenna (Library Archives, British Geological Survey, Keyworth) is thanked for permission to cite document GSM 1/669 (Proposal to Purchase the Museum of the Late Hugh Miller).

Appendix: Type and Figured fossil plants in the Hugh Miller Collection

79

NMS G.I859.33.2103 (Figured) Milleria thomsoni from the Middle Devonian of Cromarty, Ross and Cromarty, Scotland. Figured as 'vegetable impression' by Miller (1841), plate 7, Fig. 5. Mentioned by Lang (1925), p. 262.

NMS G.1859.33.2104 (Figured) Thursophyton milleri (Salter) from the Middle Devonian of Thurso, Caithness, Scotland. Figured as 'unnamed' by Miller (1857), p. 345, Fig. 120. Described and figured as Lycopodites Milleri by Salter (1858), p. 72, plate 5, Fig. 8a and b.

NMS G.1859.33.2105 (Figured) Thursophyton milleri (Salter) from the Middle Devonian (Eifelian-Givetian boundary) Bay of Skaill, Orkney, Scotland. Figured as 'Fucoid' by Miller (1857), p. 388, Fig. 119 (left-hand figure).

NMS G. 1859.33.2106 (Figured) Thursophyton milleri (Salter) from the Middle Devonian of Thurso, Caithness, Scotland. Figured as Lycopodites sp. by Miller (1857), p. 22, Fig. 12.

NMS G. 1859.33.2107 (Figured) Archaeopteris hibernica (Forbes) from the Upper Devonian of Kiltorcan, County Kilkenny, Ireland. Figured as Cyclopteris hibernica by Miller (1857) p. 8, Fig. 2.

NMS G. 1859.33.2101 (Figured)

NMS G.I859.33.2108 (Figured)

Thursophyton milleri (Salter) from the Middle Devonian of Scotland. (MS Register says Thurso, but may be a specimen of the plant bed from Eathie Haven.) Figured as 'vegetable impression' by Miller (1841), plate 7, Fig. 4. Figured as 'unnamed' by Miller (1857), p. 345.

Prototaxites sp. from the Middle Devonian of Lerwick, Shetland, Scotland. Figured as ^Catamite'by Miller (1857), Fig. 11, p. 22.

NMS G. 1859.33.2102 (Figured) Milleria thornsoni (Dawson) from the Middle Devonian of Cromarty, Ross and Cromarty, Scotland. Figured as 'vegetable impressions' by Miller (1841), plate 7, Fig. 3. Figured as 'fucoids' by Miller (1857), Fig. 119. Mentioned by Lang (1925), p. 263.

NMS G.I859.33.2109 (Figured) Archaeopteris hibernica (Forbes) from the Upper Devonian of Prestonhaugh, near Duns, Berwickshire, Scotland. Figured as Cyclopterus hibernicus by Miller (1857), p. 363, Fig. 124.

80

L.L ANDERSON

NMS G.1859.33.2110 (Figured)

NMS G.I 859.3 3.3223 (Figured)

IBarinophyton dawsonii Krausel & Weyland from the Middle Devonian of Bay of Skail, Orkney, Scotland. Figured as 'fern' by Miller (1857), p. 23, Fig. 13. Figured as 'Fern?' by Miller (1849), p. 218, Fig. 63. Figured as 'undetermined' by Lang (1925), p. 272, plate 4, Fig. 66. Associated label reads 'examined by Dr Kidston, 5 Dec 1923: fruitifaction sp. indet'.

Telangium affine from the Lower Carboniferous of Burdiehouse, Midlothian, Scotland. Figured as Telangium affine by Kidston (1924), plate 100, Fig. 2.

NMS G.1859.33.2111 (Figured) 'Dichotomising plant' from the Middle Devonian (Eifelian-Givetian boundary) Bay of Skaill, Orkney, Scotland. Figured as 'Fucoid' by Miller (1857), p. 387, Fig. 118.

NMS G.1859.33.3224 (Figured) Telangium affine (Lindley & Hutton) from the Lower Carboniferous of Burdiehouse, Midlothian. Used by Miller (1857) in the restoration of Sphenopteris in the frontispiece of The Testimony of the Rocks. Mentioned as Sphenopteris elegans by Bunbury (1852), p. 35. Figured as Telangium affine by Kidston (1924), plate 102, Fig. 1.

NMS G.I859.33.3225 (Referred) NMS G.1859.33.2112 (part) & G.1859.33.2113 (Counterpart) (Holotype and Figured) Palaeopitys milleri McNab from the Middle Devonian of Cromarty, Ross and Cromarty. Scotland. Figured as 'Fossil Wood' by Miller (1849), p. 221. Figured as Palaeopitys milleri by McNab (1870), p. 312. Described and figured by Kidston & Lang (1923), pp. 409^17, plate 1, Figs 1-13, plate 2, figs 14-25. Referred to by Lang (1925), pp. 271-272. Referred to by Boureau (1970), pp. 450-451.

Sigillaria tesselata Bronignart from the Lower Carboniferous of Water of Leith, above Colinton, near Edinburgh, Scotland. Referred to as Ulodendron minus by Miller (1857), p. 419.

NMS G.1859.33.3226 (Figured) Stigmaria stellata Gopp from the Carboniferous of Portobello, Midlothian, Scotland. Figured by Miller (1857), p. 461, Figs 126 and 127.

NMS G.I859.33.3227 (Figured) NMS G.1859.33.2114 (Figured) Milleria thomsoni and Thursophyton milleri from the Middle Devonian of Thurso, Caithness, Scotland. Figured as 'Fucoids' by Miller (1849), p. 187, Fig. 61. Mentioned by Lang (1925), pp. 786 and 789.

Sphenopteridium crassum Lindley & Hutton from the Lower Carboniferous of Burdiehouse, Midlothian, Scotland. Figured as Sphenopteris crassa by Kidston (18830, b\ p. 235, plate 5, Fig. 2. Figured as Sphenopteridium crassum by Kidston (1922), plate 39, Fig. 1.

NMS G 1859.33.3221 (Figured)

NMS G.1859.33.3228 (Figured)

Pecopteris sp. from the Upper Carboniferous of Airdrie, Lanarkshire, Scotland. Figured as 'fern' by Miller (1857), Fig. 125, p. 417.

Sphenophyllum tenerrimum Stur from the Lower Carboniferous of Burdiehouse, Midlothian, Scotland. Described and figured as Sphenophyllum crassa by Kidston (1883a), p. 235, plate 5, Fig. 2. Figured as Sphenophyllum crassa by Kidston (18836), p. 117, plate 4, Fig. 2. Figured as Sphenophyllum tenerrimum by Crookall (1966), plate 126, Fig. 4.

NMS G.1859.33.3222 (Figured) Sphenopteris bifida (Lindley & Hutton) from the Lower Carboniferous of Burdiehouse, Midlothian. Figured by Miller (1857), p. 423, Fig. 129. Figured as Telangium bifidum by Kidston (1924), plate 103, Figs 1, la, Iband Ic.

HUGH MILLER AND PALAEOBOTANY

81

NMS G.191L9.1 (Type and Figured)

NMSG.191L9.7 (Figured)

Pseudoctenis eathiensis (Richards 1884) from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian), Eathie, Ross & Cromarty, Scotland. Figured as Zamia by Miller (1857), Fig. 133. Designated the type of Zanites eathiensis by Richards (1884), p. 117. Figured by Seward (1911), pp. 692-693, photo 45.

Marattiopsis boweri Seward, 1911 from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured as Zamia by Miller (1857), p. 386, Fig. 140 (right-hand figure). Described as Marattiopsis boweri by Seward (1911), p. 670. Accompanying old museum label identifies specimen as Nilssonia ornentalis, Heer.

NMS G.191L9.2 (Figured) NMS GJ911.9.8 (Figured) Nilssonia orientalis Heer from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured as Zamia by Miller (1857), Fig. 134. Described and figured by Seward (1911), p. 696, plate 10, photo 46.

Nilssonia orientalis, Heer from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured as 'Fern leaves Harts-tongue Fern'by Miller (1857), Fig. 141.

NMS G.1911.9.3 (Figured)

NMS G.1911.9.9 (Figured)

Pseudoctenis eathiensis (Richards 1884) from the Upper Jurassic (Kimeridgian), of Eathie, Ross & Cromarty, Scotland. Figured by Miller (1857), Fig. 135. Described as ICteris falcata by Richards (1884), p. 122. Described as P. eathiensis by Seward (1911), p. 692.

Sagenopteris phillipsi (Brongniart) from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured as 'Simple leaved frond' by Miller (1857), Fig. 141.

NMS G.1911.9.10 (Figured) NMS G.191L9.4 (Figured) Zamites buchianus Etheridge from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured by Miller (1857), Fig. 136. Described as Podozamites heerianus by Richards (1884), p. 121. Designated and figured as Zamites buchianus by Seward (1911), p. 593, plate 10, photo 47.

NMS G.191L9.5 (Figured) Zamites carruthersi Seward, 1911 from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured by Miller (1857), Fig. 136. Described as Podozamites heerianus by Richards (1884), p. 120. Designated and figured as Zamites carruthersi by Seward (1911), p. 694, plate 10, photo 43.

Pecopteris obtusifolia Lindley & Hutton from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured as Pecopteris obtusifolia by Miller (1857), p. 390, Fig. 143. Identified as Todea sp.?

NMS G.191L9.11 (Figured) Cladophlebis denticulata from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured by Miller (1857), Fig. 144.

NMS G.191L9.12 (Figured) Pterophyllum nathorsti Seward, 1911 from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured as Phlebopteris by Miller (1857), p. 392, Fig. 146. Described and figured as Pterophyllum nathorsti by Seward (1911), p. 694, plate 10, photo 44.

NMS G.191L9.6 (Figured) Decayed coniferous wood from the Upper Jurassic of Eathie, Ross and Cromarty, Scotland. Figured as 'cone' by Miller (1857), Fig. 139.

NMSG.1911.9.13 Dichopteris ?pomelii from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured as 'a true fern' by Miller (1857), Fig. 147.

82

L.I. ANDERSON

NMS G.191L9.14 (Figured)

NMSG.1911.9.21 (Figured)

Sphenolepidium cf. kurrianum Dunker, 1846 from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured as 'conifer' by Miller (1857), p. 472, Fig. 130A. Described as Sphenolepidium cf. kurrianum by Seward (1911), p. 689.

Hausmania buchii from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured as 'Dicotyledonous leaf by Miller (1857), Fig. 151.

NMS G.1911.9.22 (Figured) NMS G.1911.9.15 (Figured) Elatides curvifolia from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured by Miller (1857), Fig. 130 (righthand figure)

Elatides sternbergiana from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured as 'conifer' by Miller (1857), Fig. BOB.

NMS G.1911.9.23 (Figured) NMS G.1911.9.16 (Figured) Dictyophyllum sp. from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridigian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured as Dictyophillum by Miller (1857), p. 398, Fig. 152. Referred to by Seward (1911), p. 651.

Elatides curvifolia from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured by Miller (1857), Fig. 130c.

NMS G.I859.33.4341 (Holotype and Figured)

Elatides sternbergiana from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured as 'conifer'by Miller (1857), Fig. 130E.

Brachyphyllum eathiensie Seward & Bancroft, 1913 from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Eathie, Ross and Cromarty, Scotland. Figured as 'Imbricated stem' by Miller (1857), p. 395, Fig. 149. Figured as Brachyphyllum sp. by Seward (1911), p. 683, plate 9, Fig. 33. Figured as Brachyphyllum eathiense Seward & Bancroft (1913), text-Fig. 5a, plate 1, Figs 2^-4.

NMS G.1911.9.18 (Figured)

NMS G.1859.33.4342 (Holotype and Figured)

Elatides curvifolia from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured by Miller (1857), Fig. 130D.

Taxites jeffreyi Seward, 1911 from the Upper Jurassic (Oxfordian) of Brora, Sutherland, Scotland. Figrured as 'Conifer twigs' by Miller (1857), p. 379, Fig. 131 A. Figured as Taxites jeffreyi by Seward (1911), p. 688, plate 5, Fig. 73. Figured as Taxites jeffreyi by Seward & Bancroft (1913), plate 1, Fig. 5.

NMS G.1911.9.17 (Figured)

NMS G. 1911.9.19 (Figured) Williamsonia pecten (Phillips) from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured as Zamia by Miller (1857), p. 386, Fig. 140 (left-hand figure). Figured as Williamsonia pecten (Phillips) by Seward (1911), plate 7, photos 19 and 20, plate 7, Fig. 26. Referred to by Seward (1912), p. 101.

NMS G.1911.9.20 (Figured) Indeterminable plant from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured by Miller (1857), Fig. 147 (lefthand figure)

NMS G.I859.33.4343 (Holotype and Figured) Masculostrobus woodwardi Seward & Bancroft, 1912 from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Eathie, Ross and Cromarty, Scotland. Figured as 'unnamed' by Miller (1857), p. 475, Fig. 132. Figured as Masculostrobus sp. by Seward (1911), p. 650. Described and figured as Masculostobus woodwardi Seward & Bancroft (1913), plate 1, Figs 6-8.

HUGH MILLER AND PALAEOBOTANY

83

NMS G.1859.33.4344 (Holotype and Figured)

NMS G.1859.33.4352 (Figured)

Conitesjuddi Seward and Bancroft, 1913 (forma a) from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Eathie, Ross and Cromarty, Scotland. Figured as Conites juddi by Seward & Bancroft (1913), p. 874, text-fig. 2B;p. 875, text-fig. 3.

Indeterminable plant from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured by Miller (1857), Fig. 141A. Quoted by Seward (1911), p. 650.

References NMS G.I859.33.4345 (Holotype and Figured) Conites juddi Seward & Bancroft, 1913 (forma (3) from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Eathie, Ross and Cromarty, Scotland. Figured as Conitesjuddi by Seward & Bancroft (1913), p. 875, text-Fig. 2C.

NMS G.I859.33.4346 (Holotype and Figured) Conites juddi Seward & Bancroft, 1913 (forma x) from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Eathie, Ross and Cromarty, Scotland. Figured as Conites juddi Seward & Bancroft (1913), p. 876, text-Fig. 2a; p. 877, text-figs. 4a and b, plate 1, Figs 10-12; plate 2, figs 14-16.

NMS G.I859.33.4348 (Holotype and Figured) Strobilites miller Seward & Bancroft, 1913 from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Helmsdale, Sutherland, Scotland. Figured by Miller (1857), p. 448, Fig. 150. Described and figured by Seward & Bancroft (1913), p. 882, plate 1, Fig. 13.

NMS G.I859.33.4350 (Holotype & Figured) Williamsonia scotica Seward, 1913 from the Upper Jurassic (Kimmeridgian) of Eathie, Ross and Cromarty, Scotland. Figured by Miller (1857), Fig. 138. Figured by Seward (1912), p. 101, plate 12. Referred to by Seward & Bancroft (1913), p. 887.

NMS G.I859.33.4351 (Syntype and Figured) Bucklandia milleriana Carruthers, 1870 from the Jurassic (Corallian) of Brora, Sutherland, Scotland. Described and figured as Bucklandia milleriana by Carruthers (1870), p. 687, plate 55, Fig. 1. Referred to by Seward & Bancroft (1913), p. 698.

AGASSIZ, J.L.R. 1844. Monographic des poissons fossiles des Vieux Gres Rouge ou Systeme Devonien (Old Red Sandstone) des lies Bretanniques et de Russie, Jent and Gassmann, Neuchatel. ALSTON, D. 1996. The fallen meteor: Hugh Miller and local tradition. In: SHORTLAND, M. (ed.) Hugh Miller and the Controversies of Victorian Science. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 206-229. ANDREWS, S.M. 1982. The Discovery of Fossil Fishes in Scotland up to 1845 with Checklists of Agassiz's Figured Specimens. Royal Scottish Museum Studies, Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh. BAILEY, E.B. & WEIR, J. 1932. Submarine faulting in Kimmeridgian times: East Sutherland. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 57,429^67. B AYNE, P. 1871. Life and Letters of Hugh Miller, Volumes I & II. Strathan & Co., London. BOUREAU, E. 1970. Bryophyta, Psilophyta and Lycophyta. In: BOUREAU, E. (ed.) Traite de paleobotanique, Volume 4, Part 1. Masson, Paris. BUNBURY, C.J.F. 1852. Description of a peculiar fossil fern from the Sydney coal field, Cape Breton. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 8, 31—35. CARRUTHERS, W. 1870. On fossil Cycladean stems from the Secondary rocks of Britain. Transactions of the Linnean Society, 26,675-708. CHAMBERS, R. 1844. [1994]. Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation and Other Writings [with introductions by J.A. SECORD]. Chicago University Press, Chicago, IL. CLEAL, C.J. & THOMAS, B.A. 1995. Palaeozoic Palaeobotany of Great Britain. Geological Conservation Review Series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. CROOKALL, R. 1966. Fossil Plants of the Carboniferous Rocks of Great Britain. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain: Palaeontology, 4, Part 4. DONOVAN, R.N. 1980. Lacustrine cycles, fish ecology and stratigraphic zonation in the Middle Devonian of Caithness. Scottish Journal of Geology, 16, 35-50. HUDSON, J.D. 2002. The Geology of Eigg. Isle of Eigg Heritage Trust. HUDSON, J.D. 2003. Hugh Miller's Geological Discoveries and Observations on the Isle of Eigg, as Recorded in The Cruise of the Betsey and in the Light of Modern Knowledge. In: BORLEY, L. (ed.) Celebrating the life and times of Hugh Miller. Scotland in the early 19th century, ethnography and folk lore, geology and natural history, church and society. Cromarty Arts Trust, Cromarty Elphinstone Institute of the University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, 197-213. KIDSTON, R. 1883a. On Sphenopteris crassa. Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society of Edinburgh, 7, 120-125.

84

L.L ANDERSON

KIDSTON, R. 18836. On Sphenopteris crassa (Lindley and Hutton). Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 11, 297-314. KIDSTON, R. 1924. Fossil plants of the Carboniferous rocks of Great Britain. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, 2, Part 5. KIDSTON, R. & LANG, W.H. 1923. On Palaeopitys Milleri, McNab. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 53,409-419. KNELL, SJ. & TAYLOR, M.A. 2003. Hugh Miller, the Fossil Discoverer and Collector. In: BORLEY, L. (ed.) Celebrating the life and times of Hugh Miller. Scotland in the early 19th century, ethnography and folk lore, geology and natural history, church and society. Cromarty Arts Trust, Cromarty Elphinstone Institute of the University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, 156-167. LANG, W.H. 1925. Contributions to the study of the Old Red Sandstone Flora of Scotland. I. On plant-remains from the fish beds of Cromarty. II. On a sporangiumbearing branch-system from the Stromness Beds. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 54, 253-279. LEASK, W.K. 1896. Hugh Miller. Oliphant, Anderson and Ferrier, Edinburgh. LYON, G. 1866. Memoir of the Society. Transactions of the Edinburgh Geological Society, 1, 2-3. McNAB, J. 1870. [Title unknown.] Transactions of the Botanical Society of Edinburgh, 10,312. MILLER, H. 1841. The Old Red Sandstone: Or, New Walks in an Old Field. J. Johnstone, Edinburgh. MILLER, H. 1847. First Impressions of England and Its People. Nimmo & Co., Edinburgh. MILLER, H. 1849. Footprints of the Creator or The Asterolepis of Stromness. Nimmo & Co., Edinburgh. MILLER, H. 1854. My Schools and Schoolmasters. [1993 reprint with Introduction and notes by J. Robertson.]. B&W Publishing, Edinburgh. MILLER, H. 1857. The Testimony of the Rocks, Or, Geology in its Bearings on the Two Theologies, Natural and Revealed. [2001 edition.] St Matthew Publishing, Cambridge. MILLER, H. 1858. The Cruise of the Betsey Or A Summer Holiday in the Hebrides with Rambles of a Geologist Or Ten Thousand Miles Over the Fossiliferous Deposits of Scotland. Nimmo & Co., Edinburgh. MILLER, H. 1859. Sketchbook of Popular Geology. Nimmo & Co., Edinburgh. MILLER, H. 1863. Edinburgh and its Neighbourhood, Geological and Historical with the Geology of the Bass Rock. Nimmo & Co., Edinburgh. MILLER, H. 1870. Leading Articles on Various Subjects. Nimmo & Co., Edinburgh. MORRISON-LOW, A.D. 1992. William Nicol, FRSE c. 1771-1851: Lecturer, scientist and collector. Book of the Old Edinburgh Club, New Series, 2,123-131. MORRISON-LOW, A.D. & NUTTALL, R.H. 2003. Hugh Miller in an Age of Microscopy. In: BORLEY, L. (ed.) Celebrating the life and times of Hugh Miller. Scotland in the early 19th century, ethnography and folk lore, geology and natural history, church and

society. Cromarty Arts Trust, Cromarty Elphinstone Institute of the University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, 214-226. OLDROYD, D.R. 1996. The geologist from Cromarty. In: SHORTLAND, M. (ed.) Hugh Miller and the Controversies of Victorian Science. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 76-121. RICHARDS, J.T. 1884. On Scottish fossil cycadaceous leaves contained in the Hugh Miller collection. Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society of Edinburgh, 4,117. S ALTER, J.W. 1858. On some remains of terrestrial plants in the Old Red Sandstone of Caithness. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, 14,72-76. SEWARD, A.C. 1911. The Jurassic flora of Sutherland. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 47, Part 4,643-709. SEWARD, A.C. 1912. A petrified Williamsonia from Scotland. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, London (Section B), 203,101-126. SEWARD, A.C. & BANCROFT, T.N. 1913. Jurassic plants from Cromarty and Sutherland, Scotland. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 48, 867-888. SMILES, S. 1878. Robert Dick: Baker of Thurso, Geologist and Botanist. John Murray, London. SMITH, J.A. 1862. Hugh Miller's Museum. Royal Physical Society of Edinburgh, 2,151. STEVENSON, S. 20020. The Personal Art of David Octavius Hill. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. STEVENSON, S. 2002&. Facing the Light: The Photography of Hill andAdamson. National Galleries of Scotland, Edinburgh. SUTHERLAND, E. 2002. Lydia: Wife of Hugh Miller of Cromarty. Tuckwell Press Ltd, East Lothian. TAYLOR, M.A. 2002. Hugh Miller and his fossils: a bicentenary appreciation. Edinburgh Geologist, 38,10-19. TAYLOR, M.A. & GOSTWICK, M. 2003. Hugh Miller's Collection - a memorial to a great geological Scot. Edinburgh Geologist, 40, 24-29. TORRENS, H. 2003. William Smith (1769-1839) and the Search for English Raw Materials: Some Parallels with Hugh Miller and Scotland. In: BORLEY, L. (ed.) Celebrating the life and times of Hugh Miller. Scotland in the early 19th century, ethnography and folk lore, geology and natural history, church and society. Cromarty Arts Trust, Cromarty Elphinstone Institute of the University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, 137-155. TREWIN, N.H. & HURST, A. 1993. Excursion Guide to the Geology of East Sutherland and Caithness. Scottish Academic Press, Edinburgh. VAN DER BURGH, J. & VAN KONIJNENBURG-VAN CITTERT, J.H.A. 1984. A drifted flora from the Kimmeridgian (Upper Jurassic) of Lothbeg point, Sutherland, Scotland. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 43,359-396. WATERSTON, C.D. 1951. The stratigraphy and palaeontology of the Jurassic rocks of Eathie (Cromarty). Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 62, 33-51.

Baron Achille de Zigno: an Italian palaeobotanist of the 19th century HUGH LANCE PEARSON Clay don High School Church Lane, Claydon, Ipswich, Suffolk IP6 OEG, UK Abstract: Baron Achille de Zigno (1813-1892) of Padua published dozens of articles on the early Mesozoic floras from the Venetia region of Italy. His magna opera, however, were the two volumes of the Flora fossilis formations oolithicae (Volume 1 (1856-1867) and Volume 2 (1873-1885), Padua University Press, Padua). In these he aimed to put the Venetian Jurassic plants in context with what were then considered oolitic floras from around the world. Like many of his contemporaries, his research has been revised both taxonomically and stratigraphically, so that the fossil plants he described from the calcari grigi are now regarded as older than Middle Jurassic. His collection of over 3000 specimens of Italian fossil plants, now kept in the University of Padua, continued to attract researchers during the 20th century from across Europe who used light microscopy to investigate them. Today electron microscopy is being applied to Baron Zigno's specimens that are of importance not only as representatives of a rare Middle Liassic flora but also of value in the palaeobiogeography of the Tethys area in Lower Jurassic times.

The discovery, investigation and description of fossil plants from the Italian peninsular during the last three millennia have been discussed by several authors (e.g Stopes 1914; Edwards 1931, 1976; Gordon 1935; Andrews 1947, 1980; Chesters 1963; Scott 2001). Moreover, the excavation of an Etruscan necropolis at Marzabotto, about 60 km west of Bologna, has revealed one of the earliest instances of human encounters with Mesozoic plants. Burial chambers discovered at that site in 1867 had been ornamented in about 500 BC with silicified stems of the Cretaceous bennettite Cycadeoidea etrusca (Capellini & Solms-Laubach 1892). Most anglophone commentators have focused their attention on Roman and Renaissance times in their histories of Italian palaeobotany, with little mention of the researchers who investigated fossil plants there after the 17th century (Seward 1898; Gothan & Weyland 1954; Wesley 1956). Amongst the score of Italian palaeobotanists who described new genera during the 19th century (Andrews 1955), Baron Achille de Zigno is one whose collection and published accounts of Italian fossil plants deserve to be more widely consulted. A number of biographies were published in Italian shortly after Zigno's death (e.g. Omboni 1892), but only a brief obituary appeared in English (Anon. 1892). Wesley revised and extended Zigno's account of the Jurassic flora of the Venetia region of NE Italy (Pearson 2002). In this account of Zigno as a palaeobotanist, much information has been drawn from Wesley (1956). Therefore, I take this opportunity to dedicate this biographaphical sketch of Zigno to my former mentor at the University of Leeds, the late Alan Wesley.

Life history Achille de Zigno (Fig. 1) was born at Padua, then part of the Bonapartist Kingdom of Italy, on 14 January 1813. His father, Baron Marco de Zigno, was a descendant of the 17th century Count Alberto de Zignis of Padua. His Irish mother, who had both French and English ancestry, assisted in his primary education at home, encouraging him to make his own herbarium of named plant specimens. Omboni (1892) described how the young Signor de Zigno (he became Count de Zigno in 1838 and was made an hereditary Baron of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1857) had his interest in mineralogy fostered by Lord Paroloni of Bassano, whose collection of metals and crystals he tried to recreate on his return to Padua. A diary he kept from when he was 6 years old reflects his love of natural beauty and a delight in poetry. Following travels to Switzerland and around the then Austrian provinces of northern Italy, Zigno settled to study Italian, French and English at the famous University of Padua, founded in 1222. Aged 13, he began work on his studies in natural sciences, going on to study Spanish and some aspects of agricultural industry. The teenage Achille often visited the famous Orto Botanico di Padova, a botanical garden dating from 1545 and second in age only to that at Pisa (Morton 1981). There he came into contact with Professor Catullo, who encouraged him to study the cryptogamic elements of the flora in and around Padua, including the microscopic scrutiny of algae. Moreover, at the Orto Botanico, young Achille also met Count Nicolo Da Rio, a geologist who introduced him to fieldwork in the Euganean Hills to the south of Padua. These extinct volcanoes bear an endemic flora and Zigno composed a catalogue of the cryptogams found there to enable him to graduate as an alumnus of the University of Padua in

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241, 85-94.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

86

H.L. PEARSON

Fig. 1. Baron Achille de Zigno. Photographed in later life by Fiorentini. Original print kept at the Palazzo Catullo, University of Padua.

1834. In 1835, he continued his geological studies whilst assisting Prof. Catullo at the Orto Botanico.

The palaeobotanical research and publications of Zigno Following his detailed life history of the baron, Omboni (1892) offered a full and annotated bibliography of all of Zigno's published works. Here, this chapter attempts to remark upon Zigno's research on fossil plants and the reader is directed to Omboni (1892) for his works on stratigraphy, palaeozoology,

neobotany, mycology, history and biography. Cleevely (1983) lists other published biographies, but these have a less palaeobotanical focus or are less complete than the work by Omboni. Although Omboni's biography of Zigno is very informative, it offers few details of the personal life of his friend the Baron. Omboni was Professor of Geology in the University of Padua between 1869 and 1906, so, one imagines, Zigno had ready access to the relevant scientific literature obtained by the libraries of that university. Zigno evidently continued to travel widely within Italy to attend, and sometimes to preside over, national scientific conferences

BARON ACHILLE DE ZIGNO: PALAEOBOTANIST

(see: www.quipo.it/sips/riu-19.htm for details). Wesley (1956) quoted from a letter sent to Zigno from Adolphe Brongniart in 1855 in which the latter compared certain conifer species found in the Lias of Italy, France and England. However, one is left only to speculate as to how the Baron earned his living, how his publications were paid for and whether he continued to travel outside Italy as much in later life as in his youth. In total Zigno published exactly 100 papers (opuscoli) and four books (opere), an output bearing comparison with that of his close contemporary in England, W.C. Williamson. Contrary to one English obituary notice (Anon. 1892), Zigno's first published work was a paper in 1833 that dealt with the Recent cryptogamic flora of Padua and its province. This was his only paper in Latin (Zigno 1833), but he used that language for diagnoses of new taxa in subsequent studies. Of his 104 works, two books (i.e. both volumes of his Flora fossilis formationes oolithicae, 1856-1867, 1873-1885) and 22 papers (Zigno 1852, 18530-d, 1854, 1856, 1859a, 6, 1860, 1861,1862,1863,1864,1865,1868,18690,fc,1871, 1872, 1875, 1878) dealt with fossil plants, being about one third of his published output in the last 40 years of his life (although Wesley 1956 claimed more). Most of these were in Italian, but Zigno reflected his mixed parentage, experience as a cosmopolitan traveller and as a polyglot worker by writing five papers in German, three in French and two in English. He was the sole author in all of his publications. Although he devoted one paper to Eocene plants (Zigno 18530) and another to Triassic plants that had been collected in Italy by his contemporary Professor Abramo Massalongo (Zigno 1862), the majority of Zigno's palaeobotanical publications dealt with Jurassic plants from the Noriglio Grey Limestone Formation of the Venetian or Vicentinian Alps in what is now NE Italy.

Research by Zigno on the Grey Limestones of the Venetian Alps If one were to look for a time when Zigno first encountered fossil plants then, arguably, his initial visit to the Altopiano dei Sette Comuni (Sieben Burgen of germanophone authors) in the summer of 1836 might fit. In this part of the Province of Vicenza, between Trento and Asiago some 80 km NW of Padua (see maps of fossil plant localities in Van Erve 1977), Zigno met Lodovico Pasini. Pasini drew his attention to the Jurassic flora (Phytolites of Zigno 1850) that had been described first by Abbot Agostino del Pozzo in 1764 from a quarry on Mount Spitz, about 1 km from the village of Rotzo (Zigno 1856; Wesley 1956, 1965). Zigno's interest in these

87

plants, however, seems to have remained dormant for almost 15 years. During the 1840s he devoted most of his attention to other aspects of the geology of Venetia, plus writing his textbook Introduzione allo Studio della Geologia that was published in 1843. Then, in the first of his papers in English, Zigno (1850) drew attention to the earlier works of Pagani, Arduino, Brocchi, Da Rio, Alexandre Brongniart and Catullo in describing the stratigraphy of the Venetian Alps. He was, therefore, aware of the observations made by those authors, going back into the late 18th century, concerning the taxonomic comparisons of the Sette Comuni fossil flora and extant plants, including the remarks by them on climatic changes since Jurassic times. Nevertheless, he stated (Zigno 1850, p. 426): Above these are found grey shelly beds, together with one containing the well known Phytolites of Rotzo in the Setti Comuni, No one, as far as I am aware, has studied these vegetable impressions (author's italics), which I propose to describe and figure in my work on the Alps: in the meantime I may state my opinion that this bed also is lower oolite [i.e. Middle Jurassic]

Zigno maintained this stratigraphic view of the Sette Comuni flora for the rest of his life and that is, of course, evident in the title of his two major volumes, the Flora fossilis formationis oolithicae (Zigno 1856-1867,1873-1885). As Wesley (1956, pp. 7-9) remarked, Zigno had misidentified some fossil shells in the Rotzo floral horizon with what had originally been considered Oolitic species of the brachiopod Terebratula. Moreover, subsequent discoveries of certain ammonites and palynomorphs in association with these plant beds have shown them to belong high in the Middle Lias (viz- the late Pliensbachian stage of the Lower Jurassic, c. 190 Ma,Van Erve 1977). As a result of this stratigraphic error, Zigno (1850) was inclined to favour taxonomic identity between this Venetian flora and younger, Middle Jurassic plants described during the first half of the 19th century from Yorkshire, the Sarthe in France and the Rajmahal Hills of India. Simultaneously, Zigno tended to disregard comparisons with the older, Rhaeto-Liassic floras then known from Normandy, Franconia, Scania in Sweden, Danish Bornholm and Virginia, USA (Zigno 1859^,6,1862). At this point, Zigno is to be praised for the great amount of fieldwork and collecting of fossil plant specimens he carried out in order to further his research. Thereby, he managed to amass some 3053 specimens that went on to become part of the geological collection at the University of Padua (Cleevely 1983). He extended the number of Liassic plant localities in Vicenza province from one to five, collected at eight localities in Verona province and from one locality on the border

88

H.L.PEARSON

between the provinces of Venezia Tridentina and Veneto (see Wesley 1956; Van Erve 1977 for locality details). As with most of his contemporary palaeobotanists, Zigno described and compared fossil plants more megascopically rather than microscopically. I know of only one illustration and written account in his published works that helps to define his species using cuticular preparations (Fig. 2). One reads in Zigno (1859, p. 114) an account of Venetian fossil plants: . . . The preservation of the specimens is surprising, and some of them show fructification in the most evident manner. Simple immersion in water saturated with nitric acid is sometimes sufficient to separate the epidermis (sic) of the two surfaces of the pinnules, and thus to observe the tissue easily through a microscope.... This evidently shows that Zigno was using the oxidative maceration technique described in Lindley &Hutton(1834).

The Flora fossilis formationis oolithicae (1856-1885) Although Baron de Zigno described certain new genera and species in separate shorter papers (Zigno 1852, \853a-d, 1861, 1865), the bulk of his taxonomic descriptions and revisions were published by the University of Padua Press in the two volumes of his Flora fossilis formationis oolithicae: Volume 1 (1856-1868) (Fig. 2) and Volume 2 (1873-1885). Andrews (1955) listed seven new generic names erected by Zigno, viz.: Cycadopteris 1853 non Schimper 1869, Encoelocladium 1856, Pholidophorus 1856, Trevisania 1856, Dichopteris 1865, Marzaria 1865 and Blastolepis 1885. In addition, Zigno (1856) validated the manuscript name Mastocarpites Trevisano MS 1849 and in 1873 he formally established Pandanocarpum Brongniart 1828 that had been a nomen nudum. As Wesley (1956) enumerated, Volume 1 described and illustrated 32 fossil plant species from the Venetian Alps, whilst Volume 2 added a further 36. If one adds on the eight species names published elsewhere (Zigno 1868), the grand total of new Venetian fossil plant taxa comes to 76 species. Moreover, in those two volumes, Zigno attempted a cosmopolitan revision of all fossil plant species that he considered to be oolitic in age. Although his illustrations are only of Venetian specimens, Zigno listed and remarked upon a total of 74 genera discovered not only in Europe but also from India, Australia, Spitzbergen and Siberia. His taxonomic revisions included some 28 species in new combinations plus several amended diagnoses for certain genera and species. The 42 plates that accompany both volumes were

drawn by G. Prosdocimi and F. Kirchmayr with lithography by Kirchmayr and Scozzi (Fig. 3). The plates are mostly quarto, with a few folding out for larger material, showing the fossils at approximately life size. Yellow or green tinting has been used on all plates, but the rock matrix, as its name calcaro grigio suggests, is an achromatic dark grey marl with the plant specimens in either typically black coaly matter or as grey impressions.

Taxonomic and palaeobiogeographical consequences of the research by Zigno on fossil plants As mentioned above, Zigno's taxonomic decisions regarding the identities of the species discovered in the fossil flora of the Venetian Alps were influenced significantly by his belief that they are from the Oolite, i.e. Middle Jurassic. Wesley (1956) noted that although certain contemporaries of Zigno (e.g. Bunbury 1859; Schenk- see Zigno 1869&) criticized and revised a few of his circumscriptions of taxa, most 19th century commentators on his publications (including, notably, Schimper 1870) found his determinations acceptable. Likewise, in Volume 2 of his Flora fossilis formationis oolithicae, Zigno (1873-1885) accepted Schimper's revisions and readily followed the taxonomic assignments proposed by Zeiller (1882) and Saporta (1891) for the few elements of the Sette Comuni flora they had investigated. Even after the death of Zigno in 1892, Seward (1898, 1900) chose to agree with him in identifying most of these Italian fossils with species described by Lindley & Mutton (1831-1837) and others from the Yorkshire Jurassic. The advent of the 20th century, however, brought more criticism of the taxonomic opinions of Zigno. Seward (1904, 1910, 1917, 1919) remarked upon specific differences between the plants from Italy and England, although he continued to accept their close synchrony. At Padua itself, however, Grandori (1913&) published part of her doctoral thesis on the gymnosperms of the Sette Comuni flora, having had access to the unpublished manuscript for a proposed Volume 3 of Flora fossilis formationis oolithicae that Zigno had worked on to within 6 months of his death (Wesley 1956). Her comments on the conifers in particular led Grandori to compare them more with the described Rhaeto-Liassic taxa rather than with the younger oolitic species. Wesley (1956) agreed with Grandori's remarks and he gave detailed palaeontological reasons why the Sette Comuni flora came to be regarded as late Middle Liassic in age (Wesley 1965). Harris (1961,1964,1969) continued the trend in separating the English Middle Jurassic plants from the Italian Lias taxa. He followed Wesley's advice in discussing certain species of the

BARON ACHILLE DE ZIGNO: PALAEOBOTANIST

Fig. 2. Plate 16 from the fourth part of Volume 1 of Flora fossilisformationis oolithicae (Zigno 1867) This illustrates specimens of the pinnate frond Cycadopteris brauniana Zigno, including, as 4, microscopic details of unspecified magnification drawn from a cuticular preparation.

89

90

H.L. PEARSON

Fig. 3. Plate 42 from Part 5 of Volume 2 of Flora fossilts formationis oolithicae (Zigno 1885, Volume 2, Parts 4 and 5). In addition to the cone, megasporophylls and seeds of cycads, (1-8), three bennettite 'cones' are illustrated, (9-11). Note in 9 the rare organic connection between the reproductive organ and the leaf fragments in Williamsonia otozamitis (Zigno) Seward.

BARON ACHILLE DE ZIGNO: PALAEOBOTANIST

bennettite morphogenus Otozamites, Harris (1969, pp. 52-53) remarking:

91

below for more detailed accounts of these amendments.) However, two aspects of Zigno's work go beyond the fundamental descriptive and systematic O. tenuatus was identified with O. bunburyanus Zigno first level and are significant in our understanding certain by Zigno (1868, p. 9) and later by Seward (1900), and I aspects of Jurassic biogeography and the reconstrucagree (Harris 1946) since the figures look just alike. O tention of whole Mesozoic plants. uatus is now separated on information given me by Dr A As mentioned above, Zigno sought to compare Wesley. . . . This removes one of the very few remaining the Sette Comuni flora from the Venetian Alps with species of the Italian Upper (sic) Lias which seemed identiall the other fossil plant taxa known to him from all cal with one from the Yorkshire Lower Oolite. around the world and that he regarded as oolitic in The overall taxonomic framework that Zigno age. The majority of the genera that he chose for employed is presented in the two 'Indice' sections these Italian plants are widely distributed amongst that follow the plate captions and precede the plates the Jurassic northern hemisphere (Laurasian) floras in each volume of his Flora fossilis formationis and, therefore, present no surprises from the peroolithicae. In brief, Volume 1 spans what he termed spective of prehistoric plant geography (Wesley five 'classes' of 'Acotyledones' - viz. 'Fungi, Algae, 1965, 1973). However he erected two species of Calamariae, Filices, Lycopodiaceae' - correspon- Phyllotheca Brongniart from Italy (namely P. ding approximately to what might be called cryp- brongniartiana and P. equiestiformis) following his togams of more modern usage. Both lower 'classes' account of three other species of Phyllotheca then were then split further into the lower ranks of 'Ordo, known only from the Jurassic of Australia, includGenus, Species', there being no formal considera- ing the type species P. australis Brongniart. tion of the familial level. Therefore, Zigno identified what was essentially a One should recall here that at the time of the publi- Gondwanan morphogenus as being present in the cation of Volume 1 (1856-1868), the distinct status of Jurassic flora of Italy. Moreover, Zigno (1867, what are now called pteridosperms (seed ferns or Volume 2, Books 3-5) named a morphospecies of Cycadofilices auctorum) had yet to be recognized or Jurassic fern frond from the Venetian Alps, described by Oliver, Scott and others (Andrews Hymenophyllites leckenbyi. Halle (1916) revised 1980). Thus, what are now treated as a group of gym- this taxon in relation to his work on Mesozoic plants nospermous plants (e.g. Pachypteris, Dichopteris, from Antarctica, recombining it as Sphenopteris Sagenopteris) were included by Zigno amongst his leckenbyi (Zigno) Halle. As Wesley (1965, 1973) 'Filices', loosely meaning ferns. Likewise, in Volume remarked, there exist certain elements of the Sette 2, Zigno covered what were essentially spermato- Comuni flora, that Zigno first brought to scientific phytes under the headings of 'Monotyledones' and attention, that might indicate a palaeogeographic 'Dicotyledones\ but without implying any close location for the Venetian Alps flora on the southern affinity with flowering plants (angiosperms) as does or Gondwanan shore of the Tethys Sea in Jurassic present-day usage. Amongst the former, he included times. This suggestion is further supported by the two classes - viz. Spadiciflorae and Liroideae - to discovery of the miospores Cadargasporites and incorporate undivided leaves (or leaflets) showing Fimbriaesporites in the Lias of the Venetian Alps, parallel venation. Given their general lack of cuticular both palynomorphs originally described from detail and/or connection with reproductive organs, Gondwanan localities (Van Erve 1977). A second important palaeobotanical observation these two 'classes' of Zigno's might more appropriatley have been left as incertae sedis, a designation he arising from Volume 2 of the Flora fossilis formatioelected not to employ. The greater part of Volume 2 nis oolithicae is his description and illustration (Fig. dealt with the most abundant and diverse elements of 3) of a bennettite reproductive organ bearing parts of the Venetian Alps flora, i.e. the cycadophytes, all of three vegetative fronds in organic connexion (Zigno which he put into one class, his Cycadaceae, within 1885, Volume 2, Books 4 and 5, pp. 174-175; plate his 'Dicotyledones'. Much as with Volume 1, Zigno's XLII, Fig. 9). Not only are these so-called 'flowers' account in Volume 2 preceeded the work of Engler, of Bennettitales infrequent discoveries (Seward Thomas, Bancroft and others who named and diag- 1917; Harris 1969), but also their irrefutable connecnosed the Bennettitales (Cycadeoideales auctorum) tion with a recognizable leaf morphogenus provides as an order of Mesozoic gymnosperms distinct from a rare and important example for use in the partial reconstruction and subsequent naming of a more the superficially similar cycads. Of course, much of the systematic scheme that complete bennettite plant body. Zigno named this Zigno proposed for the liassic Venetian Alps flora in fascinating specimen Blastolepis otozamitis, placing his Flora fossilis formationis oolithicae and else- the following morphological interpretation on it: where has been revised at the specific, generic and higher taxonomic ranks. (The reader should refer to Questo interessante esemplare, da cui sorge la foglia prithe works of Seward, Grandori and Wesley cited mordiale di un'Otozamite, ci svela il modo di germinazone

92

H.L. PEARSON

di queste Zamiee, ed esclude il dubbio, posto innanzi da qualche autore, che possano spettare alia Classe delle Felci. (See the Appendix for a translation.)

Seward (1917) re-examined Zigno's holotype of B. otozamitis at Padua and agreed with him that this specimen showed an ovulate 'strobilus' in organic connection with an Otozamites frond, renaming it Williamsonia otozamitis (Zigno) Seward on grounds of nomenclatural priority. The morphological view of Zigno that this represents a germinating vegatative propagule was not queried, however, until Harris (1969) compared it to a 'female flower' rather than a bud. Wesley (1974) re-examined the holotype of B. otozamitis, when he confirmed the organic connection between the ovulate organ and the three fronds, identifying the latter with O. molinianus Zigno and remarking on closely associated fragments of possible involucral scales. Therefore, Zigno had drawn to our attention a very rare instance of a partially reconstructed, large Mesozoic plant that links together two previously isolated morphogenera. Chaloner (1986) discussed the nomenclatural consequences of such examples of organic connection, but palaeobotanical literature generally refers to such fortuitous finds more from the Palaeozoic or Cainozoic eras, rather than from the Mesozoic sediments.

Concluding remarks Shortly after the publication of Volume 2 of his Flora fossilis formationis oolithicae Zigno was elected Foreign Correspondent of the Geological Society of London in 1886. An unpublished manuscript now kept at the University of Padua shows that he continued to work on a third volume of the Flora fossilis formationis oolithicae to within 6 months of his death. Having spent most of his life as a Habsburg subject, Zigno died at his home in via Sette Martiri, Padua in the newly independent Kingdom of Italy on 15 January 1892 when he was 79 years old. Following his paper of 1878 that served as a preamble to that volume, Zigno began to describe the conifers unearthed in the Venetian Alps, along with all other coniferous species that he regarded as oolitic in age. In addition, a supplement was to have been appended to this proposed third volume in order to describe certain Jurassic ferns and cycadophytes discovered after 1885 (Wesley 1956). During his lifetime Zigno was commemorated by at least two eponymous taxa. Saporta (1884) named one of the Italian Lias conifers Pachyphyllum zignoi. Wesley (1956) synonymized this morphospecies of leafy shoots with Pagiophyllum rotzoanum (Massalongo) Seward. Nathorst (1886) named a winged seed from the Rhaetic of Sweden Samaropsis

zignoana. Posthumously, Zigno had two additional morphospecies of Italian Lias conifer, Elatocladus zignoi Wesley (1956) and Brachyphyllum zignoi Grandori (1913&), named in his honour. The large collection of Liassic plants made by Zigno and kept at Padua attracted direct re-examination within a decade of his death (Seward 1898). What had originally been the Baron's private collection of fossils (including both vertebrates and plants) was sold by his surviving family to the University of Padua Institute of Geology. The specimens were first housed in the famous Palazzo del Bo before removal to their present location in the Renaissance Palazzo Cavalli in Via Giotto (Fornasiero 1998). Whilst these specimens attracted scrutiny by Seward (1898,1910, 1917, 1919) and Wesley (1956, 1958), the principal Italian palaeobotanist to examine them was Luigia Grandori (1913a, b, 1915). Research on these specimens continues today at Lyons, France, where Prof. F. Thevenard and colleagues of the Universite Claude-Bernard, Villeurbanne are using transmission electron microscopy to investigate the ultrastructure of certain plant cuticles from the Liassic floras of the Venetian Alps (pers. comm.). The author is also engaged in a re-examination of some of the bennettite and conifer specimens in the Zigno collection at Padua. Given the large size of Zigno's collection of Lower Jurassic plants, its inclusion of a rare example of connection between different organs, the supposed presence of Gondwanan elements and its almost unique stratigraphic position within the European Lias, it is perhaps most fitting to leave the final remarks on the work of Baron Achille de Zigno to Wesley (1956): L'interesse principale della flora fossile dei calcari grigi risiede nelle sua sta geologica, . . . Per questa ragione, dunque, uno studio della flora e tanto importante poiche il complesso di specie ci da notizia, forse la sola, di una fase della storia della flora mondiale. (See the Appendix for a translation.) Much of this research has been made possible by the kind help given by Dr M. Fornasiero of the Dipartimento di Geologia, Paleontologia e Geofisica, Universita di Padova. Signer S. Castelli, of the same department, supplied the photograph of Zigno from an original in Padua. Mr R. Pinkney assisted with the additional photography and typescript, as well as with helpful remarks on the manuscript. Prof. W.G. Chaloner kindly read an early draft of this paper and his detailed criticisms are gratefully acknowledged.

Appendix I take the liberty of offering the following translations from the Italian from pp. 87 and 88 of this paper:

BARON ACHILLE DE ZIGNO: PALAEOBOTANIST

(a) Zigno (1885, pp. 174-175): This interesting specimen, in which the first leaf of an Otozamites emerges, shows us the mode of germination in this cycad, and removes any ambiguity, proposed by certain authors previously, that it might belong to the class of ferns.

(b) Wesley (1956, p. 62): The most interesting aspect of the fossil flora of the Grey Limestones of the Veneto lies in their geological age. . . . For this reason, therefore, a study of this flora is very important, since this combination of species gives information, perhaps uniquely so, about one phase in the history of the world's flora.

References ANDREWS, H.N. 1947. Ancient Plants and the World They Lived In. John Wiley, New York. ANDREWS, H.N. 1955. Index of Generic Names of Fossil Plants, 1820-1950. US Geological Survey Bulletin, 1013. ANDREWS, H.N. 1980. The Fossil Hunters in Search of Ancient Plants. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY. ANON. 1892. Baron Achille de Zigno. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 48, 60. BRONGNIART, A. 1828. Histoire des vegetaux fossiles, Volume 1: Parts 1 and 2 (1828). G. Dufour & E. d'Ocagne, Paris. BUNBURY, C.J.F. 1859. Note. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 16,115. CAPELLINI, G. & SOLMS-LAUBACH, H. 1892. I tronchi di Bennettitee dei Musei Italiani. Memorie della Reale Accademia delle Scienze dell'Istituto di Bologna, ser. 5a, 2,161-215. CHALONER, W.G. 1986. Chapter 5. Reassembling the Whole Fossil Plant, and Naming it. In: SPICER, R.A. & THOMAS, B.A. (eds) Systematic and Taxonomic Approaches in Palaeobotany. Systematics Association Special Publications, 31, 67-78. CHESTERS, K.I.M. 1963. Fossil plant taxonomy. In: TURRILL, W.B. (ed.) Recent Researches in Plant Taxonomy. Vistas in Botany, 4. Pergamon Press, Oxford, 239-297. CLEEVELY, R.J. 1983. World Palaeontological Collections. British Museum (Natural History). Mansell Publishing, London. EDWARDS, W.N. 1931. Guide to an Exhibition Illustrating the Early History of Palaeontology. Special Guide No. 8. British Museum (Natural History), London. EDWARDS, W.N. 1976. The Early History of Palaeontology. British Museum (Natural History), London. FORNASIERO, M. 1998. The Collections and the History of the University Palaeontological Museum in Padua. University of Padua Press, Padua. GORDON, W.T. 1935. Plant Life and the Philosophy of Geology. Report of British Association for Advancement of Science, Aberdeen, 1934,49-82. GOTHAN, W. & WEYLAND, H. 1954. Lehrbuch der Palaobotanik. Akademie, Berlin. GRANDORI, L. 1913a. La Flora dei Calcari Grigi del Veneto, Pt. 1. Memorie degli Istituti di Geologia dell'Universita di Padova, 2,45-112.

93

GRANDORI, L. I9l3b. Intorno alia flora dei calcari grigi studiata da Achille de Zigno. Atti del' Accademia Scientifica Veneto-Trentino-Istriana, Anno, 6, 143-148 GRANDORI, L. 1915. Su di un seme mesozoico di pteridosperma e sulle sue affinita con forme paleozoiche e forme viventi. Atti del'Accademia Scientifica VenetoTrentino-Istriana, Anno, 8,107-116. HALLE, T.G. 1916. The Mesozoic Flora of Graham Land. Wissenschaftliche Ergebnisse der Schwedischen Sudpolar-Expedition 1901-1903,3. HARRIS, T.M. 1961. The Yorkshire Jurassic Flora, Volume I (Thallophyta - Pteridophyta). British Museum (Natural History), London. HARRIS, T.M. 1964. The Yorkshire Jurassic Flora, Volume II (Caytoniales, Cycadales and Pteridosperms). British Museum (Natural History), London. HARRIS, T.M. 1969. The Yorkshire Jurassic Flora, Volume III (Bennettitales). British Museum (Natural History), London. HOLMES, G. 1997. The Oxford Illustrated History of Italy. Oxford University Press, Oxford. LINDLEY, J. & HUTTON, W. 1831-1837. The Fossil Flora of Great Britain: or Figures and Descriptions of the Vegetable Remains Found in a Fossil State in this country. Volume 1 (1831-1833); Volume 2 (1833-1835); Volume 3 (1835-1837). James Ridgeway, London. MORTON, A.G. 1981. History of Botanical Science: An Account of the Development of Botany From Ancient Times to the Present Day. Academic Press, London. NATHORST, A.G. 1886. Om floran Skanes Kolforande Bildningar. Sveriges geologiska undersokning, ser. C, 85,85-131. OMBONI, G. 1892. Achille de Zigno. Riunione della Societa Geologica Italiana, Vicenza, 1892, 5-55. PEARSON, H.L. 2002. Obituary; Alan Wesley (1926-2000). The Linnean, London, 18, (3), 48-52. SAPORTA, G. DE. 1884. Paleontologie francaise ou description des fossiles de la France. (2, Vegetaux), Plantes Jurassiques. Volume III Coniferes ou Aciculariees G. Mason, Paris. SAPORTA, G. DE. 1891. Paleontologie francaise ou description des fossiles de la France. Volume IV. Types Proangiospermiques et supplement final. G. Mason, Paris, 355-548. SCHIMPER, W.P 1870. Traite de paleontologie vegetale ou la flora du monde primitif, Volume I. J.B. Bailliere, Paris. SCOTT, A.C. 2001. Frederico Cesi and his field studies on the origin of fossils between 1610 and 1630. Endeavour, 25, (3) 93-103. SEWARD, A.C. 1898. Fossil Plants for Students of Botany and Geology, Volume I. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. SEWARD, A.C. 1900. The Jurassic Flora, Pt. I. The Yorkshire Coast. Catalogue of the Mesozoic Plants in the Department of Geology, 3. British Museum (Natural History), London. SEWARD, A.C. 1904. The Jurassic Flora, Pt. 2. Liassic and Oolitic Floras of England. Catalogue of the Mesozoic Plants in the Department of Geology, 4. British Museum (Natural History), London. SEWARD, A.C. 1910. Fossil Plants: A Text-book for Students

94

H.L. PEARSON

of Botany and Geology, Volume II. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. SEWARD, A.C. 1917. Fossil Plants: A Text-book for Students of Botany and Geology, Volume III. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. SEWARD, A.C. 1919. Fossil Plants: A Text-book for Students of Botany and Geology, Volume IV Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. STORES, M.C. 1914. Palaeobotany: its past and its future. Knowledge, 37,15-24. VAN ERVE, A.W. 1977. Palynological investigation in the Lower Jurassic of the Vicentinian Alps (northeastern Italy). Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 23, 1-117. WESLEY, A. 1956. Contributions to the knowledge of the Flora of the Grey Limestones of Veneto; Part 1. Memorie degli Istituti di Geologica e Mineralogia dell'Universita diPadova, 19, 1-69. WESLEY, A. 1958. Contributions to the Knowledge of the Flora of the Grey Limestones of Veneto; Part II. Memorie degli Istituti di Geologica e Mineralogia dell'Universita di Padova, 21,1-57. WESLEY, A. 1965. The fossil flora of the Grey Limestones of Veneto, northern Italy, and its relationship to the other European floras of similar age. Palaeobotanist, 14,124-130. WESLEY, A. 1973. Jurassic plants, pp. 329-338; 5 figs. In: HALLAM A. (ed.) Atlas of Palaeobiogeography. Elsevier, Amsterdam. WESLEY, A. 1974. On the bennettitalean remains from the Lias of northern Italy. In: Symposium of Morphological and Stratigraphical Palaeobotany. Silver Jubilee Volume of the Birbal Sahni Institute of Palaeobotany, Special Publications, 2,66-72. ZEILLER, C.R. 1882. Observations sur quelques cuticules fossiles. Annales des Sciences Naturelles, Serie 6, Botanique, 13, 217. ZIGNO , A., DE. 1833. Plantae cryptogamae in Provincia Patavina hucusque observatae. University of Padua Press, Padua. ZIGNO , A. DE. 1843. Introduzione allo Studio della Geologia. University of Padua Press, Padua. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1850. On the stratified formations of the Venetian Alps. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 6,422-432. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1852. Fossile Pflanzen der Venetianer Alpen. Jahrbuch der koeniglichen geologischen Reichsanstalt, Vienna, 2, 171. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1853#. Nouveau gisement de poissons et de plantes fossiles. Bulletin Societe Geologique de France, ser. 2,10, 267. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1853&. Decouverte d'une flore jurassique analogue a celle de Scarborough dans les couches oolithiques des Alpes Venitiennes. Bulletin Societe Geologique de France, ser. 2,10, 286-289. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1853c. Sui terreni jurassici delle Alpi Venete e sulla flora fossile, che li distingue. Rivista Periodica della Imperiale Reale Accademia della Science di Padova, 1,1-14. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1853. (d) Sulle Cicadacee fossili dell'Oolite. Rivista Periodica della Imperiale Reale Accademia della Scienze di Padova, 1, 345-349. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1854. Vegetaux fossiles de la Venetie. Bulletin Societe Geologique de France, ser. 2,11,1-2.

ZIGNO, A., DE. 1856. Sulla flora fossile deil'oolite. Memorie dell'Imperialo Royalo Istituto Veneto di Scienze ecc, 6, 325-339. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1856-1867. Flora fossilis formationis oolithicae.Le piante fossili deil'oolite. Volume 1: Book 1 (1856); Book 2 (1858); Books 3-5 (1867). Padua University Press, Padua. ZIGNO, A., DE. 18590. Delle Alghe e delle Calamarie dei Terreni Oolitici. Rivista Periodica della Accadamia della Scienze diPadova, 1858,1-9. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1859£. Some observations on the Flora of the Oolite. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 16, 110-115. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1860. Ueber die Gattungen Pachypteris und Thinnfeldia. Verhandlungen der Koenig, lichen geologischen Reichsanstalt, 1860,1-2. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1861. Sopra un nuovo genere di felce fossile (Cycadopteris). Rivista scienze Atti dell'Istituto Veneto, Serie 3,6, 574-586. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1862. Sulle piante fossili del Trias di Recoaro raccolte dal prof. A. Massalongo. Memorie dell' Imperiale Reale Istituto Veneto di Scienze ecc, II: 1-32. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1863. Sopra i depositi di piante fossili dell'America settentrionale, delle Indie e dell'Australia, che alcuni Autori riferiscono all'epoca oolitica. Revista periodica della Accademia della Scienze di Padova, 1862,1-14. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1864. Dichopteris, genus novum filicum fossilium. - Monografia del genre Dichopteris, nuovo genere di felce fossile. Rivista Istituto Memorie, 12, 211-225. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1865. Enumeratio filicum fossilium oolithicae: Osservazioni sulle felci fossili dell'Oolite, ed Enumerazione delle specie finora rinvenute nei varj piani di questa formazione, coll'a'giunta dei sinonimi, della descrizione dei generi e delle specie nuove, e di un prospetto della loro distribuzione geografica. Rivista Istituto Memorie, 1864,1-36. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1868. Descrizione di alcune Cicadeacee fossili rinvenute nelTOolite delle Alpi. Rivista scienze Atti del'Istituto Veneto, ser. 3,13, 1-16. ZIGNO, A., DE. 18690. Ueber die Jurassischen Bildungen in den Sette Comuni (Venetien). Verhandlungen der koeniglichen geologischen Reichsanstalt, 1869, 291. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1869&. Bemerkungen zu Prof. Schenks Referat ueber die Flora fossilis formationis oolithicae. Verhandlungen der koeniglichen geologischen Reichsanstalt, 1869, 307-310. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1871. Fossile Pflanzen aus Marmorschichten im Venetianischen. Verhandlungen der koeniglichen geologischen Reichsanstalt, 1871, 54. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1872. Sulle piante monocotiledoni dell'epoca giurese. Revista Periodica dell'Accademia di Padova, 1871, 1-10. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1873-1885. Flora fossilis formationis ooliticae, Volume 2: Book 1 (1873); Books 2 and 3 (1881); Books 4 and 5 (1885). Padua University Press, Padua. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1875. Einige Bemerkungen zu den Arbeiten des Herrn Dr. O. Feistmantel ueber die Flora von Rajmahal. Verhandlungen der koeniglichen geologischen Reichsanstalt, 1875,1-3. ZIGNO, A., DE. 1878. Sulla distribuzione geologica e geografica delle Conifere fossili. Rivista Periodica dell'Accademia diPadova, 1877,1-12.

The palaeobotanical beginnings of geological conservation: with case studies from the USA, Canada and Great Britain BARRY A. THOMAS Institute of Rural Sciences, University of Wales Aberystwyth, Llanbadarn Fawr, Aberystwyth, Ceredigion SA23 3AL, UK (e-mail: [email protected]) Abstract: The need to conserve geological features and palaeontological sites is an increasingly recognized part of conservation policy in many countries. In the USA, Canada and Great Britain this need was emphasized by the discovery in the 19th century of spectacular plant fossils that were in danger of disappearing through overcollecting or through the effects of weathering. People were spurred into action by these all too obvious dangers to save the plant fossils where they had been found as 'monuments' or 'records of the past'. The methodology for protection varied from one country to another through differences in both land ownership and legislation. The backgrounds to the discoveries, the reasons for their conservation, and the methods employed for their protection are outlined and discussed.

Fossil collecting can be traced back into antiquity but only really became a scientific pursuit towards the end of the 18th century. In the early years of the 19th century a number of important publications on plant fossils were published, such as Parkinson (1804) and Schlotheim (1820), although Sternberg (1820-1838) is now taken to be the first work for the valid publication of taxa. There were also the large and important works of Brongniart (1822, 1828-1837, 1837-1838) and Lindley & Hutton (1831-1837), together with others such as Artis (1825), Witham (1833) and Bowerbank (1840), that became available for people interested in the study of plant fossils. Interest there certainly was, because from that time on an ever-increasing number of scientific papers and publications on plant fossils began to be published documenting the new discoveries that were being made around the world. Much of the earlier published work relied on the efforts of amateur and professional collectors who gave or sold fossils to wealthy individuals or the new museums, but soon professional geologists began to make their own discoveries. A steady increase in demand for fossils and the pace of collecting were generally sustainable at first but some localities yielded such beautiful fossil material that commercialism crept in. Therefore, conflicts arose between the commercial interests and those people who perceived the scientific or intrinsic value of retaining the fossils where they were. Occasions occurred when the perceived value of preserving plant fossils where they were found outweighed the desire of others to remove them. This is especially true in the case of, what might be called, 'monuments to the past' such as fossil forests where removal and/or damage is all too obvious. The desire to preserve such 'monuments' led to the need for official geological conservation and this paper looks

at the way in which this arose in Great Britain, the USA and Canada. In all three countries, the history of geological conservation is inextricably linked with the study of plant fossils, particularly with trees or tree-like trunks that are found still in their original stands. The desire to protect such 'fossil forests' was approached in different ways in the three countries, which, together with the legislation that followed, in part reflects the differences in land ownership, that is the ease of control of private v. public land.

Palaeobotanical discoveries The first important date in the history of geological conservation is 1842, which was 5 years into the reign of Queen Victoria. It was also the year that Charles Darwin moved into Downe House in Kent and wrote the 3 5-page draft of his theory that would eventually lead to the publication of his Origin of Species in 1859. However, it was not in Britain, but across the Atlantic that these important finds were being made; discoveries that would eventually lead people down the road of geological conservation.

Canada The British geologist Sir Charles Lyell spent the summer of 1842 in Canada studying the Upper Carboniferous Coal Measures exposed in the cliffs and foreshore along the Bay of Fundy in the Province of Nova Scotia. Here, in the cliffs at South Joggins (Fig. 1), he first saw the extensive layers of 'fossil forests' of lycophyte trunks (Fig. 2) (Lyell 1843, 1845). Lyell was so impressed with the site that he revisited it in 1852 with another geologist, William Dawson, who was Superintendent of

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,95-110.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

96

B.A.THOMAS

Fig. 1. Locality map of the Joggins Fossil Forests, Nova Scotia, Canada.

Education for Nova Scotia. While they were surveying the area they discovered vertebrate remains within the upright lycophyte trunks that led to a number of scientific papers (Dawson 1853, 1859 1882; Lyell & Dawson 1853; see also Ferguson 1988; Scott 1998). Dawson went on to become Principal of McGill University, Montreal in 1855, although he continued to travel throughout the Province collecting plant fossils for his palaeobotanical research. He continued to visit the site over the next 30 years publishing a further account in 1882 and mentioning the upright stumps in his more general works (Dawson 1855, 1888). Dawson was knighted in 1883 (see Andrews 1980 for biographic details).

The USA While Bell was working in Nova Scotia, the United States was in the throes of its westward expansion. The Republic of Texas was annexed in 1845, Oregon purchased in 1846 and the boundary with Canada fixed through the Oregon Treaty, but, most importantly for westward expansion of the United States, California, Arizona and New Mexico were taken from Mexico in 1848. There was then an urgent need for communications and transport between the more established states on the east coast and the new settlements on the west coast, but the problem was that the route lay through Indian lands. Therefore, US Cavalry expeditions were dispatched first to pacify the native Indians and then to seek out the best routes for wagon trails and later for a transcontinental railroad. In 1849, 8 years after Brunei had constructed the

railway from Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads, Colonel John M. Washington led the first US Cavalry military expedition into Navajo lands, in what was to become the state of Arizona. With the expedition was Lieutenant James H. Simpson of the US Army Corps of Topographical Engineers. On 5 September Simpson climbed down into a nearby canyon where he 'found protruding horizontally from the wall, its end only sticking out, a petrified tree of about a foot in diameter' (Simpson 1850). Recognizing the importance of this discovery, Simpson sent pieces of the wood to Washington, DC together with his report. Unfortunately, the subsequent fate of these specimens is unknown (much of this information on the Petrified Forest in Arizona comes from Ash 1969, 1972, which I shall not quote repetitively throughout this text). At the same time that Britain was celebrating the Great Exhibition in Hyde Park in 1851, a further US Army military expedition, led by Captain Lorenzo Sitgreves, was exploring the area some distance south of Colonel Washington's route (a few miles south of what is now the Petrified Forest National Park). On 28 September 1851 they found large deposits of petrified wood: 'The ground was strewed with pebbles of agate, jasper, and chalcedony, and masses of what appeared to have been stumps of trees petrified into jasper, beautifully striped with bright shades of red (the predominating colour), blue, white and yellow' (Sitgreaves 1854). The physician and naturalist on the expedition, Dr S.W. Woodhouse, was the first scientifically trained person to see and write about the trees: 'we passed the remains of a large petrified tree, the wood of which was agatized. It was broken in pieces, as if by a fall, and its root was uphill. It must have been

PALAEOBOTANY AND GEOLOGICAL CONSERVATION

97

Section of the cliffs of the South Joggins, near Minudie, JSfova Scotia.

Fig. 2. The Upper Carboniferous Fossil Forests, South Joggins. (a) Field observations of Lyell (1845). (b) A section of the strata with details of the upright fossil plants at Coal Mine Point above coal 15 (Lyell & Dawson 1853).

upwards of three feet in diameter' (Woodhouse 1854). One of the fragments that Woodhouse collected was recently located at the Academy of Sciences in Philadelphia (Spamer 1989). Two years later, in 1853, Lieutenant Amiel W. Whipple set out into the same area leading one of the several expeditions that were exploring possible routes to the Pacific. On 2 December they found vast quantities of petrified wood in a dry riverbed that Whipple named Lithodendron Creek (later known as Lithodendron Wash). Whipple's report includes the first published illustration of petrified wood. He wrote: The banks of Lithodendron Creek are 40 feet in height and composed of red, sandy marl. The width between the bluffs seems nearly a mile. Quite a forest of petrified trees was discovered here today (Dec. 2, 1853) prostrate and partly buried in deposits of red marl. They are converted into

beautiful specimens of variegated jasper. One trunk was measured 10 feet in diameter and more than 100 feet in length. Some of the stumps appear as if they had been charred by fire before being converted into stone. The main portions of the trees have a dark brown colour; the smaller branches are of a reddish hue. Fragments are strewn over the surface for miles. (Quoted in Merrill 1911.)

Whipple's was the first expedition into the area that was accompanied by a geologist, in this case a French-Swiss mining engineer called Jules Marcou. Marcou (1855) described the wood as coniferous and the age as comparable to the German Keuper (an essentially correct age). William P. Blake, a geologist for the US Pacific Railroad Explorations and Surveys, completed the final report because Marcou had returned to Europe because of poor health. The German artist Baldwin Mollhausen also accompanied Whipple and later published a book

98

B.A.THOMAS

describing his experiences and reported the discovery of the petrified wood. Mollhausen illustrated the logs and sent samples to the German palaeobotanist Heinrich Robert Goeppert who provided a note on them for inclusion in his book (Mollhausen 1858) saying 'the six specimens all belong to the coniferous species' and 'A specimen which I examined with particular attention seemed to belong to the Araucaria type, and after having been considered with reference to the already described species, was named in honour of its discoverer Araucarites Mollhausianus'. Unfortunately for Mollhausen this name was subsequently shown to be a nomen nudum and, therefore, invalid (see Ash 1972 for photographs of Simpson, Whipple, Marcou and Mollhausen). Yet another US Army expedition led by Lieutenant Joseph C. Ives discovered more petrified wood (this time of Late Cretaceous age) about 60 miles north of Lithodendron Wash on 7 May 1858. The expedition's physician and naturalist this time was J.S. Newberry who examined the wood and reported that it was coniferous (Newberry 1861). Newberry on a later US Army exploring expedition under Captain Macomb went on to discover and describe Triassic plants in northern New Mexico. He eventually became the first Director of the Geological Survey of Ohio and wrote over 200 articles and books (Ash 1972; and see Andrews 1980 for a biographical sketch). Soon after this last discovery, expeditions were curtailed for a few years because of the American Civil War (1861-1865) and the Indian wars that followed. Many of the soldiers from the US Army expeditions fought in these wars. In 1878, after the fighting had finished, the General of the United States Army, William T. Sherman, instructed Lt. Col. P.T. Swaine, the commanding officer of Fort Wingate in New Mexico, to send two petrified logs to Washington, DC for display in the Smithsonian Institution. Frank Knowlton of the US National Museum (see Andrews 1980 for a biographical sketch) described the specimens and gave them the new name of Araucarioxylon arizonicum n.sp. (Knowlton 1889; see also Ash & Creber 2000).

Great Britain In Britain everything seemed outwardly calm and organized, and in 1851 the Great Exhibition was held in Hyde Park. In January of the same year William Crawford Williamson became Professor of Natural History in Manchester. The emphasis in Britain was very much on studying in the laboratory fossils that had been collected by others. Nevertheless, geologists were fascinated by the bases of trees being found in apparent growth

position in the Coal Measures. Many were found underground in coal mines, but occasionally they were found on the surface. In 1873 excavations for new buildings in the grounds of the Wadsley Lunatic Asylum (now Middlewood Hospital) in Sheffield uncovered a group of in situ lycophytes stumps. The Professor of Geology at Sheffield at the time was H.C. Sorby, who saw the importance of preserving the bases and ensured that special outbuildings were constructed to protect them (Sorby 1875). This discovery was 13 years before Williamson saw and removed the enormous Stigmaria that is now in the Manchester Museum (Williamson 1887,1896). Such stands of stigmarian stumps are not that rare in the Carboniferous. In 1840 Buckland told how he had seen fossil tree stumps in a sandstone quarry at Balgray, 3 miles north of Glasgow (Buckland 1840). Then in 1868 a small group of five or six stumps were uncovered in another nearby sandstone quarry (Young 1868). However, in late 1887 a cluster of 11 Namurian in situ stumps was uncovered on the floor of an old quarry in the new Victoria Park in Glasgow that had been opened to the public on July 5 that year to honour the Queen's Jubilee (Fig. 3) (Young & Glen 1888). The Scottish palaeobotanist Robert Kidston, who lived in Stirling (for biographical details see Crookall 1938; Andrews 1980: Edwards 1986), became involved in their excavation and interpretation (Kidston 1888, 1901), and may have helped persuade Glasgow Council to protect them and preserve them for future generations. A glassroofed shelter was constructed to house this now world-famous Fossil Grove (Fig. 4) (for further information see Macgregor & Walton 1948, 1972; Mclean 1973; Lawson & Lawson 1976; Gastaldo 1986; Gunning 1995; Cleal & Thomas 1995).

Site conservation The USA The northern part of the Arizona Territory (not a State until 1912) had begun to be settled by the late 1870s, encouraged by the Desert Land Act of 1877 (US Statutes at Large, Volume 19, Chap. 107, p. 377) that granted up to one section - 640 acres - of public land to any citizen at a cost of $1.25 an acre. Souvenir hunters soon started to take wood from the petrified forests. George F. Kunz was the first person to publish accessible accounts of the large deposits of highly coloured wood in the area often referred to in those days as Chalcedony Park and stated his opinion that the silicified wood found there was more beautiful than any other found throughout the world (Kunz 1885, 1886). Kunz also reported that there were about 1 million tons of silicified wood scattered over

PALAEOBOTANY AND GEOLOGICAL CONSERVATION

Fig. 3. Two views of the then newly discovered Fossil Grove in Victoria Park, Glasgow. (From Gunning 1995, with permission from the Glasgow Museums.)

99

100

B.A. THOMAS

Fig. 4. Stigmarias protected inside the fossil grove building.

1000 acres and discussed the commercial value of the wood, estimating that only about 1000 tons was suitable for ornamental work. His 1886 publication was aimed more for the popular market, so the news of these fossil forests quickly spread. Professional collectors and jewellers came in increasing numbers to take away the smaller trunks and even to blow up the larger trunks, in the so-called Crystal Forest area, in their search for the amethyst crystals that could occasionally be found in cavities in the wood. Transportation was, of course, still a major problem dissuading collectors from taking the largest trunks, but the new railroads soon alleviated that difficulty. The Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad was being constructed to meet up with the Gulf Colorado and Santa Fe Railroad, and by June 1887 trains were able to run from Kansas City to Galveston on the Texas coast. Then the railroad was continued westwards right through the middle of the Petrified Forest to Flagstaff and on to Los Angeles. Kunz (1890) published further accounts of the petrified forests that encouraged more people to collect and transport away even larger quantities of petrified wood for inlay work, mosaics, tabletops and even floor tiles. The Drake Company, in Sioux

Falls, South Dakota, even cut and polished the better and more highly coloured logs and used them for ornamental purposes. They transported train-car loads of tree sections from '6 inches to 5 feet in diameter' and from '50 to 2500 pounds in weight'. At Sioux Falls the trunks were cemented together with calcine or cement and ground down for about a week, starting with large slabs of Sioux Falls quartzite and finishing with emery. The final polishing was with tin oxide and then 'tripoli' on feltcovered wheels. The sawing process was kept secret (Anon. 1888). The Drake Company exhibited at the incredibly popular and influential World's Fair at Chicago in 1893 where millions of Americans visited over the 6 months it was open. In the Manufacturers and Liberal Arts Building, where manufactured goods were next to items of historic or artistic interest, they exhibited a display of the wood sawn into slabs and polished to form table tops and other pieces of furniture. The Arizona Territory also displayed trunks of petrified wood in their exhibition. The Drake Company then showed their products in New York at Davis Callamar & Co. Ltd on Broadway and 21st Street to 5th Avenue (Anon. 1894). The local people expressed disquiet at this ever-increasing rate of removal, but the problem was that the petrified forests were on railway land, or on public land managed by the Federal Government, so there was effectively no deterrent for the fossil collectors. There was the 1872 Mining Law, which provided for the location and patent of certain mineral deposits such as gold, silver, lead and zinc, but fortunately it could not be extended to include petrified wood or there would have been a claims rush. Eventually, in the early 1890s, came a proposal that was so outrageous it would change public opinion across the whole of the Arizona Territory. A crushing mill was constructed in the nearby railway town of Adamana expressly to turn the petrified logs in what is now Chalcedony Park into abrasives. So, in 1895 the Territory's Legislature petitioned Congress to create a National Park for the petrified forests. They must have been encouraged in their petition in the knowledge that not only had Yellowstone National Park been created in 1872 (US Statutes at Large, Vol. 17, Chap. 324, pp. 32-33 [S. 392]), and Sequoia (US Statutes at Large, Vol. 26, Chap. 926, p. 478 [HR. 1570]) and Yosemite (US Statutes at Large, Vol. 26, Chap. 1263, pp. 650-652 [HR. 1263]) National Parks in 1890, but more so because Wind Cave in South Dakota had been declared a National Park (US Statutes at Large, Vol. 32, part. 1, Chap. 634, pp. 765-766 [Public Act No. 16]). The more spectacular scenic sites of the far west were established for 'the benefit and enjoyment of the people' but Wind Cave was preserved because of its unusual features. Civil War sites, Indian wars

PALAEOBOTANY AND GEOLOGICAL CONSERVATION

101

Fig. 5. Views in the Petrified Forest National Park, Arizona, (a) The Agate Bridge in the Jasper Forest, c. 1908. (b) The Agate Bridge in 1923 with the new concrete supporting beam, (c) A balanced log in the Rainbow Forest about 1950. (d) Broken logs in the Rainbow Forest in 1935. (e) A large log with the Painted Desert in the background in 1929. (a, American Memory, Library of Congress; b-e, courtesy of the US National Park Service.)

sites and Pueblo archaeological sites were also coming under protection. Although there were fossil forests preserved within the Yellowstone National Park they were not discovered until 1878 by Dr William Holmes of the US Geological Survey for the Territories, some 6 years after the park was created. So, as yet, there was no national park created specifically for fossils (Holmes 1883; Knowlton 1928). Congress took notice of the petition and the palaeobotanist Professor Lester F. Ward, of the US

Geological Survey (see Andrews 1980 for a biographic sketch), was instructed to survey the area of the fossil forests and make his recommendation on their suitability for a National Park. This he did, in November 1899, and recommended the next year that the area should be withdrawn from public use and that a national park created to protect the fossil forests (Ward 1900, 1901). The area was, indeed, quickly withdrawn from public use, but several more years passed before it was really protected. On 8

102

B.A.THOMAS

Fig. 6. The changing outline of the Petrified Forest from its creation as a National Monument to the present-day National Park. (Based on Merrill 1911, and Ash & Creber 2000). June 1906 Congress passed the Act for the Preservation of American Antiquities (34 Stat. 225) and gave the President authorization to declare National Monuments by Public Proclamation to preserve national monuments for the preservation of features of historic, prehistoric and scientific interest, and forbidding unauthorized injury of objects of antiquity. Devil's Tower in Wyoming was declared as the first National Monument, but on 8 December of the same year President Theodore Roosevelt declared Chalcedony Park as the Petrified Forest National Monument on the grounds of the site's 'scientific interest and value', making it the world's first legally protected palaeontological site (Fig. 5). It was about 90 square miles (60776 acres = 24500

hectares) in size, but, because the allotment of the area was thought to be too generous by some, the US Geological Survey undertook a more detailed survey in 1910. George Merrill of the US National Museum was then sent out by Congress in 1911 to make a recommendation for the size of the park and, being a hard rock geologist, did not believe that all the deposits of petrified wood needed to be protected. His recommendation brought about a Presidential proclamation on 31 July 1911 that reduced the Park in size to about 40 square miles (25920 acres = 10450 hectares). Neither the northern forest, including Lithodendron Wash, the Painted Desert nor the more southerly Rainbow Forests were included within the area declared at this time, although 2500

PALAEOBOTANY AND GEOLOGICAL CONSERVATION

103

Fig. 7. Petrified wood for sale just outside the National Park in 1939. (American Memory, Library of Congress.)

acres (= 1008 hectares) of Painted Desert were added to the Monument in 1932. Finally, in December 1962 an enlarged area of 93500 acres (=37700 hectares) was declared a National Park (Fig. 6). Much petrified wood remained outside the Park and was collected by tourists and dealers alike (Fig. 7). Incidentally, the first Park Superintendent, Stevenson, allowed each visitor to the park to take away about 81bs of wood as souvenirs (Lubick 1996). There was also the ever-present confusion about the rights of individuals to lay claim to fossil wood sites under the Mining Act 1872. It was not until 1962 that the Petrified Wood Act (originating as an amendment to the Mining Act) was passed, which confirmed that petrified wood could not be considered to be valuable minerals and, therefore, could not be 'claimed' by individuals. It did, however, also direct the Secretary of the Interior 'to provide by regulation that limited quantities of petrified wood may be removed without charge from those public lands which he shall specify'. The present rules for noncommercial collecting without a permit limit quantities to 25 Ibs in weight per day and one piece, but not more than 250 Ibs (= 113.5 kg) per person per year. Any specimen more than 250 Ibs requires a permit (available from the Bureau of Land Management, which is authorized to do this by the Federal Land Policy Management Act 1976). Commercial collecting (including sale or barter of private collections) is governed by the Materials Act of 1947 (for further details see Wolberg & Reinhard 1997). There is some potential for confusion here because, in addition to Federal lands, there are Stateowned lands where the state can impose its own rules and regulations. Arizona State requires

permits, available from the Arizona State Museum, for collecting anything at all on land controlled by the state (Arizona Revised Statutes Annotated, Title 41, Chap. 4.1, Art. 4). Any specimens must be placed in a public repository and any violation knowingly committed is a class 2 misdemeanour. Also Navajo Nation Policy maintains that all fossils on lands of the Navajo Nation are the property of the Navajo Nation (Fig. 8). The Tribal Minerals Department would seem to be the only authority to issue permits to collect fossils on Navajo lands (Wolberg & Reinard 1997). Arizona, since 1988, has included petrified wood as one of its state symbols together with the gemstone turquoise, plus certain flowers and animals. This is a success story, although a comparable situation in South Dakota was a disaster (see later in the Discussion).

Great Britain As explained above, the two British clusters of in situ stumps were protected in buildings. Wadsley was saved through the action of individuals and Glasgow through the action of an enlightened local authority. The real point to remember here is that all land in Britain is owned privately or by the Crown, therefore the lycophyte stumps were owned together with the land on which they were sited. The implications of land ownership were constantly in the public eye throughout the 19th century because of the increasing number of Land Enclosure Acts taking away the commoners' rights (Rackham 1986; Thomas 1999).

104

B.A.THOMAS

Fig. 8. A recent photograph of a partially reconstructed building made up of sections of petrified logs in the Petrified Forest National Park, Arizona. Navajo Indians probably constructed this building, now known as the Agate House, about 600 years ago. (Courtesy of S. Ash.)

The Sea Bird Protection Act 1869 initiated wildlife conservation legislation in Britain and it was followed 20 years later by the founding of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), and at about the same time (1888) the Society for the Promotion of Nature Reserves started purchasing land for biological reserves. However, there was no relevant legislation for the protection of either biological or geological sites until the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949. This permitted the creation of National Parks in England and Wales, and Nature Reserves in England, Wales and Scotland. It also included the provision for Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) designed so that small areas of conservation interest could be identified and their scientific interest taken into account when changes of land use were proposed. This Act and the subsequent Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 ensure that SSSIs are given precise boundaries, are supported by information on their scientific importance and that a list of Potentially Damaging Operations (PDOs) are drawn up to safeguard their integrity. Once sites are selected the relevant statutory body (the Countryside Council for Wales (CCW), English Nature (EN) or Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH)) have a duty to notify the owners/occupiers before the designation is confirmed. The landowner must give notice in advance to the relevant statutory body of any

Potentially Damaging Operations that would destroy the scientific interest of the site. There was a provision for earth science conservation in both the 1949 and 1981 Acts, but action on identifying and notifying such sites lagged behind that for biological conservation until a programme was launched by the Nature Conservancy Council (the forerunner of CCW, EN and SNH) to conserve the most significant earth science sites in Great Britain as SSSIs. This is the Geological Conservation Review (for further details see Wimbledon et al. 1995; Ellis et al. 1996). Both the Wadsley and the Victoria Park fossil forests are now listed as SSSIs and are in the Geological Conservation Review (Cleal 1988; Cleal & Thomas 1995). The conservation agencies in Britain pride themselves in being at the forefront of geological conservation, and legal protection for sites has now been in effect for over half a century. However, management of the sites is the key to success for many geological SSSIs. Some need constant protection against the effects of the weather, and without the building it is doubtful if any of the Victoria Park stumps would have survived to today. The major difference here between the 1949 and 1981 SSSI notifications is that the latter carried some degree of responsibility (albeit limited) to protect the site as required under EC and international legislation. Since the 1949 Act

PALAEOBOTANY AND GEOLOGICAL CONSERVATION

105

Fig. 9. Recent restoration work on the Wadsley Fossil Forest in progress.

there had been the gradual evolution from 'passive' conservation via planning legislation to more active conservation. The original Nature Conservancy Council (NCC) developed an active, although informal, site-clearing programme that needed the permission of the owner. Then the NCC were given powers under the Countryside Act 1968 to enter into management agreements and grant aid for the purpose, although management was still not identified as a primary purpose. The 1981 Act's provision for SSSIs relied on the voluntary co-operation of landowners to protect the interest on their land. Doing nothing and allowing the site to deteriorate was still not an offence. Victoria Park was first notified as an SSSI in 1954, long before becoming a GCR site, and is still in good condition through maintenance of the building by Glasgow City Council. Wadsley, in Sheffield, was apparently not notified until 1990 and already had been left to deteriorate for at least 40 years. The buildings collapsed long ago and many of the stumps have largely disintegrated. Some voluntary remedial conservation work has been carried out in recent years guided by staff of the Sheffield City Museum (Fig. 9). The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (Section 75 and Schedule 9) replaces the provisions for SSSIs. Although there is the same notification procedure, details must now be published in at least one local paper to ensure that the public become aware of the existence of SSSIs. More importantly, the notification must now contain a management statement signifying that SSSI status is not merely a

label. The Act refers to enhancement, recognizing that management may require some positive action. Indeed, management is now a primary objective of designation and the nature conservation bodies hold the view that management statements should be simple and detail their aspirations for the site. The Act also gives the conservation bodies the power to intervene and serve notice of a management scheme to the landowner. Section 28(4) allows a Management Notice to be served on the landowner requiring him to carry out work. It also permits the conservation body to undertake the work and recover expenses from the landowner or even to compulsory purchase if management agreements cannot be reached or if an agreement has been breached. At last there is the legislation available to ensure that geological sites are not allowed to deteriorate, but it remains to be seen if the conservation bodies act to do this.

Canada Legislation was even later in Canada. It was the plunder of tree stumps from Joggins by researchers and museums outside Nova Scotia, especially during the 1960s, that prompted the Nova Scotia Government to pass the Historical Objects Protection Act 1970 (Statutes of Nova Scotia 1970); the first Province to pass such an Act. A 1 mile-stretch of Joggins cliff was designated as a Protected Site. This Act was repealed in 1980 and replaced by the Special

106

B.A. THOMAS

Places Protection Act 1980 (Statutes of Nova Scotia 1980) revised in 1989 (Revised Statutes, Chap. 438) and amended in 1990, clause 45 and 1994-95, clause 17 (see http://museum.gov.ns.ca/fossrls/protect/act. htm). This retained Joggins as a Protected Site, although Ferguson (1988) maintains that it is not a long enough stretch of coast and does not include the intertidal zone where many bases are to be found. The site may be enlarged in the near future. The Act allowed for the placing of appropriate signs indicating that the land is a protected site, although this is not a requirement. As yet there is no sign at Joggins, although there are plans to erect one. The Special Places Protection Act also made it illegal to collect fossils anywhere in Nova Scotia without a obtaining a Heritage Research Permit (issued by the Nova Scotia Museum to serious scientists for a period of 1 year). There is also a version of permit intended for moderate, non-commercial collecting by amateurs and tourists who wish to avoid breaking the law. The Act permits fossils collected without a permit to be seized and become the property of the Province (Revised Statutes, Chap. 438, section 11; 1994-95, clause 17, section 6). A permit is also needed to export them to other Provinces and in Canada there is also the Federal Cultural Property Export Act 1975, which controls the export of fossils from Canada. This all seems rather draconian, but, as Ferguson (1988) points out, there is a tacit understanding that casual collecting is permissible without a permit, even of loose material on the beach at Joggins. Implementing the Special Places Protection Act has been the mandate of the Nova Scotia Museum. In accepting that implementing the Act has been problematic, and that changing times suggested that the Act and its supporting policies be revisited, the Museum held 1-day meetings in November 1994 and May 1995. A visionary document resulted, entitled Towards a Learning Culture . . . The Vision of Fossil Resources Management in Nova Scotia, which identifies key strategic goals that define the direction for legislative, policy and programme initiatives, is available at http://museum.gov.ns.ca/ fossils/protect/vision.htm. Although the main thrust is still to control collecting through issuing permits, there is the realization that 'Over-regulation of small-scale occasional collecting for individual pleasure or learning, for example by children or tourists, must be avoided'. The Halifax Museum has now even issued guidelines on Protecting the Past in which it is explained, 'You may collect one or two loose fossils still. Do not disturb anything still in the bedrock'. And tips for collecting fossils: 'Do not collect too many specimens; it is a long walk home.. . Limit yourself to one or two good specimens, rather than keeping everything that catches your eye'. See http://museum.gov.ns.ca/fossils/protect/info.htmfor

further information. Thankfully, prosecution for collecting a few plant fossils does not now seem likely.

Discussion As we have seen, the moves in USA, Great Britain and Nova Scotia to preserve plant fossils in the places where they were discovered were the first of the strictly geological sites to be protected. However, the reasons and the methodology for doing so were very different. In the USA and Nova Scotia overcollecting was the reason for initiating protective legislation. Even then, though, there was a major difference because in the USA it was commercial exploitation while in Canada it was palaeontological exploitation. The Fossil Forest in Arizona was protected by specific decree, while the stumps in Nova Scotia were protected by a blanket province-wide ban on collecting without a permit. Both systems have worked well for these two sites, although in the case of the USA preventative legislation was by no means certain without proper management. For example, the 320 acre Fossil Cycad National Park in South Dakota was created on 21 October 1922 to preserve an exposure of Cretaceous forest of hundreds of fossilized cycadeoides. Interestingly, Wieland (for biographical details see Andrews 1980), who had published the major work on these cycadeoides (Wieland 1916), used the Homestead Act in 1920 to gain control of the land and the fossils. He then gave the land back to the government for the creation of the Monument, but not before removing all the large exposed specimens (Santucci & Santucci 1998). The site was, therefore, depleted before it was created a monument and there were only a few smaller bits and pieces lying around. This did not escape the notice of the National Park Service, which soon after Wieland's death in 1953 agitated to have the site removed from its protection. Congress de-authorized the Monument on 1 September 1957. However, as Santucci & Santucci (1998) point out, the legislation de-authorizing the site still maintained that any fossils found on the site would become the property of the Federal Government; an interesting anomaly since the de-authorization legislation was passed because there were supposed to be no more fossils. In fact the site does contain fossils because cycadeoids were discovered when a new road was constructed. Some cycadeoids were given to the South Dakota School of Mining while the rest were reburied under the new road. Now a draft amendment of the South Dakota Resource Management Plan prepared by the Bureau of Land Management suggests that the area should be conserved for its 'geologic and paleontologic values for future geologists to study and enjoy'. If this amend-

PALAEOBOTANY AND GEOLOGICAL CONSERVATION

ment comes into force and since no National Park Services area now contains fossil cycadeoids the clear implication is that the Fossil Cycad National Monument should never have been de-authorized. The situation may be altering again in the United States because on 2 October 2001 the Paleontological Resources Preservation Act was introduced into the House of Congress (107th Congress 1st Session H.R. 2974). This is a bill To provide for the protection of paleontological resources on Federal lands, to promote the systematic compilation of baseline paleontological resource data, science-based decision making, and accurate public education, to provide for a unified management policy regarding paleontological resources on Federal Lands, to promote legitimate public access to fossil resources on Federal lands, to encourage informed stewardship of the resources through educational, recreational, and scientific use of the paleontological resources on Federal lands, and for other purposes'. The purpose appears to be an all-encompassing Preservation Act, but is really aimed to protect rare fossils and all vertebrate fossils, and prevent overexploitation by commercial collectors. Permits would be available for collectors, but all collections would remain the property of the United States and should be placed in approved repositories. Amateur collecting of rocks, minerals, and invertebrate and plant fossils on Federal lands would not be affected by this Act. In Great Britain there was no real danger of commercial or palaeontological exploitation of the two fossil forests, the threat instead came from exposure and subsequent weathering. It was, therefore, action at the local level that really protected the Wadsley and Victoria Park stumps, not the legislation that came in much later. This, apparently, more casual approach in Britain reflects the difference in countrywide land ownership between the three countries. In the USA, states such as Arizona have both Federal and State public land, and in Canada provinces like Nova Scotia have Provincial as well as Provincial Crown land. In Britain, however, the Crown, individuals or companies own all land and there is no public land as such. Even National Nature Reserves are owned by the Conservation Agencies and are not public land. Although today there is concern about overcollecting (Norman 1992) and there is pressure building for control of exports of particularly scientifically valuable specimens from Britain, the draconian laws on collecting plant fossils in Nova Scotia and those for the Arizona petrified woods are never likely to be passed in the UK. I am very grateful to S.R. Ash (New Mexico), CJ. Cleal (Wales), D. Skilliter (Canada) and L.M. Warren (Wales) for information and their helpful comments on the manuscript.

107

I also thank S. Ash, the Glasgow Museum and for the use of their photographs.

References ANDREWS, H.N. 1980. The Fossil Hunters. In Search of Ancient Plants. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY. ANON. 1888. The petrified trees of Arizona. Manufacturer and Builder, 20, (6), 131-132. ANON. 1894. The petrified forest of Arizona. Manufacturer and Builder, 26, (5), 102-104. ARTIS, E.T. 1825. Antediluvian Phytology, the author, London. ASH, S.R. 1969. Ferns from the Chinle Formation (Upper Trias sic) in the Fort Wingate Area, New Mexico. US Geological Survey, Professional Paper, 613-D. ASH, S.R. 1972. The search for plant fossils in the Chinle Formation. In: BREED, C.S. & BREED, WJ. (eds) Investigations in the Triassic Chinle Formation. Museum of Northern Arizona Bulletin, 47,45-58. ASH, S.R. & CREBER, G.T. 2000. The late Triassic Araucarioxylon arizonicum trees of the Petrified Forest National Park, Arizona, USA. Palaeontology, 43,15-28. BOWERBANK, J.S. 1840. A History of the Fossil Fruits and Seeds of the London Clay. John van Voorst, London. BRONGNIART, A. 1822. Sur la classification et la distribution des vegeteau fossiles en general, et sur ceux des terrains de sediment superieur en particulier. Memoires Museum de Histoire Naturelle, Paris, 8, 203-348. BRONGNIART, A. 1828-1837. Histoire des vegetataux fossiles ou recherches botaniques et geologiques sur les vegetataux renfermes dans les diverses couches du globe, Volume 1: Parts 1 and 2 (1828); Part 3 (1829); Part 4, (1830); Parts 5 and 6 (1831); Part 7 (1833); Parts 8 and 9 (1834); Part 10 (1936); Parts 11 and 12 (1837). G. Dufour & E. d'Ocagne, Paris. BRONGNIART, A. 1837-1838. Histoire des vegetataux fossiles ou rechesches botaniques et geologiques sur les vegetataux renfermes dans les diverses couches du globe, Volume 2: Part 13 (1837); Parts 14 and 15 (1838). G. Dufour & E.d'Ocagne, Paris. BUCKLAND, W. 1840. Anniversary Address to the Geological Society of London. Proceedings of the Geological Society, London, III, 231. CLEAL, CJ. 1988. British Palaeobotanical Sites. Special Papers in Palaeontology, 40, 57-71. CLEAL, CJ. & THOMAS, B.A. 1995. Palaeozoic Palaeobotany of Great Britain. Geological Conservation Review Series No. 9. Chapman & Hall, London. CROOKALL, R. 1938. The Kidston Collection of Fossil Plants, with an Account of the Life and Work of Robert Kidston. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain. HMSO, London. DAWSON, J.W 1853. Of the coal measures of the South Joggins, Nova Scotia. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 10, 1-51. DAWSON, J.W. 1855. The Geology of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island or Acadian Geology. Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh (other editions 1868,1878,1891). DAWSON, J.W 1859. On a terrestrial mollusk, a chilognathus myriapod and some new species of reptiles

108

B.A. THOMAS

from the coal-formation of Nova Scotia. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 16, 268-277. DAWSON, J.W. 1882. On the results of recent explorations of erect trees containing animal remains in the coal formation of Nova Scotia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, London, 173,621-659. DAWSON, J.W. 1888. The Geological History of Plants. Kegan Paul, Trench & Co., London. EDWARDS, D. 1986. Robert Kidston The most professional palaeobotanist. A tribute on the 60th anniversary of his death. Forth Naturalist and Historian, 8,65-93. ELLIS, N.V. BOWEN, D.Q. et al 1996. An Introduction to the Geological Conservation Review. Geological Conservation Review Series No. 1. Joint Nature Conservation Committee. FERGUSON, L. 1988. The 'Fossil Cliffs' at Joggins, Nova Scotia: A Canadian Case Study. Palaeontology, Special Papers, 40,191-200. GASTALDO, R.A. 1986. An explanation for lycopod configuration. 'Fossil Grove' Victoria Park, Glasgow. Scottish Journal of Geology, 22,77-83. GUNNING, R. 1995. The Fossil Grove. Glasgow Museum, Glasgow. HOLMES, W.H. 1883. Twelfth Annual Report. US Geological Survey of the Territories, 1878. KIDSTON, R. 1888. Note on the nature of fossil trees found at Whiteinch. Transactions of the Geological Society, Glasgow, 8,235-6. KIDSTON, R. 1901. Excursion to the Fossil Grove, Whiteinch, Glasgow. British Association Handbook, Glasgow. KNOWLTON, F.H. 1889. New species of fossil wood (Araucarioxylon) from Arizona and New Mexico. Proceedings of the US National Museum, 1888, 11, 1-4. KNOWLTON, F.H. 1928. Fossil Forests of the Yellowstone National Park. US Government Printing Office, Washington. KUNZ, G.F. 1885. On the agatized woods and the malachite, azurite, etc., from Arizona. Transactions of the New York Academy of Science, 5, 9-11. KUNZ, G.F. 1886. Agatized and jasperised wood of Arizona. Popular Science Monthly, 28, 362-367. KUNZ, G.F. 1890. Gems and Precious Stones of North America. New York Science Publishing Company. (Reprinted by Dover Publications, New York, 1968.) LAWSON, J.A. & LAWSON, J.D. 1976. Geology Explained Around Glasgow and South-west Scotland, Including Arran. David & Charles, Newton Abbott. LINDLEY, J. & HUTTON, W. 1831-1837. The Fossil Flora of Great Britain; or, Figures and Descriptions of the Vegetable Remains Found in a Fossil State in this Country, Volume 1 (1833); Volume 2 (1835); Volume 3 (1837). John Ridgeway, London. LUBICK, G.P. 1996. Petrified Forest National Park: A Wilderness Bound in Time. University of Arizona Press. LYELL, C. 1843. On the upright fossil trees found at different levels in the coal strata of Cumberland, Nova Scotia. Proceedings of the Geological Society, London, 4,176-178. LYELL, C. 1845. Travels in North America (2 volumes). Murray, London. LYELL, C. & DAWSON, J.W. 1853. On the remains of a

reptile (Dendrerpeton acadianus, Wyman and Owen) and of a land shell discovered in the interior of an erect fossil tree in the coal measures of Nova Scotia. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 9,58-63. MACGREGOR, M. & WALTON, J. 1948. The Story of the Fossil Grove at Glasgow Public Parks and Botanical Gardens, Glasgow. Glasgow D.C. Parks Department, Glasgow. MACGREGOR, M. & WALTON, J. 1972. The Story of the Fossil Grove at Glasgow Public Parks and Botanical Gardens, Glasgow, rev. edn. Glasgow D.C. Parks Department, Glasgow. MARCOU, J. 1855. Resume of a geological reconnaissance extending from Napoleon at the junction with the Arkansas with the Mississippi to the Pueblo de los Angeles, in California. In: WHIPPLE, A.W. et al. (eds.) Report of Exploration for a Railway Route Near the Thirty-fifth Parallel. US 33rd Congress, 1st session, House Executive Document 129, Vol. 18(2), 44-80; also US 33rd Congress, 2nd session, Senate Executive Document 78 and House Executive Document 91, Vol. 3(4), 165-167 [1856]. MCLEAN, A.C. 1973. Excursion 1: Fossil Grove. In: BLUCK, B.J. (ed.) Excursion Guide to the Geology of the Glasgow District. Geological Society of Glasgow, Glasgow. MERRILL, G.P. 1911. The Fossil Forests of Arizona. Tucson, Arizona Geological Survey. MOLLHAUSEN, B. 1858. Tagebiich einer Reise von Mississippi nach den Kusten der Sudsee. Herman Mendelssohn, Leipzig. (Translated in the same year as Diary of a journey from the Mississippi to the coasts of the Pacific with a United States Government expedition. London, 2 Volumes.) NEWBERRY, J.S. 1861. Geological report. In: IVES, J.C. et al. Report upon the Colorado River of the West explored in 1857 and 1858. US Congress, 1st session, Senate Executive Document & House Executive Document, 90,1-154. NORMAN, D.B. 1992. Fossil collecting and site conservation in Britain: are they reconcilable? Palaeontology, 35,247-256. PARKINSON, J. 1804. Organic Remains of a Former World, Volume 1. Sherwood, Moetg and Jones, London. RACKHAM, O. 1986. The History of the Countryside. J.M. Dent and Sons, George Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London. SANTUCCI, V.L. & SANTUCCI, M. 1998. Fossil Cycad National Monument: a case of paleontological mismanagement. In: SANTUCCI, V.L. and MCCLELLAND, L. (eds) National Park Service Paleontological Research. Geological Resources Technical Report NPS/NRGRD/GRDTR-98/01 84-89. SCHLOTHEIM, E.F. 1820. Die Petrefactenkunde auf ihrem jetzig Standpunkte durch die Beschreibung seiner Sammlung versteinerter und fossiler Uberreste des Theis- und Pflanzenreichs der Vorwelt erlduter. Becker, Gotha. SCOTT, A.C. 1998. The legacy of Charles Lyell: advances in our knowledge of coal and coal-bearing strata. In: BLUNDELL, D.J. & SCOTT, A.C. (eds) Lyell: The Past is the Key to the Present. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 143,243-260.

PALAEOBOTANY AND GEOLOGICAL CONSERVATION SIMPSON, J.H. 1850. Journal of a military expedition to the Navaho Country, made in 1849. US 31st Congress, 1st session Senate Executive Document, 64, 56-138. (Reprinted and edited by Frank McNite in 1964 and published by University of Oklahoma Press.) SITGREAVES, L. 1854 [Diary], In: SITGREAVES, L. et al. Report of an Expedition Down the Zuni and Colorado Rivers. US 32nd Congress, 2nd session, Senate Executive Document, Vol. 10, no. 59,4-29. SORBY, H.C. 1875. On the remains of fossil forest in the Coal-measures at Wadsley, near Sheffield. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 31, 458-500. SPAMER, E.E. 1989. A historic piece of petrified wood from the Triassic of Arizona. The Mosasaur, 4,149-152. STATUTES OF NOVA SCOTIA. 1970. An Act to Provide for the Protection of Historical Objects. Chapter 8. Assented to the 24th day of April, AD 1970. Queen's Printer, Halifax, Nova Scotia. STATUTES OF NOVA SCOTIA. 1980. An Act to Provide for the Preservation, Regulation and Study of Archaeological and Historical Remains and Palaeontological and Ecological Sites. Chapter 17. Assented to the 5th day of June, AD 1980. Queen's Printer, Halifax, Nova Scotia. STERNBERG, K. 1820-1838. Versuch einer geognostischen botanischen Dasstellung der Flora der Vorwelt, Volume I: Parts 1 and 2 (1820-1821), F. Fleischer, Leipzig; Parts 3 and 4 and Tentamen (1823-1825), E. Brenk's witte, Regensburg; Volume II: Parts 5 and 6 (1833), J. Spurny, Prague; Parts 7 and 8 (1838), G. Hasse und sohne, Prague. THOMAS, B.A. 1999. Do the hedgerow regulations conserve the biodiversity of British hedgerows? International Journal of Biosciences and the Law, 2, 67-90. WARD, L.F. 1900. Report on the Petrified Forests of Arizona. Washington, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC. WARD, L.F. 1901. The Petrified Forests of Arizona. Annual Report, Smithsonian Institute for 1899,289-307. WIELAND, G.R. 1916. American Fossil Cycads, Volume II. Taxonomy. Carnegie Institute of Washington Publication, 34, Volume li. WILLIAMSON, WC. 1887. A Monograph on the Morphology and Histology of Stigmaria ficoides. Palaeontographical Society (Monographs), 40,1-62. WILLIAMSON, WC. 1896. Reminiscences of a Yorkshire Naturalist. George Redwave, London. (Reprinted 1985, WATSON, J. & THOMAS, B.A. (eds), University of Manchester.) WITHAM, H.T.M. 1833. The Internal Structure of Fossil Vegetables Found in the Carboniferous and Oolitic Deposits of Great Britain. A&C Black, Edinburgh. WIMBLEDON, W.A., BENTON, M.J. et al. 1995. The development of a methodology for the selection of British geological sites for conservation: Part 1. Modern Geology, 20,159-202. WOLBERG, D. & REINHARD, P. 1997. Collecting the Natural World. Legal Requirements & Presumed Liability for Collecting Plants, Animals, Rocks, Minerals & Fossils. Geosciences Press, Tucson, Arizona. WOODHOUSE, S.W. 1854. Report on the natural history of the country passed over by the exploring expedition

109

under the command of Brev. Capt. L. Sitgreaves, United States Topographical Engineers during the year 1851. In: SITGREAVES, L. et al. Report of An Expedition Down the Zuni and Colorado Rivers. US 32nd Congress, 2nd session, Senate Executive Document, Vol. 10, no. 59, 31^0. YOUNG, J. 1868. Note on the section of strata in the Gilmorehill Quarry and Boulder Clay on the site of the new University buildings. Transactions of the Geological Society, Glasgow, III, 298. YOUNG, J. & GLEN, D.C. 1888. Notes on a section of Carboniferous Strata containing erect stems of fossil trees and beds of intrusive dolerite in the old Whinstone Quarry Victoria Park. Transactions of the Geological Society, Glasgow, VIII, 227-235.

Addendum Great Britain Recent excavations carried out at the Wadsley site in Sheffield revealed remains of many more stigmarian bases and fallen stems. After logging the remains, the site was covered over to preserve the remains from weathering.

Canada Using the Joggins locality in Nova Scotia as a case study, Falcon-Lang & Calder (2004) provided a framework for the assessment of candidate UNESCO World Heritage Sites. They stressed the outstanding value of Joggins' 'unrivalled record of fossil biota preserved in a high resolution palacoecological context.' The Joggins cliffs locality has now been placed on Canada's list of potential UNESCO sites. FALCON-LANG, H.J. & CALDER, J.H. 2004. UNESCO World Heritage and the Joggins Cliffs of Nova Scotia. Geology Today, 20,139-143.

USA The Petrified Forest National Park Expansion Act was first introduced to the House of Representatives on April 3rd 2003 (H.R. 1630). Congress finally passed the Bill in late November 2005 first having been passed by both the House of Representatives (108-713) and the Senate (784). President George Bush then signed the Bill, on December 3rd 2004. This Act more than doubled the size of the Petrified Forest National Park adding 52,000 hectares (125,000 acres) of fossil-rich Upper Triassic rocks thereby giving the park a total area of about 91,000 hectares (28,000). More information about the park and its fossils can be found at www.nps.gov/pefo/.

110

B.A.THOMAS

Fig. Al. The cliffs at Joggins, Nova Scotia, Canada, showing the dipping Upper Carboniferous strata containing the fossil forests.

Palaeobotanical studies and collecting in the 19th century, with particular reference to the Ravenhead collection and Henry Hugh Higgins W. SIMKISS & AJ. BOWDEN Earth and Physical Sciences, National Museums Liverpool, William Brown Street, Liverpool L3 8EN, UK (e-mail: [email protected]) Abstract: Palaeobotanical studies in the NW of England could be said to originate with Mr William Barton and Charles Leigh in the latter part of the 17th century. These individuals merely noted the existence of fossil plant remains in the Coal Measure deposits around Lancashire. However, it was not until the 19th century before any real studies were carried out on the flora found within the Lancashire Coalfield. The Ravenhead collection is primarily made up of an Upper Carboniferous Langsettian flora, fish and bivalves with some insect remains. The collector was Liverpool Museum volunteer Reverend Henry Hugh Higgins and the collection was made from a railway construction site in 1870. The site exposed two coal seams known as the Upper and Lower Ravenhead Coals. The collection was exhibited at the British Association meeting held in Liverpool in 1870 and at once created a great deal of interest. W. Carruthers remarked upon the fine preservation and the importance of having material where the separate components can now with certainty be shown to be part of the same plant. Higgins published the first paper on the Ravenhead collection in 1871. A year later, museum assistant Frederick Price Marrat produced an extensive paper for the Liverpool Geological Society in which he attempted a more detailed description of the Ravenhead flora. This paper described 58 true and seed fern specimens with variations, nine types that included five holotypes and two syntypes. However, Marrat admitted he found identification of plant remains by relying on external features extremely difficult and Williamson's methods of examining the microstructures of fossilized material were not yet in use. He published a further paper in 1872, listing the Sphenopsids found at the Ravenhead site. The bulk of the Ravenhead collection, including most of the types, survived the May 1941 blitz that virtually destroyed the museum. Unfortunately, all of the Ravenhead display material was lost in the fire.

The year 1700 saw publication of Charles Leigh's The Natural History of Lancashire, Cheshire and the Peak in Derbyshire. In this work he gave a brief account of observations made by Mr William ^ Ae rocks m these p^s are only found/-o/^, WaH T^ ^ Barton, an apothecary, practising in Ormskirk, , „ Lancashire. Barton, during the 1680s-1690s, noted i fossil plant remains near Ormskirk andJ j Cfrom the surrounding region. He communicated his observations to Leigh believing them to be the exuviae of plants deposited as a result of the Deluge. Leigh further mentions 'plant remains' found in rocks near Latham (modern spelling, Lathom), Lancashire on land belonging to the Rt Hon. William Stanley, 9th Earl of Derby, to whom Leigh was physician. He also collected what he called 'leaves of thorns' from Heesham (modern spelling, Heysham) and in the spoil heaps of various coal pits near Burnley in Lancashire. However, Leigh maintained that they were disports of nature, merely mineral concretions that had nothing to do with the Deluge. Indeed, he asserted that any plant remains laid down by a flood would be disjointed, folded over or would show other evidence of transport, which these remains did

not. Furthermore, Leigh was also disturbed at the restricted nature of the apparent flora noting:

In the rocks in thesee parts are only found Polypody W\, Wall Rue, Scolopendium or Leaves 01 Thorns; doubtless other

Plants as wf as these would have occurred to our observa-

tions had these been deposited by (Leigh r J Noah s Deluge. & &

1700,p/99.)

In 1723 Johannes Jacobus Scheuchzer published the 2nd edition of his Herbarium Diluvianum and figured a specimen of Osmunda (Neuropteris) from Northbierly and Flintshire. Scheuchzer's book is often regarded as one of the first true works on palaeobotany. Prior to the work of Higgins there are few records of plant fossils from Lancashire. It is also apparent that this was a time of flux in palaeobotanical understanding and taxonomy. The opening of the Ravenhead site in 1869, a result of preparatory work for the construction of the new Liverpool-St Helens railway, now part of the City Line, was to greatly increase our understanding of NW palaeofloras and, in particular, those from the Lancashire coal field.

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,111-126.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

112

W. SIMKISS & A.J. BOWDEN

Fig. 1. The Reverend Henry Hugh Higgins (1814-1893) painted by R.E. Morrison c. 1880.

Henry Hugh Higgins and the Ravenhead collection The collector of the Ravenhead material was Reverend Henry Hugh Higgins (1814-1893) (Fig. 1). Born at Turvey Abbey, Bedfordshire in 1814, he gained a BA, Senior Optime in Mathematics from Corpus Christi College, Cambridge University in 1836 (MA in 1842). Higgins became a curate, having several postings before taking a job as Inspector of Church Schools in Liverpool in 1843 and chaplain to the female orphan asylum. During the 1850s Higgins developed an interest in natural history. He proved to be an active and enthusiastic worker, eventually becoming President of the Liverpool Naturalists' Field Club in 1869. Higgins was also involved with the City Library, formerly Liverpool Free Library and Museum, and worked as a volunteer for Liverpool Museum. By 1859 Higgins had established himself

as an important part of educated society in 19th century Liverpool. He remained a dedicated worker for the museum and a number of other clubs and societies until his sudden death from a suspected heart attack in July 1893. A career change, following an unspecified period of ill health, enabled Higgins to be appointed Chaplain of Rainhill Asylum and he moved to Rainhill near St Helens, Merseyside in 1853. It was this change in location, and the construction of the new railway nearby in 1869, that provided the opportunity to make the Ravenhead collection. The site, which consisted of a series of strata from the Middle Coal Measures, was accessible from 1869 to 1870. In May 1870 Higgins paid his first visit to the site. However, it is not clear as to whether Higgins had been notified that the strata were fossiliferous or that he had sufficient knowledge of the local geology to enable him to search for fossils. A paper written in

PALAEOBOTANY AND HENRY HUGH HIGGINS

1866 demonstrated that he had some knowledge and interest in the local geology before the excavation took place (Higgins 1866). Higgins also mentioned previously unsuccessful attempts to find Carboniferous plant fossils at Huyton Quarry and the abundance of fossils found in the Wigan Area. The Ravenhead cutting site, near the village of Thatto Heath, was only 2.3 km from Higgins' home and had two main coal seams, which were locally worked for fuel, known as the Upper and Lower Ravenhead Coals (in the vicinity of the Ravenhead Main Delf and Ravenhead Higher coal seams). These contained a Langsettian flora (Cleal 1981). Initially, Higgins enlisted his family to assist with removal of fossil material from the site. He also developed his skills in finding good-quality fossil plant and animal remains as his familiarity with the temporary exposure increased. Although Higgins made over 100 visits to the site he realized that with so many other home, work and society commitments it was impossible to devote all his time to it. This, together with his increasing concern at the amount of material being removed, led him to start training and employing the railway workers to find and collect new specimens. He used a simple preferential reward system to ensure that the navvies provided him with a selection of high-quality specimens. Higgins was a perceptive individual who had previous experience of working with labourers and colliers in Wolverhampton (he organized church services at 5 o'clock in the morning so that they could attend them more easily). By use of a reward system Higgins was able to maintain a competitive spirit and good humour amongst the 'volunteer' workforce. Higgins's educational instincts enabled him to appreciate and develop a lay person's interest in science, and he actively enjoyed sharing his knowledge and expertise with people at all levels of society without holding any unrealistic expectations as to any probable results. Indeed, he regarded the workers' responses to his requests as a kind of social experiment. The railway workers concentrated on fine specimens of the common fossils whilst Higgins searched for more obscure material. Higgins also enlisted the assistance of three or four boys from the Ravenhead National Schools who became zealous collectors, particularly of the ironstone nodules. These they split with great dexterity and furnished Higgins with many fine specimens (Higgins 1886). The major problem with this method of 'rescue collecting' was that there was little precise information as to the exact locality for each specimen. This type of information would only be recorded if detailed field notes had been made by the collector. Such notes could have been of great value to future palaeobotanists. As it is, the lack of detailed specimen locations has hampered research into the stratigraphy of the area.

113

The Ravenhead site: stratigraphy and problems The 'rescue collection' of the Ravenhead material has led to some problems in determination of the accurate stratigraphic position of the specimens. In his 1872 paper Higgins notes that some of the beds of rock contained more fossils than others and that the material was collected near the bridge at the south end of the cutting. He states that both the Upper and Lower Ravenhead Coals were exposed, as well as ironstone nodules containing leaf remains. Higgins also notes the collection of fern remains from the shales above and below the coal seams. Fifty yards north of this point sandstone beds were encountered that contained arborescent forms rather than ferns including Catamites, Halonia, Lepidodendron and Pycnophyllum. The third locality mentioned was close to the Pigeon-house coals, again in sandstone but including similar fern material to that found in the ironstone nodules of the first locality. Higgins also noted that immediately below the Pigeon-house coal was a bivalve bed and, below this, a weathered shale yielding specimens of Volkmannia, Sphenophylum and Catamites. Below the shale Higgins identified another sandstone band that contained fern remains, including the fruit Trigonocarpus that is thought to be from seed ferns. Below the main coal seams Higgins mentioned that there were the remains of upright stems found in the grey shales. These were chiefly the remains of Catamites, Halonia, Lepidodendron and Pycnophyllum, with a few fern species as well. It was suggested that some of the remains recovered were in situ with damaged trunks and roots attached. Kidston (1889) has attempted to provide a stratigraphy for the Ravenhead collection and provides a detailed stratigraphic column with measurements for the thicknesses of each bed for the Prescot, St Helens and Wigan areas. However, there is considerable uncertainty in the accuracy of Kidston's attribution to localities and he suggests that all of the Ravenhead material was collected from the shales above the Higher Ravenhead Coal, between the two coal seams or below the Ravenhead Main Coal. Cleal (1981) provided a stratigraphy for the region putting the age of the Ravenhead material in the Lower Coal Measures. Cleal goes on to suggest that all of the Ravenhead material was collected between the Ravenhead Higher Coal and the Ravenhead Main Coal. However, a cursory examination of the matrix surrounding the specimens suggests that this is not the case, as there appears to be a variety of sediment types. If they were, as suggested by Cleal (1981), from this narrow range then all of the specimens would have been preserved in shale or ironstone nodules. Unfortunately, these questions will remain unresolved as the site was levelled and

114

W. SIMKISS & AJ. BOWDEN

landscaped shortly after completing the railway cutting. A schematic of the stratigraphy is included as Figure 2.

Post-collection history of the Ravenhead material Higgins seems to have used two criteria for specimen selection. First, he obtained large, well-preserved specimens from the railway workers, which were probably intended for display material in the galleries of the Liverpool Free Public Museum. For the more obscure material, Higgins relied on his botanical knowledge to select specimens. Having an interest in botany proved an advantage in some respects because he chose specimens that showed leaves, stems, roots and young shoot foliage attached, if they were available. He recognized the importance of finding plant remains that were representative of the full range of vegetative structures. It must be remembered, however, that Higgins was not a trained palaeobotanist and that he was unable to identify his collected material satisfactorily. His attempts to name the plant fossils were further hampered by the general lack of readily available publications that could assist with identification. Possessing some botanical knowledge, however, also proved disadvantageous as it led to Higgins making decisions based on false criteria. For example, Higgins rejected many hundreds of specimens collected from the Ravenhead site because the leaves did not show the sori structures found on modern true ferns: Besides the specimens collected, hundreds of fern fragments were anxiously scrutinised for traces of fructification, but without success. The rarity of fossil ferns exhibiting sori is reasonably enough accounted for by the suggestion that the under side of the leaf, being rough, would cling more closely to the matrix than the smooth upper side. The cleavage therefore of an ironstone or a piece of shale would always shew the upper side of the leaf and its impression. (Higgins 1871, p. 16.) At the time he would have known of Brongniart's work linking fossil and modern forms (Brongniart 1828-1837, 1837-1838). Unfortunately, workers at that time failed to realize that the fossilized leaves were likely to be those of seed ferns, which do not possess sori structures. As a result, Higgins was searching for true fern structures on fossilized seed ferns. In addition to this, John Lindley carried out an important experiment in plant taphonomy between 1833 and 1835 on the capability of different plant genera to resist decomposition in an aqueous environment (Lindley & Hutton 1837, pp. 4-12). Lindley proved that fruiting structures on modern non-flowering plants break down more rapidly than leaves and

stems in aquatic environments. The rapidity with which this occurs means that, even on true ferns, it is unlikely that sori structures would be preserved before fossilization. We must therefore assume that Higgins had not read this information, even though it appears he had access to the publication in which it occurred. It is therefore apparent that he discarded specimens unnecessarily in a fruitless search and there is nothing to suggest that he requested a second opinion when selecting suitable material for the Liverpool Free Public Museum's collection. Once collected, selected and sorted, the Ravenhead collection then became the centre of attention when it was exhibited at the British Association Meeting held at Liverpool in 1870. The material was obviously impressive, as William Carruthers mentioned that: The great value of this collection, made by the Rev H. Higgins, depended as much upon the comparatively limited number of species met with, as the fine condition in which they occurred. It was possible to arrive at considerable (in some cases absolute) certainty as to the different parts of the same species. (Carruthers 1871, pp. 71-72; William Carruthers was the Keeper of Botany at the British Museum (Natural History) from 1871 to 1895.) During the early 1870s an accurate taxonomic classification of fossil plants had not been fully established, and Carruthers obviously realized the importance of finding specimens where the separate parts (often with different names) were shown to be components of the same plant. Of particular interest is the linking of Calamites with its root structure named Pinnularia. In the Ravenhead collection they were found together as stem and roots. Another example includes that of Volkmannia binneyi, a cone structure that is found together with its leaves. Carruthers also observed that the Ravenhead collection had the cones, stems and leaves of sphenopsids together, that the structure of some cones could be observed and that the foliage actually showed different stages of growth in some cases. During this period, many fossils had been named, classified and described separately, and collections such as the Ravenhead became significant in showing the associations between parts of the Coal Measure plants and the possibility that foliage which appeared different may actually have been from the same plant. Such a collection of material would have been particularly important at that time when so much new work in sorting out fossil plant taxonomy was being undertaken. On 9 December 1870 the Liverpool Naturalists' Field Club held a meeting in which the guest speaker was William Crawford Williamson of Owen's College, Manchester. (Professor William Crawford Williamson, FRS, FGS (1816-1895) was a palaeobotanist who was employed as Professor of Natural History at Owens College, Manchester and worked

Figure 2

STRATIGRAPHY DIAGRAMS FOR THE RAVENBOEAD LOCALITY

Fig. 2. Schematic stratigraphy of the Ravenhead site as derived from Higgins (1871), Kisdston (1889) and Cleal (1981). Detailed observations concerning the stratigraphy were not made during the 'rescue collecting' from the Ravenhead site. This makes interpretation of the actual horizons from which specimens were obtained almost impossible as the exact location of the site is now unknown due to landscaping activities from 1875 onwards.

116

W. SIMKISS & A.J. BOWDEN

on the taxonomy of Upper Carboniferous and Jurassic plants.) Williamson described the characteristics of Lepidodendra and how they had been classed as clubmosses. He went on to criticize Brongniart for assuming a Lepidodendron branch could be classed as a cryptogam whereas Sigillaria, which was woodier, was a gymnosperm. Williamson argued that they were from the same plant and that the structures could be explained by the fact that it took a long time for a Lepidodendron to develop a woody thickening to its stem. Higgins mentioned that Williamson was still unclear about the status of Stigmaria and Sigillaria, but, in fact, Williamson had completed the first part of a memoir a month before the meeting in which his findings were still being disputed (noted on p. 158 of his autobiography Reminiscences of a Yorkshire Naturalist', Williamson 1896). In that paper he stated that Stigmaria and Sigillaria were both separate parts of lycopods. The memoir was refused publication; possibly because it disputed the opinions of many established palaeobotanists, although that was not the excuse given. The published grounds for refusal was that there would be an obligation placed upon the Royal Society to publish other parts of the memoir. Eventually the memoir did appear in print and the scientific world began to accept his findings. During the 1880s Williamson's ideas on Carboniferous plant classification began to become accepted in Europe and by 1890, except for those pupils of Brongniart, most palaeobotanists had changed their ideas on fossil plant classification. Williamson also advised on the classification of Catamites, which Higgins subsequently adopted in the presidential address he gave in January 1871.

Frederick Price Marrat and the first Ravenhead papers The first paper on the Ravenhead collection appeared in 1871 as a printed version of a presidential address to the Liverpool Naturalists' Field Club. Higgins described the material and noted that the plants were typical of a depositional environment found at low latitudes. His inference was based on a comparison with modern-day environments and noting the sedimentological relationships of the deposits. Higgins figured nine specimens from the collection in his paper (Higgins 1871). In 1872 museum assistant Frederick Price Marrat wrote a paper in which he identified and described 58 true and seed ferns, this included nine new types of which five were holotypes, and two syntypes (Marrat 1872). Marrat's 1872 paper was preceded by a short introductory paper from Higgins in which he recorded his debt of gratitude for Marrat's careful work in identifying the Ravenhead fern species (Higgins 1872).

Marrat (1820-1904) (Fig. 3) was American born and was originally employed by the 13th Earl of Derby to work on his collection of fossils at Knowsley in 1841. (Edward Smith Stanley (1775-1851), 13th Earl of Derby was a noted natural historian whose collections formed the core of the natural sciences collections of Liverpool Museum on his death in 1851.) In 1843 Marrat taught science and by 1845 he was dealing in natural history objects (McMillan 1985). He assisted in the arrangement of geological collections at the Liverpool Royal Institution and was later employed as a museum worker in 1862. Marrat's expertise lay with mollusca rather than palaeobotany, and he became Liverpool Museum's conchologist in 1872. Marrat was noted as having some botanical expertise despite a lack of formal training. He was an acknowledged expert in the Cryptogamia of the Liverpool district, and conducted pioneering work on the Musci, Hepaticae, Lichens and Algae from 1849 to 1864 (Lee 1920). Marrat admitted that fossil plant identification was a difficult task. He struggled with the confusion of taxonomic ideas and, to a certain extent, his papers reflected some of this uncertainty. Brongniart's idea that all fossil material could be classified within the same categories as modern plants was in favour at the time, but mistakes and confusion arose because fossilized remains were not found as complete specimens and might therefore be classified as separate species or even genera. For example, Brongniart assigned two different parts of a lycopod to both cryptogams and gymnosperms because he relied on the characteristics of modern plants for identification. As early as 1831 Lindley & Hutton had criticized botanical classification saying: 'If the species that are found in a fossil state are not capable of being reduced to the genera of modern Botanists, this is of little importance when we consider how artificial those genera are' (Lindley & Hutton 1831, vol. 1, p. 111). So when Marrat tried to identify the fern-like fossil leaves of the Ravenhead collection, he had little basis on which to form his ideas and the publications to which he had access were of limited value. For example, each author seemed to have their own definition of a genus so, for Sphenopteris alone, Marrat was faced with seven different definitions, with at least two for Pecopteris. Although it was broadly agreed by most authors as to what defined Nephropteris, Brongniart used the name Cyclopteris for this genus. Marrat was therefore faced not only with the problems of identifying the Ravenhead specimens, but was also required to choose which author's definition he was going to use for his identification. The standards involved in taxonomic description were not always very precise and relied purely on the characteristics of external features. William Crawford Williamson's methods of exam-

PALAEOBOTANY AND HENRY HUGH HIGGINS

117

Fig. 3. (a) and (b) Frederick Price Marrat (1820-1904) as a younger man around the time of collecting the Ravenhead material (b). In his senior years c. 1900 (a). ining the microstructures were only just being developed. These factors, together with the incompleteness of fossil remains, meant that the chances of accurate identification were remote. Nevertheless, Marrat described the collections with only limited methods and access to publications. He observed that in the case of Sphenopteris trifoliata (Artis), the leaves of the Ravenhead specimen were smaller and more rounded than the one figured in publications. He was sure that it was from the same plant and that the slight morphological differences were entirely due to the fact that it came from near the top of the plant. Guided by Brongniart's illustrations, Marrat found that two of the Ravenhead specimens resembled those illustrated only very superficially, so he decided to give them the new name Sphenopteris coriacea (Marrat 1872). He did, however, explain that if he was using Artis' definition to identify this material it would not stand as a new species and, hence, type specimen (Marrat 1872, pp. 98-99). Marrat described Sphenopteris obliqua (Marrat 1872) according to the angle of the leaf attachment to its rachis. Marrat noted that it was similar to a previous find but on a smaller scale. He also described

Sphenopteris plumula (Marrat 1872), but this lost its type status and was re-identifed as Sphyropteris obliqua (Marrat 1872) by Robert Kidston in 1889 (Kidston 1889, p. 402). Sphenopteris pulchra (Marrat 1872) was designated a holotype until Kidston identified it as Sphenopteris mixta (Schimper) (Kidston 1889, p. 405). However, Cleal (1981) referred to this specimen under its original name. See Figure 4. Marrat named one of the specimens after Mr Footner, the engineer on the railway at the Ravenhead cutting, who allowed full site access and collection of the fossil material. Sphenopteris footneri (Marrat 1872) is now known as Renaultia footneri (Marrat), Brousmiche 1983. This was noted as different from Sphenopteris quereifolia (Goeppert) by Marrat. Sphenopteris multifida (Marrat 1872) was described as being in the form of a miniature stag's horn. The specimen in today's collections is the counterpart of the holotype, the latter having been destroyed in 1941. It has, however, been reassessed and is now identified as Sphenopteris sp., its specific status being very uncertain. Marrat appeared to use the name Nephropteris for what many contemporary authors would have termed

118

W. SIMKISS & AJ. BOWDEN

Fig. 4. Ravenhead type specimens mentioned in the paper, (a) Sphenopteris coriacea Marrat. Accession No. Higgins AC. (b) Ephyropteris onliqua (Marrat). Accession No. Higgins AT. (c) Sphenopteris plumula Marrat. Accession No. Higgins AL. (d) Shenopteris pulchra Marrat. Accession No. Higgins AM. (e) Sphenopteris footneri Marrat. Accession No. Higgins AG. (f) Sphenopteris multifida Marrat Accession No. Higgins AK. (g) Neuropteris dentata Lesquereux Accession No. Higgins L.

PALAEOBOTANY AND HENRY HUGH HIGGINS

Cyclopteris. To assist in identification Marrat used Lesquereux's publications on the Pennsylvanian floras, noting that Lesquereux had found the rounded leaves supposed to be Cyclopteris on the same stem as the lanceolate leaves typical of Neuropteris. This suggested that the same fossil had leaves in both a lanceolate and rounded form and that this was known to some nineteenth century palaeobotanists. (Leo Lesquereux (1806-1889) was arguably America's first palaeobotanist, as well as a leading bryologist. Although he failed to gain any permanent scientific position in America he was noted for his work on Coal Measures flora, publishing extensively for State Geological Surveys. Lesquereux was also profoundly deaf as a result of illness in early adulthood and stands as a shining example of overcoming severe disability to make a lasting contribution in science.) Marrat stated that he was aware of different leaf forms from the same plant and yet he named a sharp-toothed leaf form Nephropteris denticulata (Marrat 1872). He later doubted this identification because there was only a single leaf. The specimen is currently named Cyclopteris sp. However, Marrat was not always consistent over his doubtful identifications. He had already stated that he knew that fossil plant material could have a variety of leaf forms for the same plant, yet was happy to assign new names to single leaf specimens for Nephropteris triangularis (Marrat 1872) and Nephropteris obcordata (Marrat 1872). There is little in the way of description for these specimens and they are not type specimens today. See Figure 5. Marrat's species Odontpteris neuropteroides (Marrat 1872) was characterized by the striated nervation, which continues into the rachis. This species has since been re-identified as Odontopteris reichiana (Gutbieri) with Marrat's name listed as a synonym in a revision by Robert Kidston in 1889 (Kidston 1889, p. 409). A second specimen was also figured, but has never been found and is thought to have been destroyed in the fire in 1941. However, this is a late Westphalian D (Bolsovian) species from the upland basins of Saar-Lorraine, Zwickau and Central Bohemia, and is clearly out of stratigraphic sequence with the Ravenhead flora. Cleal (pers. comm.) believes that Kidston's revision is in error and that the specimen belongs to Neuropteris obliqua, whose pinnules often become broadly attached to the rachis. Although most of Marrat's work on the Ravenhead collection concerned the identification of true and seed fern specimens, he also looked at the sphenopsids. Marrat found five genera, 13 species and six varieties of these in the collection. In the ensuing paper he also included the previously listed type specimen Calamocladus (Calamites) tennuis (Marrat 1871) (noted in Higgins 1871). Marrat's list of Sphenopsids was published in 1873 (Marrat

119

1873) with a continuation published in 1874 (Marrat 1874). Marrat's 1872 paper on the Ravenhead collection continued to receive attention, but not always in a positive light, as in 1873 William Carruthers wrote his 'Review of fossil botany' where he commented: The figures and descriptions are scarcely sufficient for independent investigators to determine the characters which distinguish them from already described species' (Carruthers 1873, p. 463). Carruthers pointed out that the standard of description and illustrations was not high enough for an accurate description of the new species. In particular, Chard's drawings came in for criticism as lacking the fine detail required for detailed botanical study (John Chard was the museum's illustrator and draughtsman who prepared plates for publication). Figures 6-8 of this paper show a selection of Chard's drawings, compared with the actual specimens, for which Carruthers criticized him for showing a lack of detail in his illustrations of the Ravenhead flora. Plant identifications and captions are those used in Marrat (1872). Museum specimen identifications are those currently residing on labels. Despite the shortcomings of Marrat's descriptions, the paper did serve to notify the scientific world of the collection. It must be remembered that neither Higgins nor Marrat had any specialist knowledge of palaeobotany and that, in this respect, they were amateur players in a field that contained individuals who held strong opinions. Furthermore, the range of suitable publications to assist with identification was very limited during the 19th century. This, compounded with the uncertain state of palaebotanical taxonomy, meant that both workers had a very difficult task to make full scientific sense of the Ravenhead collection. It is, perhaps, a credit to Marrat that some of the specimens he described as types still retain their status today, especially as his specialist field of study was conchology. The work on the Ravenhead collection was Higgins' and Marrat's only real foray into the world of palaeobotany. Both workers remained active in botany and other branches of the natural sciences until their respective deaths. Higgins, in particular, specialized in cryptogams discovering Weisia verticillata and Orthotrichum diaphanum. The study of fungi also caught his serious attention and he left detailed records of the Gasteromycetes and Hymenomycetes (Lee 1922). Higgins also entered into the world of botanical conservation pleading for special conservation status for Bidston Hill in view of its unique flora. His passionate plea in 1883 to free Bidston Hill, on the Wirral, from the hands of developers has a very modern tone, listing the plant species that would be threatened if development were allowed to continue (Higgins 1883). It is thanks to Higgins that this unique site has been preserved

120

W. SIMKISS & A.J. BOWDEN

Fig.5. Ravenhead type specimens mentioned in the paper, (a) Nephropteris triangularis Marrat. Accession No. Higgins M. (b) Neuropteris obcordata Marrat. Accession No. Higgins T. (c) Odontopteris neuropteroides Marrat. Accession No. Higgins X. (d) Catamites tennuis Marrat. Accession No. Higgins G. (e) Sphenoteris marratii Kidston. Accession No. Higgins AJ. (f) Sphenopteris footneri Marrat. Accession No. Higgins AF.

PALAEOBOTANY AND HENRY HUGH HIGGINS

Fig, 6. (a) Alethopteris decurrens, Dawson. (b) Alethopteris sp. Accession No. Higgins PR. (c) Rootstock of a fern, with paleae or chaffy scales. (d)Aphlebia crispum (presl). Accession No. Higgins H. Illustration by J. Chard.

121

122

W. SIMKISS & AJ. BOWDEN

Fig. 7, (a) Sphenopteris (Aneimioides) pulchra, Marrat. (ai) Magnified pinnules of the same, showing striation and nervation, (b) Sphenopteris pulehra, Marrat. Accession No. Higgins AM. (c) Sphenopteris pulchra, Marrat, close up to reveal pinnule detail, (d) Callipteris conferta, Sternb. (?). (di) A magnified leaf of the same plant, showing the nervation, (e) Neuropteris sp. (cf. ovata Hoffman) Accession No. Higgins H. Illustration by J. Chard.

PALAEOBOTANY AND HENRY HUGH HIGGINS

Fig. 8. (a) Neuropteris heterophylla, Brongniart., var. (?). (ai) A magnified pinnule, showing nervation, (b) Neurodontopteris obliqua (Brongniart.). Accession No. Higgins R. (c) Neurodontopteris obliqua (Brongniart), detail showing leaf pinnules. Accession No. Higgins R. Illustration by J. Chard.

123

124

W. SIMKISS & AJ. BOWDEN

Fig, L Group of Museum Workers about 1890 J. Chard F. P. Marrat Unidentified P. Entwistle K H, Higgiits T. J« Moore Fig. 9. Group of Liverpool Museum Workers about 1880. Chard, Higgins, Marrat and Moore were instrumental in bringing the Ravenhead material to the notice of the academic community, as well as to a much wider public audience. today. Marrat similarly held a deep and lasting interest in the Cryptogamia becoming a local authority on the Musci, Hepaticae, lichens and algae (Lee 1920). After publication of the Ravenhead papers other museum duties prevented Marrat from continuing his botanical studies. Instead he concentrated on conchology, in particular specializing in the Oliviidae and Nassariidae.

Robert Kidston's revision of the Ravenhead collection It was Marrat's 1872 paper that came to the attention of the Scottish palaeobotanist and former banker, Robert Kidston. (Robert Kidston (1852-1924) was a Scottish palaeobotanist who was especially noted for his work on the Rhynie Chert floras in the 1920s. After studying botany at Edinburgh University he was made an honorary palaeobotanist of that

Institution in 1880.) In March 1886 Kidston visited Liverpool and viewed the Ravenhead collection. He returned again in September of the following year, and mentioned that Marrat and the curator of Liverpool Museum, Thomas J. Moore, gave him much assistance (Fig. 9). Kidston made a request for 68 of the specimens to be borrowed for examination. He also asked to make nine thin sections of two specimens in order to identify the microstructures. These thin sections were thought to have been lost in the fire of 1941. However, during a recent move of the collections, seven of them were subsequently rediscovered in 1999. Kidston returned 58 of the specimens in 1888 and the remaining 10 were returned in the following year. Kidston's observations were published in 1889. Kidston identified three additional species of Catamites - Calamites undulatus (Sternberg), Catamites cistii (Brongniart) and Calamocladus lycopodioides (Zeiller) - to those of Marrat, plus two

PALAEOBOTANY AND HENRY HUGH HIGGINS

new Sphenopterids and two others - Sphenopteris sauveurii (Crepin) and Sphenopteris sternbergii (Brongniart) - amongst the true ferns. Marrat's identification of Sphenopteris multifida (Lindley and Hutton) was altered by Kidston who united it with another species - Urnatopteris tenella (Brongniart). He also renamed one of the specimens identified by Marrat - Sphenopteris trifoliolata, Marrat (not Artis) - as Sphenopteris marratii saying that it was close to both Sphenopteris obtusiloba and Sphenopteris (Diplothemema) avoldensis (Stur), although he states that Stur did not give drawings with enlarged details of the leaf structure, which made it impossible for a good comparison to be made. Unable to make up his mind, Kidston named it separately after Marrat, because he was the first to publish a list of the Ravenhead material (Kidston 1889). Further revisions made to Marrat's list by Kidston include renaming Sphenopteris pulchra to Sphenopteris mixta (Schimper) and requesting that Sphenopteris footneri be renamed to Sphenopteris (Renaultia) gracilis (Brongniart) because its structure appeared similar to similar species found at Clay Cross in Derbyshire (Kidston 1889, pp. 406-407). Of the seed ferns, Kidston listed an additional species to those of Marrat, namely Mariopteris muricata (Schlotheim) and also included sections on the other groups of lycopods and cordaites, neither of which had been examined before. Kidston therefore attempted to revise the identifications in light of changes in plant taxonomy, which were still being made. On 16 July 1888 Kidston's paper on the Ravenhead collection was read at the Royal Society of Edinburgh (Kidston 1889). By this time Kidston was more certain as to the identification of Sphenopteris marratii and that it could be described as a new species, which was named after Marrat. He also mentioned that there were some other specimens, that appeared to be new species, but that they were too fragmented to be named as such. During the 1880s the use of microstructures became an established method of identifying Carboniferous plants. In 1890 Williamson's ideas on classification had been accepted in most of Europe, as noted in Williamson (1896, p. 158). A list of species from the Ravenhead site was published in 1891 by G.H. Morton who produced this as part of a much wider study of the geology in the Liverpool area (Morton 1891, pp. 51-52). (George Highfield Morton, FGS (1826-1900) was a Liverpool painter and decorator who devoted his life to the study of geology. He was President of the Liverpool Geological Society and produced a number of publications on local geology. His collection is held at Liverpool Museum.) The plants in the Ravenhead

125

collection had no other revision in the 19th century, but labels have been found with the name W. Hemmingway written on them suggesting that the collection may have been viewed by him. W.W. Hemmingway was an amateur palaeobotanist who may have originated in Yorkshire but certainly lived in Derby. He practised as a geological thin section maker (A. Howell pers. comm.). There is no date for this but it was possible that he attended a British Association meeting in the local area.

Conclusion Since the 19th century the collection has been reviewed in other publications and part of it has survived the 1941 blitz. However, fairly recent examination of the material has revealed that there are specimens from some other collections with original labels still adhering to them - for example specimen HIGGINS YN Artisia transversa, which carries an original label with the collection date April 1858, over a decade before the Ravenhead site was excavated. A few of these specimens were collected in the 1850s, and have been included with the Ravenhead fossils as the locality given is Thatto Heath. However, this is not actually from the Ravenhead cutting site. This may now cast some doubt upon certain elements of the flora, particularly highlighting CJ. deal's concern about the occurrence of Neuropteris scheuchzeri Hoffman, which was formerly only known from Duckmantian - Upper Cantabrian strata in Europe. If this specimen can be confirmed as coming from the Ravenhead Langsettian flora it would possibly be a first appearance for this species in the UK. Cleal has highlighted two points to be considered when discussing the Ravenhead collection. First, the Ravenhead flora remains the only well-documented Late Carboniferous compression flora from the Lancashire Coalfield. Despite all of the mining activity in the area nobody followed up Higgins' initiative and expanded on the collection of plant fossils (Cleal pers. comm.). Secondly, the Ravenhead collection has remained important for palaeobotany and continues to be studied. Kidston (1892) refers to some of the specimens, whilst in recent years Amerom (1990) revised Sphyropteris and figured the holotype from Higgins' collection. Brousmiche (1983) also made references to Renaultia footneri (Cleal pers. comm.). Perhaps the last word should be left to Higgins, who revisited the Ravenhead site after he had made the collection. Walking across the hill through which the cutting has been driven, near to St Helen's, where the trees are being poisoned every one, and even the grass looks miserable, I have often wished that I could have seen the spot as it was when

126

W. SIMKISS & AJ. BOWDEN

John Harrison, the Coal-miner, botanised there so successfully; but I little thought of the rich and varied Flora lying only a few yards under my feet. Still it must be admitted that in one group alone, the vegetation of the coal-measures may have been superior to the woodland plants familiar to us now. We have not in the living British Ferns the variety, and perhaps not the beauty, that distinguished those of the coal period. (Higgins 1871, p. 17.) This work formed part of an unpublished MSc dissertation on the Ravenhead collection by W. Simkiss, supervised by A.J. Bowden. The resulting paper arose from a suggestion by Dr J.R. Edmondson that we present a paper on Higgins and Marrat at the Linnean Society/History of Geology Group joint meeting held at the Linnean Society on 24 October 2001. The authors thank Drs J.R. Edmondson and G.R. Tresise for critically reading the initial draft of the manuscript. To the external reviewers A. Howell and Dr C.J. deal we extend our thanks and appreciation for their useful comments and insight.

References AMEROM, H.W.J., VAN. 1990. Sphyropteris obliqua (Marrat) Kidston. A fossil fern fructification from the waste dump of the former Laura & Vereeniging mine at Eygelshoven. Mededelingen Rijks Geologische Dienst, Nieuwe Serie, 44, 11—21. BRONGNIART, A. 1828-1837. Histoire des Vegetaux fossiles, Volume 1: Parts 1 and 2 (1828); Part 3 (1829); Part 4 (1830); Parts 5 and 6 (1831); Part 7 (1833); Parts 8 and 9 (1834); Part 10 (1836); Parts 10 and 11 (1837). G. Dufour & E. d'Ocagne, Paris. BRONGNIART, A. 1837-1838. Histoire des vegetaux fossiles, Volume 2: Part 13 (1837); Parts 14 and 15 (1838). G. Dufour & E. d'Ocagne, Paris. BROUSMICHE, C. 1983. Lesfougeres sphenopteridiennes du basin houiller Sarro-Lorrain. Publication Societe Geologique du Nord, 10. CARRUTHERS, W. 1871. Remarks on the fossils from the railway section at Huyton. Report of the 4th Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Liverpool (1870), 4, 71-72. CARRUTHERS, W. 1873. Review of the contributions to fossil botany published in Britain in 1872. Geological Magazine, 10,461^465. CLEAL, C.J. 1981. The Ravenhead collection of fossil plants. Amateur Geologist, 9, Part 2, 12-23. HIGGINS, H.H. 1866. Notes on the local, natural and geological history of Rainhill. Proceedings of the Literary and Philosophical Society of Liverpool, 21, 64-82. HIGGINS, H.H. 1871. President's Address. Proceedings of

the Liverpool Naturalists'Field Club for 1870-1871, 9-19. HIGGINS, H.H. 1872. On some fossil ferns in the Ravenhead collection, Free Public Museum, Liverpool. Proceedings of the Liverpool Geological Society 13th Session (1871-1872), 2,94-96. HIGGINS, H.H. 1883. A plea for Bidston Hill First meeting of the Literary and Philosophical Society session for 1883-1884. Liverpool Mercury, 12 October 1883. HIGGINS, H.H. 1886. Fossil Insects from the Coal Measures, Ravenhead, St Helens, 1870. 13th Ordinary Meeting, Liverpool Royal Institution Minutes 1886. KIDSTON, R. 1889. On the fossil plants in the Ravenhead collection in the Free Library and Museum, Liverpool. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 35, 391-417. KIDSTON, R. 1892. Notes on some fossil plants from the Lancashire Coal Measures. Transactions of the Manchester Geological Society, 21,401^28. LEE, A. 1920. Frederick Price Marrat & Thomas Palgrave. Lancashire and Cheshire Naturalist, 13, 47-56, 76-82,127-129. LEE, A. 1922. The Rev. Henry Hugh Higgins, a Liverpool Naturalist. Lancashire and Cheshire Naturalist, 14, 159-165. LEIGH, C. 1700. The Natural History of Lancashire, Cheshire and the Peak in Derbyshire. Printed for the authors, Oxford. LINDLEY, J. & HUTTON, W. 1831-1837. The Fossil Flora of Great Britain; or, Figures and Descriptions of the Vegetable Remains Found in a Fossil State, Volume 1 (1833); Volume 2 (1835); Volume 3 (1837). John Ridgeway, London. MARRAT, FP. 1872. On the fossil ferns in the Ravenhead Collection. Proceedings of the Liverpool Geological Society 13th Session (1871-1872), 2, 97-134. MARRAT, P.P. 1873. Calamites and their alliances. Proceedings of the Liverpool Geological Society 14th Session (1872-1873), 2, 34-36. MARRAT, P.P. 1874. Calamites and their alliances. A continuation of a paper on the Fossil Plants, in the Liverpool Free Public Miseum, collected by the Revd. H.H. Higgins, and known as the Ravenhead Collection. Proceedings of the Liverpool Geological Society 15th Sesssion (1873-1874), 2, 81-84. MCMILLAN, N.F. 1985. Frederick Price Marrat, Conchologist. Liverpool Museum Occasional Papers. MORTON, G.H. 1891. The Geology of the Country Around Liverpool. George Philip & Son, London & Liverpool. SCHEUCHZER, J.J. 1723. Herbarium Diluvianum, 2nd edn. Petri Vander Aa, Ley den. WILLIAMSON, W.C. 1896. Reminiscences of a Yorkshire Naturalist. George Redway, London.

The palaeobotanical work of Marie Stopes W.G. CHALONER Geology Department, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey TW209 OEX, UK (e-mail: [email protected]) Abstract: Marie Stopes was unquestionably one of the most remarkable women of the 20th century. The long-term significance of her work in pioneering the defence of women's rights, and in urging the general acceptance of contraception, far exceeds that of her contributions to palaeobotany. Nonetheless, between 1903 and 1935 she published a series of palaeobotanical papers that placed her among the leading half-dozen British palaeobotanists of her time. Her book Ancient Plants (1910; Blackie, London) was a successful pioneering attempt to popularize the subject for a non-botanical audience. Her contributions on the earliest angiosperms, on the formation of coalballs, and, above all, on the nature and terminology of coal macerals have had a lasting impact on palaeobotanical thought.

Marie Stopes has been aptly described as one of the 20th century's most remarkable women (Hall 1977). She made a name for herself in three very different fields: first, as a palaeobotanist and coal geologist; secondly (and in chronological order) as a pioneer in proclaiming and defending women's rights and expectations within marriage, and in making contraception available and acceptable to the public; and, finally, as a prolific poet and playwright, an activity that ran synchronously with the other two. But there is no question that her fame and, for some of her contemporaries, her notoriety came from her writing on sexual technique and advocating the use of contraception. It was in this field that she truly achieved worldwide fame. The South African palaeobotanist Rayner (1991) wrote that 'Marie Stopes changed the face of British (and to some extent, Western) society almost beyond recognition . . . she . . . almost single-handedly led women out of the sexual repression of the Victorian Age into an enlightened age of sexual awareness'. Hall reported that when a number of American academics were asked in 1935 to list the 25 most influential books of the previous 50 years, Married Love (Marie Stopes's best selling work; Stopes 19180) scored only a little behind Marx's Das Kapital, and ahead of Einstein's The Meaning of Relativity and Hitler's Mein Kampf. Four major biographies of Marie Stopes have been published (Maude 1924; Briant 1962; Hall 1977; Rose 1992), but inevitably they concentrate on aspects of her life other than her palaeobotany. The latter two, particularly, give full accounts of her family background and childhood, and for this reason I brush past these in this brief account of her palaeobotanical work. Those two biographies also list some of the many other writings and analyses of particular aspects of her work outside palaeobotany. Eaton & Warnick (1977) give a list of her main published works. An account of the relevance of her

palaeobotanical work in the history of American palaeobotany is given in Chaloner (1995), and some of this is drawn on here. I was fortunate to have met Marie Stopes in the 1950s, and as this has coloured my perception of her and her work, I give an abbreviated account of what I wrote about that occasion (Chaloner 1995) here. I first met Marie Stopes at the Geological Society in London in 1952, when she attended a Geologists' Association meeting for the presentation of the Henry Stopes Lecture, named for her father. I was at that time in the second year of my PhD research on Carboniferous plants. I will never forget the scene as she came into the Geological Society library where we were having tea prior to the meeting. She was dressed strikingly, with showy jewellery and a large hat, rather as for a Buckingham Palace garden party than a scientific meeting. Heads turned, and there were murmurs of recognition. Bill Croft, palaeobotanist at the Natural History Museum, urged that I should not miss this opportunity of meeting her, and introduced me. On learning that I had embarked on palaeobotanical research, she announced in a voice thoroughly audible to all above the tea-time chat: Ah, dear boy, that is wonderful! Of course, palaeobotany was my first love!'. That really turned all the heads, and I was consumed with embarrassment and sought cover behind Bill Croft. But in later times I was very proud to have encountered her, and we corresponded, and I met her on several later occasions under less daunting circumstances. I proudly sent her my first offprint on a Carboniferous spore, and she responded by sending many of her palaeobotanical offprints, which I cherished.

Early Years - University College London Marie Charlotte Carmichael Stopes was born in Edinburgh on 15 October 1880. Her father, a civil

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241, 127-135. 0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

128

W.G. CHALONER

Fig. 1. Marie Stopes aged 24, a photograph taken around 1904-1905, perhaps when she was in Munich. The light source for her microscopy is a gas mantle. The water-filled globe would have served as a condenser for top illumination, but does not seem to be aligned for that purpose in this photograph. Her slide on the microscope stage is larger than a standard 3 X 1 inch, and may have been a coal-ball section. Reproduced by kind permission of her son, Harry Stopes-Roe.

engineer, was an enthusiastic and dedicated 'amateur' archaeologist. As a young girl, Marie helped him to wash and prepare items from archaeological digs, and helped him to catalogue his collection. She was educated at home by her mother, and started conventional schooling only at the age of 12. By then her parents had moved to London, and she went on to the North London Collegiate School, from which she matriculated, and was accepted as a student in University College London. Interestingly, she sought to major in Chemistry, but that department would not accept her. However, Professor RW. Oliver (co-discoverer with D.H. Scott of the pteridosperms), then Professor of Botany, accepted her to major in botany, with chemistry and zoology as subsidiary subjects. This may well have been an important element in diverting her career into botany, and thence palaeobotany. For at the end of her first year she got a gold medal in botany, and was second in her year in zoology. In order to speed up her academic progress (and in contravention of university regulations that you can only be a student in one college at a time!) she then regis-

tered at Birkbeck College, the night school of London University. This defiance of authority, combined with immense commitment and hard work, were a foretaste of what was to come. For she graduated with honours after only 2 years at University College, in Botany and Geology (Briant 1962) and this earned her a scholarship for a further year of (postgraduate) work in University College. It also appears to have funded her for a further year (1905-1906) of postgraduate work, which she elected to take in Munich in Professor Goebel's laboratory to work on cycad seeds. But the work she carried out in Oliver's department yielded two short papers on coal-ball plants (Stopes 1903a, b) and an ecological note on plants colonizing a dried-up river bed (Stopes 1903c).

Munich and Manchester Marie's work in Munich through 1903-1904 centred on cycad seed structure and function; although pure plant morphology, its theme was close to palaeob-

THE PALAEOBOTANIC AL WORK OF MARIE STOPES

otany. For Oliver & Scott (1903) had just revealed the true nature of the pteridosperms, and their seeds had been for some time recognized as being closer to those of the cycads than those of any other living group. Remarkably, she was able to complete her research in Goebel's laboratory within a year, presented and defended a thesis in German, and was awarded her doctorate magna cum laudel That work was published, in German, later that year (Slopes 1904). In a remarkably telescoped sequence of only 4 years, she had progressed from undergraduate admission to University College to a Munich PhD. While at Munich, Stopes met the Japanese botanist Kenjiro Fujii who was also carrying out research at that time in Goebel's laboratory. Much has been written about the nature and scope of their relationship at that time, and as it subsequently developed (see especially Hall 1977; Rose 1992). In the context of this paper, it need only be noted that it had a significant role in the development of her research, and the year (1907-1908) that she was later to spend in Japan. Their first joint paper emerged directly from work carried out together in Munich (Stopes & Fujii 1906) on the nutritive role of the female gametophyte in living gymnosperms. Although dealing with living plants, the structures and processes involved were highly relevant to the function of primitive seeds, and, indeed, to seed evolution. When in 1904 Marie returned from Munich, she took up her first academic appointment as 'Demonstator' in the Botany Department at Manchester University where, aged 23, she was the first female member of the scientific staff (Watson 2005). The department was headed at that time by Professor F.E. Weiss, who had already published on a number of papers on Carboniferous plants. It was in 1905, while Stopes was in Manchester, that she was made a DSc of London University, aged only 24. While at Manchester she carried out her first work on Mesozoic plants, publishing on the Middle Jurassic flora (of plant compression fossils) exposed on the Scottish coast at Brora (Stopes 1907d). This may well have played a role in the invitation that came to her later from the Natural History Museum in London to write a catalogue of the Cretaceous plants in the museum collection. It may also have contributed to her developing interest in one of the major themes of Mesozoic palaeobotany, then as now, the origin and rise of the angiosperms. Another product of her Manchester years (1904-1910) was her introduction to palaeobotany published as 'Ancient Plants' (Stopes 19Wb). This was aptly subtitled '... being a simple account of the vegetation of the Earth and of the recent important discoveries made in this realm of nature study'. It was, indeed, written for a readership unfamiliar with plant systematics and anatomy, and yet it carried the

129

reader into such issues as the evolution of seeds, and the changes in climate through geological time and how plants had responded to them. It was a pioneering effort in being the first textbook of palaeobotany in the English language written at such a level. It makes an interesting comparison with Scott's Studies in Fossil Botany (Scott 1900) of which the second edition had just been published. This was a scholarly, but rather daunting, account of palaeobotany, dominated by Scott's interest in Carboniferous plants, and expressly the anatomical work made possible by coal-ball studies. Marie Stopes' book was, in the current jargon, a much more reader-friendly book, and one which undoubtedly led a number of young scientists (including the present author) into appreciating the excitement of palaeobotanical research.

Robert Falcon Scott and Glossopteris A minor side plot on Marie Stopes' time in Manchester concerns her meeting with 'Scott of the Antarctic' when he visited that city in 1905, prior to his ill-fated expedition to the South Pole. In his biography of Stopes, Keith Briant (1962) describes how Scott met her at a dinner in Manchester, and how she had urged him to take both her and his own wife with him to Antarctica; and how, at the end of the evening, he had said that if he was unable to do this 'he would do his utmost to find for her the fossils that she wanted. Later, he visited her at the University to familiarize himself with the look of the fossils; and when he was found dead in the Antarctic, there were discovered near him some pieces of fossil plants' (Briant 1962). It is now well known that among the specimens found with Scott's party were the fragments of Glossopteris, subsequently described by Seward (1914). This record of Glossopteris in Antarctica supplied the missing piece in the palaeobotanical jigsaw of Gondwana; for at that time Glossopteris was already known from the other fragments of that Palaeozoic southern super-continent Australia, South America, Africa and India. Did Marie Stopes show Scott material of Glossopteris when he visited Manchester? Was this the fossil that she believed they might find in Antarctica? If so, did Scott's party realize that the fragments they had found were indeed of that genus, and that its occurrence in Antarctica was of great significance? Unfortunately, it seems not. Or, if she showed Scott Glossopteris, his memory of it may have faded. For Dr Wilson records in his diary (Seward 1914) that the leaves that they found in the Beacon Sandstone cliffs 'were like beech leaves in shape and venation, in size a little smaller than British Beech, and the venation much more abundant and finer in character'. Seward goes on to say that the

130

W.G. CHALONER

Glossopteris leaves that he described 'are the beechlike impressions referred to' in Wilson's diary. So the excitement of finding that very significant fossil was missed until the geological specimens found with their bodies were put into Seward's hands.

Early angiosperms The origin of the angiosperms, and their earliest appearance in the fossil record, was an important element in Stopes' work. As she wrote: 'Except the origin of Man himself there are probably no problems in palaeontology of greater interest and importance, and of which less is known, than those which centre round the origin of Angiosperms, and the early history of that group' (Stopes 1912a). Her contributions to evidence bearing on the problem came from two different directions. The first was from material sent to her from Hokkaido, northern Japan, by Fujii, after he had returned there from his time in Europe. She believed that nodules known to be of Cretaceous age from that part of Japan might contain permineralized angiosperms and that, if so, these would be a significant palaeobotanical discovery; and she urged him to get hold of such material and to send it to her. June Rose (1992) records from Marie's diary that the material from Fujii arrived in October 1906 and that 'the first section cut revealed an angiosperm'. Marie used this critical information to support a bid to the Royal Society to fund her spending a year in Japan searching for angiosperm fossils. She was successful in this, and was to spend rather over a year (1907-1908) in Japan carrying out work on Cretaceous fossil plants with Fujii, which was subsequently published (Stopes 1909, 1910e; Stopes & Fujii 1909,1910). She wrote a very readable account of many aspects of that year in her book A Journal from Japan (Stopes 1910c). There can be little doubt that at least a part of her motivation in going to Japan was simply to rejoin Fujii. However, the palaeobotanical case for going was well substantiated, and amply vindicated by her subsequent publications. Perhaps the most significant was the trilocular ovary that was described as Cretovarium japonicum Stopes and Fujii (1910), a superior trilocular ovary which they attributed to the monocotyledonous family, the Liliaceae. This was of Santonian age, roughly equivalent to the middle part of the Upper Cretaceous Chalk Formation of northern Europe, representing then, as now, an early record of a secure angiosperm. Although Marie Stopes described it as 'the only known structural petrifaction of a true angiospermic flower' (Stopes 1910
structures have been recorded from earlier in the Cretaceous (see e.g. Friis & Crepet 1987), but, nonetheless, Cretovarium was an important and significant discovery at that time. The other important contribution that Stopes made to angiosperm palaeobotany was the permineralized woods that she described from the British Aptian (Lower Greensand). These she had encountered while working, at the invitation of the Natural History Museum in London, on the catalogue of the Cretaceous Flora (Stopes 1913, 1915). Seward had already written the catalogue dealing with the main plant-bearing unit of the British Cretaceous in his Wealden Flora (Seward 1894, 1895) leaving Marie Stopes with the rather uncomfortable assignment of picking up the pieces. As she explains, 'this is not my own choice . . . but depends on the fact that the Wealden has been dealt with by Prof. Seward, and the work allotted to me is to complete the Cretaceous, but to leave out of consideration the parts covered by Prof. Seward's work' (Stopes 1913, author's Preface). Her first volume was largely a literature review, covering Cretaceous plants from the Arctic to Australia, with a bibliography of some 900 literature citations and a record of over 4000 plant species described from the Cretaceous. It is salutary for the present generation to realize that almost 100 years ago so much had already been made of Cretaceous palaeobotany! The few remaining pages of Part I covered the algae and fungi known from the British Cretaceous. Part II deals with the Lower Greensand (Aptian) plants of Britain, and includes such forms as Weichselia, Tempskya, the Bennettitales and various conifer woods. It also covers the controversial early angiosperm woods. The discovery of permineralized woods of undoubted angiosperm affinity, claimed to be of Aptian age, was a noteworthy item, and she got a letter into Nature on that basis (Stopes 1910g). But the full account of her discovery was to wait until she published in the Philosophical Transactions (Stopes I9l2a). As she states there of her three new genera (Aptiana, Woburnia and Sabulia), 'the woods do not appear in any degree like any group of gymnosperms, but on the contrary, like quite highly placed angiosperms in all their details. This may either mean that the Angiosperms originated even earlier than we thought, or that the current views of gymnospermic origin require modification. Personally, I incline to both views'. In the second volume of the Cretaceous catalogue, she went on to describe two further new genera of angiosperm woods, Cantia and Hythia, both believed to be from the Aptian. However, later authors have called to question the real provenance, and hence the age, of all these specimens. One of the first to question this aspect was Harris (1956), who suggested in effect that since all were existing museum specimens (i.e. not directly

THE PALAEOBOTANIC AL WORK OF MARIE STOPES

collected by Marie Slopes herself) there could have been confusion in their labelling, as readily happens in museums with the passage of time. Casey (1961) gives a critical reassessment of the biostratigraphy of the Lower Greensand, and discusses the evidence for the age of some of her woods. He argues (pers. comm. November 2002) that he finds 'no evidence to support Harris' scepticism regarding the provenance' of Stopes' Greensand woods. He favours an Aptian assignment for Hythia, Woburnia, Sabulia and Cantia. While he does not doubt the source of Aptiana as being Lower Greensand, he accepts that since the Aptian-Albian boundary is considered to fall within that unit, and its precise location is still the subject of debate, 'Aptiana is left hovering over the Aptian/Albian fence. In any event, it is Lower Cretaceous'. A careful reinvestigation of the original Stopes specimens of four of those five genera leads Crawley (2001) to cast doubt on the provenance of all bar one, although he makes no reference to Casey's 1961 paper, but only to an earlier unpublished report. He concludes that of Stopes' five putative Cretaceous angiosperm woods, only Aptiana radiata is acceptable as a record of a Lower Cretaceous (Aptian-Albian) angiosperm. There are now other records of Aptian woods, pollen and leaves attributed to angiosperms (see, for example, Upchurch & Wolfe 1987). But Stopes' woods from the Lower Greensand, although in varying degrees controversial, remain a noteworthy element in our record of early angiosperm fossils.

Carboniferous plant fossils Marie Stopes's contributions to palaeobotany were principally in the interpretation of structure and evolutionary relationship of the plant fossils she investigated. But she also made an important contribution to what might be called 'classical' Carboniferous fossil plant biostratigraphy - using plant impression fossils in dating Carboniferous rocks, especially in the context of coal exploration and mining practice. Her most significant piece of work in that field was undoubtedly that on the 'Fern Ledges flora' in New Brunswick, Canada. Plant fossil had already been known from that locality for some years, and their age was a matter of controversy, the fossils having been variously attributed to the Silurian, the Devonian and the Carboniferous. But even before her revision of the flora, the consensus both from North America and Europe, in the views of R. Kidston, D. White and R. Zeiller, seems to have been that the flora was Carboniferous, at least (see Stopes 1914
131

European palaeobotanist expressly invited by a North American body to carry out research for them on American material. The fact that she was a woman makes it the more remarkable, for that era. Marie Stopes had made her first visit to North America en route back from Japan, in January 1909, arriving by sea in Vancouver. She lectured to various women's groups on the west coast before travelling overland to the east coast, and thence back to London. Although she then took up her lecturing position in University College, London, it appears that the following year, 1910, she applied for a university position in Toronto, in which she was unsuccessful (Rose 1992). Canada evidently still had an appeal for her, despite the prestige of her University College position. The fern Ledges plant fossils were not visually very striking, unlike those from many British localities of approximately the same age. As she described them (Stopes 1914
The Sportophyte One of the less well-known products of Marie's inexhaustible enthusiasm for creative writing was

132

W.G. CHALONER

her brief career as an editor of a 'journal of botanical humour, assisted by a flare of Northern Lights' - The Sportophyte. The first edition was published on 1 April 1910 while she was still in Manchester. This was claimed to have been 'edited by the Palaeophytologist of Manchester University'. The journal was to run for 4 years - rather turbulent ones in Marie's own life - with the fourth and last edition appealing with the dateline of University College London (to where she had by then moved) in 1913. The journal had the probably unique distinction of having a different publisher and a different place of publication for each of its editions, although the format and colour of the cover was sustained with high fidelity. The cover price was given as 1 shilling or 25 cents - a gesture to encourage international readership (which it got), and with the interesting indication that there were then 5 dollars to the pound! The title was itself a characteristic piece of coy humour - a play on both 'sport' in the sense of a mutation, as we would now use it, and the word sporophyte, describing the spore-bearing generation of a plant's life cycle. Her biographer, Ruth Hall, wrote rather unkindly that 'the humour now appears stunningly puerile, but at the time it was considered rather daring' (Hall 1977). One of its few contributions with a palaeobotanical angle, a poem probably written by the editor, appeared in Volume 4: A Botanical Dream Last night as I lay dreaming There came a dream so fair I stood mid ancient Gymnosperms Beside the Ginkgo rare. I saw the Medullosae With multipartite fronds, And watched the sunset rosy Through Calamites wands. Oh Cryptogams, Pteridosperms And Sphenophyllum cones, Why did ye ever fossilise To Palaeozoic stones? E.M. Delf

If it has no other great merit, this is of interest in perhaps being the only common ground between Marie's palaeobotanical persona, and that as a very prolific poet.

Coal, coal-balls and evidence of fire in the geological past While she was in Manchester, Marie Stopes became interested in the origin of coal-balls, the Carboniferous concretions containing structurally preserved fossil plants, which had come to play a major role in

palaeobotanical research at that time. W.C. Williamson had amply demonstrated their potential in elucidating the structure of Carboniferous coal swamp plants, and Oliver and Scott had greatly extended his pioneering lead, but up to that time little interest had been directed to the process of their formation. Stopes collaborated with D.M.S. Watson, also on the staff at Manchester University, in attempting to explain how these nodules of calcium and magnesium carbonate came to form in the coal, preserving by mineral infiltration the remarkably unaltered three-dimensional anatomical structure of the plant tissue (Stopes & Watson 1908). She carried out experimental work to explore how far immersion in sea water retards the normal process of microbial breakdown of the plant tissue; and she and Watson suggested that calcium carbonate derived from marine mollusc shells was the principal source of the carbonate matrix. Essential features of their explanation were that the coal-balls formed in situ within the coal swamp peat itself, and that the coal was, of course, also formed in situ. The marine environment was also an essential feature both in retarding decomposition of the plant material, and as a source of the calcium and magnesium carbonate of the coal-ball. Further, they claimed that the plants preserved in the roof nodules (the coal-balls) and compression fossils in the shale above the coal were different from those forming the coal itself. Their explanation of the mechanism of coal-ball formation held sway for more than 50 years; and although later work (reviewed in Scott et al 1996; Phillips & Cross 1995) has raised a number of other possible rival mechanisms, the Stopes and Watson explanation still remains as one of several plausible theories for coal-ball formation. The last phase of Marie Stopes' palaeobotanical research concerned the nature of coal and the recognition of its constituents under the microscope. During World War I, coal was the essential power source for virtually all manufacture and the movement of naval and merchant ships (see Stopes 19lib). This gave coal research a very high priority in government funding, and in 1916 the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research set up a laboratory headed by R. V. Wheeler. Aware of Stopes' work on coal palaeobotany, he visited her in University College, where she was working as a lecturer (1910-1920), and invited her to collaborate with him on coal research. Their joint work published at the end of the war (Stopes & Wheeler 1918) had a lasting impact on the terminology of coal and its constituents. This and her two subsequent papers on coal (Stopes 1922; Stopes & Wheeler 1923a, b) were to be her last contributions in this field, as her work on birth control and the welfare of married women increasingly took over her life. The microscopic study of coal at that time was conducted on thin sections, cut like other petrologi-

THE PALAEOBOTANIC AL WORK OF MARIE STOPES cal sections, but with the coal usually protected in some way by embedding or treatment with shellac. Because of its opacity, it needed very careful grinding and polishing after the section was cut, and the preparation of large sections was a very skilled and time-consuming process. Working on such material, Stopes coined the term 'maceral' to designate coal constituents, by analogy with mineral for inorganic rock components. Her four basic rock types, of vitrain, clarain, durain and fusain, became widely adopted in coal petrography, with only minor modifications. Parallel work was being conducted at about this time by the American Thiessen (see Lyons & Teichmuller 1995), who used a rather different terminology; but it is fair to say that, eventually, Marie Stopes's four macerals became the basis for coal petrographic work worldwide. Perhaps the most controversial item in her terminology was her use of the French word fusain (meaning, precisely, charcoal) for the charcoal-like component of coal. Some controversy arose because of her firm belief that this coal component was not produced by wildfire occurring in the swamp environment; that indeed, despite her choice of the word, fusain was not charcoal. One of her last public appearances, when she spoke before a scientific audience, was at a Linnean Society meeting in 1957 in which T.M. Harris defended the fire origin of fusain. He wrote '. . . she opposed my revival of the old fire theory with vigour and in a pleasant voice. If I could have talked it over [with her] I doubt if we would have got far, because we were thirty years out of phase...' (see Chaloner 1995). While a number of American authors - most notably J.M. Schopf - also rejected the fire origin of fusain, the significance of fusain as evidence of wildfire in the geological past has come to be very widely accepted (see Scott 1989; Jones & Chaloner 1991). Marie Stopes died at her home in Leatherhead in Surrey on 2 October 1958, and her passing was barely noted in the palaeobotanical world (Chaloner 1958). But if her research on fossil plants has passed into the more obscure archives of the subject, the global adoption of her terminology of coal macerals is a fitting memorial to her work in that field. I gratefully acknowledge the helpful comments and suggestions of H. Pearson, Dr M. Kolb-Ebert and Prof. B. Thomas in reviewing an earlier draft. I am also very grateful to H. Stopes-Roe for permission to use the photograph of his mother, reproduced here as Figure 1.

References In this list an attempt has been made to include all Marie Stopes's scientific papers dealing with palaeobotany, including some botanical papers, and those dealing with coal petrology. Not all of these are cited in the text.

133

BRIANT, K. 1962. Marie Stopes, a Biography. Hogarth Press, London. CASEY, R. 1961. The stratigraphical palaeontology of the Lower Greensand. Palaeontology, 3,487-621. CHALONER, W.G. 1958. Obituary: Dr. Marie Stopes. Proceedings of the Geologists' Association, 70, 118-120. CHALONER, W.G. 1995. Marie Stopes (1880-1958): The American connection. In: LYONS, PC., MOREY, E.D. & WAGNER, R.H. (eds) Historical Perspective of Early Twentieth Century Carboniferous Paleobotany in North America. Geological Society of America Memoirs, 185,127-134. CRAWLEY, M. 2001. Angiosperm Woods from British Lower Cretaceous and Palaeogene deposits. Special Papers in Palaeontology, 66. EATON, P. & WARNICK, M. 1977. Marie Stopes - A Preliminary Checklist of Her Writings Together with Some Biographical Notes. Croom Helm, London. FRIIS, E.M. & CREPET, WL. 1987. Time of appearance of floral features. In: FRIIS, E.M., CHALONER, W.G. & CRANE, PR. (eds) The Origins of Angiosperms and Their Biological Consequences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 145-179. HALL, R. 1977. Marie Stopes, a Biography. Andre Deutsch, London. HARRIS, T.M. 1956. The mystery of flowering plants. The Listener, 26 April, 514-516. JONES, T.P. & CHALONER, W.G. 1991. Fossil charcoal, its recognition and palaeoatmospheric significance. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology (Global and Planetary Change Section), 97, 39-50. LYONS, PC. & TEICHMULLER, M. 1995. Reinhardt Thiessen (1867-1938): Pioneering coal petrologist and stratigraphic palynologist. In: LYONS, PC., MOREY, E.D. & WAGNER, R.H. (eds) Historical Perspectives of Early Twentieth Century Carboniferous Paleobotany in North America. Geological Society of America Memoirs, 185,149-161. MAUDE, A. 1924. The Authorized Life of Marie C. Stopes. Williams & Norgate, London. PHILLIPS, T.L. & CROSS, A.T. 1995. Early and mid-twentieth century coal ball studies in North America. In: LYONS, PC., MOREY, E.D. & WAGNER, R.H. (eds) Historical Perspective of Early Twentieth Century Carboniferous Paleobotany in North America. Geological Society of America Memoirs, 185,15-339. RAYNER, R. 1991. The private and public life of a palaeobotanist. South African Journal of Science, 87, 473^78 ROSE, J. 1992. Marie Stopes and the Sexual Revolution. Faber & Faber, London. SCOTT, A.C. 1989. Observations on the nature and origin of fusain. International Journal of Coal Geology, 12, 443-475. SCOTT, A.C., MATTEY, D.P. & HOWARD, R. 1996. New data on the formation of Carboniferous coal balls. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 93, 317-331. SCOTT, H.D. 1900. Studies in Fossil Botany, 1st ed. Adam and Charles Black, London. SEWARD, A.C. 1894. Catalogue of the fossil plants in the Department of Geology, British Museum. The Wealden Flora - Pt. I. Thallophyta—Pteridophyta. British Museum (Natural History), London.

134

W.G. CHALONER

SEWARD, A.C. 1895. Catalogue of the Fossil Plants in the Department of Geology, British Museum. The Wealden Flora — Pt. II. Gymnospermae. British Museum (Natural History), London. SEWARD, A.C. 1914. Antarctic Fossil Plants. British Museum (Natural History), Terra Nova Expedition Report, Geology, 1,1-49. STOPES, M.C. 19030. On the leaf structure of Cordaites. New Phytologist, 2,92-98. STOPES, M.C. 1903&. The 'epidermoidal' layer of calamite roots. Annals of Botany, 20,792-794. STOPES, M.C. 1903c. The colonisation of a dried river bed. New Phytologist, 2,186-192 STOPES, M.C. 1904. Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Fortpflanzungsorgane der Cycadeen. Flora oder Allgemeine Botanische Zeitung, 93,435-482. STOPES, M.C. 1905. On the double nature of the cycadean integument. Annals of Botany, 19,561-566. STOPES, M.C. 19060. A new fern from the Coal Measures: Tubicaulis sutcliffi sp. nov. Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, 50, 1-34. STOPES, M.C. 1906/>. The Study of Plant Life for Young People. Blackie, London. STOPES, M.C. & FUJII, K. 1906. The nutritive relations of the surrounding tissues to the archegonia in gymnosperms. Beihefte zum Botanischen Centralblatt, 20, 1-24. STOPES, M.C. 19070. Note on a wounded Calamite. Annals of Botany, 21, 277-280. STOPES, M.C. 1901b. The xerophytic character of the gymnosperms. New Phytologist, 6,46-50. STOPES, M.C. 1907c. The relation of the concretionary nodules of the Yarra to the calcareous nodules known as 'coal balls'. Geological Magazine, 4,106-108. STOPES, M.C. 1901 d. The flora of the Inferior Oolite of Brora. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 63, 375-382. STOPES, M.C. & WATSON, D.M.S. 1908. On the present distribution and origin of the calcareous concretions in coal seams, known as 'coal balls'. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B200,167-218. STOPES, M.C. 1909. Plant containing nodules from Japan. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 65,195-205. STOPES, M.C. & FUJII, K. 1909. Studies on the structure and affinities of Cretaceous plants. Geological Magazine, 6,557-559. STOPES, M.C. 19100. The internal anatomy of Nilssonia orientalis. Annals of Botany, 24, 389-393. STOPES, M.C. 1910&. Ancient Plants. Blackie, London. STOPES, M.C. 1910c. A Journal from Japan. Blackie, London. STOPES, M.C. 191001. Adventitious budding and branching in Cycas. New Phytologist, 9,235-241. STOPES, M.C. 1910*?. Further observations on the Fossil Flower, Cretovarium. Annals of Botany, 24, 679-681. STOPES, M.C. 1910/. The value and interest of Japanese fossils. Transactions of the Japan Society, 9, 1-12. STOPES, M.C. 1910g. Letter. Nature, 85,139. STOPES, M.C. & FUJII, K. 1910. Studies on the structure and affinities of Cretaceous plants. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B201, 1-90. STOPES, M.C. & KERSHAW, E.M. 1910. The anatomy of

Cretaceous pine leaves. Annals of Botany, 24,395-204. STOPES, M.C. 19110. A reply to Professor Jeffrey's article on Yezonia and Cryptomeriopsis. Annals of Botany, 25, 269-270. STOPES, M.C. 191 \b. On the true nature of the Cretaceous plant Ophioglossum granulatum Heer. Annals of Botany, 25, 903-907. STOPES, M.C. 191 Ic. The dragon tree of the Kentish Rag. Geological Magazine, 8, 55-59. STOPES, M.C. 191 Id. The correct name for the dragon tree of the Kentish Rag. Geological Magazine, 8, 467^69. STOPES, M.C. 19120. Petrifactions of the earliest European angiosperms. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society,B2Q3,15-m. STOPES, M.C. 1912&. The Red Crag portrait. Geological Magazine, 9, 285-286. STOPES, M.C. 1912c. Palaeobotany Versus Stratigraphy in New Brunswick. British Association Report, Dundee. STOPES, M.C. 1913. Catalogue of the Mesozoic Plants in the British Museum (Natural History), Part I: Bibliography, Algae and Fungi. British Museum of Natural History, London. STOPES, M.C. 19140. Palaeobotany: its past and its future (Inaugural lecture at University College, London). Knowledge, 37,15-24. STOPES, M.C. I9\4b. A new Araucarioxylon from New Zealand. Annals of Botany, 28, 341-350. STOPES, M.C. 1914c. A new Cretaceous plant from Nigeria. Geological Magazine, 11,433-435. STOPES, M.C. 1914J. The 'Fern Ledges' Carboniferous Flora of St John, New Brunswick. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Canada, 41. STOPES, M.C. 1915. Catalogue of the Mesozoic Plants in the British Museum (Natural History), Part II: Lower Greensand (Aptian) Plants of Britain. British Museum of Natural History, London. STOPES, M.C. 1916. An early type of Abietineae (?) from the Cretaceous of New Zealand. Annals of Botany, 30, 111-125. STOPES, M.C. 1917a. Roots in Bennettites. Annals of Botany, 31,257-259. STOPES, M.C. \9\lb. Plants as a source of national power. In: OLIVER, F.W. (ed.) The Exploitation of Plants. Dent, London. STOPES, M.C. 19180. Married Love. A.C. Fifield, London. STOPES, M.C. \9lSb. New Bennettitalean cones from the British Cretaceous. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B208, 389^40. STOPES, M.C. & WHEELER, R.V. 1918. The Constitution of Coal. Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. HMSO, London. STOPES, M.C. 1919. On the four visible ingredients in banded bituminous coal. Proceedings of the Royal Society, B90,470-487. STOPES, M.C. 1920. Bennettites Scottii, sp. nov., a European petrifaction with foliage. Journal of the Linnean Society, 44,483^96. STOPES, M.C. 1921. The missing link in Osmundites. Annals of Botany, 35,56-61. STOPES, M.C. 1922. The constitution of coal, palaeobotanical aspects. In: A Pamphlet of Lectures. Colliery Guardian Company, London, 1-8.

THE PALAEOBOTANICAL WORK OF MARIE STOPES STOPES, M.C. & WHEELER, R.V. \923a. Terminology in coal research. Fuel, 1,5-9. STOPES, M.C. & WHEELER, R.V. 1923& The spontaneous combustion of coal. Fuel Bulletin, 1, 1-125. STOPES, M.C. 1935. On the petrology of banded bituminous coals. Fuel, 14,4-13. UPCHURCH, G.R. & Wolfe, J.A. 1987. Mid-Cretaceous to Early Tertiary vegetation and climate: evidence from fossil leaves and woods. In: FRIIS, E.M., CHALONER,

135

W.G. & CRANE, PR. (eds) The Origins of Angiosperms and Their Biological Consequences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 75-106. WATSON, J. 2005. One hundred and fifty years of palaeobotany at Manchester University. In: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds). History ofPalaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications 241,229-257.

This page intentionally left blank

James Lomax (1857-1934): palaeobotanical catalyst or hindrance? ALAN C. HOWELL Guernsey Museums and Galleries, Candie Gardens, St Peter Port, Guernsey GY1 1UG (e-mail: [email protected]) Abstract: James Lomax was born in Radcliffe, near Bury, Lancashire, the son of a colliery manager. After a meagre formal education he too began work in the mines. There his interest in geology was aroused by the abundant fossil plant remains in the Coal Measure rocks. He became particularly keen on the applications of the microscope to geological science and developed some skill in the production of the thin sections necessary for geological microscopy. Lomax was initially encouraged by W.C. Williamson of Owens College, for whom he began to prepare fossil plant thin sections around 1885. Ultimately, Lomax gave up his job as a collier and became a full-time commercial manufacturer of geological thin sections. James Lomax was aided by his son Joseph in a business that produced sections from the complete range of geological materials; however, he became especially noted for his fossil plant preparations. From 1906 the business was rather more formally constituted as the Lomax Palaeobotanical Company Limited, and received sponsorship from a group of academic palaeobotanists for whom Lomax collected and prepared fossil plant sections. The output from the Lomax workshops was a significant component of the so-called 'Golden Age' of palaeobotany and the evidence for that is still present in the collections of many museums and academic institutions. The business model under which Lomax operated, however, did not always serve the best interests of academic research.

This article is drawn from the present author's unpublished MSc thesis, submitted to UMIST in 1984, under the title 'James Lomax (1857-1934) His Life Work and Influence on Palaeobotany and Coal Research'. It examines the life and palaeobotanical contributions of a man who provided the scientific world with a rather unusual commercial service from the late 1880s until his death in 1934. James Lomax was primarily a manufacturer of geological microscope slides, and evidence of the considerable output from his Bolton workshops can be found in many museum and teaching collections all over the world. These collections vary from important reference collections housed in research centres like the Natural History Museum, London to teaching collections in universities, colleges and schools. In addition, there may be many Lomax preparations remaining in private hands, relics of the tremendous surge of popular interest in the natural sciences, especially geology, which began during the latter half of the 19th century. Lomax developed his own geological interests within this very same context, having had a distinctly non-academic family background. James Lomax was born into a mining family in 1857 and served as a collier himself in his early working life. However, his interests in geology and microscopy led him to develop some skill in the preparation of geological thin sections for microscopic examination. Commercial production of these sections ultimately enabled him to leave mining and develop a family business, trading originally under his own name as 'Petrologist, Geologist, and Palaeo-botanist', then as the Lomax

Palaeobotanical Company Limited and later still as the Lomax Palaeobotanical Laboratories. Family links with the coal trade remained strong, however, and James Lomax's grandson was to join the industry much later as a mining engineer. Although he was not a scientist in the sense of having received any formal scientific training, James Lomax was certainly among the vanguard of individuals studying British Carboniferous fossil plants around the turn of the 19th century. Many advances of palaeobotanical knowledge were founded on specimens he obtained or prepared. Lomax was certainly a focal point of scientific activity in the field of palaeobotany and could even be regarded as an important catalyst in the development of the subject. Naturally, such an assertion requires some justification. A simplistic assessment could place James Lomax squarely in the role later occupied by 'in house' university technicians. However, this proves to be only part of the truth. He undoubtedly did fulfil commercially the technical function of producing microscope slides for a number of academic customers, but Lomax did far more than latter-day technicians. He actively collected material for scientific study from coal mines all over northern England, building up an extensive set of contacts in the mining industry. Thus, Lomax was frequently a point of contact between the industry and the scientific community. He searched the collected fossil plant material for new species, implying a good knowledge of the scientific literature. This knowledge also enabled him to lecture to local scientific societies on the contemporary state of palaeobotanical knowledge and research. Lomax

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,137-152. 0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

138

A.C. HOWELL

certainly considered himself to be a palaeobotanist, although his published output of research in this field was undoubtedly small. This has led later scientists to be somewhat dismissive of his palaeobotanical contribution, except as a section maker. The excellence of his microscopy preparations attracted patronage that enabled Lomax to follow his scientific interests, although initially it is doubtful if he could have made a living solely from the sale of thin sections. His early work was very much encouraged by W.C. Williamson, first Professor of Natural Sciences at Owens College and one of the pioneers of systematic palaeobotany in Britain. The mainstream of academic palaeobotanists who followed Williamson (with the notable exception of A.C. Seward) also continued to support Lomax until his research interests shifted from fossil plants to microscopical studies of coal. From around 1910 Lomax became increasingly concerned with research into those physical characteristics of coal discernible by microscopic examination. He published several papers in this field, which are probably his most enduring and widely known scientific legacy (Lomax 1911, 1914, 1915). Following this change of research emphasis the palaeobotanists were replaced as Lomax's chief sponsors by a group of local colliery owners who had formed a quasi-official research body known as the Lancashire and Cheshire Coal Research Organization. This body was later able to obtain government research grants mainly on the strength of the coal research that the Lomax Palaeobotanical Laboratories carried out under its auspices. James Lomax died in 1934 and his son Joseph then took the family business out of the Lancashire and Cheshire Coal Research Association and proceeded to trade alone as a commercial thin section manufacturer. Some material was supplied direct to customers buying from printed advertising lists, but much of the output went to educational suppliers, like Flatters and Garnett of Manchester, for resale. Clearly a full assessment of the life and scientific contribution of James Lomax should begin by considering the history of the scientific pursuits with which he was involved and would also consider his contributions to coal research. That was the approach taken in the thesis from which this article is drawn, but in the current volume others are likely to have covered the historical background and coal research is, arguably, outside the present remit, so the emphasis here is on Lomax's mainstream palaeobotanical contributions and influence.

Biographical details James Lomax was born at Elton, near Bury, Lancashire on 27 October 1857. His father, Joseph

Lomax, managed the Elton Collieries of Mr W. Thornton-Parkes. James left school and commenced working in these collieries at the age of 10 years. However, he left the pit in his 13th year and received a further 2 years of school education. He then returned to the Elton Collieries, remaining there until they closed in 1876 following the death of the owner. James Lomax was 19 years old at this point, when he took further employment with the Clifton and Kearsley Coal Company as an engineer and winder. In 1878 he moved to the Radcliffe collieries of Messrs A. Knowles & Sons. In a letter written many years later Lomax commented that he had served as a collier 'in nearly every capacity for nearly 20 years' (Lomax 1919). Lomax married Miss Alice Anne Isherwood, probably during his employment at the Knowles' Radcliffe collieries where her father spent his entire working life (Anon. 1934). James and Alice had four children, three daughters and a son - Joseph Robert. Joseph was destined to join his father in the family business that developed later. Alice Ann Lomax died in 1928,6 years before her husband. As the son of a colliery manager, James Lomax clearly started life at some advantage within the community of mining employees. This position probably had some bearing on the provision of his extra 2 years of school education. Later, his seemingly rapid rise to the relatively high status position of winding engineer, in control of all traffic in and out of the mine (and hence its productivity), doubtless reflected his expectations and ambition, as well as his technical ability.

First interest Lomax first developed an interest in fossil plants and the formation of coal during his employment at the collieries. One account suggested that he was attracted to the subject while watching the 'hoppets' of shale being turned onto the spoil heap during the sinking of a mine shaft (Orchard 1934). Certainly, sinking a shaft would allow for the collection of a memorable number of fossils. Joseph R. Lomax later implied that this event may have occurred at Aliens Green Pit (Anon. 1938). James Lomax himself stated that he first started collecting fossil plants when he was 16 or 17 years old (Lomax 1920).

Lomax and science in Radcliffe In the following years, while continuing his employment as a colliery winder, James developed a growing interest in geology, to the point where he was able to deliver lectures on the subject. On 30 January 1889 he addressed the Radcliffe Literary

JAMES LOMAX (1857-1934) and Scientific Society on 'Limestone Caverns' and again on 16 November 1893 when 'Volcanoes and Earthquakes' were his subject. By this time he had built up a considerable collection of Coal Measure fossils from collieries in the Bolton, Radcliffe and Worsley districts (Anon. 1925). Fossils from his collection were put on public display in 1897 as part of an exhibition to celebrate the Diamond Jubilee of Queen Victoria, organized mainly by the aforementioned local society. The exhibition was held in the Radcliffe Technical School and the Catalogue of Pictures, Curiosities, Natural History and other Specimens, Home Work and Local Industries, drew attention to Lomax's fossils on the first page. Geology in Room B followed Electricity in Room A; this was a local 'Great Exhibition' enjoined with all the Victorian pomp Radcliffe could muster. During and after the exhibition several owners of the exhibited material, Lomax among them, offered to present their specimens to the Literary and Scientific Society. Their objective was the establishment of a permanent museum in Radcliffe. The offers were accepted and the society established freely accessible displays, opened in September 1898, at their rented rooms in the Congregational School (Anon. 1908). Subsequently, the society presented the collection to the local authority for display in its new Carnegie Library and Museum, which was opened in 1907. After initial reluctance the authority only appeared to accept responsibility for the museum collection following financial inducements by several prominent members of the society, such as the initial purchase of the site and provision of money for books. This may go some way towards explaining the lack of real commitment to the new museum by the local authority and why it ultimately declined to the point where the collections were sold in 1949. However, the initial establishment of the museum was enthusiastically supported by the good intentions and funds of the Literary and Scientific Society. James Lomax tendered for the job of transferring the exhibits from the Congregational School to the new building. In support of his tender he was able to produce testimonial letters from Professors BoydDawkins and Weiss at Manchester University, attesting him to be 'qualified beyond any other man' for the job in question (Boyd Dawkins 1908). He was given the job and apparently performed it to everyone's satisfaction, although the society treasurer might have been less than pleased. The final account of £203.5s.lOd. was considerably in excess of the original £125 tender. The transformation of the colliery winding engineer of the 1880s into a man commanding the respect and recommendation of university professors by 1908 is worthy of further examination. It involved Lomax's evolution from a semi-skilled col-

139

liery operative into a professional scientific artisan who would ultimately achieve a reputation as an applied scientist. All of this development grew out of an amateur interest in geology, a common enough thing in the second half of the 19th century. Clearly the transformation from collier to scientist did not happen overnight. In 1899 Lomax said that he had 'commenced palaeobotanical work some twelve years ago' (Lomax 1899) and most of his obituarists gave 1887 as the date when he ceased to be a colliery engineer. However, minute and membership books of the Farnworth, Kearsley and Little Hulton 'Wellingtons Glory' Lodge of the Colliery Engine Winders Union, which survive in Bolton Borough Archives (Ref: FT/2/1 and FT/2/2), indicate that a James Lomax of the correct age paid union dues from 1885 to 1894. This implies that Lomax's geological business activities may have been of a part-time nature, at least until 1894, although he was also actively advertising his geological services at that time. As early as 1890 an advertisement appeared in the Radcliffe Historical Almanack, proclaiming Lomax to be a 'Petrologist, Geologist and Palaeo-botanist', able to supply 'all kinds of rock sections &c. made to order'. The address given was presumably Lomax's home at 25 Smyrna Street, Radcliffe, although in 1893 his address was in Victoria Street and, later still, in Sion Street, Radcliffe. Lomax was never noted for being open-handed with money; as an example, he later preferred to give Bolton Microscopical Society thin sections in lieu of subscription arrears. If he continued to pay union dues until 1894 it is highly likely that he continued in full-time employment until that time and one obituarist stated that Lomax continued as a collier until 1898 (Hickling 1935). This may have been a misprint for 1888, but, on the other hand, the writer did seem to take some trouble over his task; he alone mentioned the financial risk and courage inherent in the early years of Lomax's business venture.

Williamson, Lomax and the 'auxilliaries' In fact there was a bevy of working men in the Lancashire-Yorkshire area producing thin sections of fossil plants in their leisure time. Messrs Butterworth, Whittaker, Binns, Wild, Earnshaw, Spencer, Neild and Hemingway, together with the names Aitken and Cash, could all be listed as purveyors of specimens to W.C. Williamson of Owens College, Manchester. Like them, Lomax became fascinated by Williamson's researches on fossil plants from coal-balls. Like them Lomax came under Williamson's influence and began to supply him with specimens and sections. Unlike the majority of the others, however, Lomax managed to

140

A.C. HOWELL

develop the collecting and sectioning of geological material generally into a viable business, which ultimately enabled him to give up his employment as a collier. The exact manner in which Lomax and Williamson first met is not entirely clear. One account stated that Lomax attended some of Williamson's lectures for working men at Owens College in 1885 (Weiss 1935). Bill Fowler, who described himself as Lomax's protege and worked for him for much of the period 1915-1934, was equally positive that Williamson attended one of Lomax's lectures at Radcliffe, although this seems less likely (Fowler pers. comm. 1978). As a collector of fossils Lomax undoubtedly came into contact with other local naturalists and museum curators. He could easily have met one of Williamson's small army of amateur collectors or it could have been Thomas Midgley, curator of the Chadwick Museum, Bolton, who effected Lomax's personal introduction to Williamson. Midgley recalled Lomax bringing to the museum one of his earliest attempts at manufacturing a thin section and 'his subsequent introduction to Professor W.C. Williamson' (Midgley 1934). Unfortunately, the account is not more specific. However, once the link was established between the two men, it radically altered Lomax's life and, as we shall see later, it probably led to acceleration in the advance of palaeobotanical knowledge at the beginning of the 20th century. At the time when Lomax and Williamson met the Professor was deeply engaged on the palaeobotanical researches that resulted primarily in his wellknown papers to the Royal Society on the Organisation of the Fossil Plants of the Coal Measures, In the later papers of the series and in Williamson's British Association for the Advancement of Science contributions after 1885, Lomax's name can often be found, cited as the 'young auxiliary' who had collected or prepared the specimens under description (Williamson & Cash 1887). By then Williamson was an old and distinguished naturalist, and his responsibilities at Owens College were confined to botany, although he had previously taught all branches of natural history. His own background lay in the amateur natural science culture of early 19th century Yorkshire, so from youth he was familiar with the world of artisan naturalists. Perhaps this contributed to his success as a popular lecturer, enabling him to communicate more easily with artisans clamouring for knowledge of natural history. It may also have allowed him to foresee the advantages that the recruitment of a willing band of intelligent field collectors and preparators could provide. Williamson first began to work on Carboniferous palaeobotany in the 1850s, although the subject did not dominate his publication output until after 1870 -

when the first 'Organisation...' paper appeared. His successful presentation of radical (but correct) interpretations, initially of the Sphenopsid genus Catamites, was largely made possible by access to new material obtained from the recently discovered coal-ball localities. The assistance of John Butterworth was important to this venture and he appears to have been the first of the many 'enthusiastic Lancashire Working men' who helped Williamson in this way (Weiss 1911). Butterworth was an over-looker in a large cotton mill at that time and 'was eminently skilled in matters relating to machinery' (Williamson 1896, p. 201). He already had an 'excellent lapidaries lathe' and had manufactured some coal-ball thin sections of a quality that clearly impressed Williamson. Initially, he gave Williamson some coal-balls and loaned him some sections to help with the Catamites problem, but around 1868 he brought the professor a nodule containing something new. Williamson advised on the directions in which the coal-ball should be cut, then Butterworth went away and prepared the thin sections. Williamson published details of the new Calamitean strobilus in the Memoirs of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, and a precedent was established for the way in which Williamson's palaeobotanical research would progress (Williamson 1871). Given the popularity of botany among working men at that time 'in the area where Lancashire, Cheshire and Yorkshire all meet' (Allen 1976, p. 159), it would be reasonable to expect that this new, but related, subject of palaeobotany would also attract a following. The raw materials were relatively easily obtained in the shape of coal-balls and each nodule was a surprise package that could easily contain something new to science. Attract a following it did, with Williamson garnering a rich scientific harvest from the efforts of his reapers. He became, as F.E. Weiss put it, 'the Scientific mouth-piece of these collectors and thus put to the best use the specimens which many of them had not the scientific knowledge to describe' (Weiss 1930). A list of their names has been given earlier and it is not proposed to give details of them all. Indeed, little is known of some, except their names, and finding further information could be difficult, if not impossible. However, some of the 'auxiliaries' did achieve the recognition of obituaries in the popular natural history and local press. It is proposed, therefore, to examine briefly the lives of those with prominent links to James Lomax.

William Cash (1834-1914) William Cash was perhaps the best known of the enthusiasts. A resident of Halifax and long-time

JAMES LOMAX (1857-1934)

employee of a local bank, he became an accountant in his 50th year. He was also a freemason. Natural history was his over-riding interest and he was very active in several local societies and the Yorkshire Naturalists, Union. His obituary from the Halifax Courier (Anon. 1914) was very full and informative, although the Naturalist (Sheppard 1915) gave a more complete list of his publications. His first palaeobotanical publications, produced from 1878 onwards, were mostly co-authored by Thomas Hick (later assistant to Williamson at Owens College) and he produced one paper jointly with James Lomax. In a letter to D.H. Scott, Robert Kidston (a rising young 'professional' scientist who will be discussed later) claimed to have given Cash and Lomax the 'substance' of their paper (Kidston 1898/?). It seems distasteful that Kidston should have felt the need to inform Scott that he had allowed a crumb to slip from the high table of academic achievement. However, this was probably how the system worked in practice. Williamson and the professional scientists who followed him pontificated on the finds of the collectors and attempted to fit them into the taxonomic hierarchy by interpreting and comparing their structure. The results of their deliberations were published in the weightier scientific journals such as the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. The collectors were not ill-versed in the subject, but generally had to be satisfied with publishing secondary accounts of the on-going research in the more popular scientific press. In correspondence, though, the auxiliaries were quick to point out who had noticed an affinity between old and new discoveries: Dr Williamson was always exceedingly cautious in expressing any opinion as to the relationship of the specimens he received, e.g. when I told him that the foliage of Rhaciopteris oldhamium belonged probably to Lyginodendron in the opinion of Binns (an opinion to which I myself leaned very strongly), he poh-pohed the matter; this was long before the relation was acknowledged and published. (Cash 1910.)

It is, of course, easy to say that enthusiastic collecting and intuitive snap judgements were one thing and proper methodical scientific methods another. Williamson was an experienced scientific researcher, and knew the risks and confusion resulting from ill-considered publication. Cash collaborated with Williamson in British Association work (Williamson & Cash 1887) and was also a popular lecturer, so he was perhaps the best known of Williamson's auxiliaries.

James Spencer (1834-1898) James Spencer was perhaps more important than Cash in terms of palaeobotany. His career stands

141

some comparison with that of James Lomax. He too began work in an extractive industry, at Charlestown brickyard, Halifax, but developed an interest in fossils from collectors who visited his workplace. He furthered his education by attending evening classes at a Working Mens' College at Haley Hill, Halifax, especially concentrating on Chemistry and Geology. The college had been founded by a Colonel Akroyd and, being impressed by Spencer's progress, the Colonel offered him a position in the family business. Spencer remained with this organization until his retirement around 1887. James Spencer was a tireless geological fieldworker and collector who turned his energy towards palaeobotanical investigation around 1878. His obituarist did not state the source of his inspiration, but Williamson's coal-ball research would have been well known by that time. Spencer acquired a lapidarist's lathe and learned to cut and mount sections that earned praise for their quality (Crump 1898). He published a series of articles in Hardwicke's Science Gossip, with illustrations drawn from his own thin sections (Spencer 1881). An analysis of these papers would be interesting in the light of earlier remarks concerning the originality of publications by the 'auxiliaries'. Spencer also contributed to the British Association meeting at York in 1881 and published quite frequently in the local natural history press. However, the obituarist drew particular attention to Spencer's services to Williamson: 'Without his aid in furnishing material which he had collected and prepared, it is certain that Prof. Williamson's papers to the Royal Society would have been less complete, and our knowledge of the Carboniferous Flora less extensive' (Crump 1898). Williamson certainly acknowledged Spencer frequently and named Lepidodendron spencerii 'after my friend, Mr J. Spencer, of Halifax, who has so long been one of the most active of my several auxilliary collectors, and to whom I have been so much indebted' (Crump 1898). Reworking some of Williamson's material in 1897, D.H. Scott gave the name Spencerites to a cone, presumably to honour its original collector. Others among Williamson's band of auxilliaries were George Wild, a colliery manager from Ashton under Lyne, Isaac Earnshaw, James Neild and Mr Whittaker of Oldham, James Binns of Halifax, John Aitken of Urmston and Thomas Hick of Harrogate - who became Williamson's assistant at Owens College from 1886. The kingpin of this group was obviously W.C. Williamson and when he retired to London in 1892 their activities were bound to be affected. Williamson's successor at Manchester was RE. Weiss. He did not attempt to carry on directly with Williamson's researches, as the old professor was still working in retirement, collaborating with D.H. Scott at Kew. Thomas Hick, however, remained in

142

A.C. HOWELL

Manchester and, as we shall see, attempted to keep together the auxilliaries as a team of palaeobotanical researchers.

Thomas Hick (1840-1896) Thomas Hick was born in Leeds and educated there at the Royal Lancaster School (Cash 1896). He subsequently commenced work in a mill but lost several fingers in an accident. He therefore sought alternative work as a school teacher and was appointed Assistant Master at the Royal Lancaster School in 1861, becoming Headmaster in 1863. Around 1875 Hick moved to Harrogate as Science Master at Pannal College; he remained there until 1886, when he became Williamson's Assistant Lecturer and Demonstrator in Botany at Owens College. Hick studied privately during his years as a schoolmaster in Leeds and passed the University of London examinations for the degrees of BA in 1886 and BSc in 1870 (Anon. 1896). In 1875 he attended a summer course for teachers in South Kensington and became an ardent convert to the recently introduced science teaching methods of Huxley and ThistletonDyer. The practical emphasis of their approach (Allen 1976, p. 181) was reflected in Hick's output of published research that mostly concerned vegetable physiology and histology. His earlier papers were connected with the structure of seaweeds, but he later turned to the study of Coal Measure plants, probably at the inspiration of Williamson and, indeed, co-authored one paper with James Lomax (Hick &Lomax 1894). Hick had been involved with the establishment of the Leeds Naturalists' Field Club and Scientific Association in the early 1870s; he lectured to it frequently in the years that followed and its success may have inspired his later approach to the problem of keeping together Williamson's auxilliaries. After the old professor retired to London, Hick formed them into a society.

The Lancashire and Yorkshire Palaeobotanical Society RE. Weiss referred to the new society as the Shaw Palaeobotanical Society (Weiss 1930) but the minute book (preserved in the Botany Department at Manchester Museum) is headed The Lancashire and Yorkshire Palaeobotanical Society'. The first meeting was convened at the home of Thomas Hick in Rusholme, Manchester, on 9 September 1893. Also present were Messrs Butterworth, Lomax, Wild and Cash, plus John Maiden who lived near Butterworth, Thomas Mitchell (also from Oldham) and M.M. Buckley from Elland. Binns, Spencer and

Earnshaw joined 2 months later (by invitation), and several others joined during the 3 years in which the society existed. John Butterworth was elected as the first President with Thomas Hick as Secretary. It seems almost certain that the establishment of the society was engineered by Hick in order to monitor the flow of recent finds by the auxilliaries and to encourage them in the work of collecting. Hick was probably still in contact with the London-based Williamson. The society met about four times a year in rotation at various members' homes and once at Owens College. Each meeting consisted of a general exhibition of specimens and a paper given by one of the members. As a means of communication between the members the organization appears to have been successful, but it ceased to function with the death of Thomas Hick, soon after that of W.C. Williamson, in 1896. The other auxiliaries slipped out of the picture; but for Lomax this proved the beginning of an era rather than the end.

The early Lomax business James Lomax showed considerable aptitude for the work of sectioning geological material and he delighted in microscopical studies. His scientific appetite had been whetted at a time when microscopy was becoming a normal part of scientific studies and 'every student, amateur and professional, had within his reach a sound working instrument, of far greater efficiency than previously and very moderate in price' (Allen 1976, p. 128). His involvement was part of the tremendous surge of popular interest in natural history that was reflected by an increase in the number of provincial societies and field clubs which 'took scientific culture to all classes'(Lowe 1978). A market clearly developed, among those interested in geology, for well-produced thin sections and doubtless advertisements by Lomax could be found in local scientific society publications, from the mid1880s onwards. However, the practice of binding together journals without end-papers has so far precluded their discovery. A rather later advertisement is known from the Proceedings of the Liverpool Geological Association of 1910. The Lomax advertisement cited earlier from the 1890 Radcliffe Historical Almanack places the designation 'Petrologist' before 'Geologist and Palaeobotanist' and also specifically mentions 'rock sections'. This implies that the major part of Lomax's early commercial work consisted of petrological thin sections. In fact, the most rapid adoption and development of petrographic techniques occurred in continental Europe, particularly in Germany. Speaking of his early days as a section

JAMES LOMAX (1857-1934) maker, Lomax was later to remark that the market was not easy as 'either by prejudice, custom or usage nearly all British petrologists were wedded to the German makers' (Lomax 1919). However, Lomax eventually produced sections that were easily comparable with those of the best German makers and, in fact, he was selling sections to German dealers for resale before World War I. Even the British Government had preferred the German suppliers, as an amusing anecdote given in several Lomax obituaries related. Cut off from their normal source of supply (probably Krantz of Bonn) a member of a government department approached Lomax with some sections and asked if he could produce similar items. Naturally he could, as the sections had originally been made in his own workshop. The closing years of the 19th century, then, saw Lomax established as a professional geological section maker, developing his presence in the market place and gaining a reputation for the excellence of his preparations. Lomax was a late arrival among Williamson's band of auxiliaries, because of his age, but it is clear (from an examination of the catalogue of Williamson's slide collection) that Lomax was supplying most of the material that the professor received towards the end of his life. As D.H. Scott carried on with Williamson's work it was natural that Lomax should continue to supply him with sections, and the implications of this in connection with Lomax's commercial aspirations are the next topic for consideration.

The Lomax Palaeobotanical Company Limited Having established the context within which James Lomax developed his scientific interests, and examined his career to the point where he was a selfemployed geological collector and thin section maker, we can now consider the subsequent development of his business activities.

Business in Bolton Around 1897 James Lomax moved his family to the Great Lever area of Bolton (about 2 miles from Radcliffe) and took up residence at 65 Starcliffe Street, Moses Gate. He was to live and work in Bolton for the rest of his life. Advertisements, such as the one that forms Figure 1, demonstrate that by 1906 the range of his business activities included the preparation of microphotographs and lantern slides, as well as rock and fossil thin sections. His assiduous search for new species of fossil plants had continued unabated. In 1893 he had co-authored a paper with Thomas Hick, the

143

Assistant Botany Lecturer at Owens College (Hick & Lomax 1894). The paper described a new species of Calamostachys, but this was only one of many new species that Lomax discovered, most of which he supplied to other academic palaeobotanists for description. D.H. Scott, who carried forward the researches of W.C. Williamson, continued to patronize Lomax, as the old professor had done. He also introduced new members of the slowly growing circle of academic palaeobotanists to Lomax's services. In March 1897 Robert Kidston wrote to Scott, 'I have got my first lot of slides from the lapidary' (Kidston 1897). There is little doubt that the lapidary was Lomax; in July 1898 Kidston was more specific, '. . . and while away another batch of slides came from Lomax' (Kidston 18980).

Enterprise v. science Lomax's excellent microscope preparations were frequently acknowledged in the scientific literature around the turn of the 19th century, but his marketing policy was often at variance with the needs of his academic customers. Clearly it was in Lomax's best financial interest to find hitherto undescribed fossil plants, from each specimen of which he could cut a number of thin sections. These could then be sent to a variety of known customers, probably on a sale or return basis. Advertised as something new, such material would clearly command a higher price than species that were already in the literature. Looked at in this light it becomes clear that Lomax would have disadvantaged himself considerably had he attempted to publish all his discoveries himself. There was no remuneration to be had from publishing scientific descriptions, even if he had possessed the ability. The dispersal of sections cut from each new specimen was a severe problem for Lomax's academic customers. A scientist wishing to interpret the threedimensional structure of a new fossil plant with any accuracy required as many sections through it as possible. There was, anyway, considerable wastage of material, lost in the sawing stage of the old 'slice and grind' preparation method. This led to misinterpretations; even in the best of circumstances (Andrews 1980, pp. 99-100). If only half of the prepared sections were available the problem was compounded. D.H. Scott's 1906 paper illustrated this problem of section dispersal among Lomax's patrons (Scott 1906). Scott had obtained from Lomax 11 transverse sections of the specimen under description, plus most of the 27 longitudinal sections. However, he still needed to bring together six more transverse sections, from as many scientists, in addition to several longitudinal sections. He did not try to recall the sections that had been sent abroad!

144

A.C. HOWELL

Fig.1.Lomax advertisement from The Naturalists'Directory 1906-1907.

JAMES LOMAX (1857-1934)

Formation and development of the Lomax Palaeobotanical Company The problem was clearly important and it could well have been a contributory factor leading towards the formation of the Lomax Palaeobotanical Company, with a number of leading academics among the directors. It would be interesting to know who originated the scheme to form the company, but so far no correspondence has been found that answers the question directly. The company offered advantages to all parties; the academics doubtless hoped to control Lomax's section output, while Lomax gained capital. As he later put it, 'In 1907 through various causes, chiefly lack of capital, the business was turned into a small limited company' (Lomax 1919). The new company was, in fact, formed on 22 December 1905 and became incorporated as a Limited Company on 12 January 1906. James Lomax held most of the shares, because his existing business had in effect been taken over. Additional shareholders, with one share each, were J.R. Lomax, RE. Weiss, D.H. Scott, F.W. Oliver, W.H. Sutcliffe, E. A.N. Arber and Robert Kidston. Apart from James Lomax's son and W. H. Sutcliffe, the remainder were (or became) academic scientists of some repute. Sutcliffe, Scott, Weiss and Oliver were appointed directors and additional capital was raised by the issue of 52 debentures of £10 each. The agreement drawn up between Lomax and the new company gave the directors, on paper at least, considerable powers over him and appointed him manager at a wage of £2.10s. per week for an initial period of 5 years. The objectives of the firm were stated in some detail in the statutory Company Registration documents. They included 'To promote the scientific investigation of fossil plants' and 'to carry on business as makers, producers, merchants and dealers of and in geological, botanical, photographic and other scientific specimens, educational materials and models'. Interestingly, the possibility of providing direct instruction to students was also mentioned. The main aims were, however, 'the collection and preparation of fossil plants, both impressions and petrifactions, and their distribution for study and teaching purposes'. These data concerning the company were taken from Defunct Companies File B.T.31/17651/87202 in the Public Record Office. Detailed correspondence dealing with the establishment of the Palaeobotanical Company appears to be almost non-existent. The Scott letters housed in the Seward Library of the Palaeobotany Section at the British Museum (Natural History) do, however, offer some indication of machinations between the academics concerning Lomax. A letter to Scott from Oliver on 21 October 1904 commented that, 'the Lomax situation is very

145

untimely and perplexing', but did not elucidate further. However on 24 June 1904 Lomax had written a very lengthy epistle to Dr SmithWoodward of the British Museum (Natural History) almost begging him to purchase some specimens as, 'I am at the present time making some expensive alterations to my workshops' (Lomax 1904). The letter goes on to talk of a bank overdraft and one is led to speculate that the 'untimely and perplexing' Lomax situation mentioned by Oliver may have been a financial crisis that had driven Lomax to seek aid from his chief palaeobotanical patrons. This would have presented the academics with a chance to provide aid for Lomax, but only on terms that would further their research interests, particularly with regard to the dispersal of specimens. However, if the favoured group of Lomax's customers who were involved with the formation of the Palaeobotanical Company thought it would solve all their problems, they were doomed to some disappointments. Lomax was a strong willed individual and the problems of reconciling the research interests of some customers with his own need to make a living seem to have brought forth several confrontations. Even in 1906 there were indications of difficult relations, as Oliver wrote to Scott on 26 November 1906: The meeting at Bolton had its breezy episodes, but Lomax agreed to hand over to you the Miadesmia. If he were presented with a slender golden bridge in the form of a note (?) you were now ready to receive material once more, he might disgorge material the more easily. Your letter was not used at the meeting.

In 1911 the issue was the sale of new material abroad. Oliver had arranged for a British researcher to look at a new Medullosa that Lomax had found, only to discover that Lomax had already offered the material to a French worker, Bertrand. Oliver wrote to Scott, 30 November 1911: Thus it would seem to me that Lomax has acted in a very unauthorised and premature way in seeking a market abroad before obvious people at home had been approached. If Weiss or any of our people were in question I sh'd of course waive all claims but under the circumstances I think Bertrand should be written to that the thing is premature and that the series of sections will be available for distribution later on. My new proposal is to add £10 or £15 to your balance by way of taking up my claim. The foreigners merely think us fools for letting good things slip out of the country. If, however, in view of the position you consider L. & Co. honourably bound to give Bertrand the material and that consequently it wd. be inappropriate to hand over the residue of the grant for the purpose indicated, I shall drop the matter. I shall not however forgoe (sic) the opportunity of the next mtg. of Directors to comment on the whole proceeding.

146

A.C. HOWELL

Clearly some kind of subsidy was being given to Lomax and it was certainly in Oliver's mind to use it as a means of persuading Lomax to 'deliver the goods'. The subsidization of Lomax's activities was also reflected in the price that the academics paid for their research material. In a letter to Scott, dated 12 July 1910, Lomax said: I have been with Mr Sutcliffe during the week and we have had some talk about the prices of the special things, he insists that for the welfare of the company that the prices must go up, the amount of time, expenses etc. spent on the work for some time has not repaiyed (sic) itself. I do not desire to have any friction or unpleasantness but you will quite understand that owing to the generosity of Mr Sutcliffe we can not ignore his suggestion.

It would appear from the above that the division of Lomax's business activities between what we could term 'research' and purely 'commercial' work was inherent right from the outset. Such a division of effort was specifically described later, in the company's coal research phase (Burrows & Sinnatt 1920). Bill Fowler (the ex-Lomax employee) indicated that James Lomax was really only interested in the research activities, while Joseph R. Lomax was wholly concerned with the commercial side of the business (Fowler pers. comm. 1978). It would seem that the two aspects were mutually dependent in no small measure, for as the scientific literature of palaeobotany expanded so there was created a demand around the world for teaching and comparative material. In 1906 Oliver wrote to Scott: 'Financially the company will need careful piloting. The trade is to be pushed rigorously by advertisement and lists'. However, Lomax was already adept at pushing his trade rigorously. There is a particularly extensive series of letters in the Palaeontology Library of the British Museum (Natural History) that documents Lomax's dealings with the museum from about 1904 (the first letter is undated) right through to 1934. The early letters concern the fitting of cover glasses to some uncovered slides in the Williamson collection, but the majority relate to specimens that Lomax had sent or was offering to send on approval to the museum. In tone the letters are very variable. Some give blatant over-representations of the goods on offer: This is the finest section that I have ever made of this material. You will notice that in the section of the largest shell the syphonfuncal (sic) is shown in every whorle.

Others plead the case when a refusal had been received: I should take it as a great privilege if you could also manage to retain the large coral section, as I made a special effort to make the section as large and as perfect as possible, because when I was up (in London) I had not noticed in any

of the table cases any section or specimen so large and so good as this one, consequently I thought it would be a welcome addition to the collection of fossil corals.

There were often pleas designed to speed up the official payment of bills: I should (take) it as a great kindness if you could get this account sent so that it arrives here by Wednesday mornings post at the latest, as I have an overdraft to meet at Bank then, and it is their making up day.

Initially the staff at the British Museum (Natural History) exhorted Lomax to refrain from sending unsolicited specimens on approval. But Lomax was well aware oif the excellence of his own preparations and the impression they would make on a possible purchaser: T received the returned list last week, I think if you had seen the preparations and specimens you would have considered it further'. In a mixture of pique and an attempt to shame the national institution he went on: 'I have now sent them to Harvard University, U.S.A.'. This initial reluctance to purchase probably reflected a lack of palaeobotanical knowledge by Dr A. Smith Woodward, Keeper of Geology at the British Museum (Natural History). His reply pencilled on a letter from Lomax in 1905 was: 'Consideration postponed until I can take advice from palaeobotanist'. Naturally, SmithWoodward turned to Scott and Oliver for this advice, but as his confidence increased Lomax's sale or return methods seemed to become accepted at the national museum. After 1906 a regular flow of specimens and correspondence developed between Bolton and South Kensington. Requests for advice regarding the purchase of Lomax specimens did cause Scott some embarrassment, particularly with regard to values. He wrote to Smith-Woodward, 6 November 1910: From what Oliver says and what I have heard otherwise, I should think the price asked not unreasonable. Perhaps, however, our opinion should be discounted as we are technically members of the Lomax Palaeobotanical Co.! I believe Seward is not under this disability. (Scott 1910)

At this point it seems appropriate to consider the various individuals who were involved with the establishment of the Lomax Palaeobotanical Company. Leaving aside the Lomax family we will begin with the non-academic 'odd man out'.

William Henry Sutcliffe (1856-1913) W.H. Sutcliffe was the son of a cotton manufacturer and entered the trade himself after being educated at Manchester Grammar School and Owens College. For some time he managed a cotton mill near Rouen, France, for a British firm and then, in 1885, he

JAMES LOMAX (1857-1934)

moved to manage the Shore Mills of Messrs E. Clegg & Sons. He subsequently became a Managing Director, then Vice Chairman of their board. Being a keen businessman he also represented them at the Manchester Royal Exchange. Sutcliffe was an enthusiastic amateur archaeologist and geologist. In concert with several others, he searched the local moors for evidence of early man and was involved with the excavation of several local archaeological sites. He supported the Rochdale Literary and Scientific Society, lecturing to them frequently on archaeological and, occasionally, geological topics. He frequently led field excursions for various societies, being himself a member of many, including the Geological Society of London, Manchester Geological Society, and the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society. He also served on the Council of the Manchester University Museum. Archaeology seems to have been his main interest, although he also collected much geological material both locally and while on holidays. A considerable amount of this material was donated to museums, particularly Rochdale, although a very fine plesiosaur that he found near Whitby was given to Manchester Museum. Sutcliffe's link with the Palaeobotanical Company was almost certainly a function of his control over access to that important source of coalballs, the drift mine at Shore near Littleborough. The palaeobotanical excellence of the Shore coal-balls was well known by 1905 when the Company was formed and, as the mine was owned by the firm of which Sutcliffe was a senior executive, it is easy to see why he was involved with Lomax. There is no indication of any commercial arrangement between Lomax and Sutcliffe's firm, although the latter could well have incurred some inconvenience in the matter. The mine had been disused for some time and was specially opened up for the extraction of coal-balls, on several occasions (Weiss 1911). F.W. Oliver gave a graphic description of the interior, quoted from Andrews' 1980 book, The Fossil Hunters... (p. 85): About 1/2 to 1/3 of the seam for which coal had been worked for his mill consisted of dense accumulations of coal-balls ranging in size from a walnut to a foot or more in diameter. It was an incredible spectacle and Sutcliffe rigged up a temporary electric light installation, which made it really spectacular. At places the entire seam appeared to consist of coal balls in almost continuous contact.

The mine furnished a great deal of material for as long as it was accessible and, since its closure, there have been many palaeobotanists who have dreamed wistfully about the possibility of it being re-opened (Albert Long DSc pers. comm.). Sutcliffe's link with the Palaeobotanical Company must have given Lomax a virtual monop-

147

oly over the commercial exploitation of material from Shore. Certainly a catalogue of slides from the section maker, W. Hemingway, held at Cambridge University Botany School records all his Shore material as being 'Per J. Lomax'. However, although removal of the nodules may have been restricted to Lomax, many groups of academics visited Shore in order to see coal-balls in situ (Anon. 1913). Until the time of his death Sutcliffe was a director of the Lomax Palaeobotanical Company and his must have been an important voice during business negotiations. It is likely that he was a leading architect of the firm's original form, as it is doubtful whether the other directors possessed the requisite business acumen. As a fellow non-academic Sutcliffe was probably closer to Lomax than the other directors and, as we have seen from the letter quoted earlier, he was probably something of an ally in Lomax's dealings with the others. It is difficult to assess what effect the loss of Sutcliffe's direction may have had on the company, but it was probably considerable. Sutcliffe took his own life while on holiday with his family at Weymouth. No sensible reasons for this action were discovered at the inquest and, The Jury returned a verdict of suicide during temporary insanity caused by mental depression' (Anon. 1913). He has been awarded permanent recognition for his services to palaeobotany with the naming of the fossils Sutcliffia insignis by Scott and Tubicaulis sutcliffei by Stopes. If W.H. Sutcliffe was the business architect of the Palaeobotanical Company it seems likely that D.H. Scott was the prime mover among the academics. Letters to Scott from the other palaeobotanists seem to convey the impression that he was regarded as a sort of senior partner in the venture with Lomax.

Dukinfield Henry Scott (1854-1934) D.H. Scott was born in London into an affluent family and received his early education from tutors at home. He showed a strong interest in natural history at an early age, especially in botany and microscopy, although this youthful interest did not immediately dominate his life. He read classics at Christ Church, Oxford from 1872 to 1876, thereafter taking employment at Euston Station 'where for three years he pursued his intention to become a railway engineer' (Andrews 1980, p. 97). From 1880 to 1882 Scott studied for his botanical PhD at the University of Wurzburg in Germany (Wilding 2005). Cardwell described the German university system at that time, with its emphasis on research rather than teaching (Cardwell 1972, p. 133), which explains why Scott would have considered that Germany was 'in the mainstream of botanical progress' (Scott 1925).

148

A.C. HOWELL

In 1882 Scott took a position as Assistant to Professor Daniel Oliver at University College, London. Francis Oliver was a member of the class at that time and it is not without significance, from our point of view, that the two became lifelong friends. In 1885 Scott became Assistant Professor under Thomas Huxley at the Normal School of Science and the Royal School of Mines. In 1892 he accepted a post as Honorary Keeper of the Jodrell Laboratory at Kew. He retired from this position in 1906, although he continued his researches and writing from his home near Basingstoke. During his period at the Jodrell Laboratory, Scott became associated with W.C. Williamson, and began his serious involvement with palaeobotany. Before then, his research had mainly concerned the structure of recent plants; he was, thus, well versed to develop Williamson's discoveries among the Upper Carboniferous fossil plants. In fact, it would appear that Scott was offered Williamson's chair at Manchester as H.V. Klaassen (later Scott's wife) wrote offering him congratulations on the post at Kew and saying: 'I have been 8 days in Manchester. It is a good thing for you that you declined the position offered you there. The smoke and the smells there beat everything' (Klaassen 1892). In 1900 Scott published his Studies in Fossil Botany, which mainly dealt with Palaeozoic petrifaction fossils and was based on a course he taught at University College. The second edition of 1908-1909 was expanded into two volumes and a third edition appeared in 1920-1923. As Andrews said in 1980, 'A comparison of the first and third editions shows how rapidly evolutionary palaeobotany was advancing during this period'. Bill Fowler was firmly convinced that Lomax had given Scott the substance of these books (pers. comm. 1978), although, of course, it is probably more correct to say that Lomax provided the thin sections from which many of the illustrations were made. Scott acknowledged Lomax in the Preface to the first edition: The progress of scientific fossil botany has been greatly advanced by the skilled and intelligent work in collecting petrified specimens and preparing sections, of such men as Mr J. Lomax....

Apart from his 'Further Observations . . .' papers (Williamson & Scott 1894, 1895, 1896) written jointly with Williamson, Scott also produced his own series of Royal Society papers entitled 'On the Structure and Affinities of Fossil Plants from the Palaeozoic Rocks'. The first appeared in 1897 and the series title was obviously descended from that chosen by Williamson (Scott 1897). In 1901 Scott published a paper in the series, on a Lycopod fructification called Lepidocarpon to which he gave the specific name lomaxi (Scott 1891). Scott was variously President of the Linnean

Society and the Royal Microscopical Society, and twice presided over the Botanical Section of the British Association. He was one of the key figures in what has been called the 'Golden Age' of British palaeobotany, the other important character being A.C. Seward at Cambridge. Whereas Scott specialized in petrifaction fossils and thus became linked with Lomax, the Cambridge 'school' mainly concerned itself with compression fossils; so Seward was never linked directly with the Palaeobotanical Company.

Frederick Ernst Weiss (1865-1953) F.E. Weiss was the first Secretary of the Lomax Palaeobotanical Company. He was born in Huddersfield, but his father died 3 years later so his mother moved the family to Germany, where education was cheaper and where Frederick attended the Heidelberg Gymnasium. After a period in Switzerland, Weiss returned to England where he entered University College in 1886, intending to study zoology. While serving as a Demonstrator for Professor Daniel Oliver in his fourth year, Weiss became acquainted with Scott and P.O. Bower. He then shifted his studies to botany and spent some time at Strasburg, like Scott, taking advantage of the German research-orientated university system. In 1893 Weiss succeeded Williamson as Professor of Botany at Owens College, Manchester. He was primarily a botanist, although he did publish some palaeobotanical work and greatly encouraged his Manchester colleagues W.H. Lang and John Walton, who made important contributions later. As the Secretary of the Palaeobotanical Company, Weiss was clearly the local representative of the academics, situated as he was within easy reach of Bolton. In 1906 when Lomax wrote to the British Museum (Natural History) requesting the loan of some slides of the plant Bothrodendron from the Williamson collection, it was suggested as a compromise (following their initial reluctance to lend) that the slides be sent to Weiss at Manchester. He would then supervise Lomax's examination of the material. Incidentally, the British Museum (Natural History) letters file indicates that D.H. Scott was responsible for the advice not to lend the specimens: 'His feeling is that it would be well if you could find some way of refusing Lomax's request' (signed A.B.R., presumably A.B. Rendle of the British Museum (Natural History) Botany Department). This seems rather odd behaviour from Lomax's new business partner, but perhaps Scott did not wish to encourage Lomax to delve too deeply into the 'structure and affinities' of Bothrodendron, He did, however, mention Lomax's opinions on the genus in the second edition of Studies in Fossil Botany.

JAMES LOMAX (1857-1934)

Francis Wall Oliver (1864-1952) F. W. Oliver was the son of Daniel Oliver, Keeper of the Herbarium at Kew, so botany was something of a family tradition. He attended Bootham School in York, after which he entered University College, London where he was influenced by D.H. Scott and his own father. He later attended Trinity College, Cambridge and spent some time studying in Bonn during his vacations. Subsequently Professor of Botany at University College, Oliver's contributions to palaeobotanical literature were not numerous and mostly concerned fossil seeds. His later work consisted of ecological studies of living vegetation. Oliver is justly famous for his discovery of the extinct group of fossil seed ferns. He arrived at this through his studies of the seed Lagenostoma, which he proved to belong to the stem Lyginodendron (later Lyginopteris] and linked to the fern-like foliage Sphenopteris. He took the matter to Scott who agreed after some persuasion (not wishing to diminish Oliver's credit) to share the task of bringing the discovery before the scientific world. Their initial communication was made to the Royal Society in May 1903, followed by a full report read on 21 January 1904. Some aspects of the discovery had been determined from slides in the Williamson collection, others had been found in waste material from Lomax's workshop: Lomax (pere) cut and took trial sections from an enormous number of coal balls. Specimens he rejected as of no commercial value he just threw into a crate standing handy in his workshop. Knowing of this I had Lomax send me from time to time boxes filled with these 'Rubbish' sections thousands of them. About one in a thousand contained a good thing . . . the ovule, fig. 34 in Oliver and Scott was found in just such a rubbish section. It was the best preparation in a bunch of 1000 and I was just about to run off to the botany lab tea. (Andrews 1980, p. 164.)

Robert Kidston (1852-1924) Robert Kidston was born at Bishopton, Renfrewshire and educated at Stirling High School. Initially he was employed by the Glasgow Savings Bank, but gave this up at the age of 26 and devoted most of the rest of his life to palaeobotany (Liston & Sanders 2005). During his banking years he attended lectures in Glasgow, some of which, delivered by W.C. Williamson, influenced him towards palaeobotany. After quitting the bank he attended botany classes at Glasgow University, given by Hutton Balfour. His early interests were concentrated on recent botany, but gradually shifted towards the study of fossil plants. Kidston accomplished an enormous amount of

149

research, although where necessary he collaborated with others to supplement his own knowledge of plant anatomy. He was a prodigious collector, both by his own efforts and those of others such as Lomax. He mostly worked with compression fossils and his enormous collection of these was bequeathed to the Geological Survey. He did have a collection of petrifaction thin sections and these are now housed in the Botany Department of Glasgow University. As might be expected of a Lomax Palaeobotanical Company shareholder, there are many Lomax preparations in the collection. Kidston's main work, however, was with compression fossils and he developed 'unrivalled floristic and stratigraphic knowledge' (Crookall 1938). With this in mind he was approached as early as 1901 to produce a monograph on the British Carboniferous Flora for the Geological Survey. This seminal work was eventually published in parts between 1923 and 1925, with the title Fossil Plants of the Carboniferous Rocks of Great Britain. Unfortunately, Kidston only lived to produce six parts of the monograph, although Robert Crookall has been able to bring out six more parts based, to some extent, on Kidston's notes and collections. Kidston's other important work was his study of the Rhynie chert plants, in collaboration with W.H. Lang. This resulted in several joint papers between 1917 and 1921.

Edward Alexander Newell Arber (1870-1918) E.A.N. Arber was born in London but, suffering from poor health, was despatched to Switzerland for a year around 1885. There he developed a passion for alpine vegetation. He entered Trinity College, Cambridge in 1895 and afterwards was appointed demonstrator in Palaeobotany at the Sedgwick Museum. He spent much time identifying and curating fossil plant specimens at Cambridge and the British Museum (Natural History). For the latter institution he produced the Catalogue of the Glossopteris Flora in 1905 (Arber 1905) and, for the Cambridge University Press, Devonian Floras in 1921 (Arber 1921). He was also an extremely keen field worker, who had expressed 'a desire to visit every spot in this country where fossil plants have ever been found' (Arber 1918). He also had a sense of humour. Writing to Scott from Stockholm concerning the fossil collection of A.G. Nathorst, he said: The place is a gold mine. There is only one thing to be done. The Foreign Office must be contacted and we must buy up Sweden and Nathorst and all. This will all come in under the Lomax Company. (Arber 1906.)

Having now sketched the personnel who were effectively sponsoring the Lomax Palaeobotanical

150

A.C. HOWELL

Company it is perhaps appropriate to try to assess the achievements of the organization. This is no easy task, for a variety of reasons. At first sight a simple search of the (very extensive) palaeobotanical literature might give an indication of the frequency with which Lomax preparations have been used. However, in most cases it would be difficult to ascertain exactly when the preparations were manufactured, as Lomax made many before the formation of the company and many were made after the company as such ceased to exist. Also, many papers were published without necessarily stating who prepared the material. In addition, all collections of old thin sections are subject to periodic re-examination and re-description in the light of advancing knowledge. The paper by Blanc-Louvel concerning Lyginodendron is an example of a fairly modern paper that is in large measure based on a re-appraisal of Lomax sections housed in various European museums and universities (Blanc-Louvel 1966). In fact, the paper solves a problem in a similar way to Scott in 1906, by re-assembling Lomax's original series of sections in order to properly interpret the structure of very complex stems. Faced with the problem of trying to quantify the achievements of the Palaeobotanical Company in its own right, it seemed appropriate to look at the thin section collections of the chief academic shareholders and to assess the proportion of Lomax preparations that they contain. The collections of Scott and Oliver are (together with that of Williamson) housed at the British Museum (Natural History), while Kidston's collection is in Glasgow. Weiss was probably responsible for acquiring the extensive collections at Manchester Museum, with their obvious preponderance of Lomax specimens (personal examination), while Arber seems to have been the exception and is not known to have accumulated a large collection. The Oliver collection at the British Museum (Natural History) is the easiest to deal with; it contains 2351 sections, of which 1701 can definitely be ascribed to the Lomax workshops. The Scott collection at the same institution is not so straightforward, as some of the material was obtained before the inception of the Palaeobotanical Company and batches of sections (from various makers) were subsequently obtained from other collectors. Thus, we find that Scott acquired some 82 sections from Williamson, presumably during the brief period of their collaboration. He acquired George Wild's collection of 116 slides in 1901 and this contained a significant number of Lomax preparations. He also obtained the collection of James Spencer, containing 339 sections in all. Looking through his collection catalogue, it is clear that Scott began to acquire large quantities of Lomax preparations after 1897. As a whole the collection contains a total of 2225 Lomax

items out of a total 3182 slides. Clearly some of these were produced by Lomax before the days of the Palaeobotanical Company. The Kidston collection of thin sections at Glasgow contains 3481 slides. The bulk of these are Upper Carboniferous petrifactions, although there is an important series of Rhynie chert specimens (mostly prepared by W. Hemingway). Out of the total number, 866 can be ascribed to Lomax, about 25% of the total. This is a much lower percentage than that for the Oliver and Scott collections which, respectively, consist of about 72 and 70% Lomax specimens. Also in the Botany Department at Glasgow is another collection of slides that was started by Professor F.O. Bower and continued by Professor John Walton. It contains 519 catalogued items, of which 259 (about 50%) are Lomax preparations. It must be admitted, however, that some of these were purchased as late as 1936, after James Lomax's death. The Scott and Oliver collections at the British Museum (Natural History) can thus be seen to contain impressive numbers of Lomax preparations. Much of the rapid progress in palaeobotany, noted earlier in connection with the various editions of Scott's textbook, was founded on specimens from these collections and on those contained in the Williamson collection. The latter also contains a significant number of Lomax preparations (about 34% of the material that is attributable to any particular manufacturer), a figure that is surprising considering that the two men were only associated for half of Williamson's palaeobotanical research period. The numbers of Lomax thin sections in these collections clearly indicate that he and his Palaeobotanical Company were an important part of the palaeobotanical research scene at least 10 years before, and for more than 20 years after, the beginning of the 20th century. It is, however, difficult to assign any particular set of advantages to the formation of the company, apart from the fact that it allowed the palaeobotanical research of various individuals to continue in a relatively efficient manner. Oliver's letter to Andrews quoted earlier (Andrews 1980, p. 164) gives some idea of the amount of material that must have been processed and examined in Lomax's workshop, and clearly the law of diminishing returns came strongly into play as the coal-ball flora became better known. The chances of finding something new decreased as knowledge increased and perhaps this would be a factor to bear in mind if a serious proposal were made to re-open the mine at Shore today. The collection and preparation of slides was not Lomax's only contribution, however, as a letter from Seward to Scott indicated. A party of visiting scientists was conducted to Dulesgate Colliery by Lomax, in 1903, an occasion described in a letter to Scott by A.C. Seward:

JAMES LOMAX (1857-1934)

151

early years of the 20th century. The evidence is plain to see in the collections of thin sections upon which so much published knowledge was founded. It is also true that the business model under which Lomax operated mitigated against the best interests of individual study by a single worker and this ultimately led academia to seek alternative means of not only acquiring, but also of preparing, specimens for study. The main substance of this article is taken from an MSc thesis on the life, work and influence of James Lomax, which was submitted to UMIST in 1984 when the author worked at Bolton Museum. In this more public forum thanks should be reiterated to the Bolton authorities plus colleagues there and elsewhere for their support; also to J. Pickstone for his supervision. I am indebted to J. Cooper and R.J. Cleveley for finding the subject of Figure 1. Special thanks are due to J.J. Listen of the Hunterian Museum for flagging up this opportunity to publish - it might otherwise have remained a 'good intention' - and I am also grateful to the external reviewers for their time and comments. Fig. 2. Memorial photograph of James Lomax, presented to Radcliffe Borough in 1938.

The whole thing was well organised by Lomax, J. The mine people did all in their power to afford us facilities. Brebner who is offensive at times was the only one who wished himself elsewhere. Among others there were: Miss Benson, Thames, Slopes, Robertson and friend, Lignier, Lotsy, Tansley, Rendle, Hill, Brebner, Lomax et fils & C. (Seward 1903) Lomax's links with the coal industry were st (ill strong and he was clearly a point of contact between it and the developing world of academic science. In fact, his own research interests began to change around 1910 and the commercial activities of the Palaeobotanical Company began to change with them. Research on the origins and structure of coal began to dominate his life and, like that of his earlier palaeobotanical work, the inspiration for this can largely be attributed to W.C. Williamson. (Lomax 1911,1914,1915,1920,1925 James Lomax died following an acute attack of bronchitis in 1934, some 2 years after he retired as head of the microscopical section of the Lancashire and Cheshire Coal Research Association. He was buried in an unmarked grave in Breightmet Parish Churchyard, Bolton. Four years later, in January 1938, a framed memorial photograph of James Lomax was presented to Radcliffe Borough (Fig. 2) and was clearly intended to grace the walls of the local museum he helped to found. In conclusion, and referring back to the question posed by the title of this article, there can be little doubt that James Lomax was a catalyst in the development of palaeobotanical understanding in the

References ALLEN, D.E. 1976. The Naturalist in Britain: A Social History. Harmondsworth, Penguin, London, 159. ANDREWS, H.N. 1980. The fossil hunters: In Search of Ancient Plants. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY. ANON. 1896. Obituary: Thomas Hick. Natural Science, 9, 209. ANON. 1908. Radcliffe and District Literary and Scientific Society, Coming of Age Souvenir, 17. ANON. 1913. Tragic death of Mr W.H. Sutcliffe. Rochdale Observer, 23 August. ANON. 1914. Death of Mr W. Cash. The Halifax Courier, 19 December. ANON. 1925. Men of note in the British coal industry, No. 71, Mr James Lomax. Colliery Guardian, 24 December, 1523. ANON. 1934. Death of Mr James Lomax. Radcliffe Times, 20 October. ANON. 1938. A famous son of Radcliffe. Radcliffe Times, 22 January. ARBER, E.A. 1905. Catalogue of the fossil plants of the Glossopteris Flora BM (NH). ARBER, E.A. 1918. E.A. Newell Arber. Geological Magazine, 5,426-431. ARBER, E.A. 1921. Devonian Floras, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. ARBER, E.A.N. 1906. Letter to D.H. Scott, 4 April 1906. Scott Letters, Seward Library, British Museum (Natural History), London. BLANC-LOUVEL, C. 1966. Etude anatomique comparee des tiges et des petioles d'une pteridospermee du Carbonifere du genre Lyginopteris Potonie. Memoires du Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, SerieC,17. BOYD DAWKINS, W. 1908. Letter to James Lomax, dated 1 June 1908. Radcliffe Literary and Scientific Society. BURROWS, R.A. & SINNATT, F.S. 1920. The organisation of the Lancashire and Cheshire Coal Research

152

A.C. HOWELL

Association. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 60, 3-4. CARDWELL, D.S.L. 1972. The Organisation of Science in England, rev. edn. Heinmann, London, 133. CASH, W. 1896. Thomas Hick (1840-1896). Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological and Polytechnic Society, 13,234-239. CASH, W. 1910. Letter to D.H. Scott, dated 23 August 1910. Scott Letters, Seward Library, British Museum (Natural History), London. CROOKALL, R. 1938. The Kidston Collection of Fossil Plants with an Account of the Life and Work of Robert Kidston. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, 8. CRUMP, W.B. 1898. James Spencer. Halifax Naturalist, 3,71. HICK, T. & LOMAX, J. 1894. On a new sporiferous spike from the Lancashire Coal Measures. Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, Series 4,8, 1-8. HICKLING, G. 1935. Untitled Obituary of James Lomax. Proceedings of the Geological Society, 91, 96-97. KIDSTON, R. 1897. Letter to D.H. Scott, dated 18 March 1897. Scott Letters, Seward Library, British Museum (Natural History), London. KIDSTON, R. 1898«. Letter to D.H. Scott, dated July 1898. Scott Letters, Seward Library, British Museum (Natural History), London. KIDSTON, R. 1898&. Letter to D.H. Scott, dated 7 November 1898. Scott Letters, Seward Library, British Museum (Natural History), London. KLAASSEN, H.M. 1892. Letter to D.H. Scott, dated 16 February 1892. Scott Letters, Seward Library, British Museum (Natural History), London. LISTON, JJ. & SANDERS, H.L. 2005. The 'other' Glasgow Boys: the rise and fall of a school of Palaeobotany. In: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds). History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications 241,197-227. LOMAX, J. 1899. Recent investigations on plants of the Coal Measures. Transactions of the Manchester Geological and Mining Society, 26,237-255. LOMAX, J. 1904. Letter to A. Smith-Woodward, dated 24 June 1904. Palaeontology Library, British Museum (Natural History), London. LOMAX, J. 1911. The microscopical examination of coal and its use in determining the inflammable constituent present therein. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 42,1-21. LOMAX, J. 1914. Further researches in the microscopical examination of coal, especially in relation to spontaneous combustion. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 46,675. LOMAX, J. 1915. The formation of coal seams in the light of recent microscopic investigations. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 50,127-158. LOMAX, J. 1919. Letter to Sir Frank Heath, dated 10 October 1919, p. 7, Bolton Museum. LOMAX, J. 1920. (Evidence given by) In: Minutes of Home Office Departmental Committee on Spontaneous Combustion in Coal Mines, HMSO, London, 90. LOMAX, J. 1925. The Microstructure of a Coal Seam. D.S.I.R. Fuel Research Board, Technical Paper No. 11. LOWE, P.D. 1978. Locals and cosmopolitans. MPhil. Thesis, University of Sussex, 7.

MIDGLEY, T. 1934. James Lomax (1857-1934). The North Western Naturalist, 31 December, 392-393. ORCHARD, A.J.A. 1934. Address to Manchester Geological and Mining Society. Colliery Guardian, 16 November, 913. SCOTT, D.H. 1897. On the structure and affinities of fossil plants from the Palaeozoic rocks. On Cheirostrobus, a new type of fossil cone from the Lower Carboniferous strata (Calciferous Sandstone Series). Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, CLXXXIV, B, 1. SCOTT, D.H. 1900. Studies in Fossil Botany, A. & C. Black, London. Ibid 2nd edn. 1908-1909, 2 vols. Ibid 3rd edn. 1920.2vols. SCOTT, D.H. 1901. On the structure and affinities of fossil plants from the Palaeozoic rocks. IV The seed-like fructification of Lepidocarpon, a genus of lycopodiaceous cones from the Carboniferous formation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B, 291-333. SCOTT, D.H. 1906. On Sutcliffia insignis, a new type of Medulloseae from the Lower Coal Measures. Transactions of the Linnaean Society, 2nd Series Botany, 7,46. SCOTT, D.H. 1910. Letter to A. Smith-Woodward, dated 6 November 1910. B.M. (N.H.), Palaeontology Library, British Museum (Natural History), London. SCOTT, D.H. 1925. German reminiscences of the early eighties. New Phytologist, 24,9-16. SEWARD, A.C 1903. Letter to D.H. Scott, September 1903. Scott Letters, Seward Library, British Museum (Natural History), London. SHEPPARD, T. 1915. In Memoriam, William Cash, F.G.S. (1843-1914). Naturalist, 1 January, 28-30. SPENCER, J. 1881. The fossil flora of the Halifax Hard Bed Coal I. Science Gossip, 17, 52-54. (This was the first in the series, the final paper appeared in July 1883; the series was listed in Crump 1898.) WEISS, F.E. 1911. The Microscopical Study of Fossil Plants. Report of the Manchester Microscopical Society, 32,37. WEISS, F.E. 1930. Microscopy in Manchester. Report of the Manchester. Microscopical Society, 50,51. WEISS, F.E. 1935. James Lomax (1857-1934). Proceedings of the Linnaean Society 1934-35, 182-183. WILDING, R. 2005. D.H. SCOTT & A.C. SEWARD: modern pioneers in the structure and architecture of fossil plants. In: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds). History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications 241,153-160. WILLIAMSON, W.C. 1871. On a new form of Calamitean strobilus from the Lancashire Coal-measures. Memoirs of the Literary and Philosophical Society of Manchester, 3rd series, 4, 248-265. WILLIAMSON, W.C. 1896. Reminiscences of a Yorkshire Naturalist. George Redway, London, 201. WILLIAMSON, W.C. & CASH, W. 1887. Report of the Committee, Investigating the Carboniferous flora of Halifax and its Neighbourhood. Report of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, 235. WILLIAMSON, W C. & SCOTT, D.H. 1984. Further observations on the fossil plants of the Coal-Measures, Pt 1 Calamites Calamostachysopherophyllum. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, CLXXXV.

D.H. Scott and A.C. Seward: modern pioneers in the structure and architecture of fossil plants RICHARD WILDING History of Geology Group, 175, Whitton Road, Twickenham, Survey TW2 7QZ, UK (e-mail: ricval@ tiscali. co. uk) Abstract: The last 40 years of the 19th century saw a great expansion in the study of fossil plants. This was, in part, brought about by the growth of coal mining and the consequent increase in the discovery of plant remains from the Carboniferous Coal Measures. The interest in the evolution of life forms following Darwin's theories, together with the development of the petrological microscope, also had their effect on the growth of this discipline. Among the pioneers of this growth of palaeobotany was the Canadian John William Dawson, who was the first to have a clear understanding of some of the earliest land plants from the Devonian. William Crawford Williamson, another of the 19th century pioneers, was also instrumental in forwarding the interests and careers of the two great palaeobotanists with which this paper is concerned - Dukenfield Henry Scott and Sir Albert Charles Seward. Scott was the son of a distinguished architect, who studied botany as a boy and returned to the science after studying in Germany. Through Williamson's influence he later took up palaeobotany, a field in which he was to distinguish himself, eventually becoming Honorary Director of the Jodrell Laboratory at Kew. His contributions to the science of palaeobotany were considerable. So were those of Albert Charles Seward, his near contemporary, who attained a high position and influence in palaeobotany through his own hard work and undoubted talents. He was awarded a Fellowship of the Royal Society in 1898, and received a knighthood in 1936. He was Master of Downing College, Cambridge for 21 years from 1915, and in 1924 he became Vice Chancellor of the university. He wrote of the palaeobotany of many parts of the world, including Antarctica. Both Scott and Seward can be regarded as the forerunners of the great growth of the palaeobotanical work during the 20th century.

In the Historical Sketch of the first volume of his three volume work on Fossil Plants, A.C. Seward states that 'palaeobotany has only attained a real importance in the eyes of botanists and geologists in the last few decades' - that is of the 19th century (Seward 1898,1). It is certainly true that a great leap forward in this science came after Darwin's On the Origin of Species (1859), and the consequent growth of interest in evolutionary studies, but, about the same time, came the invention of the polarizing microscope. William Nicol (1810-1879) developed the calcite prism for producing polarized light and the first thin sections he examined included those of petrified wood. Henry Clifton Sorby (1826-1909) was the great British pioneer in the microscopic study of rocks (Sorby 1851, 1858), although microscopic petrography was later more fully developed in Germany by Ferdinand Zirkel (1838-1912) and Karl Heinrich Rosenbusch (1836-1914). Scientific advances always greatly rely on the development of new techniques of investigation and the earth sciences have always benefited from such novel developments. It must be noted that most of the studies of fossil plants were of the Carboniferous plants, which are easily accessible in the Coal Measures. As the new industries that arose during the Industrial Revolution

were powered by coal, the opportunities to study coal plants grew during the 19th century with the growth of coal mining. Later, Tertiary plants were studied, but those of the Lower Palaeozoic, the earliest land plants, were ignored until Canadian, John William Dawson (1820-1899), began to look at them. He had studied in Edinburgh, then became Superintendent of Education in Nova Scotia and later became Principal of the new McGill University. Sir William Logan, head of the Canadian Geological Survey, encouraged Dawson to study Devonian plant fossils. Several papers on these fossils followed (Dawson 1859,1871,1881,1882). In 1889 he published The Geological History of Plants, an important work on the then known history of fossil plants, from the Pre-Cambrian onwards (Fig. 1). All of this early work had little immediate impact on the study of the earliest fossil plants, but by the early 20th century his pioneering work had begun to be appreciated.

D.H. Scott (1854-1934) Dukenfield Henry Scott, palaeobotanist (Fig. 2), was born in London, the youngest of the five sons of the eminent architect, Sir Giles Gilbert Scott. He was

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,153-160.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

154

R. WILDING

Fig.1. Dawson's 'Vegetation of the Devonian PEriod, resotred': Calamites, Psylophytom, Leptophleum, Lepidodendro

Cordaites, Sigillaria, Dadoxylom, Asterophyllites and Platphyllum(from Dawson 1889,49).

educated at home by tutors and before he was 14 years old was persuaded by his mother to study botany, and the subject of plant structure soon occupied his attention and eventually became his chief occupation. Before he was 16 he had read a number of German works in translation and studied microscopy. He then gave up botany for about 9 years, studying the classics at Christ Church, Oxford, and then spent a further 3 years training to be an engineer. In 1879 his interest in botany revived and, on the advice of Sir W.T. Thistleton-Dyer, he decided to study the subject in Germany, then in the vanguard of botanical studies. Here he worked under von

Sachs at Wurzburg. He took his PhD in 1881 with a thesis on articulated lactiferous vessels. He then returned to England for a year, before returning to Germany for a few months to study plant physiology under Goebel. From this and the field excursions involved, he developed a lifelong love of plants. He had been impressed by the dominance at German universities of research over mere rote learning. On his return to England Scott was appointed Assistant to Professor Daniel Oliver at University College where, in his lectures, he encouraged that love of research he brought from Germany. He was the first lecturer at University College who allowed women to enroll in his class. He was thus a pioneer

D.H. SCOTT AND A.C. SEWARD

155

Fig. 2. Dukenfield Henry Scott (1854-1934). Reproduced by kind permission of the Royal Society.

in the movement to advance women's rights and educational opportunities. In 1885 he was appointed Professor of Botany, under T.H. Huxley at the Normal School (later Imperial College) of Science and the Royal School of Mines in South Kensington. Here he continued to produce some interesting papers and to teach, but his teaching career would only last for a decade (1882-1892), in the final year of which he became Honorary Director of the Jodrell Laboratory at Kew. Having independent means, Scott was not compelled to work for his living and he used this independence to follow his main interests in studying the anatomy of plants. A paper, given at the British Association Meeting at Newcastle-upon-Tyne in 1889, not only drew attention to promising lines of research, but

showed the palaeontological importance of knowledge of the anatomical characters of plants. Scott had earlier met William Crawford Williamson at Manchester. When he retired Williamson moved to London and the two men renewed their acquaintance and worked together at the Jodrell Laboratory. Williamson appreciated the help of a younger colleague with a more modern outlook, and Scott had learned much from Williamson at their earlier meetings. Mrs Williamson writing in the last part of Williamson's autobiography states: To Dr Scott's intellectual enthusiasm for the subject, to his tactful veneration for its exponent, and to his unfailing kindness, my husband owed much of the enjoyment of his last years. (Williamson 1896, p. 213.)

156

R. WILDING

Scott not only provided Williamson with intellectual companionship, but also acted as his guardian during his last visit to a meeting of the Royal Society. The collaboration was fruitful, resulting in several joint papers (Williamson & Scott 1894, 1895, 1896). It was Williamson who really introduced Scott to the subject of Fossil Botany. Scott had already produced his admirable two-part textbook, An Introduction to Structural Botany (Scott 1894, 1896), a model of clear exposition. After Williamson's death in 1895 he went on to produce such comprehensive works as Studies in Fossil Botany (1900, 1920, 1923) and Extinct Plants and Problems of Evolution (1924). Scott's work was clearly orientated towards the growing interest of the time in Darwinism. Evolution and the need to build up the genealogical tree of the organic world was never far from his thoughts, but his engineering training plus the inherited interest in architecture certainly had their influence in the development of his work and ideas. His great contributions to the science of palaeobotany have been well explained and summarized by Sir Albert Seward, in an obituary. In this Seward wrote of: ... his discoveries of new types among the petrified records of Carboniferous rocks, and his additions to our knowledge of the evolutionary significance of types previously described. Part IV of the Royal Society papers on Carboniferous plants, published in 1901, furnished an exceptionally interesting illustration of his share in reconstructing the course of development, in the latter part of the Palaeozoic era, of highly organised forms of reproductive organs. In Part IV he describes the seed-like fructification of Lepidocarpon: the generic name was proposed for specimens which demonstrated the true nature of some detached seeds previously described by Williamson as a species of Cardiocarpon. The seeds were borne on a cone agreeing generally with Lepidostrobus, the spore-bearing shoot of Lepidodendron. [See Fig. 3 of this paper.] This fructification, as Scott said, 'is of great interest, as demonstrating to us one way in which seeds may have originated'. In Lepidostrobus each sporophyll bears a large sporangium megaspores or microspores; in Lepidocarpon the megasporangium is enveloped in an integument which grew up from the sporophyll, and except for a longer and narrower micropylar crevice over the top, completely covered the megasporangium with its large, single megaspore containing prothallus-tissue. It was a detached sporophyll with its integumented megasporangium that Williamson had described as a gymnospermous seed. The question was, whether or not these almost completely covered megasporangia might reasonably be called seeds, and accepted as evidence of the production of seeds by a Palaeozoic member of the lycopod group. It was objected that no embryo had been found in Lepidocarpon, and that the integument differed in origin from the integuments of

recent seed. Scott, in reply, said that he regarded Lepidocarpon as 'a seed in as nascent stage of evolution', and added: 'our current morphological conceptions are derived entirely from the study of the recent flora, and we cannot expect them apply rigidly to plants at a far earlier stage of evolution'. (Seward 1934.)

Here, and in other parts of this obituary, one can see his clear search for evolutionary mechanisms, still an important field of research today. Seward also mentions Scott's quoting, with approval, from a review of Fossil Plants, the sentence: 'The discovery of seed-bearing plants with the foliage of ferns threatened to disturb the mental balance of palaeobotanists'.

Sir Albert Charles Seward (1863-1941) Seward (Fig. 4) was born at Lancaster in 1863, sixth child of Abram Seward, an ironmonger who became Mayor of Lancaster in 1877. After early education at Lancaster Grammar School, he entered St John's College, Cambridge, obtaining a First Class in each part of the Natural Sciences Tripos (1885,1886). He began to study palaeobotany in 1886 and worked for a year under William Crawford Williamson at Manchester. Seward then visited several continental museums to study the fossil plants in their collections. This travel year was facilitated by the award of a Harkness Scholarship at Cambridge in 1888. In 1890 he was appointed Lecturer in Botany at Cambridge and in 1892 published an important paper, 'Fossil Plants as Tests of Climate' (Seward 1892). Other books and papers led to an award of Fellowship of the Royal Society in 1898. He was awarded a Fellowship of St John's in 1899, but resigned it soon afterwards to become Fellow and Tutor at Emmanuel College. In 1906 he succeeded Marshall Ward as Professor of Botany, a post he held until he resigned it in 1936. Important monographs and short papers described fossil plants from many parts of the world. For instance, four volumes published by the British Museum (Natural History) covered The Wealden Flora (1894, 1895) and The Jurassic Flora (1900, 1904). He also wrote a publication for the South African Museum on 'The Fossil Floras of Cape Colony' (1903). This work led to more work on the Glossopteris flora, on which he produced many papers, including Antarctic Fossil Plants' (1914Z?). This discusses many of the climatic and distributional problems that were connected with Gondwanaland, and was based on material collected during the Terra Nova' expedition that rescued rock specimens collected by Edward Wilson, physician and scientist to the ill-fated Scott South Polar Expedition, from 'coal seams containing leaves and

D.H. SCOTT AND A.C. SEWARD

157

Fig. 3. Lepidodendrum elegans (from Scott 1908, 127).

stems' in cliffs at Mt Buckley. The specimens were rediscovered by the rescue party that found the bodies of Scott, Wilson and Bowers. Alfred Wegener first presented his theory of continental drift in 1912, but the first English edition was not published until 1924, and this was a translation of the third (1922) German edition. Thus, when Seward first wrote on the Glossopteris fauna, (Fig. 5) the evidence for continental movement was not examined and his interest in fossil plants as indicators of climatic change occupied the main part of his attention. The South African geologist, Alex Du Toit, an early proponent of drift, later wrote on the species geographical distribution:

. . . the Glossopteris Flora originated during the Carboniferous far to the south, perhaps, as Seward has suggested, in Antarctica, possibly, as the author fancies, in Argentina. It should be noted too that this vegetation, so far as our limited information goes, occupied at least fourfifths of the Gondwana of that time . . . whence it spread during the mid-Permian into Russia, presumably via Persia, while certain elements reached Central and Eastern Asia. The uniformity of the vegetation generally, from Argentina across to Australia, from the Carboniferous to the Rhaetic, stage by stage, is proof first of the remarkable evenness of climatic and other conditions, and secondly on the absence of geographical hindrances to spreading, such as mountain ranges or seas. The Glossopteris Flora is

158

R. WILDING

Fig. 4. Sir Albert Charles Seward (1863-1941).

nevertheless characterised by a poverty in genera and species in strong contrast to the contemporary vegetation of Laurasia. (Du Toit 1937, 83.)

The name Glossopteris derives from the Greek glosso, meaning 'tongue', and pteris, meaning 'fern'. The name was given by A.T. Brongniart in 1828 to a tongue-shaped fern leaf that he later discovered was a leaf of Lepidodendron, but it was later given to a true Glossopteris, as we now define the genus, a tongue-shaped leaf with a conspicuous midrib and reticulate venation. (We now know that

various specimens can have the same venation pattern and form but different epidermal patterns, so their identification depends on their cuticular structure.) Seward in these early years also produced his great four-volume master work on Fossil Plants (1898-1919), still an indispensable work of reference. A later volume on Plant Life through the Ages (1931) covers much ground not dealt with in the earlier work, and may almost be read as a continuation of it. This book reflects an earlier work, Links with the Past in the Plant World (1911), a work that

D.H. SCOTT AND A.C. SEWARD

Fig. 5. Glossopteris. (a) Glossopteris browniana Brongn, (from Seward 1910, 499). (b) (A) Glossopteris indica, Schimper, (B) Glossopteris angustifolia, Brogniart (from Seward 1910, 505). (c) Glossopteris retifera (from Seward 1910, 511).

demonstrates his never-ending interest in the popularizing of science. Scott was certainly a great teacher with an immense influence on students; and always emphasized the geological aspects of his work. He had joined the Geological Society in 1886, was President of the Society in 1922 and 1923, and became a recipient of the Murchison Medal in 1908 and the Wollaston Medal in 1930. Other honours included the award of a Royal Society Medal in 1925 and the Darwin Medal in 1934. Other learned societies also took up much of his time and attention: the British Association, the Cambridge Philosophical Society and the Royal Society, who had elected him a Fellow in 1898, amongst many others. He also received honorary membership of various foreign learned societies, such as the Swedish Royal Academy, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the New York Academy of Sciences, the Norwegian Academy, the Geological Societies of South Africa and Belgium, and the Palaeontological Society of Russia. He was given a knighthood in 1936, when he retired to London. On the outbreak of war Seward returned to Cambridge, and later went to live in Oxford, where he died, rather suddenly, on 11 April 1941.

159

160

R. WILDING

References DARWIN, C.I859. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. London. DAWSON, J.W. 1859. On fossil plants from the Devonian rocks of Canada. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, xv, 177. DAWSON, J.W. 1871. The Fossil Plants of the Devonian and Upper Silurian Formations of Canada. Geological Society of Canada, Toronto. DAWSON, J.W. 1881. Notes on new Brian (Devonian) plants. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, xxxvii, 299. DAWSON, J.W. 1882. Notes on Prototaxites and Pachytheca discovered by Dr. Hicks in the Denbighshire Grits of Corwen, North Wales. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, xxxviii, 103. DAWSON, J.W. 1889. The Geological History of Plants. Kegan Paul Trench Turner & Co., London. Du TOIT, A.L. 1937. Our Wandering Continents. Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh. SCOTT, D.H. 1894. An Introduction to Structural Botany, Volume 1. A. and C. Black, London. SCOTT, D.H. 1896. An Introduction to Structural Botany, Volume 2. A. and C. Black, London. SCOTT, D.H. 1900. Studies in Fossil Botony; Studies in Fossil Botany, 2nd edn (1908-1909); Studies in Fossil Botany, 3rd edn (1920-1923). A. and C. Black, London. SEWARD, A.C. 1894. The Wealden Flora, Volume 1; The Wealden Flora, Volume 2 (1895). British Museum (Natural History), London. SEWARD, A.C., 1898-1919. Fossil Plants for Students of Botany and Geology, (four volumes): Volume 1 (1898); Volume 2 (1910); Volume 3 (1917); Volume 4 (1919). A. and C. Black, London. SEWARD, A.C. 1900. The Jurassic Flora, Volume 1; The

Jurassic Flora, Volume 2 (1904). British Museum (Natural History), London. SEWARD, A.C. 1911. Links with the Past in the Plant World. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. SEWARD, A.C. 19140. Climate as tested by fossil plants. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 203-212. SEWARD, A.C. 19146. Antarctic Fossil Plants. In: British Antarctic {'Term Nova') Expedition (1910), Natural History Reports, BM(NH), London. SEWARD, A.C. 1931. Plant Life Through the Ages. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. SEWARD, A.C. 1934. Dukenfield Henry Scott 1854-1934. (Obituary.) Royal Society Obituaries. SORBY, A.C. 1851. On the microscopic structure of the calcareous grit of the Yorkshire Coast. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, IX, 1—4. SORBY, A.C. 1858. On the microscopical structure of crystals indicating the origin of minerals and rocka. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, XIV, 453-500. WILLIAMSON, W.C. & SCOTT, D.H. 1894. Further observations on the organisation of the fossil plants of the Coal Measures. Pt. I. Catamites, Calamostachys and Sphenophyllum. Philosophical Transactions CLXXV, 863. WILLIAMSON, W.C. & SCOTT, D.H. 1895. Further observations on the organisation of the fossil plants of the Coal Measures. Pt. II. The roots of Catamites. Philosophical Transactions CLXXXVI, 683. WILLIAMSON, W.C. and SCOTT, D.H. 1896. Further observations on the organisation of the fossil plants of the Coal Measures. Pt. III. Lyginodenron and Heterangium. Philosophical Transactions, CLXXXVI, 703. WILLIAMSON, W.C. 1896. Reminiscences of a Yorkshire Naturalist. George Redway, London.

Arthur Raistrick: Britain's premier palynologist J.E.A. MARSHALL School of Ocean and Earth Science, University of Southampton, Southampton Oceanography Centre, European Way, Southampton SOI 3ZH, UK (e-mail: [email protected]) Abstract: Arthur Raistrick was a dedicated socialist and pacifist. Following imprisonment as a conscientious objector in World War I, he changed direction from engineering to applied geology. He spent the 1920s largely self-employed and working on geological problems in coal mines, but researching on Quaternary geology and archaeology. Following appointment to Newcastle University, he undertook pioneering work on the pollen analysis of peat. He then used this knowledge to successfully correlate Carboniferous coal seams using quantitative spore profiles. To achieve this, he experimented extensively on spore extraction from coals and devised a spore classification system. Raistrick made rapid progress on applying microspores for seam correlation and established an extensive database that proved that the same seam had a very similar spore content, but different seams had different spore contents. Ultimately, his prodigious output led to overwork and severe eye strain. He then completely stopped palynological studies to concentrate on industrial history and archaeology, to which he also made a seminal and lasting contribution. Raistrick's methods for coal seam correlation were widely adopted by many coal laboratories both in the UK and overseas, and formed the starting point for the modern development of the subject.

Claiming Arthur Raistrick as Britain's premier palynologist might seem a bold assertion, but it will be demonstrated that his combination of technical innovation and comprehensive studies in a real commercial situation made an unanswerable case for the utility of microspores and pollen in geological correlation. Indeed, it can be argued that the level of his contribution was such that any debate about the application or merits of palynology was effectively terminated. In fact, the comprehensiveness of this success probably contributes to the now relative obscurity of his palynological contribution. The method was proven, and the debate and literature moved on. Raistrick also wrote very few palynological papers (three substantive contributions out of a total output of some 330 published items; Croucher 1995), created no new taxa (although he had the microspores Raistrickia and, by default, Neoraistrickia named after him) and had no formal school of research students. In addition, he left the subject completely and abruptly before the post-war growth of the discipline. His subsequent contributions to both research and the community were immense (Annison 1991; Wainwright 1991), but in the completely different spheres of industrial history and archaeology, the Yorkshire Dales and the National Park movement. It is through these contributions that he is better known and celebrated (Jennings in Croucher 1995). He also achieved a longevity such that he outlived his geological contemporaries and any likely obituarists of his early work. Hence, at his death, this early work was generally eclipsed (Marshall 1991). Fortunately, he left an unpublished autobiography (Raistrick 1974-1975, Odds and Ends, unpublished manuscript) and an

account with the North West Sound Archive (Joy 1991) that, together with his published work, forms the source for much of this account. Early years Raistrick's early life was very influential as to how he came to enter geology. These years also reveal the extent of his energy, enthusiasm, beliefs and perseverance. These characters were key factors in both his success and his subsequent abandonment of palynology at the peak of his achievement. Arthur Raistrick was born on 16 August 1896 in the village of Saltaire (now part of Shipley), near Bradford, in the West Riding of Yorkshire. His parents were skilled mill workers, his father an engineer and his mother a weaver. Saltaire was a model village created by the philanthropist mill owner Titus Salt. As such, it was provided with a range of facilities for education, health and leisure unavailable to most of the working class at that time. The young Raistrick was born into an extended family with a tradition of support for trade unions, pacifism and socialism. The family were active in the Amalgamated Society of Engineers, the Independent Labour Party (ILP) and the Cooperative movement. When Raistrick was 1 year old, his father was involved in the 6 month-long engineering workers' lockout. Subsequently his father, along with other family members, was blacklisted, with resulting long-term unemployment and poverty. He only again found secure employment, but never a living wage, in a workers co-operative that he had helped form. The Raistrick

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,161-179.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

162

I.E. A. MARSHALL

ter despite almost certainly being in a restricted occupation and therefore ineligible for call up. As the war continued and the demand for manpower increased, the government passed the 1916 Conscription Act. As conscription was compulsory, all men not previously registered were deemed to have done so, with their Attestation Forms being filled in and signed for them by government clerks. Their employers were then instructed to dismiss them. Raistrick responded to this sacking by spending all his time organizing and speaking at NCF meetings. Eventually the police took him to appear at a military tribunal to determine his eligibility for service. Here he was deemed to have attested and be eligible for service, released, and shortly after called up and ordered to report to barracks. He refused to do this and was posted as a deserter. He spent the next few months on the run, continually on the move but still organizing and speaking at NCF rallies. On occasion, the police would be break these up and Raistrick would have to flee to escape arrest. Eventually Raistrick was arrested whilst going to visit his mother, had a trial for desertion, which lasted some 3 minutes, and was handed over to the military. There then followed a number of weeks of ill treatment, intimidation and bullying. This centred on his refusal to obey any orders or wear military uniform. By any measure, this solitary defiance required great courage, a quality that conscientious objectors were so often accused of lacking. Finally, the army admitted defeat and passed Raistrick to a court martial where he was sentenced to 1 year of imprisonment with hard labour. This was to be served as prisoner number 3225 in Wormwood Scrubs Prison in London. A sentence of hard labour was spent entirely in solitary with no association, total silence (even to warders) with the work being the demanding task of spending 10 hours each day hand-sewing post office mail sacks. All this was done in the prison cell (Fig. 1). To The war years provide moral support to the conscientious objectors a NCF-ILP choir would come and sing outside Arthur Raistrick finished his apprenticeship in 1915 the prison walls. This would get broken up until and was then kept on at the Shipley works as a joined by a Salvation Army Band that the police felt mechanic and shift engineer. However, from 1912 unable to harass. In time, Raistrick was categorized onwards, as the possibility of a war between the as a red-band prisoner (from the red band around the European powers became more likely, Raistrick prison uniform shirt) and sent to work with the engibecame directly involved with the peace movement. neer warder. This task included lock maintenance. This was through both the ILP and the Society of However, the work was still made up to 10 hours Friends, although he chose not to become a Quaker with sewing mailbags. until after the war. With his uncle he formed the The continued opposition to the war by conscienBradford group of the No Conscription Fellowship tious objectors eventually became a political issue (NCF). At this time all soldiers were volunteers, but and all prisoners were offered alternative service. In the introduction of conscription had been foreshad- Raistrick's case this would have been a move to owed in 1914 by the compulsory national registra- Dartmoor prison, open association with other contion of all men of military age. This involved signing scientious objectors and the freedom to talk, but with an Attestation Form that accepted the future obliga- an obligation to undertake prison employment on tion of conscription. Raistrick had refused to regis- 'work of national importance'. This he refused and family was originally from the Yorkshire Dales and had a great love of the natural world. In common with many of the northern working class, they were keen walkers and naturalists on the local hills. For a time, at Easter, a family group including the young Arthur would 'illegally' climb Pendle Hill before dawn and then greet the sunrise with choruses from England Arise and The Red Flag. Hence, they combined the rare holiday with both an outdoor activity and the opportunity to declare their strongly held principles. After education at his local primary school, Raistrick was awarded a scholarship to Bradford Grammar School, the first person from Shipley to do so. At school he specialized in the sciences and mathematics with the clear ambition to follow the family tradition by becoming an engineer. However, geology was always a strong additional interest much stimulated by science teachers who had an enthusiasm for the subject. It was at this time that Raistrick began to travel more widely and was sent for holidays with relatives who lived in Scotland. He used this time to visit the geology and engineering galleries in the then Royal Scottish Museum in Edinburgh, as well as the local classic geological localities. In 1912, at the age of 16, he left school and was apprenticed for 3 years as an engineer in the Shipley Council electricity and sewage works. This brought Raistrick into contact with a wide range of engineering activities. Responsibilities included operating a coal and water quality laboratory for the steam-powered generators, and conducting the daily taste test on the waste sewage water before discharge into the local river. During this time he attended night school at the local technical college and in 1916 was awarded a County Major Scholarship to the local university (Leeds) to study mechanical engineering.

RAISTRICK: BRITAIN'S PREMIER PALYNOLOGIST

163

and allowed free association. Raistrick was able to freely talk with them and got to know some of them well. In November 1918 the armistice was declared. Most conscientious objectors were released the following April, but a small number, including Raistrick, were not released until late July 1919.

Leeds University 1919-1929

Fig. 1. Sketch by Arthur Raistrick of his prison cell at Wormwood Scrubs. Slightly retouched from the original. Date unknown.

he chose to become an Absolutist and remain in Wormwood Scrubs. Raistrick made this decision from his very strong principles and felt that imprisonment was part of being a socialist, as many early socialists and Quakers had been similarly incarcerated. Absolutist conscientious objectors were a very small group, but later became for Raistrick a very influential network. After remission for good behaviour, Raistrick's sentence was reduced to 9 months. However, he was still classed as a deserter and on release day he was returned to the custody of the army and taken to Hartlepool Barracks. Every morning he was taken onto the parade ground, ordered to attention and, after his refusal, kicked to the ground and beaten by two soldiers, followed by being dragged round the cinder and gravel surface. This lasted for about an hour each day. After some 2 weeks he was court martialled and sentenced to 2 years, hard labour in Durham Gaol. Here the prison regime was harder, with fewer conscientious objectors and more longsentence criminals. As a second-term prisoner, Raistrick was put on association, hand-weaving prison uniform cloth (dark grey with broad white arrows for the conscientious objectors; khaki with black arrows for the criminals). Eventually Raistrick was returned to red-band status and assigned to the prison library. This job took him around the prison, including the former women's prison, that after the 1916 Easter Rising was used to house the leading Republican prisoners when it proved too difficult to hold them in Ireland. These prisoners were internees

On return home and after a period of adjustment, Raistrick contacted the West Riding County Council about the scholarship he had been awarded in 1916. Remarkably, he was allowed to retain the scholarship provided that the university would still accept him as a student. Following a meeting with the Vice Chancellor, he was accepted and enrolled for a BSc and then MSc in Civil Engineering and Engineering Geology (awarded 1923). He was then awarded a university scholarship and took a PhD in Geology (Raistrick 1925a). The change from mechanical engineering was prompted by a desire to move away from the technology that could and did promote war to one which generally added to human civilization through development of resources, provision of water, etc. However, despite this academic success, Raistrick could still find no employment in having been a conscientious objector and having a criminal record. Fortuitously, Professor P.F. Kendall at Leeds had recently retired and suggested that Raistrick should continue his research on coal. Initially Raistrick worked with Kendall but after about a year Kendall was able to secure grants for him from the Royal Society and the Coal Owners' Association. This enabled Raistrick to start an investigation of the geological conditions that hampered coal exploitation and eventually enabled him to become self-supporting. This acceptance of the Coal Owners' Association support is one of the few instances when Raistrick compromised his firm socialist principles. For a committed socialist, the coal owners represented the very worst practices of capitalism (they were regarded by the senior Conservative politician Birkenhead as 'the most stupid body of men he had ever encountered'). In 1926, following the return of sterling to the gold standard and the inevitable revaluation of the pound, the coal owners precipitated the coal strike by threatening a lockout unless the miners accepted both a reduction in wages and an increase in working hours. Initially the miners were supported by a general strike of most British workers. Afterwards the miners continued the strike for 10 months before they drifted back to work. Subsequently, there was mass unemployment in the coalfields with blacklisting and victimization of strikers that was then exacerbated by the economic depression of the 1930s.

164

J.E.A. MARSHALL

Raistrick had started teaching WEA (Workers' Education Association) classes in 1920 to help support himself financially whilst at university. He continued these classes after completion of his degrees. These WEA classes were held at a wide variety of locations in towns in and around Leeds, in the Dales and in the colliery towns. These classes and the research for the Coal Owners' Association brought Raistrick into contact with a wide variety of geological problems (including going down some 700 pits) and, more importantly, made him very widely known at all levels within the coal industry. Raistrick also became involved in the British Association (for the Advancement of Science). He regularly attended its annual meeting, gave talks and became a member of the Section C Committee (Geology) in 1925 and from 1928 a permanent member of the General Committee. This brought him into direct contact with the British geological establishment of which he had now become an integral part. The lack of full-time paid employment with regular hours meant that Raistrick was able to become more involved in organizations such as the Co-operative sponsored Holiday Fellowship movement. This provided the opportunity of affordable walking holidays for workers and took place in areas such as the Lake District. Raistrick, always a tireless advocate of the benefits of the outdoors, rapidly became a local secretary staying each summer for periods of up to 10-12 weeks. He certainly used this time profitably in that it enabled him to systematically map glacial features in the Lake District that then became the subject of his first publications (Raistrick 1925b, c). It was also through the Holiday Fellowship that he met his wife Elizabeth (Chapman). She had previously studied on the BSc and MSc Geology course at Leeds University and was employed as a lecturer at Leeds City Training College. They had many common interests in the geological sciences; both attended the British Association and worked together for the Quaker Adult Schools. However, they only married in 1930 after Raistrick had secured permanent employment. Had they married earlier, Elizabeth would almost certainly have had to give up her own post. It was normal practice in the UK during the first two-thirds of the 20th century for a woman to have her employment terminated on marriage. This pattern of complete involvement was entirely typical of Raistrick. He would join an organization, be it a Quaker community, a scientific group, a recreational club or political organization, and through tireless energy, enthusiasm and force of personality rapidly become a prime mover within it. In 1925 Raistrick started publishing what became a steady stream of scientific papers, books and more general magazine articles (see the list in Croucher

1995). As noted, these were initially on the glaciation of the Lake District (Smith 2001) and Yorkshire, but rapidly broadened to encompass industrial history, which by including field studies became the then un-named subject of industrial archaeology. The early publications on the Quaternary were largely concerned with the mapping of glacial and post-glacial features. However, being at Leeds was crucial to the development of his interests in pollen and microspores (e.g. Raistrick & Woodhead 1930). There was a research group in Leeds based around W.H. Burrell, the Director of the University Herbarium, that was attempting to understand the vegetational history of the Pennines and particularly through study of the upland peat deposits. Burrell collaborated with the botanist C.A. Cheetham, together with colleagues from the Department of Geology (including A. Gilligan). A very significant contributor was T.W. Woodhead, who was based at the Technical College in Huddersfield. By 1923 there were reports of one MSc student (Elsie D. Whitaker), who was based in the Department of Geology, studying peat using microscopical methods (Woodhead 1923; Burrell 1924). The group was very interested in the Scandinavian school of pollen research (Anon. 1924) with direct contact being made when Erdtman, the Swedish pollen analyst and palynological evangelist, visited Woodhead in Huddersfield (Cheetham 1925), following which they co-operated on a palynological study of Pennine peat (Woodhead & Erdtman 1925). Leeds University was also visited by Erdtman during one of his international lecture tours (Cross & Kosanke 1995). We do not know if Raistrick met Erdtman at this time, but he certainly corresponded with him during his subsequent peat pollen research. It was also at Leeds that L.R. Wilson spent a year studying and working as a Research Assistant for Burrell (Kosanke & Cross 1995). Again, we do not know what contact Wilson had with Raistrick, but as he was in Leeds when Raistrick was there and they did have very similar interests it would seem inconceivable that they did not meet. Wilson returned to the USA to found a very influential school of palynology (Cross & Kosanke 1995), combining like Raistrick both Quaternary and Carboniferous studies, including a very early coal seam spore profile (Wilson & Brokaw 1937). It was at Leeds in 1925 that Raistrick made his preliminary chemical separations of microspores from a number of Yorkshire Carboniferous coals. However, he chose initially to concentrate on pollen in peat. This choice was quite deliberate and with the specific aim of gaining experience in the preparation, identification and counting of peat pollen before embarking on the more novel study of microspores from Carboniferous coals.

RAISTRICK: BRITAIN'S PREMIER PALYNOLOGIST

165

Fig. 2. Arthur Raistrick c. 1932. Image courtesy of Allan Butterfield.

1929-1939 Armstrong College, Newcastle By the late 1920s Raistrick (Fig. 2) had acquired a reputation for excellence in a diverse range of geological research, was an inspirational teacher, and displayed great organizational and leadership skills. In 1929 this led to an invitation to apply for the post of Lecturer in Geology at Armstrong College, Newcastle, now the University of Newcastle-uponTyne. This was the former Durham College of Science that had changed its name to Armstrong College following a significant donation from the

Armstrong Whitworth Company, a major local engineering manufacturer with extensive interests in armaments. However, as it had always been an ambition of Raistrick to study engineering as a unionsponsored Whitworth Scholar at Armstrong College, he was very pleased to accept the invitation. During the interview the 'war service' question was asked and again it looked as if the combined record of prison and pacifist activity would debar Raistrick from the post. But the 'Friends' connection proved stronger as Quakers had been influential during the founding of the college. In addition, pacifism was

166

J.E.A. MARSHALL

becoming a more widely accepted and, indeed, respectable position. The Department of Geology in Newcastle at this time was small, in common with many UK establishments, comprising just four staff (including the Head of Department, H.G.A. Hickling with interests in coal) who taught the entire degree, plus service teaching to civil and mining engineering students. Despite this, Raistrick took on an additional extensive teaching programme of adult education classes. These took place both in the evenings and on Saturdays. Often these were at pit villages and towns where he was involved in teaching the Undermanager's Certificate. This again made him very widely known at all levels, especially as many of the mining students he taught at Armstrong College went on to become colliery managers. The Raistricks, and particularly Elizabeth, also became indirectly very involved in the mining communities through organizing relief work for the families of the unemployed of Tyneside during the Great Depression. This move to Newcastle gave Raistrick the opportunity and support to undertake an extensive programme of research on pollen from peat. In this he found an able collaborator in Kathleen Blackburn, a lecturer in the Department of Botany and now better remembered for linking modern Botryococcus with Carboniferous forms (Blackburn 1936; Temperley 1936). Raistrick and Blackburn worked together on the study of Lake District and Pennine upland peat plus the coastal peat of Northumberland. After some problems with British customs, they were able to import a Swedish peat borer (probably a Beus & Mattsen, Model III) that enabled them to retrieve uncontaminated samples from depths of up to 10 m. They carried this borer to most upland peat bogs in northern Britain with the intent of producing pollen profiles on a systematic 10 mile-grid (about 16 km). To this end they had published some 24 profiles by 1933 (Raistrick 1932; Raistrick & Blackburn 1931, 1932, 1933). They were pioneer British pollen analysts, and in doing so introduced a generation of students to the discipline and were, for example, assisted in the field by Harry Godwin, later to champion the study of British Quaternary history (West 1988). Studying Quaternary pollen also meant that Raistrick was well equipped with a good Swift compound microscope (No. 1089) with high-power (1, 1/4,1/2 and V8 inch) lenses, a Leitz mechanical stage and, ultimately, a Watson binocular head with X10 eyepieces. Clearly, a hybrid instrument he had assembled and which would have given a magnification range of about X75-X600. This was unusual in a geological department and a level of instrument sophistication not enjoyed by some workers during the post-war development of palynology. It was in 1932 that Raistrick, prompted by Hickling, again took up the study of microspores

chemically isolated from coals expressly for th< purpose of coal seam correlation. Individual coa seam correlation was a long-standing problem, oftei presenting difficulty even in relating seams betweei adjacent royalties. Seams varied both in thicknesi and quality, and could rapidly disappear in 'wash outs'. Certain seams attracted a premium price (anc were sold by seam name), hence it was vital to b( able to identify these, and their horizontal and verti cal position, to maximize commercial exploitatior and financial returns. At that time the British coa industry employed some 800000 men and was i major exporter. The chemical isolation of microspores from coals was not new and had been introduced by Schulze (1855) and further developed by Reinsch (1884). AJ a method, it was sporadically employed to isolate microspores from coals (White & Thiessen 1913: Thiessen & Staud 1923; see review by Cross & Kosanke 1995) and its use had been suggested for coal seam correlation (Thiessen 1920). However, Thiessen was primarily a coal petrographer and it was the use of microspores identified in thin section that he ultimately employed (Thiessen & Wilson 1924) in attempts to correlate coal seams. Identifying microspores in thin section is difficult, so there was an inevitable tendency to look for an abundance of a single distinctive spore when characterizing a coal seam. In this they had some success with some of the Pittsburg coals that are dominated by Thymospora pseudothiessenii. From September 1925 Thiessen spent some 14 months in the UK on an exchange with the South Yorkshire laboratory of the Fuel Research Board that was located in the University of Sheffield (Lyons & Teichmiiller 1995). Following his return, staff from the British laboratory made visits to the United States. It was through the influence of Thiessen and using his methods that staff from the South Yorkshire laboratory embarked on coal seam correlation studies (Evans 1926; Slater et al 1930; Slater 1931-1932; Slater & Eddy 1932). This involved the preparation of coal thin sections, in itself a difficult procedure, which were then scanned for microspores and particularly megaspores. These spores were then placed into morphological groups using criteria such as wall thickness, wall layering and characteristic sculpture. Again, this is a difficult procedure when using spores in thin section. The result was a profile showing the quantitative abundance of megaspores (as spores per square inch) through the seam and analogous to that of a peat pollen profile. The aim was to characterize the seam by using either the abundance or restricted distribution of a single spore or the distribution of all the microspores. Clearly, they had appreciated the significance of a quantitative pollen profile in peat and were trying to apply this method to characterize coal seams.

RAISTRICK: BRITAIN'S PREMIER PALYNOLOGIST

Raistrick's initial step was to experiment with spore isolation methods using various coal solvents. He was assisted by the metallurgist and keen amateur geologist J.A. Smythe, with whom he shared both a laboratory and a £5 research grant (now worth some £500 when tied to a lecturer's salary). A lot of the work for these initial preparations was carried out by John Simpson, the co-author of the first paper (Raistrick & Simpson 1933). Simpson had graduated in 1932 from a final year class of two. The other being C.E. Marshall, later to co-author Raistrick & Marshall (1939) following thin-section work on coals with Hickling. Both students had been awarded First Class Honours degrees, but the economic depression meant that Simpson had only been able to find employment as a school teacher. Therefore, in order to increase his qualifications to find more appropriate employment, Simpson had enrolled for an MSc degree with Raistrick as Supervisor. All this work on coals was carried out on Saturday mornings when the university was open and Simpson was free from teaching duties. Initially they tried to extract microspores using pyridine, before switching to the stronger Schultze solution. These experiments were not without risk, as Schultze solution was often ineffective when cold, but became explosive on heating. They eventually settled on a method that mixed crushed coal with its own weight of potassium chlorate, followed by carefully adding 15 times pure nitric acid and leaving for 2 days, whilst keeping the mixture cool. Following washing, the bulk of the residue could be solubilized by treatment in 10% potassium hydroxide solution for 2 days, before mounting the microspores in Canada balsam or subsequently glycerol jelly. Perfecting a reliable chemical separation method gave Raistrick slides containing thousands of microspores (the megaspores being generally fragmented during the coalcrushing procedure) and an immediate problem. How was he to identify or name these microspores so that he could then plot their distribution? He knew that some, but not many, were already described in situ from sporangia. However, he also made the observation that several of what he would consider a single type of spore had been previously recorded from different plants. He chose to sidestep the issue of a classification based on macrofossil plants by regarding that task as being the province of a palaeobotanist and beyond the scope of his immediate goal, which was coal seam correlation. Instead Raistrick developed an independent quasi-Linnaean classification scheme of spore types with seven groups, A-G, each containing subgroups identified by number subscripts. This gave some 19 spore types, although only six of these made up the bulk of the sample, with no other types achieving 1 % of the total abundance. Six of the letter groups were illus-

167

trated in a photographic plate and brief descriptions were given for each number subgroup. Importantly, all the subgroups were illustrated (Fig. 3) with several line drawings for each spore type. This showed pictorially both the range of variation within each category and how they differed from each other. Raistrick counted the microspores and plotted the abundance profile of the six dominant microspore types from the Plessey Coal from Hazelrigg Colliery (Fig. 4) against seam character. The samples were 1 inch-thick sections from the 43 inch-seam (1 inch is 2.54 cm), with initially 800 and then 400 microspores being counted (Fig. 5) for each sample. This showed that, apart from the top and base of the seam, the relative spore content was generally constant throughout the seam. This was probably a surprise, as all these attempts to profile coal seams were using the analogy with post-glacial peat and anticipating an internal spore stratigraphy. However, this homogeneity allowed Raistrick to average the seam profile in shorthand form as a single relative percentage histogram of the six abundant spore types. This seam from Hazelrigg was then compared to Plessey correlatives from the Choppington and Newbiggin collieries, some 12 and 18 km distant, respectively. These were again profiled, but on a 2 inch-thick sample split. The results were presented as relative percentage histograms (Fig. 6) of the six abundant spore types and all three Plessey correlatives showed a close correspondence of 'plan', despite small differences in relative spore percentage. To contrast this, the Beaumont Seam from Bedlington Colliery was sampled (as four splits covering the entire seam) and this gave a histogram that was quite different in peak distribution from those from the Plessey Seam. The final seam investigated in detail was that of the Tilley from Pegswood, which showed two distinct leaves differing markedly in spore content. This was internal stratigraphy and regarded as a very characteristic signature by which to identify the seam. In addition, Raistrick reported that he had studied five other seams representative of the full sequence of the local Coal Measures. This single paper, therefore, achieves in a concise nine pages a consistent preparation method and an operational spore classification; it profiles a seam and tests the method on a number of seam profiles. It then goes on to produce a simple whole-seam histogram that gives a clear graphic representation and, ultimately, the simplification of requiring only one composite sample for each seam. It was absolutely practical in its concept and had a clear goal. Significantly, the presentation of the paper (at the Mining Institute in Newcastle) was followed by an extended discussion. In the main, these were supporting statements from Raistrick's research colleagues in Newcastle (Carruthers for the Geological

168

I.E. A. MARSHALL

To illustrate Messrs. A. Raistrick and J. Simpson's Paper on "The Mierospores of Some Northumberland Coals, and their Use in the Correlation of Coal-seams."

Fig. 3. Illustrations of spore types as drawn by Raistrick, who always produced his own figures. E3 is now known as Raistrickia. Figure 1 of Raistrick & Simpson (1933).

RAISTRICK: BRITAIN'S PREMIER PALYNOLOGIST

Fig. 4. Vertical distribution of the most common spore types in the Plessey Coal of Hazehigg Colliery. Figure 3 of Raistrick & Simpson (1933).

169

170

J.E.A. MARSHALL

Fig. 5. Quantitative palynological data collected by Raistrick. Note the separation of major and accessory spore types. The data card contains a thumbnail histogram to be filled in manually. Raistrick estimated that for each slide it took about 4 hours to count the microspores. Figure 2 of Raistrick (I934b).

Survey; Hickling as his Head of Department and Jones from the Coal Survey Office). There was also somewhat faint praise from Hopkins (University of Durham) who was working on similar Coal Measure correlation problems, but using bivalves. Hopkins commented that it was interesting, but that it would take a considerable time to investigate a single seam over a wide area and hoped that if this could be done successfully, then it would agree with the correlations that he had previously suggested. Raistrick published this single seam test a year later (19340), investigating not just one seam but 10 seams at a combined 16 localities. To collect this number of seam profiles in an underground working coal environment is in itself a major challenge. Raistrick had some assistance from the Newcastle Coal Laboratory, but at this time he was also in the unique position of being very widely known and respected within the coalfield, from the coal owners through to the local managers and deputies he had taught, and in the pithead communities for whom the Raistricks' organized considerable charitable assistance. The 1934 paper gives a 10 seam correlation panel at the different collieries with 42 individual histograms being produced. This gives an immediate visual illustration (Fig. 7) of the correlation. In addition, the spore classification was refined, with an

extra 20 spore types being introduced. The microspores were also split into major and accessory types. A quantitative range chart of the four most abundant microspores was produced, together with a series of standard histograms for both the general and accessory spore abundance for a sequence of 11 seams. The investigated coal seams were collected as a whole-seam composite sample, acquired by cutting a 2 inch-wide channel down the face of the seam. The results from these channel samples were tested against pillar samples cut from four of the seams. Chemical treatment of the coals was discussed and, in particular, the effects of coal rank on spore recovery. The discussion to this paper is again very informative and as long as the original text. This includes a considerable debate on the original vegetation and how each time a peat forms it contained the same plants yet had a spore content that was different in abundance but laterally homogenous over a wide area. Interestingly, there is now a contribution from overseas (Jongmans from the Netherlands). The discussion also reveals that other laboratory (the Geological Survey Office, Manchester and the North Staffordshire Coal Survey Laboratory) were already applying the methods as outlined in the 1933 paper. The laboratory in North Staffordshire had by then already produced spore

RAISTRICK: BRITAIN'S PREMIER PALYNOLOGIST

171

Fig. 6. Relative percentage histograms comparing the relative proportion of the most common spore types in the Plessey, Beaumont and Tilley coals. Note how this method allows us to clearly distinguish these three coals. Figure 5 of Raistrick & Simpson (1933).

histograms for 15 seams. It is also apparent that Raistrick had continued the work well beyond the presented results in mentioning 20 sections of a single seam in Lancashire, and that Simpson had also been investigating related seam correlations in northern Northumberland. The only dissent to the general acclaims again being that of Hopkins who

had two contributions to the discussion, which continued through different parts of the journal. Between these two contributions he had clearly conducted some fieldwork but reserved any judgement as to the conclusion. There was now a gap of 6 years before the publication of Part II of the 19340 paper, which was on the

Fig. 7. General spore diagram for some Northumberland coals. The horizontal lines (Diamond-Bottom Busty) represent correlated seams. The vertical columns of histograms (Broomhill-Montague) are collieries. This figure clearly shows the effectiveness of the histogram method for displaying complex data. Figure 4 of Raistrick (I934a).

RAISTRICK: BRITAIN'S PREMIER PALYNOLOGIST

Trencherbone Seam of Lancashire and the Busty Seam of County Durham (Raistrick 1939a). During this time Raistrick published three review papers (Raistrick 1934&, 1935, 1937) on coal seam correlation. The 1935 review is noteworthy as Raistrick comments about separating microspores from both Jurassic and Tertiary lignites. In 1938 Raistrick (Raistrick 19380) also published a brief account of Lower Carboniferous microspores from Northumberland, including new spore types. In this paper Raistrick very much encouraged others to take up the study of these Lower Carboniferous coals. Whilst Raistrick was pursuing these coal seam correlation studies, he was also still very actively engaged in a diverse range of other research. For example, in 1933 (Croucher 1995), the year of the first coal seam paper, he published 10 papers (not including abstracts), totalling some 105 pages and, in addition to microspores, covered subjects as diverse as glaciation, archaeology (from Mesolithic to Roman) and the results of a cave excavation. Raistrick certainly achieved a reputation from his colleagues for the almost indecent rapidity of his work, his versatility and an ability to write something on what appeared to others to be quite inconsequential. This urge to produce publications meant that, when not teaching, Raistrick very much kept himself closeted in his own office. In the 6-year gap between Parts I and II of the coal seam correlation papers, Raistrick had became more involved in industrial history and published his first book (Raistrick 1938&), which was on the history of the London Lead Company. This had been a Quakeroperated company that during the 18th and 19th centuries had had extensive interests in the Yorkshire Dales. Raistrick also continued his research on the industrial history of the early ironworks of Yorkshire (Raistrick 1939£; Raistrick & Allen 1939). These interests in what became known as industrial archaeology were eventually to become the main research theme for Raistrick. Despite these major original contributions, he also found time to co-author (Raistrick & Marshall 1939) a second book, The Nature and Origin of Coal and Coal Seams. This was written for students in his adult education and service teaching classes. In addition to these major projects, Raistrick still found time to publish on a diverse range of other topics, with a total output in the 10 years from 1930 to 1939 of some 76 publications (Croucher 1995). Raistrick also took on an additional major commitment from about 1933 that was as an appointment as External Examiner for the National University of Eire. Raistrick was chosen for his academic reputation, plus his political acceptability. In addition, some of the Republican prisoners he had befriended in Durham Goal had now risen to high positions in the Irish Free State universities. This examining task was more onerous than today,

173

involving a bi-annual correlation of academic standards in a diverse range of subjects between the different university colleges. In Part II of the coal seam correlation paper Raistrick (19390) completed the microspore correlation test in what was to be his last palynological publication. Some 26 localities were studied for the Trencherbone Seam in Lancashire and 52 localities for the Busty Seam of Durham. As such, it was admitted to be the publication of work carried out some time earlier, as had been presaged in Part I and in an earlier abstract (Raistrick 1936). The Trencherbone samples were particularly important as this seam is well correlated through being overlain by a shell bed containing distinctive bivalves. The samples were supplied as averaged whole-seam composites without revealing their location. What the results revealed was that there were two separate groups of Trencherbone spore histograms, separated geographically by a line east of Wigan. This was shown to be the result of change in the thickness of an upper leaf to the seam that had a distinctly different spore composition in being rich in spore types B1 (Laevigatosporites) and D t (Lycospord). This leaf differentially thickened to the west of Wigan. Hence, compositing the whole seam produced different histograms. This revealed the complexity of the system and the continuing value of seam profiles for correlation. The results from the Busty Seam were again received as blind samples. This seam was chosen as it shows major changes in coal rank across the area. The spore histograms show significant differences with three well-defined, geographically distinct spore groups. In general, these differences result from seam misidentification, with some samples being taken from the locally thicker Tilley Seam that had always been previously referred to as the Busty. This solved correlation problems that had been apparent for over a century (Jones in Raistrick 1934&). This paper was followed by a discussion of 14 pages that is longer than the nine pages of the actual paper. Again, Hopkins from Durham attended and this time came armed with some lanternslides and a section to demonstrate his somewhat different view of the seam correlation. The 6-year gap between Parts I and II of the 'Correlation of Coal-seams by Microspore Content' papers was very uncharacteristic of Raistrick, considering the progress he had already made in such a short time. The typical pattern was an abstract (e.g. Raistrick 19330, b, 1934c) followed by the detailed account in the same year (Raistrick & Simpson 1933; Raistrick 19340). This detailed account would then note the partial results of the next year's full contribution. Clearly, he was very overworked through his complete commitment to a wide range of research, teaching and community activities. Raistrick (discussion in Paget 1936) also notes that

174

J.E.A. MARSHALL

he was spending a significant time using spore correlation to solve 'practical problems' in the mines and that this 'overburden' took him away from the more scientific aspects of coal seam correlation. This involvement in 'practical problems' almost certainly makes Raistrick the first palynological consultant. In part, the answer also lies in the contribution by Tonks of the Newcastle Geological Survey Office to the discussion in the 1939 paper. He congratulates Raistrick on completing the paper and then says: It may not be generally known that in the later stages of this work, Dr Raistrick encountered serious eye trouble through excessive use of the microscope. That this did not prove so serious as was once feared is a matter upon which we can congratulate him. It is regrettable that the possibility of a recurrence of this handicap will prevent him from pursuing his microscope studies with that ardour and energy with which he began, but it is hoped that results of far reaching importance will follow from the other workers now engaged in the study of the microspores of our coal seams.

In other words, the strain of continual microscopy of first peat pollen and then, additionally, microspores from coal, including 'consulting', had caused eye damage that at one time had been feared to be lasting. Raistrick confirms the hiatus when queried by Simpkin about results from additional samples from the Lancashire coalfield. His reply was that it had not been possible to do anything beyond preparing them at the time they were sent. Clearly, those who knew Raistrick were aware in 1939, and probably in 1937, that palynology was not something on which he could or now wished to continue as a main part of his research. A 5-year publication gap was also present in the peat pollen studies that Raistrick had begun with Blackburn. This final set of publications was from a core cut in 1936 at Linton in Wharf dale, Yorkshire. However, there is now a clear separation of activity with Raistrick (1938c) contributing the physical geology and Blackburn (1938) separately, but consecutively, adding the biological aspects that would have involved the microscopy. These contributions by Raistrick were widely acclaimed and brought him scientific recognition in the form of a Lyell Fund from the Geological Society of London (1939), the Clough Medal of the Edinburgh Geological Society (1937-1938) and, together with his later contributions, the Sorby Medal of the Yorkshire Geological Society (1981). In the later part of the 1930s, when the prospect of a second European war became more real, Raistrick was again directly involved in the peace movement. Initially this was organizing meetings and demonstrations, including a stand and tent at the Hoppings, the great fair on the Town Moor in Newcastle. Apart from being able to address the public about pacifism, this venue was also used to provide advice to poten-

tial conscripts about military service. This brought Raistrick to the attention of the authorities, with the police a constant presence at the stand and in the tent, recording his utterances. Raistrick was often escorted to police headquarters and threatened with criminal charges for spreading disaffection and interfering with recruiting. The police also reported his activities to his employers at Armstrong College. In addition, Raistrick was involved in a Pacifist Advisory Bureau that gave advice and support to conscientious objectors, and especially for those who were appearing before tribunals to determine their eligibility for conscription. Once war was declared, and bombing raids started on Newcastle, pacifists became very unpopular with the general public. Raistrick added to this by refusing to follow the strictly enforced blackout regulations. In addition, the mining and engineering staff in all universities were required to register with the Ministry of Munitions for redirection into war research. This Raistrick emphatically refused to do. This response, together with the increasing trouble with the police and the local populace, brought matters to a head. The problem was resolved by the Rector of Armstrong College who permitted Raistrick to take unpaid leave of absence. This reduction in income also meant that Raistrick no longer paid tax that would have contributed to the war effort. However, as all his WEA classes in Newcastle were also suspended, the Raistricks were left with no income, and early in 1940 moved to Linton in the Yorkshire Dales. This move precipitated the end of any possible return by Raistrick to coal seam correlation, as he chose to dispose of the greater part of his library. The books on the geology of the British Isles went to the Bootham School (a Quaker foundation) in York. The collection on the geology of coal and coalfields was sent in 1940 to help found a Department of Coal Technology in the new University of Yunnan in China. In 1940, British coal reserves were very much a strategic issue and, by dispersing his library, Raistrick certainly put it beyond the reach of those who might want to use it to help the war effort. World War II Once in Linton, Raistrick rented a local garden that provided the basis of a subsistence living. To generate a small cash income, he then started some adult education classes, but was stopped by the local county council for refusing to register for army teaching work. He then managed, despite some bitter local opposition, to organize some of his own classes, directly paid for from the London WEA office, but again had trouble finding premises. However, he was eventually allowed use of a Methodist hall. At this time Raistrick lacked both a

RAISTRICK: BRITAIN'S PREMIER PALYNOLOGIST

laboratory and library, had had his British Association membership withdrawn and was generally cut off from the scientific community. He was therefore unable to progress with his research, so instead consolidated his long-term interests on the life and history of the Dales. Most of this was contributed as short articles to the Dalesman, a popular magazine founded by a group of like-minded Conscientious Objectors. He also wrote the very popular Teach Yourself Geology (Raistrick 1943) that remained in print for some 30 years. Unfortunately for Raistrick, the publisher bought the copyright for a single payment, so he never achieved a large income from this work. Raistrick also used this time in the Dales to become more involved in Quaker activities and Quaker education. This resulted in Raistrick being offered a Fellowship for the 1945-1946 academic year at the Quaker International College in Birmingham. Initially he attempted to research on the relationship between political problems and the global distribution of mineral resources, but this proved too formidable with the resources he had. So, instead, he returned to the contribution of Quakers in pre-1800 science and industry.

The post-war years In 1946 Raistrick was invited to return to Armstrong College. He was reinstated and promoted to Senior Lecturer, but with his teaching largely being ancillary courses for engineers, although he still remained a member of staff in the Department of Geology. His research now became entirely focused on industrial history. He renewed his interests in early iron making, particularly the history of Coalbrookdale and the Darbys. This was eventually to lead by 1959 to the archaeological excavation of the furnaces of Abraham Darby, the first successful smelter of iron ore with coke. The furnaces formed the core of what became the Ironbridge Museum, now a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Substantive publications by Raistrick on both the Quakers in Science and Industry (1950) and the Dynasty of Ironfounders (1952), together with the usual stream of smaller contributions, led to Raistrick being promoted in 1954 to a Readership in Applied Geology. However, for Raistrick Armstrong College was not the environment it had been before the war and he tended to withdraw into his own research. By concentrating his teaching from Tuesday afternoon to Friday morning, he was also able to commute weekly and only during term times from the Dales, staying for 3 nights a week in Newcastle. This certainly did not make him popular with his colleagues, particularly in the Department of Geology, who felt that they still had a claim to teaching from him.

175

Raistrick also developed a reputation for starting a course with a single inspirational lecture but then, rather than appearing to complete the scheduled lectures, followed this up by issuing a reading list. Raistrick retired from Armstrong College in 1956 at the age of 60 and after that time never returned to Newcastle. Following retirement, Raistrick published many more papers and books, particularly on the industrial archaeology and the social and natural history of the Yorkshire Dales. He also became directly involved in the National Parks movement, which led to the creation, amongst others, of the Yorkshire Dales National Park. He was also President of the Ramblers Association, the Youth Hostel Association and the Holiday Fellowship. He served on many national and local committees, and was awarded honorary degrees from the Universities of Leeds (1972) and Bradford (1974). He died at the age of 94 on 9 April 1991. Subsequently he was acclaimed, by the Yorkshire Dales Society, as 'Dalesman of the Millennium'.

Raistrick's palynological legacy What Raistrick achieved was a practical and effective method of characterizing and correlating closely spaced coal seams. Achieving this level of resolution is very demanding and, even today, is still regarded as challenging. None of the methods he employed were truly original. Other groups had both isolated microspores from coal and produced coal seam profiles using spores in thin section. What Raistrick achieved was success in the application of these methods by devising an effective and replicable isolation procedure, and by using a simple and arbitrary classification system. It is a testament to Raistrick's focus that, despite discovering a great diversity of previously unseen microspores, he was still able to keep to his highly practical initial goal of seam correlation. He was clearly aware (Raistrick I934a, discussion) of the work of Robert Potonie and students (Ibrahim 1932, 1933; Loose 1932, 1934) who were formally naming taxa using the Linnaean system. However, Raistrick chose to co-operate with them in resolving the two systems, rather than competing for priority in naming taxa. Part of this success clearly resulted from his previous experience in Quaternary palynology, where he had learnt the benefits of being able to rapidly generate pollen profiles using a stable classification system. After the initial description of the method, Raistrick then tested it on a group of seams across a wide geographical area. In doing so, he put in place the framework for seam correlation. All this was achieved very rapidly due to his enormous natural energy, intense curiosity, enthusiasm and dogged

176

J.E.A. MARSHALL

persistence. These were the same character traits that had led him into so much conflict with the authorities during the two world wars. He was also much assisted in the intense sampling programme by the excellent contacts he had made at all levels in the coal industry. However, it was his enormous capacity for work that was to take him away from the subject, through undertaking so much microscopy that it led to severe eye strain. We can also only speculate whether the continual comments by Hopkins were a motivating factor for Raistrick. Clearly Raistrick had produced a new method of seam correlation that threatened to replace the macrofossil correlation techniques that Hopkins was employing. In addition, Hopkins (1927-1928) had already been involved in an extended discussion concerning bivalve-based Coal Measure correlation. This had included both Carruthers and Hickling from Newcastle, who were generally critical of the method, and A. Holmes, who was Head of the Geology Department at the University of Durham where Hopkins was based (and the city from where Raistrick had graduated from an altogether different establishment). At that time the University of Durham was the sister college to Armstrong, but a significantly older establishment with strong roots in conformist religion, was more arts based and without the same emphasis on applied science. Newcastle degrees were validated through the University of Durham with the two departments having a common examination system, although the Newcastle department was the senior partner in this process. The papers by Raistrick have been portrayed (Sarjeant 1984, 2002) as an isolated contribution that was not followed by other work in Britain until the post-war growth of palynology. Sarjeant preferred to regard the German work on Tertiary lignites (Potonie 1932) with its adoption of a formal Linnaean taxonomy for the isolated pollen as the major breakthrough in palynological research. However, the publications by Raistrick were not isolated contributions as they all attracted great interest, and a number of groups quickly started spore-based coal seam correlation in their local coalfields. These groups were Raistrick's immediate and direct legacy, which link him seamlessly to the post-war development of the subject. Somewhat ironically for Raistrick, this enthusiastic application of palynology was almost certainly accelerated by the wartime surveys of Britain's coal reserves. Immediately after his first paper, the method was applied successfully by other workers in British coal laboratories. Raistrick freely provided advice, discussion and training from his laboratory in Newcastle. The full extent of these contacts is not known, but apart from the UK he also had visitors from the Netherlands (Jongmans), and Germany,

together with Russia, China, India, Australia and Canada. He also sent a student to the United States, as well as Australia and South Africa. In addition to these visitors, Raistrick also had a diverse, regular and intriguing international correspondence (i.e. with a correspondent in Leningrad) that all ceased at the beginning of World War II. When Raistrick left the subject, there were three distinct groups in the UK that were applying his methodologies (Chaloner 1967). These were in the Fuel Survey coal laboratories, the Geological Survey and the universities. Work in the coal laboratories included Paget (1936, 1937) in Warwickshire and Derbyshire, and Millott (1939, 1945-1946) in Staffordshire. It was also Paget (1937) who, from studies in Warwickshire and Kent, was the first to show how the non-palynomorph component could be used to characterize coal seams. This is probably the first application of palynofacies. In Newcastle, Tomlinson (1940) was analysing microspores from Cumbria, whilst in the Glasgow coal laboratory, Skilling was isolating megaspores to attempt seam profiles (Raistrick 1934a). In the Sheffield laboratory, where Slater and co-workers had undertaken the coal thin section studies, Walker (Edwards et al. 1938) was now also correlating seams using Raistrick's methods. It was the workers in these coal laboratories who revealed the limitations of Raistrick's use of histograms of the major and accessory spore content (Smith & Butterworth 1967). They significantly modified Raistrick's methods to move the subject forward. Some 40 years later, and largely through the efforts of a small number of palynologists (Millott, Williams, Smith, Butterworth and Balme), they completed the task of UK seam correlation started by Raistrick (Smith & Butterworth 1967). The Geological Survey (Wright in the Manchester Office: Raistrick 1934a; Crookall & Morris 1952) also used Raistrick's methods and indeed they were amongst the last groups (also see Smith & Williams 1957) to continue with his terminology. In the universities it was Knox at the University of Edinburgh who moved into Carboniferous palynology (Knox 1939) following studies of living bryophyte spores. She wrote a number of papers (Knox 1942, 1946, 1947-1948) using the methods of Raistrick and was, ultimately, to unite his terminology with the formally defined genera and species (Knox 1950). It was in the 1950s that the first postgraduate students completed doctoral theses in palynology, with Butterworth (1956) at the University of Edinburgh and Williams (1956) at the University of London. At the University of Glasgow, Moore (1946 but read December 1945) was isolating and identifying microspores from coal using Raistrick's methods. This paper has often been cited as the starting point

RAISTRICK: BRITAIN'S PREMIER PALYNOLOGIST for modern palynological studies in the UK, largely because it was Moore who went on to found the influential School of Palynology at Sheffield (Wellman 2005). This paper was motivated by difficulties in applying Raistrick's classification and led Moore (see also Radforth 1938) to the study of the natural variation in single sporangia. The importance of this work is that it revealed the degree of variation during spore development and recognized that several dispersed genera are often present within the same sporangium. However, despite this attempt to reconcile the dispersed spore types with the in situ variation, palynological systematics had by then, and largely through the synthesis of Schopf et al. (1944), become set on the path to an arbitrary classification system based solely on the morphology of dispersed microspores and pollen. Hence, for a brief time in the 1930s, Raistrick became the focal point for the application of microspores for coal seam correlation. But, following his intense activity he was left with eye strain that forced him out of active microscopy. He then left the subject to focus more completely on research that was more central to his original background in engineering. Subsequently, he was never to contribute directly to the modern development of the subject, although very clearly aware of his own signal contribution. However, during the 15 years from 1936 to 1950, at least 11 papers, totalling some 336 pages, were published (i.e. not including unpublished reports) by other British spore workers and these all directly used his methods. These papers were nearly all in the Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers and showed that, under Raistrick's influence, the subject was rapidly and confidently expanding rather than merely 'inching along' (Sarjeant 2002). This article could not have been written without access to the unpublished autobiography of Raistrick. For that and permission to quote from it grateful thanks are to the Raistrick family (Elinor and Bill Rea), W. Braham (Hemel Hempstead), A. Butterfield (Keighley), R. Ireland (Silverdale), B. Randall (Newcastle), M. Jones (Newcastle), H. Smith (Sheffield) and J. Lee (Stanley, formerly Newcastle) provided valuable additional information.

References ANNISON, R. 1991. Obituary Arthur Raistrick. The Guardian, 18 April. ANON. 1924. Pollen in peat. The Naturalist, 811,230. BLACKBURN, K.B. 1936. Botryococcus and the algal coals. Part I. - A reinvestigation of the alga Botryococcus braunii Kutzing. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 58,841-854. BLACKBURN, K.B. 1938. Linton Mires, Wharfdale. Glacial and post-glacial history, pt II, Biological. Proceedings

177

of the University of Durham Philosophical Society, 10, 32-37. BURRELL, W.H. 1924. Pennine peat. The Naturalist, 808, 145-150. BUTTERWORTH, M.A. 1956. The distribution of micro spores in the coalfields lying to the west of the Pennine s. PhD Thesis, University of Edinburgh. CHALONER, W.G. 1967. British pre-Quaternary palynology: a historical review. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 6,21-40. CHEETHAM, C.A. 1925. Yorkshire Naturalists' Union: Botanical Section. The Naturalist, 826,340-341. CROOKALL, R. & MORRIS, L.S.O. 1952. The Carboniferous 'microspores' that have been designated 'Cl' by various authors. Bulletin of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, 4,49-Sl. CROSS, A.T. & KOSANKE, R.M. 1995. History and development of Carboniferous palynology in North America during the early and middle twentieth century. In: LYONS, PC., MOREY, E.D. & WAGNER, R.H. (eds) Historical Perspective of Early Twentieth Century Carboniferous Paleobotany in North America (W.C. Darrah Volume). Geological Society of America Memoir, 185,353-387. CROUCHER, T. 1995. Boots and Books, the Work and Writings of Arthur Raistrick. Smith-Settle, Otley. EDWARDS, W., WALKER, JJ. & WANDLESS, A.M. 1938. A new interpretation of the Pollington Boring, Yorkshire. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 95,147-172, 321-324. EVANS, M.M. 1926. Correlation of the Parkgate Seam: a preliminary study. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 71,451-469. HOPKINS, W 1927-1928. Further modification of the correlation of the coal-seams of Northumberland and Durham. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 74,221-241. IBRAHIM, A.C. 1932. Beschreibung von Sporenformen aus Floz Agir. In: POTONIE, R. (ed.) Sporenformen aus der Flozen Agir und Bismarck des Ruhrgebietes. Neues Jahrbuch fur Mineralogie, Geologic und Paldontologie Beilage-Band. Abteilung B, Geologic undPaldontologie, 67,447-9. IBRAHIM, A.C. 1933. Sporenformen des Agirhorizontes des Ruhrreviers. Wiirzburg. Konrad Triltsch, Universitat Berlin. JOY, D. 1991. Arthur Raistrick's Yorkshire Dales. Dalesman Books, Clapham, Yorkshire, 11-16. KNOX, E.M. 1939. The spores of Bryophyta compared with those of Carboniferous age. Transactions of the Botanical Society of Edinburgh, 32,477^87. KNOX, E.M. 1942. The microspores in some coals of the Productive Coal Measures in Fife. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 101,98-112. KNOX, E.M. 1946. Microspores in the productive Coal Measures of the central coalfield of Scotland. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 105,137-142,268-270. KNOX, E.M. 1947-1948. The microspores in coals of the Limestone Coal Group in Scotland. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 107,155-163. KNOX, E.M. 1950. The spores of Lycopodium, Phylloglossum, Selaginella and Isoetes and their value in the study of microfossils of Palaeozoic age.

178

J.E.A. MARSHALL

Transactions of the Botanical Society of Edinburgh, 35,207-357. KOSANKE, R.M. & CROSS, A.T. 1995. Leonard Richard Wilson (1906- ): Palynologist, paleobotanist, and geologist. In: LYONS, P.C., MOREY, E.D. & WAGNER, R.H. (eds) Historical Perspective of Early Twentieth Century Carboniferous Paleobotany in North America (W.C. Darrah Volume). Geological Society of America Memoir, 185,237-244. LOOSE, F. 1932. Beschreibung von Sporenformen aus Floz Bismarck. In: POTONIE, R. (ed.) Sporenformen aus der Flo'zen Agir und Bismarck des Ruhrgebietes. Neues Jahrbuch fur Mineralogie, Geologie und Palaontologie Beilage-Band. Abteilung B, Geologie und Palaontologie, 67,449^52. LOOSE, F. 1934. Sporenformen aus dem Floz Bismarck des Ruhrgebietes. Preussische Geologische Landesanstalt, Institut fur Paldobotanik und Petrographie der Brennsteine, Arbeiten, 4,127-164. LYONS, P.C. & TEICHMULLER, M. 1995. Reinhardt Thiessen (1867-1938): Pioneering coal petrologist and stratigraphic palynologist In: LYONS, PC., MOREY, E.D. & WAGNER, R.H. (eds) Historical perspective of Early Twentieth Century Carboniferous Paleobotany in North America (W.C. Darrah Volume). Geological Society of America Memoir, 185,149-161. MARSHALL, J.E.A. 1991. Arthur Raistrick. The Guardian, 29 April. MILLOTT, J.O'N. 1939. The microspores in the coal-seams of North Staffordshire: Part I. - The Millstone Grit Ten Foot coals. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 96,317-353. MILLOTT, J.O'N. 1945-1946. The microspores in the coalseams of North Staffordshire: Part II. - The seams of the Cheadle Coalfield. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 105, 91-102. MOORE, L.R. 1946. On the spores of some Carboniferous plants; their development. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 102, 251-298. PAGET, R.F. 1936. The correlation of Coal-seams by Microspore analysis: the seams of Warwickshire. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 92,59-88. PAGET, R.F. 1937. The correlation of Coal-seams by microspore analysis: the northern part of the Warwickshire Coalfield and some collieries in South Derbyshire. Colliery Guardian, 154, 823-826. POTONIE, R. 1932. Pollenformen aus tertiaren Braunkohle (3. Mitteilung). Jahrbuch der Preussischen Geologischen Landesanstalt, 52 (for 1931), 1-7. RADFORTH, W.N. 1938. An analysis and comparison of the structural features of Dactylotheca plumosa Artis sp., and Senftenbergia ophiodermatica Goppert sp. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 59, 385-396. RAISTRICK, A. 19250. The glaciation of Yoredale, Swaledale, and adjoining parts of the Pennine range. PhD Thesis, University of Leeds. RAISTRICK, A. 1925&. A preliminary note on the glaciation of Borrowdale. Geological Magazine, 62,277-279. RAISTRICK, A. 1925c. The glaciation of Borrowdale. Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society, 20, 155-181. RAISTRICK, A. 1932. The pollen analysis of peat. The Naturalist, No. 905,177-182.

RAISTRICK, A. 19330. The microspores of coal and their use in correlation. Geological Magazine, 70,479. RAISTRICK, A. 1933&. The Microspores of Coal and Their Use in Correlation. Report of the British Association for the Advancement of Science for 1933,480-481. RAISTRICK, A. 19340. The correlation of coal-seams by microspore-content. Part I. - The seams of Northumberland. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 88,142-153,259-264. RAISTRICK, A. 1934&. The correlation of coal seams. Armstrong College Mining Society Journal, 10, 14-22. RAISTRICK, A. 1934c. The Microspores of Carboniferous Coals. Report of the British Association for the Advancement of Science for 1934, 310. RAISTRICK, A. 1935. The microspore analysis of coal. The Naturalist, 942,145-150. RAISTRICK, A. 1936. Use of Microspores in the Correlation of Coal Seams (Trencherbone and Busty Seams). Report of the British Association for the Advancement of Science for 1936,354. RAISTRICK, A. 1937. The microspores of coal and their use in correlation, etc. In: Compte rendu du deuxieme Congres pour I'avancement des etudes de Stratigraphie Carbonifere - Heerlen 1935, Van Aelst, Maastricht, 909-917. RAISTRICK, A. 19380. The microspore content of some Lower Carboniferous coals. Transactions of the Leeds Geological Association, 5,221-226. RAISTRICK, A. 1938/?. Two Centuries of Industrial Welfare; The London (Quaker) Lead Company 1692-1905, Friends Historical Society, London. RAISTRICK, A. 1938c. Linton Mires, Wharfdale. Glacial and post-glacial history, pt I, Physical. Proceedings of the University of Durham Philosophical Society, 10, 24-31. RAISTRICK, A. 19390. The correlation of coal-seams by microspore-content. Part II. - The Trencherbone Seam, Lancashire, and the Busty Seams, Durham. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 97,425-437;98,95-99,171-175. RAISTRICK, A. 1939&. The South Yorkshire iron industry 1698-1756. Transactions of the Newcomen Society, 19,51-86. RAISTRICK, A. 1943. Teach Yourself Geology. English Universities Press, London. RAISTRICK, A. 1950. Quakers in Science and Industry. Bannisdale Press, London. RAISTRICK, A. 1952. Dynasty oflronfounders; the Darbys' ofCoalbrookdale. Longmans Green, London. RAISTRICK, A. & ALLEN, E. 1939. The South Yorkshire Iron masters (1690-1750). Economic History Review, 9, 168-185. RAISTRICK, A. & BLACKBURN, K.B. 1931. Pollen analysis of the peat on Heathery Burn Moor, Northumberland. Proceedings of the University of Durham Philosophical Society, 8, 351-358. RAISTRICK, A. & BLACKBURN, K.B. 1932. Analysis of some Lake District peats. North Western Naturalist, 7, 94-97. RAISTRICK, A. & BLACKBURN, K.B. 1933. The late-Glacial and post-Glacial periods in the North Pennines. Part III, The post-glacial peats. Transactions of the Northern Naturalists'Union, 1 (for 1932), 79-103.

RAISTRICK: BRITAIN'S PREMIER PALYNOLOGIST RAISTRICK, A. & MARSHALL, C.E. 1939. The Nature and Origin of Coal and Coal Seams. English Universities Press, London. RAISTRICK, A. & SIMPSON, J. 1933. The microspores of some Northumberland coals, and their use in the correlation of coal-seams. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 85,225-235; 86, 55. RAISTRICK, A. & WOODHEAD, T.W. 1930. Plant remains in post-glacial gravels near Leeds. The Naturalist, 877, 39^4. REINSCH, P.P. 1884. Micro-palaeophytologia Formationis Carboniferae, 1, Continens Trileteas et Stelideas. Theo Krische, Erlangen Germania, 1-80. SARJEANT, W.A.S. 1984. Charles Downie and the early days of palynological research at the University of Sheffield. Journal of Micropalaeontology, 3,1-6. SARJEANT, W.A.S. 2002. 'As chimney-sweepers, come to dust': a history of palynology to 1970. In: OLDROYD, D.R. (ed.) The Earth Inside and Out: Some Major Contributions to Geology in the Twentieth Century. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 192,273-327. SCHOPF, J.M., WILSON, L.R. & BENTALL, R. 1944. An Annotated Synopsis of Paleozoic Fossil Spores and the Definition of Generic Groups. Report of Investigations, Illinois Geological Survey, 91. SCHULZE, F. 1855. tiber das Vorkommen wollerhaltener Zellulose in Braunkohle und Steinkole. Bericht Verhandlungen Preussische Koeniglich Akademie Wissenschaften, 21,676-678. SLATER, L. 1931-1932. Microscopical study of coal seams and their correlation. Transactions of the Institution of Mining Engineers, 83,191-206, 237-239. SLATER, L. & EDDY, G.E. 1932. The significance of spores in the correlation of coal seams. Parts II & III. - The Barnsley Seam and the Silkstone Seam-South Yorkshire area. Fuel Research. Physical and Chemical Survey of the National Coal Resources, 23. Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. HMSO, London. SLATER, L., EVANS, M.M. & EDDY, G.E. 1930. The significance of spores in the correlation of coal seams. Part I. - The Parkgate Seam-South Yorkshire area. Fuel Research. Physical and Chemical Survey of the National Coal Resources, 17. Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. HMSO, London. SMITH, A. 2001. Arthur Raistrick (1897-1991), a legendary Yorkshireman. In: SMITH, A. (ed.) The Rock Men Pioneers of Lakeland Geology. The Cumberland Geological Society, Cumbria, 116-118.

179

SMITH, A.H.V. & BUTTERWORTH, M.A. 1967. Miospores in the Coal Seams of the Carboniferous of Great Britain. Special Papers in Palaeontology, 1. SMITH, A.H.V. & WILLIAMS, R. 1957. The occurrence of the Carboniferous 'microspores' Cl and C4 in seams below the Clay Cross marine band in Yorkshire. Bulletin of the Geological Survey of Great Britain, 12, 27-51. TEMPERLEY, B.N. 1936. Botryococcus and the algal coals. Part II. - The boghead controversy and the morphology of the boghead algae. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 58, 855-868. THIESSEN, R. 1920. Structure in Paleozoic Bituminous Coals. US Bureau of Mines Bulletin, 117. THIESSEN, R. & STAUD, J.N. 1923. Correlation of Coal Beds in the Monongahela Formation of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. Carnegie Institute for Technology, Coal-mining Investigation Bulletin, 9. THIESSEN, R. & WILSON, F.E. 1924. Correlation of Coal Beds of the Allegheny Formation of Western Pennsylvania and Eastern Ohio. Carnegie Institute for Technology, Coal-mining Investigation Bulletin, 10. TOMLINSON, T.E. 1940. Microspores of the coal of the Solway No. 1 shaft. Report of the Coal Survey Laboratory, Newcastle upon Tyne (internal report). WAINWRIGHT, M. 1991. Obituary, Arthur Raistrick. The Guardian, 18 April. WELLMAN, C.H. 2005. Half a century of palynology at the University of Sheffield. In: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) The History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,259-279. WEST, R.G. 1988. Harry Godwin. Biographical Memoir of Fellows of the Royal Society, 34, 259-292. WHITE, D. & THIESSEN, R. 1913. The Origin of Coal. US Bureau of Mines Bulletin, 344. WILLIAMS, R.W. 1956. The sequence ofmicrofloras in the coalfields of Southern Britain. PhD Thesis, University of London. WILSON, L.R. & BROKAW, A.L. 1937. Plant microfossils of an Iowa coal deposit. Iowa Academy of Science Proceedings, 44, 225-226. WOODHEAD, T.W. 1923. Botanical Survey and Ecology in Yorkshire. The Naturalist, 794,97-128. WOODHEAD, T.W. & ERDTMAN, O.G.E. 1926. Remains in the peat of the Southern Pennines. The Naturalist, 835,245-253.

This page intentionally left blank

The life and work of Emily Dix (1904-1972) CYNTHIA V. BUREK1 & CHRISTOPHER J. CLEAL2 1

Environment Research Group & Centre for Science Communication, Department of Biological Sciences, University College Chester, Parkgate Road, Chester CHI 4BJ, UK 2 Department of Biodiversity and Systematic Biology, National Museums and Galleries of Wales, Cathays Park, Cardiff CF10 3NP, UK Abstract: Emily Dix was a leading British palaeobotanist during the first half of the 20th century to deal with the stratigraphical distribution of macrofloras. She helped transform the use of fossil plants in defining biostratigraphic units in the Carboniferous strata in Britain; her plant-based zonation remains the foundation of Carboniferous macrofloral biostratigraphy today. She addressed several problems that came to dominate Carboniferous stratigraphical research during the second half of the century, including the mid-Carboniferous boundary and the Westphalian-Stephanian boundary. Her career was tragically cut short by mental illness when she was only in her early 40s.

During the first half of the 20th century, a number of women made significant contributions to palaeobotany in Britain. Perhaps the most notable was Margaret Benson, Professor of Botany at Royal Holloway College, London, and one of the first women to be elected a Fellow of the Linnean Society of London. She published a series of papers, mainly in Annals of Botany, dealing with Carboniferous plants. However, few other female palaeobotanists of this time seem to have achieved their full potential. A major factor in this would, no doubt, have been the male-dominated world in which they worked, but in many cases there were other circumstances that caused their careers to be curtailed. Marie Slopes, for instance, decided to transfer her energies to social issues (see Chaloner 2005). Ruth Holden died of typhoid at the age of 26, whilst working in a hospital in Russia, helping Polish refugees just after World War I. Lucy Wills (sister of the more famous Leonard) seems to have simply just dropped out of the subject. Emily Dix had a more successful career than most during this time, lasting over 20 years. There can be no question, however, that she would have made a far greater contribution if she had not suffered a catastrophic mental breakdown at the age of 41.

Background and education Emily Dix was born on 21 May 1904 in Penclawdd, on the Gower Peninsula, South Wales, then a cockling port surrounded by the ecologically scarred landscapes of the coal-mining and copper-smelting industries. She was one of four daughters and a son born to William Dix, a farmer's son and a native of Cheriton, Glamorgan. Emily Dix was educated at Gowerton Intermediate School from 1916 to 1922. She gained the

Junior and Senior Central Welsh Board Certificates, each with three distinctions. She was clearly an able student. In 1922 Emily gained the Central Welsh Board Higher Certificate in history, botany and geography, with distinctions in both history and botany (Burek 2005). Following this success she went on to obtain a Glamorgan County Scholarship to study at University College Swansea. Given her environmental surroundings, it is perhaps not surprising that here she studied geology and completed subsidiary subjects in botany (1923) and pure mathematics (1924). She also attended classes in zoology and German to help support her studies. In 1925, she graduated with First Class Honours in Geology, specializing in Palaeontology. (Arber 1974)

The Swansea years Early research in the Gwendraeth Valley and the Gower After graduation, Dix continued at University College Swansea (Fig. 1), undertaking research on the structure and palaeontology of the western part of the South Wales coalfield, funded by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. This part of the coalfield had for many years presented serious difficulties in seam correlation and the results of her studies were widely acclaimed by mining engineers in the district. As the second referee in her application to Bedford College (Woodward from University College Swansea) stated, 'It would be impossible for me to adequately indicate how much they appreciate what she has done, or how much they admire her character' (Bedford College archive). Dix's work was supervised by Arthur Elijah Trueman, Professor of Geology at Swansea, who

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,181-196.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

182

C. V. BUREK & C. J. CLEAL

Fig. 1. Emily Dix in Swansea 1929 (seated third from the left).

had a profound influence on her development as a stratigrapher. Trueman's early work had been on Jurassic sequences, and he had made fundamental improvements to stratigraphical theory. Most fundamentally, he realized the conceptual differences between bio-, chrono- and limostratigraphy, and helped lay the foundations for modern stratigraphical practice (George 1974). It was only when he moved to Swansea in 1920 that he started work on Carboniferous stratigraphy. As he was not linked to any of the existing 'schools of thought' on Carboniferous geology, he introduced fresh and often revolutionary insights into the subject. At Swansea, Trueman surrounded himself with a group of young research students, including Emily Dix (another subsequently eminent student of this time was T.N. George), whom he encouraged to adopt his new methods of biostratigraphy. Trueman's main interest in the Carboniferous was the use of non-marine bivalves for biostratigraphical correlation. From his experience of working on the Jurassic, he realized that the only accurate way to use such fossils for correlation was to divide the stratigraphical succession into biozones, which were defined exclusively by the assemblages of species present, and were totally independent of the lithology in which they were found. Previously, nearly all stratigraphy on the British Upper Carboniferous had attempted to recognize divisions based on a combi-

nation of lithology, relative age and fossil content, Trueman was able to show that this synthetic approach led to confusion and often circular argument. Dix's early work also concentrated on the nonmarine bivalves. This was not only because of Trueman's interests. Her study areas, in the Gwendraeth Valley and north Gower, are notoriously poor in palaeobotanical remains (although another of Trueman's students, Stephen H. Jones, later showed that these strata, with application, could yield macrofloras - Jones 1934, 1935). In 1926 she was awarded an MSc based on her Gwendraeth Valley work: 'The Palaeontology of the Lower Coal Series of Carmarthen and the Correlation of the Coal Measures in the Western Portion of the South Wales Coalfield'. This was subsequently published in 1928 in the Proceedings of the South Wales Institute of Engineers (Dix 1928a). Her work in north Gower had also been published in the Proceedings in 1924 in conjunction with Prof. Trueman (Dix & Trueman I924a,b). In total, Trueman wrote 9 papers jointly with Dix from 1924 to 1937 (Dix & Trueman I924a, b, 1928a, b, 1929, 1931, 1932, 1935, 1937; Pugh 1958). This is more than with any other of his coauthors, and reflects the evident empathy between the two (D. Bassett pers. comm.).

THE LIFE AND WORK OF EMILY DIX

Cwm Gorse Boreholes Dix's next project saw a marked change in direction in her research. A series of boreholes had been drilled near Gwaun-cae-Gurwen (the Cwm Gorse Boreholes), with the aim of developing the coalfield south of that location, and these revealed an excellent Duckmantian-Bolsovian succession. Trueman dealt with the non-marine bivalves, and Dix studied the macrofloras that, in contrast to the Gwendraeth Valley and Gower, were well developed. To help her with these studies on the macrofloras in 1925, Trueman pointed Dix towards a paper by the French palaeobotanist Paul Bertrand (1914), who had developed macrofloral biozones for the NordPas-de-Calais Coalfield. Trueman wondered whether the succession of plants in South Wales was similar to that of northern France, and if Bertrand's zones could be applied in South Wales (Dix 1934, p. 789). However, although Bertrand's work ultimately proved a great influence on Dix, in the short term a Welsh palaeobotanist, David Davies, had a greater impact. There is no evidence that the two ever met (Davies died in 1931: Thomas 1986), but Davies's collection was unique in providing a record of macrofloras through the Westphalian Series in South Wales (the Namurian, Westphalian and Stephanian were regarded as stages in Dix's day but have subsequently been upgraded to series). Part of Davies's collection (that from the eastern part of the South Wales Coalfield, near Pontypridd) was in the National Museum of Wales in Cardiff (ultimately, the entire collection went there) and Dix visited the collection several times to compare it with her record of macrofloras from Cwm Gorse. Dix was even employed temporarily by FJ. North (Keeper of Geology and the National Museum) to help with identifying some of the collection (Thomas 1986, p. 43). However, Davies' influence went far deeper than this. His interests were primarily palaeoecological, and he paid considerable attention to patterns of distribution and co-occurrences of different plant groups through the succession. Davies' influence can be clearly seen in Dix's palaeobotanical contribution to the Davies et al (1928) paper on the Cwm Gorse Boreholes, for instance where she noted the frequent association together of remains of Cordaites (normally regarded as indicating dry conditions) and Catamites (an index of wetter conditions). She also noted the frequent occurrence of lycophyte remains in lacustrine blue shales, which also contained nonmarine bivalves such as Carbonicola. The work on the Cwm Gorse Boreholes proved of great significance, as it was the first major study on rocks of this age to combine evidence of macrofloras, non-marine bivalves and marine bands. Up until that point the stratigraphical classification of Upper Carboniferous rocks in Britain had been mostly

183

based on the work of Robert Kidston (1894, 1905). He had produced a synthetic classification in the traditional mould, incorporating lithological and macrofloral distributions, with an overarching chronostratigraphical implication to the divisions. However, Trueman (1928) had shown by using nonmarine bivalve biostratigraphy and marine bands that it was difficult to apply these stratigraphical divisions outside of the areas where they were first established (Scotland and the Southern Pennines Basins). By integrating the macrofloras with the faunal evidence, it was at last possible to make a valid critique of the Kidston classification. Dix (193 la) also later pointed out that a major failure of Kidston's (1905) scheme was that it did not concentrate on the 'Yorkian Series' (i.e. Duckmantian and lower Bolsovian stages in the modern classification) in which the majority of the important coal seams are found. This made it of little use to the mining engineer who was trying to locate himself stratigraphically based on plants and nonmarine shells. It is ironic, therefore, that few of Dix's major contributions dealt with macrofloras from Kidston's Yorkian Series.

Lanarkian 'Series' The first stratigraphical interval in Kidston's (1905) classification to be subjected to critical analysis was the Lanarkian Series, which includes the Millstone Grit and Lower Coal Measures. Dix et al. (1930) argued that Kidston's definition of the Lanarkian was too vague, being largely based on the absence of many species found in stratigraphically higher macrofloras. Those species that he claimed were restricted to the Lanarkian are rare, and many have only been found in Scotland. Using the definition given by Kidston, the 'Series' appeared to be absent from southern Britain and it had been suggested that there was a stratigraphical break (e.g. Goode 1913). However, mainly based on the correlation of marine bands, Dix et al. (1930) suggested that the Millstone Grit of South Wales was broadly contemporaneous with that of the Pennines Basin, and that there was no significant stratigraphical break in the former area. Dix et al. (1930) argued that the problem had mainly arisen because Kidston had chosen to define his Lanarkian Series in a coalfield (Ayrshire, Scotland) with relatively poor macrofloras in the critical part of the succession. Far more complete palaeobotanical evidence is available in South Wales, which (Dix 19330) was later to describe.

Staffordian

'Series'

The second phase in the revision of Kidston's stratigraphical divisions dealt with the Staffordian 'Series',

184

C.V. BUREK & C.J. CLEAL

which in modern chronostratigraphical nomenclature is equivalent to the upper Bolsovian and lower Westphalian D stages. This required Dix, for the first time, to undertake studies outside of the South Wales Coalfield, as she needed to examine the evidence from the area where Kidston (1905) had first formulated the Staffordian: North Staffordshire. This included examining the existing collections, but she also found it necessary to supplement these with her own collected material. This she obtained whilst collecting bivalves for Trueman, who was in receipt of a Department of Scientific and Industrial Research grant to investigate this coalfield. However, the revision of the Staffordian was exclusively Dix's work, and resulted in a major paper read at the Geological Society of London in April 1930 (Dix 193 la). Dix concluded that there was a discrepancy between the base of the Staffordian Series, as defined by Kidston (1905) in North Staffordshire, and the palaeobotanical criteria that he regarded as being indicative of the Staffordian Series. As with the Lanarkian, Dix concluded that part of the problem was that north Staffordshire was not the best area to investigate the succession of macrofloras of this age; South Wales had a much more complete succession. However, Dix also criticized Kidston's conclusions for having been based on too little data. She had been given extensive access to coal mines and open cast quarries in the area, an unusual privilege for a female at that time, and she acknowledged this in the Introduction to her paper. Being able to collect fossils in situ proved to be crucial in her revision of Kidston's work. According to Dix (193 la, p. 173) the identification of the base of the Staffordian was too subjective and would 'depend, to some extent, on the emphasis which different workers place on the occurrence or absence of particular species'. Furthermore, she found that when she applied Kidston's palaeobotanical criteria for identifying the base of the Staffordian Series to the north Staffordshire succession, it occured significantly below the lithostratigraphical concept of the Staffordian Series there. It is a classic example of the confusion that arises when trying to use an integrated litho-, bio- and chronostratigraphical scheme for correlation. Kidston's subdivisions of the Staffordian are similarly confused, as they 'are based primarily on lithological divisions present in Staffordshire, to which a pala3obotanical interpretation is given when applied to other coalfields' (Dix 19310, p. 175). It has to be said that Dix herself found it difficult at this time to break away completely from Kidston's terminology and she still talked about the Staffordian 'Series' and its macrofloras in areas other than Staffordshire. Nevertheless, her critique of Kidston's classification of these strata is a landmark in the development of a clear philosophy behind the stratigraphical classifi-

cation of the Upper Carboniferous in Britain, and pointed the way to the ultimate separation of the litho-, bio- and chronostratigraphies of these strata. Significantly, Dix again emphasized the importance of integrating macrofloral evidence with data from non-marine bivalves and marine bands, a point that she continued to promulgate right up to the end of her academic career (Dix 1939). She showed that the succession of plants and shells were in accord both in the South Wales and the Staffordshire coalfields. In the field, definite plant assemblages were associated with non-marine shells and at some horizons plants had been used to identify coal seams. If more attention was paid to the vertical range of species and, especially to rare ones, then a more complete classification could be made. In the Discussion at the end of the paper, John Stobbs, who pioneered work on Coal Measure stratigraphy in North Staffordshire, congratulated Emily Dix on her classification and application of palaeontology to the coal-mining industry.

The Bedford College years 1930 proved to be a pivotal year in Dix's career. In May of that year, she applied for and was successful in becoming Lecturer in Palaeontology and Stratigraphy in the Department of Geology in the Bedford College for women in London. Her reference from A.E. Trueman stated that 'they are by far the most brilliant students I have had here' (the other one being T.N. George), and 'that she has a wonderful facility for getting on with people and is a great worker'. The Geological Appointment Committee agreed the appointment of Miss Emily Dix, an expert on the flora and invertebrates of the Coal Measures and other Carboniferous strata of South Wales and the English Midlands, on 7 May 1930. She took up her appointment in September of that year as a life appointment, i.e. up to retiring age (Royal Holloway archives, 69.10). This confirms 1930 as the date of appointment not 1929 as has previously been published (Cook 2001, pp. 156-159). 1930 also saw Dix make her first contacts with palaeobotanists from outside of Britain. The International Botanical Congress, held in August 1930, was organized by Sir Albert Seward, Professor of Botany at Cambridge and one of the most influential palaeobotanists of his time. It was the first International Botanical Congress to have a separate palaeobotanical session, and this was presumably why Dix, who was from an essentially geological background, attended. It also no doubt influenced a number of Continental palaeobotanists to attend, including Wilhelmus Jongmans (the Netherlands), Walter Gothan (Germany), Armand Renier (Belgium) and Paul Bertrand (France). Although

THE LIFE AND WORK OF EMILY DIX

these four were the leaders in Upper Carboniferous palaeobotany at the time, Dix never worked directly with any of them. Nevertheless, they had a great impact on her work, and helped her resolve many problems of taxonomy and biostratigraphy. This is clear from her 1933 paper, where she names new species after each of these colleagues, and in each dedication remarks on her indebtedness to them. A letter written by Dix in 1944 to the American palaeobotanist William Darrah refers to them as 'the great lords of palaeobotany in Europe' (Morey & Lyons 1995, p. 13). Despite this apparent reverence, though, there is also the impression of great warmth and friendship between Dix and her rather older male colleagues; the smiling faces in several photographs taken in 1935, at the time of the Second Carboniferous Congress, speak clearly of this (figured by Morey 1995). There is also W.C. Darrah's account (in Morey 1995) of an evening during the same Congress, when, 'the real dancing treat of the evening was performed by Gothan and Dix. To the orchestra, reinforced by clapping hands, they danced nobly'. Although Dix was no longer working as a Research Assistant for Trueman, their collaboration on non-marine bivalves continued. She also produced a number of papers on Late Carboniferous arthropods at this time, with S.H. Jones and J. Pringle. This reflected Dix's attitude that it is essential to combine evidence from all available groups of fossils if the Upper Carboniferous sequences are to be properly interpreted. However, Dix's new-found independence at Bedford College gave her more time to concentrate on palaeobotany, and resulted in her two most important publications.

'Macrofloras of the Millstone Grit and Lower Coal Measuresy This paper clearly evolved out of the Dix et al (1930) critique of the Lanarkian Series. Although this paper had analysed the existing data, it appears not to have clinched the argument. Robert Crookall, Kidston's successor as palaeobotanist to the Geological Survey, was also publishing on this problem (Crookall 1931, 19320, 1932&), using essentially the same approach as Kidston (1894) had originally used. The problem clearly needed new data and a new approach. Dix (1933) provided both. The new data were from the Millstone Grit and lowest Coal Measures of South Wales, much of which had been collected from the Penwyllt and Nant Llech plant beds by her old colleague W.D. Ware. Macrofloras of this age were well known as being scarce in Britain, and was one of the reasons for the difficulties surrounding Kidston's Lanarkian Series. The three plant beds at Penwyllt and the three

185

at Nant Llech yielded diverse impression macrofloras, which for the first time allowed a proper understanding of the vegetation of this time in Britain. However, she did not only use these Welsh floras. She undertook a thorough revision of the other British macrofloras of this age, partly from the literature, but also included extensive research in museums around the country, including the Natural History Museum, then called the British Museum (Natural History), the Geological Survey collections in both London and Edinburgh, the Sedgwick Museum (Cambridge), the Hunterian Museum (Glasgow), the Manchester Museum and the Hancock Museum (Newcastle-upon-Tyne), as well as the National Museum of Wales in Cardiff. She also undertook some original collecting, including a visit to Scotland, although details of this fieldwork were never published. The new approach was to use the biozonal approach that Trueman had developed for his nonmarine bivalves. Dix established four macrofloral biozones for the Millstone Grit and lowest Coal Measures, based exclusively on the composition of the macrofloras and ignoring the lithology. By concentrating purely on the palaeobotany she found that the zones 'have been recognized wherever sufficient information regarding the floras has been available, and they compare closely with the plant divisions identified in various parts of the Continent' (Dix 1933, p. 160). The zones were assemblage zones and she does not formally lay out the criteria that she used for defining them, but by carefully reading the text it is possible to elucidate the concept that she had behind their recognition. The result was a much clearer insight into the correlation of these South Wales strata with contemporaneous successions in North Devon, North Staffordshire, Lancashire, Derbyshire and Yorkshire, Northumberland and Durham, Scotland and the continent. She was able to show that there was no significant 'Floral Break' at the base of the Millstone Grit in South Wales and North Staffordshire as suggested by Kidston (1894). Her views in this were supported by Renier, who acknowledged, 'certainly the change is a very rapid one but there is not a real break' (Renier pers. comm. 1933). Interestingly, however, she did recognize a stratigraphically higher break in the macrofloras, above the level of the Penwyllt Plant Beds in South Wales and of the Limekiln Wood plant bed in Staffordshire, which is at about the level of the Arnsbergian-Chokierian Stage boundary. Although this level was not regarded as being of major significance by the British stratigraphical establishment, some 50 years later it became accepted as approximating to the boundary between the two subsystems of the Carboniferous, the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian. Dix also demonstrated the biostratigraphical significance of the group of plants now referred to the

186

C.V. BUREK & CJ. CLEAL

morphogenus Neuralethopteris (she referred them to the species Neuropteris schlehanii Stur). Kidston (1888) had recognized that there were, in fact, more than one species of this type in Britain, but Dix thought that they merely represented variation within a single species. Subsequent work, in particular by Laveine (1967), has shown that there are, in fact, several species in this complex of fronds that can be clearly circumscribed, and which are, in fact, more closely allied to Alethopteris than Neuropteris proper (hence the change in generic name). Nevertheless, Dix's demonstration of the stratigraphical importance of the fronds was of great significance. Her work on these fronds also resulted in the discovery of a rare example of one with a reproductive organ attached, which she published in a separate paper (Dix 19320). Dix (19330) is also significant in representing her only major excursion into systematics, and the only one in which photographs of the fossils are given. As already explained, macrofloras of this age are rare in Britain (they are also rare in much of the rest of Europe) and not surprisingly she found several taxa that she was unable to recognize. Five new species were established in this paper: Sphenopteris bertrandii, S. cambrensis, S. jongmansii, S. renieri, S. warei and Rhodea gothanii (spellings have been corrected so that they are compatible with the current International Code of Botanical Nomenclature). She also described a number of distinctive specimens that were probably undescribed species, but insufficiently well preserved to act as types. Few of the other species have been recognized in subsequent studies (except in the synopsis of British Carboniferous floras by Jongmans 1940; and a monograph of described Sphenopteris species by Boureau & Doubinger 1975), although this is probably a reflection of the limited studies that there have been on macrofloras of this age. The importance of this systematic work lies not so much in whether her species are ultimately accepted, but in that she was able to demonstrate the plant biodiversity in a previously little-studied part of the stratigraphical column.

'Macrofloral Bio stratigraphy of the South Wales Coalfield' Dix's (1933) paper was in effect a trial for a widerranging biostratigraphical revision of the South Wales Carboniferous macrofloras. Her previous biostratigraphical studies on the macrofloras of this coalfield had tended to be hindered by her traditionalist approach to correlation (i.e. the use of an integrated system of litho-, bio- and chronostratigraphy). At least as early as 1925, Trueman was encouraging her to adopt a more purely biostratigraphical

methodology, and directing her towards the work of continental palaeobotanists such as Bertrand (1914). Why Dix did not adopt this more modern approach immediately is not clear, but may have been because there were insufficient data available at the time for her to establish formal biozones. Other than a paper by Kidston (1894) and Davies' (1929) palaeoecological paper (plus some shorter papers of his quoted therein) there were few published records of plant fossils from the main part of the coalfield. By the early 1930s, however, the situation had changed through a combination of her own collecting and that of David Davies (the last of his collection was transferred to the National Museum of Wales shortly after his death in 1931) (Thomas 1986). Trueman had shown that South Wales had the most complete Late Carboniferous non-marine bivalve and marine band record in Britain - Dix was now to do the same for the macrofloras. She started by looking at the succession in the Swansea area, which was the thickest and most fossiliferous in the coalfield. She divided the succession into a series of biozones - the four from her 1933 paper, plus another five for the higher parts of the succession. They were assemblage zones, characterized by the overall composition of the macrofloras, and she acknowledged that this could cause difficulties with the exact location of their boundaries (subsequent studies have largely resolved these problems by focusing on the definition of the boundaries: e.g. Wagner 1984; Cleal 1991). She named each biozone after the taxa that she regarded as most important for its recognition. She made it clear that these taxa were not necessarily restricted to the zones, nor would they necessarily range throughout the zone; rather, their occurrence together should be regarded as being typical of the zone. There were up to 13 taxa in some of the zonal names, which was rather cumbersome. For convenience, therefore, she also assigned them index letters. In borehole sequence (i.e. youngest first) they were: Flora I: Zone of Pecopteris lamurensis, Acitheca polymorpha, Dicksonites pluckenetii, Mixoneura (Odontopteris) sp., Alethopteris grandinii, Sphenophyllum oblongifolium. Flora H: Zone of Mixoneura ovata, Neuropteris scheuchzeri, Neuropteris flexuosa, Odontopteris lindleyana, Alethopteris serlii, Asterotheca cyathea, A. arborescens, A. miltoni, Sphenopteris neuropteroides, S. macilenta, Diplotmema geniculatum, Sphenophyllum emarginatum, Annularia stellata. Flora G: Zone of Neuropteris rarinervis, Neuropteris linguaefolia, Linopteris munsteri, Mariopteris sauveurii, M. latifolia,

THE LIFE AND WORK OF EMILY DIX

Flora F: Flora E:

Flora D: Flora C: Flora B: Flora A:

Sphenopteris striata, Renaultia chaerophylloides, Asolanus camptotaenia. Zone of Neuropteris tenuifolia, Neuropteris callosa, Asolanus camptotaenia, Lepidodendron simile. Zone of Lonchopteris rugosa, Neuropteris gigantea, Sphenophyllum myriophyllum, S. majus, Annularia microphylla, Sphenopteris spp. Zone of Alethopteris lonchitica, Neuropteris heterophylla. Zone of Neuropteris schlehanii, Lyginopteris Sphenogteris? hoeninghausii. Zone of Pecopteris aspera. Zone of Lyginopteris Sphenogteris? stangeri, Alethopteris cf. parva.

Dix then applied her biozonation to the rest of the South Wales Coalfield. Her observations on the condensed east crop of the coalfield were based mainly on a preliminary study of the David Davies collection. She found no evidence here for her Zones A or B, and only equivocal evidence for Zone C. Above Zone C, however, she found that there was essentially the same pattern of vegetation change as in the western part of the coalfield. The boundaries between some of the zones were not as clearly demarcated, but this was largely due to the condensed nature of the sequence in this part of the coalfield. Using a combination of her own material and that of other palaeobotanists (principally Goode 1913) Dix was also able to recognize some of her zones in Pembrokeshire, at the far western end of the South Wales Coalfield. She was thus able to demonstrate the essential robustness of her scheme throughout the coalfield. Dix then turned to the other coalfields in Britain and the rest of Europe. With some exceptions, such as the middle Westphalian macrofloras of the Pennines Basin, palaeobotanical data from the other coalfields were far less complete. Although she undertook some original collecting in these other areas, her information was derived mainly from the collections and publications of others. Nevertheless, she was able to demonstrate essentially the same pattern of biozones that she had identified in South Wales, especially in the better-documented middle Westphalian. Based mainly on the records of her foreign colleagues Renier, Gothan, Jongmans and Bertrand, she was also able to show that her scheme could be applied over much of continental Europe. One of the most marked changes in the macrofloras was between her Zones F and G, which she was able to identify across Europe. She argued that it was a more profound change than even that between the Westphalian and Stephanian macrofloras. Whilst this is an exaggeration, probably due to the general

187

lack of knowledge in those days of early Stephanian macrofloras, the Zone F-Zone G change is undoubtedly significant. Trueman (1928) had shown that there was also a major change in the non-marine bivalve faunas at this level, and it also represents the level of the stratigraphically highest marine transgression across the Variscan Foreland (represented by the Upper Cwm Gorse Marine Band). Later, Dix & Trueman (1937) proposed that this faunal and floral change should be used to divide the Westphalian 'Stage' into Ammanian and Morganian substages. Even later, Trueman (1954) argued that they should be regarded as full stages, to replace the 'poorly defined' Westphalian. This classification was adopted for a time in Britain, especially among those who had worked under Trueman, but it never caught on outside of this country and is nowadays rejected in favour of the four plant-based subdivisions of the Westphalian developed during the Heerlen International Carboniferous congresses. The study revealed that South Wales had, indeed, the most complete succession of macrofloras in the Upper Carboniferous of Britain, especially compared to the Pennines Basin and Scotland, which had previously been regarded as the British 'type' successions of this age. Dix had no illusions that her macrofloral zones gave a better resolution than Trueman's non-marine bivalve zones, or the marine bands, at least in Namurian and lower-middle Westphalian strata (the Millstone Grit, Lanarkian and Yorkian Series in Kidston's old classification). In strata of this age, the macrofloras complemented these other guides to correlation rather than supplanting them. However, Dix (1934, p. 790) found that the macrofloras come into their own in the stratigraphically higher parts of the coalfield, where the marine bands are absent and the non-marine bivalves are more long ranging. Importantly, she showed that her Zone I in South Wales had some comparisons with the type Stephanian macrofloral successions in the Loire region of France. It was this latter point that she took up in her later research.

Awards and recognition The importance of her work resulted in her studies being supported by several grants from the Government Grants Committee of the Royal Society (1931-1932). In 1933, Miss Emily Dix became Dr Dix upon submission of her PhD thesis on the correlation of coal seams in South Wales to the University of Wales. The unusual occurrence of a woman student being awarded this degree is commented on in an article entitled 'Gower lady's research work' in the South Wales Evening Post (Anon. 1933), where her nine principle areas of work are quoted.

188

C.V.BUREK&CJ.CLEAL

1.

The sequence of floras in the upper carboniferous with special reference to South Wales 2. The succession of fossil plants in the millstone grit and the lower portion of the coal measures of the South Wales coalfield, near Swansea, and a comparison with that of other areas 3. the flora of the upper portion of the coal measures of North Staffordshire 4. Boreholes in Cwmgorse Valley, (part II) 5. The coal measures of the Gwendreath Valley and adjoining area 6. On the fossil xiphosura from the South Wales coalfield, with a note on the Myriapod Euphoberia 7. Some non-marine lamellibranchs from the upper part of the coal measures 8. Some coal measure anthropods from the South Wales coalfield 9. The millstone grit of Gower (Quoted as written in the newspaper.)

Despite referring to her as 'Mrs Dix' (she was not married), and the numerous spelling mistakes, it is an indication of the esteem in which she was held that they published so much detail at all. In 1936, Dix was invited to become the only female on an 11-man discussion group of the British Association for the Advancement of Science on Coal Measures correlation. In her presentational acceptance speech (1936), she reiterated the conclusions of her 1934 paper, and argued that there was an essential agreement between the stratigraphical patterns of the faunas and floras in these strata. She again compared her results with the data from Continental Europe and North America, and suggested that floral changes took place simultaneously over the whole area. In particular, she noted that the marked change at the base of her Zone G (equivalent to the base of the Staffordian Series of Kidston) could be identified across Europe and North America, and should be used as the basis for subdividing the Westphalian into Lower and Upper divisions (this had already been suggested by Trueman 1928, based on the faunas). Dix was elected a Fellow of the Geological Society of London in 1929 (and remained so until 1950). In recognition of her work, she was given an award from the Society's Murchison Fund in 1936. The President, John Frederick Norman Green, stated that: During the last 12 years you have published a number of papers dealing with the palaeontology and stratigraphy of the Coal Measures in which you have combined the evidence that can be drawn from both plants and animals, that have thus increased our knowledge of the Upper Carboniferous succession with results not only of scientific but of high industrial value. I may especially mention your work in conjunction with Professor Trueman in correlating the marine bands of Wales and the North of Britain and the extent to which in a more recent paper you have showed

that the flora can be used in zoning the Coal Measures. We look to further contributions in this important part of the science of Geology. (Green 1936)

She was 32 years old. Emily Dix believed strongly in fieldwork and always accompanied her own Bedford College students out into the field (Fig. 2). This is further supported by her involvement with the Geologists' Association. From 1930 until her retirement in 1946, she was an active member and served on their council from 1932. From 1933 to 1937 she acted as their Secretary for field meetings and was Vice President between 1942 and 1946. She continued as an active member up until 1945. For example, on 27 May 1944, during World War II and food rationing, she and her students provided tea for field members (Green 1989). In 1942 she was recognized as a continental expert on the correlation and classification of Coal Measures by Professor Hubert Cox and 'the really wonderful zonal and palaeobotanical work she has done starting her work in South Wales and extending it to some of the English coalfields and to continental coalfields' (Dix 19420).

Stephanian macrofloras in Britain One of the critical discoveries in Dix's (1934) paper was that the macrofloras of the upper part of the South Wales Coalfield bore some resemblance to those of the Stephanian sequences in France. It had been previously assumed that all of the coalfields of what we now call the Variscan Foreland (including Britain, Nord-Pas-de-Calais, Belgium, the Netherlands and the Ruhr) were Westphalian in age. The known Stephanian sequences in Europe were, in contrast, mainly restricted to the French intramontane basins. Only one coalfield was known to have both Westphalian and Stephanian aged strata, the Saar-Lorraine Basin, then part of France. However, we now know that the contact between the Westphalian and Stephanian strata there, represents a considerable non-sequence (Germer et al. 1968) and that in Dix's time the true nature of the transition between Westphalian and Stephanian macrofloras was unknown. We also now know that certain socalled 'characteristically Stephanian' taxa such as Dicksonites pluckenetii (Sternberg) Sterzel, Acitheca polymorpha (Brongniart) Schimper and Cyathocarpus arborescens (Brongniart) in fact first appear in the upper Westphalian D Lobatopteris vestita Zone (sensu Wagner 1984). It is not surprising, therefore, that Dix struggled to make sense of what she found in the British sequences. Dix summarized the then available data on possible Stephanian floras in South Wales in a paper presented at the second International Carboniferous Congress at

THE LIFE AND WORK OF EMILY DIX

189

Fig. 2. Emily Dix in the Auvergne 1936 (seated fourth from right, see white arrow).

Heerlen in 1935 (Dix 1937). This, the last major international meeting that she attended, gave her the opportunity to renew her old friendship with Jongmans, Gothan, Bertrand and Renier. She also established new friendships, including the American palaeobotanist William Darrah (Morey 1995). One of the main topics of this second Congress was the Stephanian 'Stage' and its definition, and Dix played a significant role in the discussions. Dix also noted that there were possible Stephanian macrofloras in what were then known as the Keele and Enville Beds in the English Midlands. These are red clastic sequences that yield only poor, mainly impression, floras. However, at one locality the Foleshill Brickworks near Coventry, a potentially significant macroflora had been unearthed by J.F. Cooper and F.W. Shotton (the latter went on to become an eminent geologist working for the government during World War II and then to have a distinguished career in Quaternary research, becoming Professor of Geology at Birmingham University). The flora consisted mainly of marattialean ferns that could range from the upper Westphalian to the Lower Permian. However, Dix (1935, 1937) also reported the presence of pteridosperms, including one that she identified as Odontopteris cf. schlotheimii Weiss. If

this identification was correct it would be of great significance, as it is a species that is only known from the uppermost Stephanian and Lower Permian, and would have considerable impact on our understanding of the Late Palaeozoic evolution of the English Midlands. The record is still being quoted in the literature (e.g. Wagner 1983; Waters et al 1995), but unfortunately Dix neither described nor figured the specimens to allow their identification to be corroborated. After her retirement the specimens were lost, but a recent search eventually uncovered them in unopened packing cases in the Hunterian Museum (Cleal 1996; Faithfull 1996). This has allowed the specimens to be re-examined, and have proved not to be of O. schlothiemii but rather of Odontopteris cantabrica Wagner, an index species for the lowest stage of the Stephanian (Wagner 1984). Dix's error is perfectly understandable, though, as this species is very similar to O. schlotheimii and had not been described in her time. The issue of the Westphalian-Stephanian boundary was not properly resolved until after World War II, largely through the work of R.H. Wagner in the Cantabrian Mountains of Spain (see Wagner & Winkler Prins 1979 for a summary). Wagner was a student of Dix's old friend and colleague, W.J.

190

C.V.BUREK&CJ.CLEAL

Jongmans. In view of Dix's interest in the Westphalian-Stephanian boundary, one wonders if Jongmans might not have invited her to collaborate on these Spanish sequences, if illness had not terminated her career.

War years Dix remained actively involved in palaeobotanical and stratigraphical work right up to World War II. Only a few months before the outbreak of hostilities in Europe, she was invited to partake in a meeting in India (probably the furthest afield that she ever travelled) to make a presentation on the importance of combining macrofloral and faunal evidence in stratigraphy (Dix 1939). However, at the start of the war in 1939 she was evacuated to Cambridge, along with Dr Leonard Hawkes (Head of Geology) and the rest of Bedford College Geology Department. Here, they kept the department going through the war years. As Mr Ware states, The author is to be congratulated as much for keeping alive the spirit of research in these difficult times as for a valuable contribution to Coal Measure geology' (Dix 19420, b). For Dix, this involved more than just academic responsibilities. In a letter to her American friend W.C. Darrah (quoted by Morey 1995) she described how she had the care of 11 students who were placed with her in a house, and how she was responsible for the housework and cooking for guests. She wrote that she had '. . . finished off the supper. You can believe it or not, the result was quite good. Gothan, Jongmans, Renier and Bertrand would be much surprised. Even my friends in the Geological Survey here couldn't believe that Dixie could be interested in housekeeping'. Emily found it hard to continue with her work in Cambridge, especially after she lost a lot of valuable literature and other records in a London Blitz in May 1941. Fortunately, much of her collection of fossils survived 'although the fireman's hose and the heat promoted the growth of much fungus in some of them . . .' (letter to W.C. Darrah: Morey & Lyons 1995). However, as these were still in London and she was in Cambridge, the war effectively prevented any further palaeobotanical work. Instead, she turned her attention to the economically important issue of boulders or erratics found in coal seams (Dix I942a, b, 1944). In 1941, she presented a paper at the Geological Society of London, reviewing the stratigraphy of the Warwickshire Coalfield (only the abstract and discussion were ever published: Dix 1941). She also published a short paper on German lignites (Dix 1942c), curious in view of the fact that Britain was still at war with Germany at the time. It must be emphasized, however, that Dix never seems to have shown hostility towards her German colleagues during the war, whose nationality seems to

have been of little importance to her; she was as concerned in 1944 about the fate of her German colleague Gothan, as she was about Bertrand, Jongmans and Renier (Morey & Lyons 1995). It is also interesting to note that in 1944 she was well aware of the research that the German palaeobotanist Paul Guthorl was doing at the time. The department returned to London in 1944, but her mental state soon started to decline. According to Morey (1995), the Indian palaeobotanist Birbal Sahni wrote to Darrah in late 1944 to say that Dix was suffering from a mental illness. Her last recorded activity was to lead a field trip for the Geologists' Association to Guildford and the Guildford bypass on 21 June 1945 to look at the Chalk, Reading Beds and the London Clay. Later in the summer of 1945 she became seriously ill.

Post-academia Initially, from 2 August until 13 September 1945, Dix was treated in Camberwell House Hospital in Camberwell, London by Dr Norman but then went back to Gwern Heulog, Llanrhidian, Swansea for 2 months. She planned to return to Bedford in January 1946, but her doctor forbade it. By Christmas she was reported as being in a home, but by Easter was back home in Swansea. By July 1946 it was becoming clear that her sister Margaret had taken over her affairs, and by October she was in a hospital in York known as The Retreat'. The Retreat Hospital had been established in 1796 by William Tuke, a retired Quaker tea merchant, adopting the Quaker philanthropic philosophy to mental health not the torturous conditions of chaining and abuse that many at that time had to endure. The hospital helped reshape attitudes towards mentally disordered people. It is still operating today at the forefront of medicine in the City of York. Her contract was terminated on 31 December 1947 after 1 year's notice on full pay. She was 43 years old and never worked again, although she did not die until 1972, at the age of 69 in St David's Hospital, Carmarthen. The Council of Bedford College recorded their desire to place on record 'My Council take this action with great regret' and 'their appreciation of your sister's long and valuable service to the College', (letter to Margaret Dix dated 4 December 1946 and signed by the Secretary of Council). Perhaps it was after this that she or her sister on her behalf sold her collection to the Hunterian Museum in Glasgow (Fig. 3), who acquired it in 1947-1948, deciding that she would never work on it again. In fact, in her will dated 1 January 1943, Dix had bequeathed her collection to the National Museum of Wales, except for the specimens from the Ruhr and Holland, which she left to the Sedgwick

THE LIFE AND WORK OF EMILY DIX

191

Fig. 3. Emily Dix collection of Carboniferous plant remains (Neuropteris) from Penwyllt, South Wales. Courtesy of the Hunterian Museum, Glasgow.

Table 1. A comparison ofDix's classification within Upper Carboniferous biostratigraphical schemes through time. Dix (1934) Cantabrian

Kidston (1905)

Zone I Radstockian

Westphalian D

Zone H Staffordian

Pecopteris and Neuropteris flexuosa Zone

Wagner (1984)

ZoneF

Neuropteris tenuifolia Zone

Yorkiana ZoneE

Megalopteris Zone

deal (1991)

Odontopteris cantabrica Zone

Odontopteris cantabrica Zone

Lobatopteris vestita Zone

Lobatopteris vestita Zone

Linopteris obliqua Zone

Linopteris obliqua Zone

Paripteris linquaefolia Zone

Paripteris linquaefolia Zone

Neuropteris rarinervis Zone

ZoneG Bolsovian

Duckmantian

Read & Mamay (1964)

Lonchopteris rugosa-Alethopteris urophylla Zone

Lonchopteris rugosa Zone

Dicksonites plueckenetii Subzone Lobatopteris micromiltoni Subzone

Laveineopteris rarinervis Subzone Neuropteris semireticulata Subzone Sphenophyllum majus Subzone Neuropteris hollandica Subzone

Langsettian

Zone D

7_7_7_7

Lanarkian Zone B

Zone A Arnsbergian

Mariopteris pygmaea Zone Mariopteris pottsvillea Zone

ZoneC

Yeadonian Chokierian

?

Neuropteris pocahontas and Mariopteris eremopteroides Zone

Laveineopteris loshii Subzone Lyginopteris hoeningahusii—Neuralethopteris schlehanii Zone

Lyginopteris hoeningahusii Zone

Neuralethopteris larischii— Senftenbergia aspera Zone

Pecopteris aspera Zone

Lyginopteris larischii Zone

Lyginopteris larischii Zone

Neuralethopteris jongmansii Subzone Neuralethopteris larischii Subzone Sigillaria elegans Subzone

THE LIFE AND WORK OF EMILY DIX

193

Fig. 4. Emily Dix's publication record.

Museum. The National Museum of Wales and Sedgwick Museum acquired that part of her collection that had not been taken to Glasgow in July 1976.

Contribution Emily Dix revolutionized the way that macrofloras were seen in Britain as a tool for understanding the geology of coalfields. Together with her early mentor Arthur Trueman, she introduced a modern approach to the biostratigraphy of these strata, using for the first time biozones in the modern sense. Her biostratigraphical scheme was still being referred to in the late 1970s, in the Geological Society of London's guide to Upper Carboniferous stratigraphy (Ramsbottom et al 1978). Although Wagner (1984) modified the macrofloral biostratigraphical classification of these strata, a subsequent revision by Cleal (1991) has brought the scheme back to one that mirrors closely Dix's original scheme (Table 1). The outstanding value of her contribution to Carboniferous stratigraphy lives on in her extensive publications and reports: Dix 1927, 1928a, 1930, 193Ifc, c, 1932, 1940, 1942; Dix & Jones 1942; Dix &Pringle 1929, 1930; Dix &Ware 1940; Dix & Wright 1946 (see Fig. 4). Her milestone works in 1931a, 1933, 1934, 1935 and 1937 were recognized during her lifetime, and are testimony to her determination to show how the total fossil assemblage of a Carboniferous ecosystem could be used to determine stratigraphy rather than the former narrow view of inferring correlations from a single group of organisms, or even species. She was the first to adopt this holistic view and was a forerunner in some ways of the approach adopted today towards biostratigraphy and palaeoecology. She also anticipated a number of the major issues that affected Upper Carboniferous

geological studies later in the 20 century and into the 21 century. Her palaeontological correlations across continents would later support continental drift. She anticipated the recognition of the Mid-Carboniferous environmental change near the ArnsbergianChokierian Stage boundary, which is now seen as part of a global environmental change as the Late Carboniferous 'Ice Age' started in earnest, and is the basis behind dividing the Carboniferous into two subsystems (Mississippian and Pennsylvanian). Her interpretation of Late Carboniferous biostratigraphy in terms of vegetation change was a forerunner of work now being carried out on environmental and climatic change during the Late Carboniferous 'IceHouse' world. Dix herself might have been somewhat surprised at some of the ways that her results have been interpreted. Her motivation was always primarily economic - to improve the mining industry's exploitation of coal resources. Nevertheless, given the way that she would readily take on new ideas, it seems unlikely that she would not have been excited by these developments. Emily Dix was an outstanding palaeontologist and stratigrapher, whose career was tragically cut short by illness. She worked in a male-dominated field at a time when only the determined and hardworking survived. We can only imagine what further contributions she could have made if circumstances were different. We thank AJ. Bowden for inviting us to contribute this paper to the volume. We acknowledge help given during its preparation from the archivists at Royal Holloway College (University of London), W. Cawthorne (Geological Society of London librarian), the Hunterian Museum (Glasgow), the Retreat Hospital (York), the Probate Office, London and Professor D. Bassett. We also are extremely grateful to G. Leaver nee Evans for memories of Emily Dix as a student in Swansea.

194

References

C.V. BUREK & C.J. CLEAL

DIX, E. 1931/7. The Millstone Grit of Gower. Geological

Magazine, 68,529-543. ANON. 1933. Gower Lady's research work - Mrs Emily DIX, E. 1931c. Discussion on the Value of Carboniferous and Permian Plants as Stratigraphical Indices. Dix's labours for coalfield. South Wales Evening Post, Report of Proceedings Fifth International Botanical 30 May. [Royal Holloway University of London Congress (Cambridge, 1930), 490. Archives 69.10.] ARBER, M.M. 1974. Emily Dix, Obituary. Annual report of DIX, E. 1932. On a sporocarp probably attached to a frond of Neuropteris schehani Stur. Annals of Botany, 46, the Council. Proceedings of the Geologists' 1065-1068. Association, 85,144-145. BASSETT D.A. 1961. Bibliography and Index of Geology Dix, E. 1933. The succession of fossil plants in the Millstone Grit and the Lower portion of the Coal and Allied Sciences for Wales and the Welsh Borders Measures of the South Wales coalfield (near Swansea) 1897-1958. National Museum of Wales, Cardiff. and a comparison with that of other areas. BERTRAND, P. 1914. Les zones vegetales du terrain houiller Palaeontographica, Abteilung B, 78,158-202. du Nord de la France. Leur extension verticale par rapport aux horizons marins. Annales de la Societe Dix, E. 1934. The sequence of floras in the Upper Carboniferous with special reference to South Wales. Geologique du Nord, 43, 208-254. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 57, BOUREAU, E. & DOUBINGER, J. 1975. Traite de paleobotanique. 4 (2) Pteridophylla. Masson et Cie, Paris. 789-838. BUREK, C. 2005, Emily Dix (1904-1973) - A promising Dix, E. 1935. Note on the flora of the highest Coal Measures of Warwickshire. Geological Magazine, 72,555-557. career cut short. Geology Today, 21, in press. CHALONER, W.G. 2005. The palaeobotanical work of Marie Dix, E. 1937. The succession of fossil plants in the South Wales coalfield with special reference to the existence slopes. In: BOWDEN, A., BUREK, C. & WILDING, R. of the Stephanian. Compte Rendu Congres (eds) The History of Palaeobotany. Geological International de Stratigraphie et de Geologie du Society, London, Special Publications, 241, Carbonifere, 1,159-184. 000-0000. CLEAL, C.J. (ed.) 1991. Plant Fossils in Geological Investi- Dix, E. 1939. Discrepancies between the chronological tesgation: the Palaeozoic. Ellis Horwood, Chichester. timony of fossil plants and animals. Proceedings of the Indian Science Congress, 25, 188-194. CLEAL, C.J. 1996. Plant fossils from the Keele formation Central England described by Emily Dix (1935). The Dix, E. 1940. Boulders (including some of Carboniferous sandstone) found in and associated with coal seams in Geological Curator, 6, 207-208. COOK, J.M. 2001. Bedford College: Memories of 150years. South Wales. Abstract of Proceedings of the Geological Society, London, 1368,52. Royal Holloway, University of London. CROOKALL, R. 1931. A critical revision of Kidston's Coal Dix, E. 1941. The general sequence of strata in the Measure floras. Proceedings of the Royal Physical Warwickshire coalfield (with detailed descriptions of Society, 22,1-34. some of the more important sections). Abstract of Proceedings of the Geological Society, London, 1382, CROOKALL, R. 19320. The relative value of fossil plants in 8-14. the stratigraphy of the Coal Measures. Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and Dix, E. 1942#. Some minor structures in the anthracite coal Philosophical Society, 1931, 91-122. seams of South Wales. Proceedings of the Geologists' CROOKALL, R. 1932&. Coal Measures terminology. The Association, 52, 227-244 (reprinted in Fuel in Naturalist, 1932,111-114. Science and Practice, 21, 25-32). DAVIES, D. 1929. Correlation and palaeontology of the Coal Dix, E. 1942/7. Interesting boulders found in and associated Measures in east Glamorganshire. Philosophical with coal seams in the South Wales coalfield. Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, Proceedings of the South Wales Institute of Engineers, 217,91-153. 58, (2), 21-46. DAVIES, D.F., Dix, E. & TRUEMAN, A.E. 1928. Boreholes in Dix, E. 1942c. Lignite ('oolitic wood') from the Oligocene Cwmgorse Valley. Proceedings of the South Wales brown coal near Cologne, Proceedings of the Institute OfEingineers, 64, 37-136. Geologists'Association, 53,104. Dix, E. 1927. A peatbed near Llanmorlais. Proceedings of Dix, E. 1944. On two rounded boulders from an anthracite the Swansea Scientific and Field Naturalists Society, seam, South Wales. Geological Magazine, 81, 1,(1),15. 127-128. Dix, E. 19280. The Coal Measures of the Gwendraeth Dix, E. & JONES, S.H. 1942. A note on an arthropod from Valley and adjoining areas. Proceedings of the South the South Wales coalfield. Geological Magazine, 69, Wales Institute of Engineers, 44, 423-510, 525-536, 275-277. 606-610. Dix, E. & PRINGLE, J. 1929. On the fossil xiphosura from Dix, E. 1928/?. Seeds associated with Linopteris munsteri the South Wales coalfield with a note on the myriapod Eichwald. Annals of Botany, 42,1019-1023. Euphoberia. Summary of Progress of the Geological Dix, E. 1930. A rare plant from the Coal Measures of South Swrvey,1928(2),90-114. Wales. Proceedings of the Swansea Scientific and Dix, E. & PRINGLE, J. 1930. Some coal measure arthropods Field Naturalists Society, 1, (4), 98. from the South Wales Coalfield. Annals and Magazine Dix, E. 193 la. The flora of the upper part of the of Natural History, Series 10,6,136-144. Coal Measures of North Staffordshire. Quarterly Dix, E., PRINGLE, J. & TRUEMAN, A.E. 1930. The signifiJournal of the Geological Society, London, 87, cance of the 'Lanarkian Series'. The Naturalist, 1930, 160-179. 321-326.

THE LIFE AND WORK OF EMILY DIX DIX, E. & TRUEMAN, A.E. 1924a. The correlation of the Coal Measures in the western portion of the South Wales Coalfield Part II, The Coal Measures of North Gower. Proceedings of the South Wales Institute of Engineers, 40, 353-383,390-395. DIX, E. & TRUEMAN, A.E. I924b. The correlation of the Coal Measures in the western portion of the South Wales Coalfield Part II, The Coal Measures of North Gower. (Abstract.) Colliery Guardian, 128, 1372-1374. DIX, E. & TRUEMAN, A.E. 1928a. Marine horizons in the coal measures of South Wales. Geological Magazine, 65,356-363. DIX, E. & TRUEMAN, A.E. 1928b. Marine Horizons in the Coal Measures of South Wales and the North of England. Report of the British Association for the Advancement of Science for 1927, 319. DIX, E. & TRUEMAN, A.E. 1929. The zone of Anthraacomya tennis in the Somerset coalfield. Geological Magazine, 66,499-501. DIX, E. & TRUEMAN, A.E. 1931. Some non-marine lamellibranchs from the upper part of the Coal Measures. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 87,180-211. DIX, E. & TRUEMAN, A.E. 1932. Observations on the genus Naiadites. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 10, 9, 1-20. DIX, E. & TRUEMAN, A.E. 1935. Non-marine lamellibranchs for the upper Palaeozoic rocks of Semsvik in Asker. Norsk Geologisk Tidsskrift 15, 25-32. DIX, E. & TRUEMAN, A.E. 1937. The value of non-marine lamellibranchs for the correlation of the Upper Carboniferous. Compte Rendu Congres International de Stratigraphie et de Geologie du Carbonifere, 1, 185-201. DIX, E., TRUEMAN, A.E. et al. 1936. Discussion on Coal Measure Correlation. Report of the British Association for the Advancement of Science for 1936, 352-356. DIX, E. & WARE, W.D. 1940. The occurrence of the SimilisPulchra Zone in the Pembrokeshire Coalfield. (Abstract.) Advancement of Science, 1, 252-253. DIX, E. & WRIGHT, C.W. 1946. Field meeting at Guildford and the Guildford bypass. Proceedings of the Geologists'Association, 56, 22-223. FAITHFULL, J. 1996. Plant fossils from the Keele formation Central England described by Emily Dix (1935). The Geological Curator, 6, 237. GEOLOGISTS' ASSOCIATION. 2003. List of Members. Geologists'Association, London. GEORGE, T.N. 1974. Fossil molluscs and molluscs in stratigraphy: the geological work of A.E. Trueman. In: OWEN, T.R. (ed.) The Upper Palaeozoic and PostPalaeozoic Rocks of Wales. University of Wales Press, Cardiff, 1-30. GERMER, R., KNEUPER, G. & WAGNER, R.H. 1968. Zur Westfal/Stefan-Grenze und zur Frage der asturischen Faltungsphase im Saarbriicker Hauptsattel. Geologica et Palceontologica, 2, 59-71. GOODE, R.H. 1913. On the fossil flora of the Pembrokeshire portion of the South Wales Coalfield. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 69,252-279. GREEN, C.P. 1989. Excursions in the past: a review of the

195

field meeting reports. Proceedings of the Geologists' Association, 100,17-29. GREEN, J.F.N. 1936. Presentation of awards. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 92, Ivii. JONES, S.H. 1934. The correlation of the coal seams around Ammanford. Proceedings of the South Wales Institute of Engineers, 23,131-156. JONES, S.H. 1935. The Lower Coal Series of north-western Gower. Proceedings of the South Wales Institute of Engineers, 26,172-254. JONGMANS, W.J. 1940. Die Kohlenfelder von Gross Britannien. Mededelingen Geologisch Bureauvoor hetMijngebiedteHeerlen, 1938/9, 15-222. KIDSTON, R. 1888. On Neuropteris plicata, Sternberg, and Neuropteris rectinervis, Kidston, n. sp. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 35, 313-315. KIDSTON, R. 1894. On the various divisions of the British Carboniferous rocks as determined by their fossil flora. Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society of Edinburgh, 12, 183-257. KIDSTON, R. 1905. Divisions and correlation of the upper portion of the Coal-Measures. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 61, 308-321. LAVEINE, J.-P. 1967. Contribution a I'etude de la flore du terrain houiller. Les Neuropteridees du Nord de la France. Etudes Geologiques pour 1'Atlas Topographie Souterraine, 1 (5). MOREY, E.D. 1995. William C. Darrah's European experience in 1935: palaeobotanical connections and stratigraphic controversies. In: LYONS, PC., MOREY, E.D. & WAGNER, R.H. (eds) Historical Perspectives of Early Twentieth Century Carboniferous Paleobotany in North America. Geological Society of America Memoir, 185,23-34. MOREY, E.D. & LYONS, PC. 1995. William Gulp Darrah (1909-1989): a portrait. In: LYONS, PC., MOREY, E.D. & WAGNER, R.H. (eds) Historical Perspectives of Early Twentieth Century Carboniferous Paleobotany in North America. Geological Society of America Memoir, 185,1-22. PUGH, W.J. 1958. Arthur Elijah Trueman. Biographical memoir of Fellows of the Royal Society, 4, 291-305. RAMSBOTTOM, W.H.C., CALVER, M.A., EAGAR, R.M.C., HODSON, F, HOLLIDAY, D.W.,

STUBBLEFIELD, C.J. &

WILSON, R.B. 1978. A Correlation of the Silesian Rocks in the British Isles. Geological Society, London, Special Report, 10. SWEETING, G.S. 1958. The Geologists' Association 1858-1958. Benham & Co., London. THOMAS, B. 1986. In Search of Fossil Plants, the Life and Works of David Davies (Gilfach Goch). National Museum of Wales, Cardiff, Geological Series No. 8. TRUEMAN, A.E. 1928. Some problems in the classification of the Upper Carboniferous rocks of Great Britain. Compte rendu Congres pour VAvancementdes Etudes de Stratigraphie Carbonfiere, 733-742. TRUEMAN, A.E. 1954. The Coalfields of Great Britain. Arnold, London. WAGNER, R.H. 1983. A lower Rotliegend flora from Ayrshire. Scottish Journal of Geology, 19, 135-155. WAGNER, R.H. 1984. Megafloral zones of the Carboniferous. Compte rendu 9e Congres International de Stratigraphie et de Geologie du Carbonifere (Washington, 1979), 2, 109-134.

196

C.V. BUREK & C.J. CLEAL

WAGNER, R.H. & WINKLER PRINS, C.F. 1979. The lower Stephanian of western Europe. Compte rendu 8e Congres International de Stratigraphie et de Geologie du Carbonifere, 3, 111-140.

WATERS, C.N., GLOVER, B.W. & POWELL, J.H. 1995. Discussion on structural synthesis of south Staffordshire, UK: implications for the Variscan evolution of the Pennine Basin. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 152,197-200.

The 'other' Glasgow Boys: the rise and fall of a school of palaeobotany J. J. LISTON1 & H.L. SANDERS2 3 l

Hunterian Museum, University Avenue, University of Glasgow, Glasgow Gl2 8QQ, UK, (e-mail: j. liston @ museum, gla. ac. uk) Institute of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Davidson Building, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK 3 Current address: Department of Environmental & Plant Biology, Porter Hall, Ohio University, Athens, OH 45701, USA Abstract: With its long-standing coal industry working the measures of the Scottish central belt, fossil plants have long been known in Scotland. The earliest significant work dealing with Scottish palaeontology, David Ure's The History ofRutherglen and East-Kilbride (David Niven, Glasgow) had been published in 1793, with its plates of Equisetum, ferns and bark impressions. But, as in Yorkshire and Lancashire, it was not until the industrial revolution's increased exposure of fossils was matched by the advent of the 'new European botany' (which, in part, grew from substantial improvements in the optics for microscopy) that fossil plant study began in earnest in Scotland. In 1959 John Walton reflected on palaeobotany in Britain at the end of the 19th century, as 'awakening from a long sleep'. In Glasgow, this awakening centred on the university's Botany Department, and the development of the study of fossil plants closely parallels the growth of this department as a whole for much of its time. In the same city during this period a collective of artists called the 'Glasgow Boys' were pushing the boundaries of representational painting. With Frederick Bower's own cohort of palaeobotanical 'Glasgow Boys' (David Gwynne-Vaughan and William Lang) facilitating the work of Robert Kidston, a veritable 'School of Palaeobotany' existed in the university at this time. John Walton himself was also destined to serve an unusual, but critical, later role in the preservation of Kidston's work.

In 1879 Isaac Bayley Balfour (Fig. 1), son of Sir John Hutton Balfour ('young woody fibre' and 'old woody fibre', as they were respectively known by their students), arrived at Glasgow to take up the Regius Chair in Botany, succeeding Alexander Dickson's (Fig. 2) 11 years in office (Walton 1952). Born in Edinburgh, he had graduated in science before medicine there in 1877. Balfour Junior was one of a new breed of botanists that had been inspired by new styles of botanical teaching from the European mainland. The study of fossil plants had just undergone a major revolution, as a result of work carried out earlier that decade by Joseph Jackson Lister (1786-1869) and William Nicol (1768-1851). Around 1830 Lister published the first results from his development of the achromatic compound lens for use in the analysis of biological tissues at cellular level. Nicol is regarded as having developed a technique for producing palaeontological thin sections, and viewing them, based on the work of the Edinburgh lapidary George Sanderson although Nicol claimed that Sanderson's methodology was derived from a process Nicol himself had developed for preparing mineral thin sections by grinding and polishing them while mounted directly on to plate glass, which he had personally demonstrated to Sanderson (Morrison-Low & Nuttall

1984). Regardless of the identity of the originator of this procedure, the results of Nicol's work were published in 1831 in Henry T.M. Witham's 'Observations of Fossil Vegetables, Accompanied by Representations of Their Internal Structure as Seen Through the Microscope' (Walton 1959), notably featuring an understanding of plant cellular structure. This led to the first use of the words 'protoplasm' and 'nucleus' by Von Mohl (Bower 1938) and Brown, respectively. These improvements in microscopy enabled the seminal treatise of Wilhelm Friedrich Benedict Hofmeister (1824-1877), in his 1851 On the Germination, Development and Fructification of the Higher Cryptogamia. In this work, Hofmeister (1851) resolved the relationships of the gymnosperms to the mosses and ferns (albeit without recourse to fossil evidence), showing clearly the common nature of reproduction in these groups. The term 'higher cryptogamia' refers to the more derived members of the group of plants that reproduce via spores, so called because their reproductive parts were 'hidden' to earlier botanists, whose work predated the invention of the microscope. There were some delays in English translations of Hofmeister's book (and other works) becoming available (1862 for Hofmeister). Not surprisingly, this meant that the new cellular

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,197-227.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

198

J.J. LISTON & H.L. SANDERS

ing of botany at Glasgow, due in large part to the acquisition of a teaching laboratory and preparation room (largely equipped out of his own pocket), but he had failed to form the institute that he desired. In his short time at Glasgow, Balfour had initiated the process of establishing laboratory teaching, but any hope of further progress in this regard would depend on his immediate successor, Frederick Orpen Bower (Fig. 3).

The chief

Fig. 1. Isaac Bayley Balfour, Bower's predecessor as Regius Professor of Botany at Glasgow 1879-1885. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/15/013.

approaches to botanical studies were more quickly embraced on the continent than in Britain. Consequently, any botanist in Britain that wanted to learn the new approaches had to travel to the continent to experience this European Enlightenment of a 'new botany'. Isaac Bayley Balfour had been in the vanguard of this scientific migration, and was committed to taking teaching at Glasgow from purely superficial systematics into dedicated laboratory and anatomical work. The study of plants has a long tradition at Glasgow, dating back to the teaching of the materia medica around St Nicholas' Hospital (established around the middle of the 15th century - Charitable Institutions 1793) and its small attendant 'physic garden'. As elsewhere in Britain at the end of the 19th century, botany was taught through an exploration of 'floristics and systematic aspects' (Boney 1993), but Balfour wanted significantly more. As Regius Professor he was also a director of the nearby Botanic Gardens, and he envisaged an Institute of Botany built within those grounds. However, by 1885, when he left to take up the Sherardian Chair of Botany at Oxford, Balfour had made little progress towards this goal. He had certainly revived the teach-

Born 4 November 1855, Bower was a Yorkshireman, and like Balfour was heavily influenced by the new styles of botanical teaching that were in vogue 'on the continent'. His first experience of being taught botany was under the instruction of Sir Charles Cardale Babington at Cambridge (Boney 1993) in 1875, and Bower recalled it as altogether uninspiring, 'wanting both in spirit and in substance' (Bower 1938). After being inspired by the production of the English version of Julius von Sachs' (Fig. 4) textbook Lehrbuch der Botanik (which Bower (1938) later described as 'a philosophical digest of the whole science') that same year, Bower met Sydney Howard Vines (Fig. 5) in the following year. Also at Trinity College, and another acolyte of the 'New Botany', Vines advised him that in order to further develop he should seek tuition in a university abroad. So, before commencing the second part of the Natural Sciences Tripos, he travelled to Wiirzburg in June 1877 to be instructed directly by Julius von Sachs on laboratory methods for 8 weeks, Vines having travelled there himself 3 months earlier. In 1879 at the conclusion of his studies at Cambridge, it was apparent that no vacancy could be expected there, Bower travelled to join Vines and a 'cosmopolitan group of post-graduate students' (Bayley Balfour had left shortly before their arrival) at Anton de Bary's laboratory in Strasbourg (Bower 1938) (Fig. 6). There he stayed for an academic year, returning to London in spring 1880 with a completely new outlook and approach to botany. Bower wished to bring the science out of a 'dark age' of purely systematic studies based on superficial criteria without recourse to anatomical and developmental observations. In 1959 John Walton described palaeobotany at the end of the 19th century in Britain as 'awakening from a long sleep' (Walton 1959). It was undoubtedly this 'European Enlightenment' that first stirred it. On his return, Bower became an assistant to Daniel Oliver at University College London. By 1882 he was Lecturer in Botany under Thomas Huxley in South Kensington. He came second to Isaac Bayley Balfour in applying for the Sherardian post at Oxford, before being coerced into applying for the now vacant Glasgow Chair (a more complete account of the bizarre circumstances surrounding this move are outlined in Boney 1993).

THE 'OTHER' GLASGOW BOYS

199

Fig. 2. Alexander Dickson, Head of Botany at Glasgow University 1868-1879. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/15/019.

Bower, at first, was not happy at Glasgow. His new post was far removed from what he had experienced at Cambridge, Kew or even University College London. He suddenly found himself propelled into an environment where he had to teach a room full of medical students, and, like Balfour, he found the combination of two rooms and an attic herbarium quite inadequate for teaching the 'new botany', and campaigned long and hard for these facilities to be improved. After this 'baptism of fire', he was astonished to learn that his teaching was only required for the summer term, leaving the rest of the year free, and so he travelled to Sri Lanka for much of the autumn and winter of 1885-1886 (Boney 1993). This journey renewed his spirit, and was to significantly inform his future policy towards his own staff. Initially, Bower was isolated from the rest of the botanical research community. This only changed 3

years later when Bayley Balfour returned to Scotland from Oxford (shortly after being the driving force for setting up the journal Annals of Botany). Balfour was to take the Edinburgh University Chair of Botany with its responsibilities as Keeper of the Royal Botanic Garden - a post he held until the year of his death (1922). As Bower's research reputation increased, he swiftly became FRSE and then FRS, so that by the time that he gave vent to his characteristic fiery temper in this thinly veiled ultimatum to the Glasgow University Senate in 1893, he was someone of high standing within the University. no class room, no sufficient laboratory, no botanical museum or proper Herbarium. All this must be sooner or later provided or else Glasgow University will have to take the hindmost place as regards Botany: in which case it will hardly be worth my while to remain here. (Boney 1993.)

200

JJ. LISTON & H.L. SANDERS

Fig. 3. A caricature of Frederick Orpen Bower that appeared in the University Magazine, with lettering after the style of Glasgow's own Charles Rennie Mackintosh's hand-drawn characters. Osborne Henry Mavor, 1925, ink on paper, GLAHA 43178. Photograph © Hunterian Art Gallery, University of Glasgow.

His letter appears to have had the desired effect (at least, initially) as within 12 months the University Court was talking to architects about proposals. Unfortunately, the option for an institute in the Botanic Gardens had become impractical: mounting debts had resulted in the closure of the Gardens in 1887, with Glasgow City Council buying out the Garden from the Royal Botanic Institution, and, although the Glasgow Boundaries Bill of 1891 had permanently secured the rights of the university to obtain specimens for teaching purposes, the council could give no guarantees that the garden would remain in a location so convenient for the university (Bower 1926). This rendered any potential investment by the university in building works on that site

as a financial risk. Consequently, the Senate produced a counter-proposal of a new dedicated building for botany in the grounds of the Gilmorehill campus of the university. Ultimately, the fears about the future of the garden abated, and the Botanic Garden is still a resource for plant material for use by the university to this day. However, the investigations into possible sites within the campus became protracted, and entwined with a similarly dedicated building for engineering. Eventually, in March 1898, Lord Kelvin himself intervened, bringing about the decision to build the Botany building on an old tennis court site for £19 000 (Boney 1993). It had taken some 20 years, but Balfour's vision of a Botanical Institute had come to pass, secured by Bower. It was indeed a

THE 'OTHER' GLASGOW BOYS

201

appoint assistants. With the expansion of botany teaching beyond the realms of medicine, into the BSc and MA degree courses (as well as Queen Margaret's College), the increased lecturing load throughout the academic year meant that many of these assistants went on to become lecturers alongside Bower. This also meant an opportunity to expand the scope of botanical teaching, bringing the geological history of plants closer to the fore. John Christopher Willis was one of Bower's assistants from 1893 to 1894, and then was promoted to Senior Assistant until appointed Director of the Peradeniya Botanic Gardens in Sri Lanka (one of Bower's haunts 10 years before) in 1896. This led to two major changes amongst the staff within the Botany Department - first, William Henry Lang was promoted from Junior to Senior Assistant, the Junior Assistant post then being filled by one David Thomas Gwynne-Vaughan.

Bower's boys

Fig. 4. Julius Von Sachs in 1876. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/07/004.

step up for Bower and his department - from a 'borrowed' lecture theatre, two rooms and an attic herbarium, he now had two large teaching laboratories, a herbarium and library spread over two floors, a museum spread over three floors, a 300 seat lecture theatre, and offices for himself and colleagues, as well as workshop facilities.

The Botany Department germinates Botany became the first of the university's science departments to be established in its own discrete building (Walton 1952) (Fig. 7) when it was opened by Sir Joseph Dalton Hooker on 16 June 1901 (Fig. 8). In these new facilities, Bower's department flourished. Bower was an energetic and enthusiastic lecturer, ensuring that all teaching ran smoothly (Wardlaw 1948). Bower, a staunch Darwinist, insisted that the theory of evolution was fully accepted by all his students, as it was integral to the teaching and understanding of botany. His love of his subject shone through, and was an inspiration to many of his students, some of whom went on to work on his staff. Since 1889 he had been able to

Lang was born on the 12 May 1874 in Withyham, Groombridge in Sussex, his family having just moved there from Bridge of Weir in order for his father to practise medicine (Salisbury 1961). Unfortunately, his father died when Lang was 2 years old, and the family returned to Renfrewshire. Growing up in a rural setting, Lang became extremely interested in natural history. He moved from being Head Boy at Denniston School to enter medicine at the University of Glasgow in his 15th year, as the only means of gratifying this interest in the studies of animals and plants. Even at that age he was extremely dedicated; he attended evening classes at the technical college whilst studying medicine. At the university, he fell under the thrall of Bower (Andrews 1980), coming to share his fascination for, and later work in the field of, cryptogamic botany. By 1894 he had attained his BSc, and was offered the post of Junior Assistant in the Botany Department by Bower the same year, graduating in medicine and surgery the following. By autumn 1895 he had been awarded a Robert Donaldson Scholarship allowing him to start work at the Jodrell Laboratory of Kew Gardens (Walton 1960) under Dukinfield Henry Scott (1854-1934) (Fig. 9). There, on 8 October, he first met David Thomas GwynneVaughan. Born on 12 March 1871, Gwynne-Vaughan came from an old Welsh family that claimed descent from Cradoc (a Knight of the Round Table) (Scott 1916). In October 1890 he entered Christ's College (Darwin's), Cambridge, obtaining a science scholarship there the following year. Passing through the hands of Vines as a botany teacher (Boney 1994), he received a First Class in the first part of the Natural Science Tripos in

202

J.J. LISTON & H.L. SANDERS

Fig. 5. Professor S.H. Vines (1849-1934). Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/10/023.

1893, but eschewed the second part in order to become a science schoolteacher. However, this evidently did not suit him, and after a year he was drawn from that profession to the Jodrell Laboratory of Kew Gardens to enter research. In October 1894 he was invited to work there by Sir William Turner ThiseltonDyer, and went on to receive much of his research training under Scott (Boney 1994). His first research subject was the anatomy and morphology of the Nymphaeaceae, which commenced in January 1895. In May 1895 he began similar studies on the structure of Primula. Meeting Lang that October at the laboratory was the start of a lifelong friendship between them. Gwynne-Vaughan reported on the structure of Nymphaceae at the Liverpool Meeting of the British

Association for the Advancement of Science in September 1896 (Bower 1917), so impressing Bower in the audience, with what he later described as a 'peculiarly lucid preliminary statement' (Bower 1915), that after congratulating him on his paper, Bower, in an uncharacteristically impulsive move, offered him the Junior Assistant post at Glasgow there and then (Boney 1994). Starting at Glasgow in January 1897, Gwynne-Vaughan's research moved from angiosperms to ferns. Mr L.A. Boodle at Kew was already working on ferns, so they politely agreed to partition the families of ferns between them so that there was no overlap in work. Gwynne-Vaughan received the more challenging families. For him to have a full understanding of the filiceans, Gwynne-

THE 'OTHER' GLASGOW BOYS

203

Fig. 6. Bower (far left) as part of Anton De Bary's work group, Strasbourg winter 1879-1980 with Anton De Bary (middle front) and his students including S.H. Vines (back middle in white hat). Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/12/020.

Fig. 7. The Botany Building c.1925 from the memorial book presented to Bower upon his retiral. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/15/014.

Fig.8. The official opening party ofthe Botany Building on 16 June 1901, attended by many eminent academics of the time. Amongst the assembled group are Issac Bayley Balfour, Lord Lister, Sir Joseph Dalton Hooker, Lord Kelving, Dukinfield Henry Scott, Bower (in classic profile) and, far right,David Thomas Gwynne-Vaughan.Lang appears to have been away on the Arthur George Tansley expedition to Malaysia and Sri Lanka at teh time. Thedrawings above the blackboard were used by Bower as teaching aids and some of them survive today. Glasgow University Archieve Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/18/001.

THE 'OTHER' GLASGOW BOYS

Fig. 9. D.H. Scott (1854-1934), Keeper of Jodrell Laboratory, Kew. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/10/031.

Vaughan needed to be conversant with the fossil forms. Thus, his palaeobotanical interest grew as he became acquainted with many fossil taxa. It was at this time that Bower's experience of his first year at Glasgow served these junior members of staff in good stead, as he encouraged them to work abroad whenever possible. In October 1897 Gwynne-Vaughan took unpaid leave to prospect for exploitable rubber trees on the upper reaches of the Amazon, some 2500 miles upstream (Scott 1916). Returning in September 1898, he wrote up his report to the commercial syndicate that had commissioned him back at the Jodrell Laboratory at Kew Gardens, again under Keeper Scott. Gwynne-Vaughan had enjoyed the rugged 'boys own' adventure of the trip, but bitterly regretted not fully availing himself of the botanical opportunities that had presented themselves, instead slavishly working against time to complete the commercial objectives of the trip. He expressed his regret in a letter to his half-sister, using the following quotation (noting that 'an apt quotation is the best sort of excuse'). Ah, fool was I and blind; The worst I stored with utter toil, The best I left behind. (Scott 1916.)

205

This disappointment, although partly resulting from his own conscientious diligence to his employers, seems to have informed the nature of his next trip. In February 1899 he again was given leave of absence by Bower in order to join the Skeat Cambridge expedition to the Malay Peninsula as the botanist (Bower 1917) (managing to drop in on Willis at Peradeniya on the way: Boney 1994). Returning in September, this expedition seems to have more deeply affected him in a philosophical way and he found it more difficult to return to everyday life in Britain: 'I am glad to get back of course but really I am muddled and perplexed, appalled by the complexity of our Europaean [sic] life, and I feel strangely that I am an outsider . . .' (GwynneVaughan 1899). During his visit he took pains to learn some of the Malay language, as Lang later did on his visits with Tansley in 1901. The two were known, on occasion, to fall into the language during conversations in the Glasgow laboratory (Boney 1995), and also to use Malaysian expressions in their letters to each other (Boney 1994). Evident from personal descriptions of GwynneVaughan, and his own letters, is his sharp and irreverent sense of humour, illustrated by his playful comments about Bower, although much more advanced in age, remaining a bachelor after Lang and Gwynne-Vaughan had married. There was clearly a close, informal friendship between the three. In addition to his achievements in advancing the study of botany at Glasgow, Bower had, by the end of his career, amassed a respectable number of publications, which he took great pleasure both in writing, and, more unusually, in later reflecting on after publication. Wardlaw (1948), recalling his time with Bower for the obituary that Lang was to write, talked of Bower reading out to him passages of his own book that he was particularly proud of each morning! In particular, Bower, inspired by Hofmeister, wrote on the evolution of land plants and how this was related to 'alternation' theory (Bower 1935). Bower was a supporter of the antithetic alternation of generations, where the sporophyte is believed to have arisen from the zygote independently of the gametophyte (Bower 1935). Bower's ideas were often argued through detailed anatomical and morphological studies of the 'Higher Cryptogamia'. Thus, he made a significant contribution to the understanding of plant evolution, for which he drew heavily upon his palaeobotanical studies. His achievements were recognized in 1928 when he won the Darwin Medal for his lifelong work in botany (Boney 1995). By the end of the 19th century, Bower (affectionately known to the rest of the department as 'the chief) had his core staff in place. Gwynne-Vaughan and Bower jointly published the second edition of

206

J.J. L1STON & H.L. SAJNIJJbKS

Practical Botany for Beginners in 1902, and in 1905 Gwynne-Vaughan took over Lang's responsibilities of 4 years' standing for the tuition of female students at Queen Margaret's College, Glasgow, with Lang starting to teach botany to trainee teachers instead (Boney 1994). The news came as a blow to the eversardonic Gwynne-Vaughan:'... this implies a course of about 75 lectures to be given next term . . . I feel very sorry for myself. Still it is not so much the lectures themselves that make me regard the immediate future with Terror; but the deplorable fact that they have to be given at the altogether unreasonable hour of 8 o'clock in the morning. I shall have to get up before 7 every blessed weekday for 3 appalling months. I abominate early rising. Its [sic] bad for you, it ruins your health & wrecks your morals' (GwynneVaughan 1905). However, the expansion in teaching and the rise of palaeobotanical study in the department created an enviable environment for the expansion of palaeobotanical research within it. Bower nurtured this environment by being careful never to impede his staff and students with his own ideas and interests - even outwith academic considerations, he did not enforce his personal fastidiousness for tidiness or nonsmoking upon his subordinates (Wardlaw 1948). He never set tasks for his staff, merely occasionally throwing in suggestions, and he always encouraged them to develop their own ideas, even though they might come into conflict with his own (Wardlaw 1948). Furthermore, Bower was ever aware of the changing focus of botanical research and was open minded to the broader view of botany. And in what John Walton (1952) described as the 'triumvirate' of Bower, Lang and Gwynne-Vaughan, everything was in place for a vibrant department to become an international beacon in the newly expanding field of palaeobotanical research. As Arthur Boney observes in his 1993 account: 'It was the association of Bower, Lang and Gwynne-Vaughan... which firmly set Botany in place as a subject for an Honours degree, and established the Department's high standing as a centre for research' (Boney 1993). The final addition of Robert Kidston gave the department unique access to a dynamic and fastidious fossil collector.

An ex-banker Robert W. Kidston had already been involved with the study of fossil plants for some time prior to beginning his joint work with members of Bower's department (Crookall 1938). He was born on the 29 of June 1852, in Bishopton, Renfrewshire, and educated at Stirling High School. From there he went to work at the Glasgow Savings Bank, attending lectures in the evenings in Glasgow, some by William

Fig. 10. W.C. Williamson (1816-1895) inspired Kidston to work on fossil plants. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/10/032.

Crawford Williamson (Fig. 10). These first guided him towards fossil plants as a field for study when he subsequently left his job at the age of 16 for a life dedicated to palaeobotany (Andrews 1980). This choice was open to him, unlike many others, as he was of independent means and so was able to follow his own interests without the financial and commercial constraints of most palaeobotanists - an extremely advantageous position. From that point on, he devoted his time to fossil plant work, virtually to the exclusion of all else. Details of the period immediately after this are somewhat sparse, but around 1878 he seems to have attended Edinburgh University botany classes given by Sir John Hutton Balfour (Fig. 11) (the publisher of one of the earliest palaeobotanical text books to be written in English, and father of Isaac Bayley Balfour), gaining a 'first class certificate and medal in practical botany'. From 1879 he began to keep records of his scientific excursions - not merely examining surface spoil heaps, but even going down the mines for specimens, most of which at this stage were diatoms (Lang 1925). Bower later reflected on Kidston's abandonment of diatoms that 'no doubt [feeling] its limitations he desisted from such work, and later he presented the collections he had made to Glasgow University' (Bower 1924&). At some point around this time he was also demonstrating in the University of Edinburgh's botany department (Seward 1924).

THE 'OTHER' GLASGOW BOYS

207

Fig. 11. John Hutton Balfour, Regius Professor of Botany 1841-1845. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/07/008.

The year 1880 was pivotal in Kidston's new career. With the retiral of Joseph Dalton Hooker, Ben Peach, the acting palaeontologist on the Geological Survey staff in Scotland, approached Kidston (Bower 19240), at the age of 28, to become their honorary Palaeozoic plant consultant for the identification of their material - a notable achievement and a testimony to the flair he had for the subject, despite relatively little formal palaeobotanical training. With the consequent increase of his exposure to the collections arriving at this august institution, his knowledge broadened and his reputation grew. His first palaeobotanical publication (Kidston 1881) challenged the conclusions of a man that was probably his earliest inspiration on fossil plants - WC. Williamson surely a sign of his growth in confidence. In terms of the regard in which he was held, Kidston was approached by the British Museum (Natural History) (now the Natural History Museum, London) to catalogue their substantial

Palaeozoic plant collection. Commencing this work in February 1883, he was in receipt of a Royal Society grant that helped fund his travels over the following 2 years to examine the relevant collections held throughout Britain and to conduct some fieldwork. During this exercise he collected some 250 specimens (mainly from Radstock in Somerset) that were (under the terms of the Royal Society grant) donated to the British Museum. These specimens are something of an anomaly, as, other than a handful in the Hunterian Museum, the Royal Scottish Museum (Stace et al 1987) and the museum of his home town Stirling (Cleevely 1983), all other hand specimens (over 7000) were given to the Geological Survey on his death some 40 years later. The 288 page monograph was finished in 1886 (although his later work made it obsolete with relative rapidity: Lang 1925), and he subsequently performed a similar feat reviewing the Palaeozoic collections in Dublin (Kidston 18880) and Liverpool (Kidston 1889).

208

JJ. LISTON & H.L. SANDERS

Fig. 12. A partly excavated Fossil Grove in Victoria Park, Glasgow c. 1887-1889. © Glasgow Museums.

The year following the publication of his British Museum monograph, in Glasgow's newly opened Victoria Park, a small disused quarry in the hill known as Quarry Knowe was being landscaped when the stumps of five Carboniferous trees with their root systems were uncovered (Gunning 1995). As further stems were exposed (Fig. 12), Kidston, who had just received his first award from the Murchison Fund, became involved with the excavations of the Victoria Park Fossil Grove (MacGregor & Walton 1948). In early March 1888 he visited Victoria Park and examined the trunks and associated fossils, concluding that the trees were of a lepidodendroid type (specifically L. veltheimianum: Kidston 18882?) rather than Sigillaria (Young & Glen 1888). Even today, recently restored and refurbished, it still serves as a striking insight into the appearance of a Carboniferous forest. Already holding (since 1890) the Neill Gold Medal for investigations in Palaeozoic Botany from the Royal Society of Edinburgh, he was made a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1902. On his application, the list of those endorsing his work from 'personal experience' is an impressive list of

correspondents: aside from the more general luminaries of Henry Woodward, Ben Peach, John Home, Ramsay Heatley Traquair and Harry Govier Seeley are the signatures of William Turner Thiselton-Dyer, Dukinfield Henry Scott, Albert Charles Seward, Frederick Orpen Bower and Isaac Bay ley Balfour. Over 1902-1903 his ideas on the stratigraphical classification of the Palaeozoic by the use of fossil plants coalesced: in the 1902 Geological Survey Memoir on the Geology of Lower Strathspey, he stated that the fossil plants of the Old Red Sandstone showed a clearly defined threefold division of the formation; in 1903 he asserted this idea with reference to the British Carboniferous rocks in an address to the Royal Physical Society, where he made the first presentation of characteristic floras for subdivisions of the British Carboniferous (Home 1924).

Hybrids: a collaboration with Kidston Kidston first came to the attention of Lang and Gwynne-Vaughan on the 28 November 1899 when they attended his lecture on Carboniferous Lycopods

THE 'OTHER' GLASGOW BOYS

209

Fig. 13. Bower, Gwynne-Vaughan and Lang at the 1904 meeting of the British Association, in Cambridge. Kidston, also present and a keen photographer, might well have been behind the camera. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 PH/PR565.

and Sphenophylls to the Glasgow Natural History Society (Kidston 1901), but they only properly met him while attending the British Association for the Advancement of Science Cambridge congress in Summer 1904 (Fig. 13), when they encountered him in E.A.N. Arber's rooms (Boney 1994). Kidston had been dealing for some time with macroscopic characters, and so he determined to work on more anatomical studies (Seward 1924). To this end, following on from the friendships newly made in Cambridge, he began, in the winter of 1904-1905, to attend laboratory courses given by his friend Bower, visiting the department on a weekly basis. He brought his knowledge of fossil flora in exchange for learning about the structure of contemporary plants. Lang later recalled: 'He was as much at home in the assistants' room as in Prof. Bower's, and his genial presence as a luncheon guest was keenly in demand by all the members of the Department. At this period, also, there were visits of Gwynne-Vaughan and myself to Stirling to be shown fossil plants in the collections'. As mentioned earlier, Bower was a vehement anti-smoker (even establishing no-smoking areas within the university: Hutcheson & Conway 1997), but this attitude did not seem to extend to the pipe smoking of his friends - one of whom Kidston quickly became. Kidston's visits led to his partnership with Gwynne-Vaughan, whose skill as a structural anatomist and preparator complimented Kidston's gifts as a draughtsman and photographer

(Seward 1924). First hinted at in an acknowledgement in a 1905 paper by Kidston on the internal structure of Sigillaria elegans (Kidston 1905), Bower later reflected that their collaboration on this probably laid the foundations for both their close friendship and their later work. Thus, when Kidston received from New Zealand a 'remarkable buttonshaped pebble... which bore clear evidence of being the apex of a massive stock of some upright fernlike plant', it was to Gwynne-Vaughan that he turned for plant anatomical assistance (Bower 1924c). From such an inauspicious beginning grew their joint magnum opus on the Osmundaceae ferns (Fig. 14). This was a pivotal event in the development of palaeobotany and the foundation of a partnership few have surpassed. Its success speaks for itself in the subsequent history of collaborative research and ensuing publications. Bower was later to reflect: Seldom have two minds blended their results more effectively. The one brought to bear a wide knowledge of fossils from the stratigraphical and systematic point of view. The other supplied critical and expert anatomical experience, based upon study of living plants. The result is a series of beautifully illustrated memoirs . . .'. (Bower 1915.)

Lang, in particular, later noted that Kidston's association with Gwynne-Vaughan had appeared to raise 'an inhibition that had rested on [Kidston] publishing the observations he had made on the structural

210

J.J. LISTON & H.L. SANDERS

Fig. 14. Kidston and Gwynne-Vaughan, complete with pipes, working on the Osmundaceae at Kidston's home in Stirling. No doubt this photograph was posed for posterity, as there are other views of the same scene. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/10/019.

part of his subject' on his own, pointing to later solo work from Kidston in this regard. Lang concluded of this association, that 'The co-operation of the palaeontologist and the plant anatomist, both masters in their craft, resulted in the production of what is recognised as a botanical classic' (Lang 1925). Kidston was somewhat avant-garde for The Establishment in his use of photographic plates for scientific publications (Fig. 15). Following one rebuff from the Royal Society of London regarding his 1906 paper 'On the Microsporangia of Pteridosperms', Bower (1906) had to write in support of him 'The author would, I understand, prefer the figures to stand as they are. I am of the opinion that he is quite right in keeping as far as possible to photographic methods of representation, and I see no sufficient reason to doubt that if carefully reproduced the photographic figures should come out well'. Bower later reflected that Kidston was 'an expert photographer, he used all his art in producing illustrations that present the details even more perfectly than the unaided eye itself could see' (Bower 1924c).

In the wake of Kidston's own success, though, he did not forget his younger colleagues, and astutely looked after their interests. It was Kidston's prompt to Bower in a December 1910 letter (regarding Gwynne-Vaughan's application) that resulted in Lang receiving his FRS (Kidston 1910) - something that Kidston had previously chased Geikie about in February of the same year (Geikie 1910).

Dispersal In 1907 Gwynne-Vaughan was elected a Fellow of the Linnean Society, and left Glasgow to become Professor and Head of Botany at Birkbeck College (Bower 1917). To symbolize his continuing 'spiritual presence' with his colleagues, he left a black enamelled tea caddy (perhaps alluding to his time in the Far East) bearing the legend 'Given to the Botanical department by Professor D.T. Gwynne-Vaughan in 1907' in the Departmental Common Room (Boney 1994). Tradition dictates that it is passed to each new senior member of staff (excluding the Regius

THE 'OTHER' GLASGOW BOYS

211

Fig. 15. An original plate from Kidston and Gwynne-Vaughan's study of the Osmundaceae Part II. This shows Kidston's skills as a photographer and an illustrator - his drawings were markedly less 'stylized' than those of some of his contemporaries. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 UGC 0887A/2/2.

212

J.J. LISTON & H.L. SANDERS

life's collection of slides, noted that his output of slide production was remarkably small for the 2 years he was at Birkbeck (Gwynne-Vaughan 1916). Although he continued to progress the joint work with Kidston, it is clear that this schedule left little time for such research, and so it is perhaps unsurprising that he chose to move to Queen's University, Belfast in July 1909. He wrote of the anticipated change, referring to the intensity of the 'much too I have finally accepted the Birkbeck post & it really appears hard work' he had had to do in London (Scott 1916)worse than ever. About as bad as it can be. The accommodaalthough he had met his future wife, Helen, there and tion is despicable. No privacy of any kind is possible. The she succeeded him as head of the Birkbeck departwhole thing is low grade polytechnic -1 do not exaggerate ment (they married in December 1911: Boney 1994). much lower than the Glasgow variety of the same article. It Helen Gwynne-Vaughan nee Fraser was a mycolois needless to say that I am harried by vain regrets. I am gist from an aristocratic Scottish family, a founding fairly sure that it is a mistake but, whether or no, I must see it member of the University of London Women's through now. Although it will take me all my time to keep a Suffrage Society and became Commander of the stiff lip. The chief is getting a little worried over it also but is Women's Royal Air Force (Edwards 1984) - clearly in otherwise good form. (Gwynne-Vaughan 1907'b). a remarkable woman for her time. The same year as Gwynne-Vaughan moved to As someone who was Secretary of the British Association, his mood is clearly affected when he Belfast, Lang left Glasgow (becoming an FRS in adds: 'The B.A. is like all B.A.s - wondrous dull & 1911) to become the first Barker Professor of stupendously futile . . .'. He signs off his letter thus: Cryptogamic Botany at Manchester (Watson 2005). 'I am suffering from an acute V-shaped depression & In returning his departmental keys, Lang confided I believe that by this time next year I shall be reciting feelings to Bower that were strongly similar to Kipling's "That Day". Yours (God Forbid) Ever, Gwynne-Vaughan's fears some 2 years earlier: Birkbeck'. 'Thanks for all your kindness -1 shall never have as Things did not immediately improve. In a later good a slice of life again . . . I am sick at heart to go letter that will have resonance with many who move out into the rude world which I do not know' (Boney to large cities to work today, he writes: 'I am still 1994). Gwynne-Vaughan wrote to Lang: very miserable and depressed. It is nearly hopeless 'Congratulations. Manchester has done itself proud to get decent rooms at a moderate price in Town'. and (aside) you haven't done so bad either . . . The The job still vexed him: 'Damn the bally Birkbeck! chief will be pleased to have got off one of his . . . If I can only stand the worry of the College (I bar daughters so well. Mine was a mesalliance that the the word Birkbeck) I believe I shall stand the rest of family decided to do the best with' (Gwynneexistence all right'. He closes with these words: 'Up Vaughan 1909b). The two of them remained in close to now I should think that "Damn!" accurately repre- contact, despite neither remaining in Glasgow, Lang sents the situation' (Gwynne-Vaughan 1907'a). Lang sending specimens to Gwynne-Vaughan, and rallied to his friend's support, but, not for the last Gwynne-Vaughan complaining about both his facilitime, Lang's handwriting posed something of a com- ties ('I hate to disturb the Universal peace but I must munication barrier: 'Thanks for your postcard, I have a laboratory of my own that does not smell of can't read some of it, but I believe you mean well' ultra-putrescent Skate' - Gwynne-Vaughan 19090) (Gwynne-Vaughan 1907Z?). and Lang's handwriting: Given his very evident discomfort and unhappiness, Gwynne-Vaughan's reasons for taking the job 'Dear Lang, What I like about your letters is that one does are still unclear. However, they were probably related not just read them and then the matter is over and done to a promotion 'glass ceiling' in Glasgow - after 11 with. They remain with me as a continual feast. I got one years at the department his pay was only £175 per from you a little time back and since the first two or three year (in comparison with Lang's £250 per year) inspections satisfied me that no one was dead or dying, it (Boney 1994), he was ready to become a departmen- has been waiting until I had leisure, as I have tonight, for a tal head and Bower clearly intended to remain in post serious attempt at deciphering. When I put my mind to it I for some years. The change of Birkbeck clearly had flatter myself I can read your script against any authority an impact on him, as it involved a heavy teaching living. What I most admire about your hieroglyph is the load, with evening as well as day classes throughout tricky way you dot your 'i's. In a four page letter simply the academic session, as well as being a Recognized reeking with 'i's there are only four marks that can be Teacher and Internal Examiner for the University of regarded as dots. One of these on prolonged study turns out London. This was in marked contrast to what he was to be an apostrophy [sic] another is an abortive attempt to used to at Glasgow and later his wife, writing on his cross a 't' (very misleading for you only sporadically cross

Professor) that comes to the department. He was replaced in a more 'human' capacity by Abercrombie Anstruther Lawson, who contributed some work on the evolution of gymnosperms before becoming Professor of Botany at the University of Sydney in 1912 (Boney 1993). For his part, Gwynne-Vaughan was far from happy with the move, describing it to Lang in the following terms around September 1907:

THE 'OTHER' GLASGOW BOYS your 't's). The other two are really dots, but one of these came so late that it is over the next word. The other has only missed two letters but since it is over an 'e' it adds to the general interest... I am getting to thoroughly enjoy your letters when I have time. But if it is anything really urgent for heaven's sake send a wire. (Gwynne-Vaughan 1911.)

Despite this communication problem, GwynneVaughan and Lang served as each other's 'best man' at their respective weddings - indeed, on Lang's wedding day, they nearly quarrelled over an aspect of fern stelar anatomy whilst waiting for the bride in the church! (Boney 1994). Once in Belfast, Gwynne-Vaughan's teaching schedule was closer to what it had been at Glasgow. Although he had to give all the lectures, the pattern of a heavy summer term teaching load and two comparatively light terms gave him more opportunity to conduct research. Gwynne-Vaughan's reputation continued to climb, as he was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh and received the MakDougall Brisbane Medal for Research from the Royal Society of Edinburgh in 1910 (Bower 1917) (based on what he had published in the Society's Transactions) and in 1912 he was elected a Member of the Royal Irish Academy. Gwynne-Vaughan, as a skilled structural botanist, perfectly complemented Kidston's fossil knowledge and understanding. In 1911 (Kidston & GwynneVaughan 1911) they produced what Dukinfield Henry Scott regarded as the first significant attempt to examine the Cretaceous tree fern Tempskya, but the core of their collaboration was the series of critical papers on the fossil Osmundaceae ferns, which they described between 1907 and 1914 (Kidston & Gwyne-Vaughan 1907, 1908,1909, 1910, 1914; the original manuscripts and plates reside with the Hunterian). This joint work, published in five parts, resulted from wide-ranging studies of Osmundaceae fossils from around the world, tracking the evolution of the lineages through their stem anatomy back through the Permian to suggest a Carboniferous origin (Andrews 1980).

The fall of Gwynne-Vaughan Gwynne-Vaughan stayed at Belfast until he became Professor of Botany at University College, Reading, in July of 1914 - the same year, he became External Examiner to the University of Glasgow (Scott 1916). By this stage his health had begun to deteriorate due to a chronic condition of neuralgia, and he was not eligible for national service for the war. Although the Reading post meant a cut in salary, GwynneVaughan had known that it should leave more time for research and had chosen to take it. Thus, rather than have a respite period (as he would have had

213

through the low winter teaching loads at Belfast), Reading returned him to the workload spread throughout the year. His health deteriorated throughout spring, and by July 1915 he was stricken by the rapid onset of tuberculosis, making him bedridden. Following a bad haemorrhage at the start of the month, by mid-August his wife was writing to Bower that he had developed 'phthisis of the upper right lung' as a complication to the neuritis. She commented that it had probably been dormant for some time, and Boney (1994) observes that it might have been a latent infection from his travels in the Far East. Gwynne-Vaughan wrote to Lang: 'I have been uncommonly unwell for over a year with my neuritis etc & last term I was very hard put to carry things out to the end. However, I just managed to do it somehow or other & then came to pieces rather completely' (Gwynne-Vaughan 1915). Detailing his illness further, he indicates that any recovery will be very protracted (and clearly his choice to reveal his illness after so long indicates how severe he now assessed it to be) then writes: 'Between you & me I'm very much afraid I am on the scrap heap'. He died on 4 September 1915, aged 44. Lang had been with him, but had left earlier that day believing Gwynne-Vaughan's health to be improving slightly from a collapse earlier in the week, although still critical (Lang 19150). Tragically, this was not the case, and he died shortly before midnight. The bereavement was a major blow to GwynneVaughan's friends. There is an overwhelming sense of loss in the correspondence between them. In a letter to Bower 6 days after Gwynne-Vaughan's death, Kidston wrote: 'I am very glad that you were able to attend Gwynne-Vaughan's funeral - I cannot yet quite take in that he is gone - I see him so readily sitting here before me - His death is a terrible loss' (Kidston 19150). His response to Bower's request to provide an obituary is illuminating in terms of how he viewed his dead colleague: 'As to writing an obituary of G. V. for the Roy. Soc. Edin. -1 cannot do it. You are the man - I did not know him in his earlier days but just jumped into his life at his prime'. Another letter to Bower, written later the same month, reveals the depth of Kidston's affection for Gwynne-Vaughan, in which he expresses his pleasure that GwynneVaughan's collection of slides (2290 in total) had been offered to (and accepted by) the University of Glasgow Botany Department: 'It was perhaps childish but I somehow wished them to lie some day beside my fossil slides - I am sure they will have a warm feeling to each other - so I am very glad they are going to you - One may say what they like but Gwynne-Vaughan's happiest days were in your lab' (Kidston 1915b). This was clearly a man who felt he had indeed been lucky, both personally and professionally, to know David Thomas Gwynne-Vaughan. Bower ultimately provided an obituary for the

214

JJ. LISTON & H.L. SANDERS

Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh in which he observed that Gwynne-Vaughan 'may be said to have run in harness till within two months of his death' (Bower 1917). Four uncompleted fern thin sections (cut from specimens of Pteris lanciniata sent to him by Bower) were left on his workbench, a testimony to the speed with which he was laid low. Lang completed the thin sections (2197-2200) for his dead friend (Gwynne-Vaughan 1916) on 18 September, 2 weeks after his death. The cut-throat razor was sent to Bower by Gwynne-Vaughan's widow, with the mark 'G-V almost worn away through years of intense use (Boney 1994).

New growth Although Gwynne-Vaughan only left 29 publications with his passing, written over some 20 years, some of them were (and still are) extremely important, especially those he had produced with Kidston. Kidston and Gwynne-Vaughan had planned further collaborations on Berwickshire's Lower Carboniferous flora, following on from their 1912 study on Stenomyelon tuedianum (Kidston & Gwynne-Vaughan 1912), as well as new material from the Devonian of Aberdeenshire (Edwards 1984) that Kidston had already had sectioned (Kidston 1913). But in the wake of Gwynne-Vaughan's sudden demise, it was left to Kidston to seek Lang's help in describing the material excavated from Rhynie some 2 years earlier. It seems certain that had he lived longer, the work on this material would have made the partnership of Kidston & Gwynne-Vaughan, rather than Kidston & Lang, world famous. This was no new relationship for Lang as, like Gwynne-Vaughan, he had first seen Kidston in 1899, becoming a close friend at the Cambridge British Association meeting in 1904, and, with GwynneVaughan, had built up his relationship with the Stirling collector, visiting him at his home. Kidston (smoking his white pipe) would meet both of them at the railway station, and they would proceed to his home (Lang 1925). Once there, it was not all study on the collections, as they actively socialized with his family; Lang was apparently a skilled competitor at 'tray racing' down the stairs of the family home in Clarendon Place, and the only recipient of his skill at general practice since he qualified as a medical doctor would appear to have been Kidston's daughter Marjorie - whom he once treated for chilblains (Edwards 1984). These visits were reciprocated, with Kidston's entire family attending the occasional staff-student gatherings at Lang's house. Lang worked on liverworts and ferns, and later came to use Kidston's collections of stigmarian material to seek examples of forms of contemporary quillwort root development in ancestral forms of lycopods,

thus reinforcing the relatedness of the two groups. Lang later wrote that: 'In my own case, and I am sure in Gwynne-Vaughan's also, the most important and valued influence in our mature scientific lives was the privilege of working with Kidston' (Lang 1925). Lang, grieving for both Gwynne-Vaughan and his mother who had died a few days after his friend, somewhat reluctantly (out of respect for GwynneVaughan) took his dead colleague's place, visiting Kidston to view the Rhynia slides within a couple of weeks of the funeral (Salisbury 1961). This was to the evident pleasure of Kidston, who wrote to Bower: 'I am glad to tell you that he is going to take G-V's place and carry on the memoirs we were working at' (Kidston 1915c). It is apparent from a letter to Bower in October that Lang wanted to keep his collaboration with Kidston respectfully distanced from Gwynne-Vaughan's work on the ferns and Berwickshire material (although he had helped Kidston with sectioning a fern in February 1909 before leaving for Manchester), and it seemed that the 'pending' work on the Rhynie material fulfilled his requirements in this regard: 'I made it as clear as possible to Kidston that I could in no way fill G-V's place with him; no one could! But I said I should be glad to try and do some joint work with him and we discussed starting later on some subject quite apart from the work that Kidston + Gwynne-Vaughan had been engaged upon. We considered some early Devonian remains with structure' (Lang 19\5b). With Kidston noting to Bower (on 14th of October 1915) that it was the first time Lang had stayed at his home since he had moved to Manchester, it was clear that an old friendship had been renewed through this time of mourning. Their new collaboration was not an easy one to find time for with the impact of First World War. Kidston was commissioned to prospect 'the moors north of the Forth' for Sphagnum, to be used for surgical dressings in the field, and took charge of a group of collectors to collect the material (Bower 1924c). Lang had already organized Red Cross work and drilled with the 'staff platoon' at the Universtiy of Manchester (Lang 1914). He could only conduct his research in the evenings and weekends (Salisbury 1961), and had already found it difficult to see the point of pursuing some of his researches against the background of European bloodshed 'seems like fiddling whilst Rome burns' as he put it (Lang 1914). This had already resulted in Lang failing to meet deadlines with regard to a collaboration with Bower (who argued forcefully for research to be continued in some form during wartime, so that it would be that much easier to restat full activity once peace returned) on a new book 'Botany for Medical Students'. The book foundered, with Land unable to make progress on Bower's initial drft, and eventually it was abandoned (Boney 1995), Bower

THE 'OTHER' GLASGOW BOYS

publishing 'Botany of the Living Plant' (1919) independently. However, Land made time for the Rhynie chert material, managing to visit Kidston in Stirling, at which time the material then took up the hours 'from 9.30 in the morning to 12.30 at night' (Boney 1995). Carried along by his colleague's enthusiasm for the material and its importance, Lang reflected that it was a valid exception to make: There is at present a certain advantage in having to do some botany under the Compulsory Service (Kidston) Act'. It justifies fiddling, even in wartime' (Lang 1916). In spite of the demands on their time, Kidston and Land published a series of papers on the flora of the Rhynie chert (Kidston & Lang 1917, 19200, b, I92la,b)- erecting the higher taxon Psilophytales for an excellently preserved 'new class of vascular plants . . . showing external form and internal structure, belonging to the earliest known land flora.' (Home 1924). The group name was chosen to reflect the original member, the rather fragmentarily preserved Psilophyton, reported by Sir James Dawson from Gaspe in Quebec (Andrews 1980) - and, as a tribute to their fallen colleague, their first paper, in 1917, had type material of a vascular plant that bore the species name Rhynia gwynne-vaughani. Lang had privately intimated this intention to Bower early the preceding year, describing the material as showing 'the plant was a rootless, leafless vascular cryptogam. Kidston and I are rather like spoilt children and are somewhat annoyed at not having yet found a prothallus!' [sic.] (Lang 1916) In addition, they named and described Rhynia major, which they also believed to be among the first vascular plants. It was held as an early example of such for 60 years, but, following re-examination, its vascular tissue was recognized as being more similar to bryophytes, lacking tracheids. As such, although it was subaerial, it was not an early vascular plant and was transferred out of Rhynia to the new genus of Aglaophyton by David S. Edwards in 1986 (Stewart & Rothwell 1993). The Rhynie chert is still regarded as containing the best preserved plant (it also contains animal, bacteria and fungal remains) material over 400 Ma old in the world, allowing detailed examination of the internal anatomy. It is thus critical to the understanding of early land plant evolution, and the work of Kidston and Lang provided a sound basis for the understanding of this important assemblage, Bower later reflecting that although their joint work was produced under the shadow and after-effects of the Great War, the results were, through the wise generosity of the Carnegie Trust, presented with a wealth of illustration that carries vivid conviction to the reader. The impressions and sections were photographed with Kidston's well-known skill and present the actual structure of these Devonian plants without the intervening hand of any artist. (Bower 1924c.)

215

Kidston had continued other avenues of research, in 1911 completing a major study of the Carboniferous plants of the Hainaut Province in the Royal Museum Brussels, Belgium. He also collaborated with W.J. Jongmans of the Netherlands on European species of Calamites, published in both 1915 and 1917 (Walton 1959) by the Dutch Government (Crookall 1938). But it should not be thought that Robert Kidston insisted on being first or even joint author on works based on material held in his collection; as stated earlier, Lang used his collections of stigmarian material to seek examples of forms of contemporary quillwort root development in ancestral forms of lycopods (thus reinforcing the relatedness of the two groups). Dukinfield Henry Scott (Scott 1924) also published his 1897 piece on Kidston's specimens of Cheirostrobus pettycurensis (Calder 1959) following Kidston approaching Scott after his 1896 presentation to the British Association (Lang 1925). In the last few years of his life Kidston was pulled back from the Old Red Sandstone plants by the Geological Survey; in 1901 the Director (J.J.H. Teall) had approached him to produce a monograph encompassing the British Carboniferous floras (Crookall 1938). By 1920, the Survey had finally obtained the necessary funding to produce the 10volume series of memoirs that would serve as a lasting monument to his life's work, and so Kidston deferred the intended fuller account of the Rhynie flora (Lang 1925). In the process of this project Kidston had begun to work with David Davies, the noted South Wales collector of Gilfach Goch, whose approach in looking at Carboniferous plants as overall communities had interested him. In June 1924 he travelled south to visit Robert Crookall's collection of fossil plants at Bristol University (Fig. 16), then after leaving him for Davies, and apparently in excellent health, Kidston was taken ill soon after arriving at Gilfach Goch and died on 13 July. Only four of the volumes of his British Carboniferous monograph had been published by then, with two further completed volumes of the Survey series being posthumously produced (guided by C.P. Chatwin). The task then fell to Crookall to finish the rest, with a further six parts being published between 1955 and 1970, drawing heavily on the illustrations, notes and photographs already compiled by Kidston and bequeathed to the Survey on his death. These works are extensive and are still a valuable resource for studies of the British Carboniferous today. In it Kidston's skills as a photographer and illustrator are clearly evident. Along with detailed descriptions of fossils from each assemblage are Kidston's own interpretations and information. It was obviously a labour of love, as the care he put into producing it shows through in the quality of the final work.

216

JJ. LISTON & H.L. SANDERS

Fig. 16. The last known photograph of Kidston, still working on specimens. Taken by Crookall at the Bristol Laboratory. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/15/015.

Kidston's legacy It is difficult to encompass the breadth of Kidston's impact on palaeobotany in his lifetime. H.N. Andrews' review of fossil plant workers (The Fossil Hunters: In Search of Ancient Plants) refers to him as 'one of the greatest contributors to our knowledge of the plant life of the past' (Andrews 1980). In his obituary, Seward drew particular attention to Kidston's long-standing support of the Geological Survey, observing that 'to him more than to any other man the Survey is indebted' (Seward 1924). Kidston's role as an undoubted catalyst to the success of Glasgow's Botany Department is beyond question, and the careers of those that spread beyond it are further testimony to how he brought life to palaeobotany at the turn of that century. The renowned Russian investigator M. Zalessky gave the international perspective on Kidston's passing: 'He was the head of palaeobotanical work in your country, and that Scottish sun by its luminosity lit all the palaeobotanists of the universe and drove them to new research' (Lang 1925). His vigorous labour for his subject was inspirational; the tale that he had a special desk constructed so that he could even work while in the bath (Walton 1959) might well be 'academic myth', but his industry clearly was not. Kidston published 181 palaeobotanical papers, many dealing with the stratigraphic significance of the science, and in his final volumes (harkening back to his work at the start of the century) Kidston wrote: 'it is no longer necessary to defend the employment of fossil plants as a means of zoning or dividing the Carboniferous Formation' (Edwards 1984). This was echoed by Seward, when he noted

that Kidston had demonstrated the stratigraphic value of plants more than any other person (Seward 1924), and this work was later built on by workers such as Emily Dix (who was given a bound volume of Kidston's stratigraphic papers by her collaborator, John Pringle, in 1930) to develop the concepts of broad correlation of the Carboniferous on the basis of biostratigraphic zones of floras (Dix 1933). In terms of his more tangible legacy, there are, of course, his collections. In his time Kidston acquired so much material that the floors of his Stirling home had been reinforced to accommodate the load of over 7000 hand specimens (Edwards 1984). These had, in part, been collected by himself, but he had also benefited from the industrious activities of James Lomax (1857-1934) and Walter Hemingway, two noted collectors and dealers with whom he frequently worked (Andrews 1980). It was from Hemingway that Robert Kidston obtained the fructifications that allowed him to publish the first complete description of a Sigillarian cone - but this relationship was not without its tensions. At one point Kidston had given a specimen to Hemingway for sectioning, on the understanding that the sections derived were for Hemingway's own use. Ever the businessman, Hemingway tried to sell the slides to the British Museum (Natural History) in 1909 (Hemingway, DF100/47, The Natural History Museum Official Archives; by permission of the Trustees of The Natural History Museum, dated 29 September 1909), which Kidston took exception to, primarily because he had intended to work on the descriptions of the specimen in question. This apparently did no long-term damage to their relationship, as Kidston was still using him for section-

THE 'OTHER' GLASGOW BOYS

217

Fig. 17. Lang and Helen Gwynne-Vaughan at the International Congress of Botanists in Cambridge, 1930. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/15/028.

ing the Rhynie material some years later (Kidston 1917). Kidston's extensive collection of hand specimens went to the Geological Survey, along with some 4000 negatives he produced in the course of his studies (Edwards 1984), eventually to be displayed in the Reserve and Study Gallery of their museum. As Andrews notes of Kidston's collection: 'It is a model for any museum to follow. The specimens are superior, carefully labelled, and readily available for study' (Andrews 1980). In 1986 these specimens were moved, along with the rest of the Survey's collections, to the new facility at Keyworth, Nottingham. Back in Glasgow, Kidston's death in July 1924 had caused a furore. Two months earlier, Bower, now 69, had declared his date of retiral would be 30 September that year, anticipating that Lang would return from Manchester to replace him as Departmental Head (Boney 2001/?). But, as when Bower and Balfour had conspired to secure Lang the Aberdeen Regius Professor of Botany (Boney 200la), Lang's Manchester University employers quickly made him the proverbial 'better offer', this time converting the Barker Professorship into a dedicated research post, and giving Lang the time for his own work that he had wanted for so long. Amidst this disappointment, Bower had to arrange for Glasgow to receive its part of the bequest (Anon. 1924; Bower 1925): all of Kidston's collection of

3481 thin sections, representing some 341 species (Calder 1959), containing many figured sections of type specimens. This was despite the fact that all of Kidston's old colleagues had now left the department - perhaps it was by way of a 'thank you' for the Honorary Degree of LLD given to him in 1908 by the university (Bower 1924c), although he had also received an Honorary DSc from Manchester in 1921, no doubt with no little instigation from Lang. In 1916 he had been given the Murchison Medal by the Geological Society, at which point he referred to the 1887 award he had received from the Murchison Fund that he had used to purchase reference books 'in the hope that the books will eventually be placed where they will be of help to others' (Lang 1925). To this end, he similarly deposited his library of palaeobotanical literature - which was described at the time as being 'almost complete to the time of his death' (Crookall 1938), of around '. . . 200 or 300 volumes, some of which are extremely rare' (Anon. 1924) and as Bower notes 'very valuable' (1925) along with his slides, in the Botany building of the University of Glasgow. Of the palaeobotanical 'Glasgow Boys', only Lang now remained academically active. However, he did not forget his times with Gwynne-Vaughan and Kidston, as exemplified in a candid photograph of a relaxed moment from the 1930 International Congress of Botanists in Cambridge (Fig. 17). Bequeathed all of

218

J.J. LISTON & H.L. SANDERS

Fig. 18. Portrait of P.O. Bower on his retirement (1925) by his cousin Sir William Orpen. Held in the Botany Building, it was also destroyed in the fire. Ironically, the portrait and the building named after Bower went up in smoke, although Bower himself disapproved of the habit. Oil on canvas, Sir William Orpen, 1926, GLAHA 44153. Photograph © Hunterian Art Gallery, University of Glasgow.

Kidston's microscopic apparatus (Lang 1924), he continued to work on Scottish pre-Carboniferous plants, but moved away from the Rhynie assemblage, working instead on material he collected from around Thurso and the northern isles - an area that had marked the start of Kidston's study of Old Red Sandstone plants in 1893 (Lang 1925). Following in Bower's footsteps, he worked on 'higher cryptogam' anatomy using information from fossils. In the 1930s his work extended to include the Baragwanathia flora of Australia with Isobel Cookson (later a noted palynologist), 2 years later establishing the genus Cooksonia in her honour in 1937 (Salisbury 1961). Lang retired in 1940, receiving an Honorary LLD from the University of Manchester 2 years later. He was awarded a Linnean Gold Medal in 1956, dying 4 years later on the 29 August. Back at Glasgow, Bower's retiral had been further delayed. Changes in pension payments came to light at the start of June 1924 that effectively meant a sig-

nificant cut in salary for Regius Professors over 40 years old (Boney 200Ib). It was this development that first caused Lang (who had gone so far as to discuss buying Bower's house from him as part of returning to Glasgow as Regius Professor) to hesitate about taking up the post. This change had also led to the successful candidate, Henry Horatio Dixon of Trinity College, Dublin, to withdraw from the appointment process. This meant that Bower remained in post until 31 March the following year, when he was given an Honorary LLD by the University of Glasgow (who also commissioned a portrait of him to be painted by his cousin Sir William Orpen in 1926; Fig. 18). He retired to his family's home town of Ripon, where he had been born, to die on 11 April 1948 at the age of 92. A successor was found in Cambridge graduate James Montague Frank Drummond, who had previously gone to Glasgow from Newcastle as a replacement assistant when Lang moved to take the Barker

THE 'OTHER' GLASGOW BOYS

Professor Chair at Manchester in 1909. Drummond had left Glasgow in 1921, when he had become Director of the Scottish Plant Breeding Station, where he had stayed. Young enough to avoid significant financial impact from the pension changes, the corollary was that Drummond had what he himself described as a 'feeble research record' (Boney 200\b). Unsurprisingly, this marked a sudden shift in both research and teaching away from fossil plants and plant evolution studies, and towards agricultural botany (Boney 1993). In particular, Drummond promoted the teaching of genetics; a subject that grew to have Dr Guido Pontecorvo as Genetics Lecturer to the University in 1945, becoming a fully fledged degree subject 2 years later. Drummond served as Regius Professor from 1925 to 1930, at which time John Walton took over the post.

The artful custodian Walton was one of the last generation to be directly inspired by the teachings of Albert Seward (and, indeed, Hugh Hamshaw Thomas, a specialist in examining 'compression-type' plant fossils) at Cambridge (Anon. 19626). Born on 14 May 1895 in London's Chelsea, he was the son of Edward Arthur Walton, a former Royal Artist and President of Royal Scottish Water Colour Society (Anon. 1971). But E.A. Walton was most famous for his membership of the 'Glasgow Boys' group of painters. His younger brother, George, was a successful designer and architect, contemporary to Glasgow's most famous artistic and architectural son, Charles Rennie Mackintosh, and the family regularly visited the area around Walberswick (where Mackintosh painted his renowned flower study watercolours after leaving Glasgow) and had a holiday home at nearby Wenhaston. This exposure to extremely talented artists in this idyllic environment was to have a lasting impact on John Walton's power as a teacher, and other more surprising aspects of his future career. Walton's parents returned to Edinburgh so that he could study at Daniel Stewart's College - thus allowing one obituary writer to say of him that, despite his Chelsea birth, he was 'ever a Scot'! (Anon. 19626). He then entered St John's College, Cambridge, in 1914 where he became the Hutchinson Research Student. His studies were interrupted by the onset of war, and, as a Quaker, he served with the Friends' Relief and Ambulance Services in France and Belgium from 1915 to 1918. Returning to Cambridge his intention was to read for a degree in Chemistry, but, like many before him, he was inspired by A.C. Seward to pursue palaeobotany. Ultimately, this relationship not only led him to take the second part of the Natural Sciences Tripos in Botany, but also Seward's daughter, Dorothy, as his wife. Graduating in Botany

219

in 1921, he went with the first Oxford Expedition to Spitzbergen as their botanist, returning to Cambridge as a Junior Demonstrator (Anon. 19626). Walton took a position as Senior Lecturer at Manchester University's Botany Department in 1923 (Watson 2005), and this was a highly productive time for him. In this year his description of the balsam 'transfer method' for examining both surfaces of delicate fossil material (wherein the specimen was affixed in balsam, and hydrofluoric acid used to dissolve the matrix away from the reverse side) was first published (Anon. 19620). Similarly, in 1928 he published the peel technique, that he had developed in conjunction with R.G. Koopmans of Utrecht, for producing sections of fossil plant material. Originally a poured solution, he later refined this to the sheets of cellulose more generally used today. In 1930, he spent a short time as acting Professor of Botany in Birmingham, before becoming Regius Professor of Botany at Glasgow the same year, succeeding Drummond (Anon. 19626). Throughout the previous decade he had published extensively on fossil liverworts and mosses, the key research area that had been developed so effectively in Glasgow and this made him a natural choice to continue the traditions of palaeobotanical excellence within the department. Plant evolution became a significant new addition to the curricula, and with limited resources available to academic departments throughout the depression and war years, palaeobotany (as a relatively low resource science) was once again able to flourish more than most, underpinning the Botany Department's overall success (Boney 1993). This led to two phases of building work: first, Seward himself opened the Stevenson Laboratory for Plant Physiology and Mycology in 1937, on the east side of the Botany Department building; secondly, post-war staff increases added pressure to the building resulting, in 1950, in a significant reduction in the size of the museum to create seven additional rooms for a library, laboratories, staff and advanced students. Indeed, by the time he retired in 1962 staff numbers had doubled under John Walton's tenure. Walton significantly enhanced the collections while at Glasgow. In 1932 he began the palaeobotanical Figured Slide Collection in the Department of Botany, noting on the first page of its catalogue: 'This collection includes not only type sections and figured specimens but also sections of special interest for research and is a continuation of the Kidston Collection' (Walton 1932). This new collection consisted of almost 2000 slides by the time he left, and in collecting (both singly and jointly with colleagues) and donating 1000 hand specimens he had acquired over a third of the Hunterian's collection of fossil plant specimens. Albert Long, the noted fossil plant peel maker and world authority on early seed

220

J. J. LISTON & H.L. SANDERS

morphology and anatomy (coincidentally inspired by Lang at Manchester during his undergraduate degree), made almost 600 of the slides between 1959 and 1964 while he was still a schoolteacher at Berwickshire High School in Duns, before he became Deputy Curator at the Hancock Museum (Long 1996; Waterston 2000). In addition, Walton left over 700 palaeobotanical slides of his own. Today, his hand specimens still form a significant part of the 5000 strong palaeobotanical collection. Walton's diagrams during lectures testified to his artistic background, ambidextrously conjuring forth great chalk murals (Andrews 1980). He was also Honorary Curator of the Hunterian Art Gallery (Anon. 19620) (where a portrait of his sister, painted by his father, hangs today), functioning as gallery administrator on a day-to-day basis. During this period, he secured several important new acquisitions (e.g. James Abbott MacNeill Whistler had been a next-door neighbour and family friend in Chelsea, and Whistler's sister-in-law, Rosalind Birnie Philip, donated the art bequeathed to her to the Hunterian, along with his private correspondence: Walton 1961; William Davidson presented a group of flower drawings by Charles Rennie Mackintosh to the Botany Department, which were then transferred to the Hunterian's art collections). It may be this connection with the Hunterian's collections that gave Walton an awareness of the need for Botany's fossil plant collections to be cared for. He demonstrated this understanding in a number of ways: first, by employing Dr Mary Calder to catalogue Kidston's collection of thin sections in the early 1930s (Calder 1959); secondly, by introducing the post of Assistant Palaeobotanical Curator. This was first occupied by Charles Hopping from 1950 to 1955, who during this time produced the taxonomic catalogue of the university's fossil plant collections (Hopping 1957). But Walton went further than merely dedicating staff resources to these collections - both before and after he retired. In order to understand this, it is important to actually review some of the terms of Kidston's bequest to the university. As reported in the University Court minutes of 9 October 1924 (Anon. 1924), Kidston's will specified that his collection should be kept in a Fire-proof Safe or Press and be accessible at all reasonable times to the officials of said Department, and at such times as may suit the convenience of the official staff of said department to experts from elsewhere . . . That students should only be entitled to use said Collection when the Professor of Botany in the University or one of his accredited assistants is present, and... Any regulations which may be made by the Botanical Department of the University in regard to the use and the preservation of said Collection should not preclude the loan to Prof. William Henry Lang, F.R.S., Baker [sic] Professor of Cryptogamic

Botany in the University of Manchester, of such slide or slides from the Collection as he may wish to borrow.

On 20 March 1925, reporting in a letter to the Secretary of the University Court that he and Lang had assessed the slides (that had all been placed within cabinets in the safe), Bower introduced further regulations (which the Court agreed to) that 'access to the slides for purposes of study may be granted to duly qualified visitors for purposes of scientific investigation, but subject always to the control of the Professor of Botany', and that 'no slide . . . shall be removed from the Botanical Department, except... should any exceptional case arise where it is desirable in the interest of science that slides should be lent to any other investigator at a distance, the express permission of the University Court must be obtained on each occasion' (Bower 1925). Within these terms, Bower also made provision (in the spirit of Kidston's will) for Lang to borrow whatever slides he might require. He also suggested that the same regulations apply to the examination and borrowing of volumes from the Kidston Library. In his first change, John Walton ordered the Kidston safe containing the slides to be left unlocked - the reasoning behind this was the potential damage that might be caused if an ill-informed burglar were to attempt to blow the door of the safe open (Edwards 1984) in search of somewhat more traditionally valuable and transferable assets. One could see that such a change would, in the circumstances suggested, increase the chances of preservation of the material, and therefore be in keeping with the spirit of Kidston's will and Bower's arrangements. But not long after Walton's retiral from the post of Regius Professor in 1962, he had decided to go a lot further in 'bending' the terms of the bequest. With the appointment of a non-palaeobotanist (Percy Wragge Brian) as his successor (Anon. 19620), Walton became concerned about the care and use of the collections held in the Botany Department. In consultation with the Hunterian, he arranged for all of the hand specimens so painstakingly curated by Charles Hopping to be transferred to the museum in July 1964, and to be stored with the rest of the University of Glasgow's collections (Rolfe 1964). On 24 November 1966, all the Kidston slides, similarly cared for by Mary Calder, followed (Rolfe 1966). It is unclear why Walton felt this was necessary. Clearly, from his activities in connection with the Hunterian's art collections, he understood the need for safekeeping of materials and respecting bequests. Perhaps he felt that the heyday of fossil plant teaching in the university had come and gone, and he wanted to ensure that these materials were preserved for future generations with a resurgent interest in the subject. Perhaps he felt that the Hunterian had more experience of understanding the value of such a collection,

THE 'OTHER' GLASGOW BOYS

221

Fig. 19. The Bower Building on fire in 2001. Photograph © Graeme A. Stewart, 2001.

and acting as its custodian for the future, than an academic department. The museum certainly had other significant geological holdings (William Hunter's own collection apparently includes the amber upon which Fothergill 1744 first based his, at the time revolutionary proposition, that this material was actually fossilized tree resin: Durant & Rolfe 1984), and the museum, as recipient of many bequests and the repository of all collections of the University of Glasgow, was used to the occasional unusual condition being attached to a donation. But Walton's decision remained a somewhat controversial one. Contrary to Edwards (1984), there was no requirement in either Kidston's will, or the arrangements set up by Bower and the University Court, that the slides be kept in the Regius Professor's room, but there was a requirement for it to remain within the Botany Department. At the time, the Hunterian requested that the precious Kidston Library be moved with the collections, but, sadly, this request was refused. Although Walton returned to serve as Dean of Faculties from 1967 to 1970, he died on 13 February 1971. In his time, in addition to moving the collections from the Botany Building to the Hunterian, he had developed important new techniques for examining fossil plant material, written the definitive textbook on the subject (An Introduction to the Study of Fossil Plants: Walton 1940) and published on every major plant group bar the angiosperms, his researches cov-

ering the Lower Devonian through to the Cenozoic (the Devonian and Lower Carboniferous being his principal areas of interest) (Andrews 1980). Of particular note is his work on fossil liverworts, the structure of pteridosperms, the Carboniferous trees of Arran and the plant assemblages of the Kilpatrick Hills (Braid 1973).

Scorched Earth John Walton was the last palaeobotanist to hold the Glasgow Chair of Botany. During the 1970s a further programme of building alterations resulted in the large lecture theatre being split into three separate floors, the second floor being two lecture theatres, the larger named the Bower, the smaller the Walton. From then onwards, the focus of the Botany Department moved away from palaeobotany to plant physiology and biochemistry, palaeobotany diminishing in importance to a component of ecological teaching, and research becoming more and more marginal (e.g. late and post-glacial deposits: Boney 1993). The department was absorbed into the Institute of Biological and Life Sciences in an administrative restructuring in 1994, the Botany Building being renamed the 'Bower Building' in the process. On Wednesday 24 October 2001 a fire started in the roofspace of the Bower Building (Fig. 19). The

222

J. J. LISTON & H.L. SANDERS

Fig. 20. The portrait of John Walton destroyed in the fire. Oil on canvas, Alberto Morrocco, 1962, GLAHA 44333. Photograph © Hunterian Art Gallery, University of Glasgow.

emergency services arrived swiftly, but the fire had already taken hold. Staff from the University Library, Archives and the Hunterian worked tirelessly to retrieve material, but the losses were massive. Wax teaching models, displays, botanical work in progress, portraits of Walton (Fig. 20) and Bower (Fig. 18) were all destroyed. Fortunately, the herbarium had been moved from the Bower in 1996, and installed in an extension to the nearby old Zoology Building, named the Thomas Hopkirk Laboratory for Plant Taxonomy and Archaeobotany, so it survived. But the palaeobotanical heritage lodged in the building was one of the great irreplace-

able casualties of the resulting blaze. GwynneVaughan's lifetime collection of slides was salvaged intact (and has since been placed with Kidston's slides, as per the wish noted earlier), but the documentation for Walton's slides and the Walton Library (John Walton's attempt to continue Kidston's complete library of palaeobotanical literature for the period he was Regius Professor) was decimated the top row of the shelves containing his offprints collection in the Walton Lecture Theatre was destroyed, leaving only the bottom row intact. Soaked by water from the fire emergency services extinguishing the blaze, they were hung out to dry by

THE 'OTHER' GLASGOW BOYS

223

Fig. 21. Hung out to dry. Items salvaged from the wreckage of the Bower Building drying out in the Hunterian's Kelvin Gallery. Photograph © Graham P. Durant, Hunterian Museum, 2001.

Hunterian staff in the Museum's Kelvin Gallery, so that they resembled a rather complex art installation (Fig. 21). In the corridor outside the Walton Lecture Theatre, Kidston's own priceless library, painstakingly assembled by him as a complete collection of the world's palaeobotanical literature, was not even that lucky: it was incinerated behind its locked glass doors. John Walton's decision to move the collections from the Botany Department had indeed proven a fortuitous, if controversial one. If only a similar decision had been made regarding Kidston's Library, it might still be in existence today. By a similar quirk of fate, four examples of Allen Thomson's fossil plant thin sections (Fig. 22), probably produced by Sanderson (Morrison-Low & Nuttall 1984) or Nicol in 1830-1831, also survived the Bower fire, by virtue of being on research loan. We are indebted to Alison Morrison-Low (National Museums of Scotland) for their safekeeping and subsequent return. The gutting by the fire was a sad end to a building (Fig. 23) that had fostered a critical generation of palaeobotanists since 16 June 1901, and a few years short of the planned 2004 tercentennial celebrations of botany teaching at the University of Glasgow. But by the time of the fire virtually no palaeobotanical research had been conducted there for over 20 years (Andrew Scott's analysis of Palaeozoic floristics, Donald Brett's work on coal-balls and Jim Dickson's

work on Quaternary material standing out as notable exceptions), a sign of the shift in emphasis in botanical teaching throughout the UK. In 1959 Walton had decried the fact that fossil plants were more studied by botanists than geologists in Britain - which was at odds with the trends in Europe and the United States (Walton 1959) - and perhaps this was one of the factors that led to its marginalization as a science at the end of the 20th century. Palaeobotanical teaching is currently a minor component of the botanical curriculum at the University of Glasgow as it approaches its tercentenary (counted from the improved 'physic garden' in 1704 and the appointment of an individual dedicated to oversee it, John Marshall: Boney 1988,1993), and the subject may indeed be returning to the 'long sleep' that Walton spoke of, but the impact of the Golden Age of its 'School of Palaeobotany' around the world continues to this day. Even though the Bower Building may have been devastated by fire, while the work and collections of its staff still exist there is still the possibility that, if the wheel turns again for fossil plant research, then Glasgow again can be a world leader in the field. The authors wish to gratefully acknowledge the contributions of expertise given by the following: AJ.C. Brown, P. Robertson, M. Jewkes, J. Dickson, M.A. Taylor, A.D. Morrison-Low, L. Clarke, I. Shepherd, H. Mackay, M.

224

J.J. LISTON & H.L. SANDERS

Fig. 22. The four fossil wood thin sections (GLAMM 109445-109448, Hunterian Museum, Universtiy of Glasgow) from the Allen Thomson collection, believed to date from 1830-1831. The thin sections were spared from the fire only through being on loan to researchers at the time. Photograph © JJ. Liston, 2004.

Rankin, G. Gardiner, T. Graham, W.D.I. Rolfe, J. Hilton, J.K. Ingham, M.Evans, A. Howell, A.M. Berrie, C.J. deal, P. Davis and P. Tucker. For use of photographs related to the Bower fire: G. Durant, and G. Stewart are gratefully thanked. In addition, A. Dulau is thanked for translation of Zalessky's pronouncement, and A.J.C. Brown, M. Jewkes and J. Hilton read through earlier versions of this text, and made sound suggestions for changes. Special thanks also to the Blodwen Lloyd Binns Bequest Fund of the Glasgow Natural History Society, the Carnegie Trust for the Universities of Scotland, the Curry Fund of the Geologists' Association and Richard Cogdell for financial support in the production of colour plates for this work.

References ANDREWS, H.N. 1980. The Fossil Hunters: In Search of Ancient Plants. Cornell University Press, Itaca, NY. ANON. 1924. University of Glasgow Court Minutes of Academic Year 1924-5: Bequest by the late Mr. Robert Kidston, 9th October 1924. Cl/1/32,6.9-10-1924. ANON. 1962
BONEY, A.D. 1994. David Thomas Gwynne-Vaughan, 1871-1915. TheLinnean, 10,27-57. BONEY, A.D. 1995. Botanists and Botany in the University of Glasgow, July 1704-July 1994. University of Glasgow, Glasgow. BONEY, A.D. 20010. The best laid schemes gang aft A'Gley: Retirement and other plans of a Regius Professor of Botany, 1919-1925. Part 1. The Linnean, 17(2), 27-38. BONEY, A.D. 20016. The best laid schemes gang aft A'Gley: Retirement and other plans of a Regius Professor of Botany, 1919-1925. Part 2. TheLinnean, 17(3), 29^1. BOWER, P.O. 1906. Letter to Chairman of RS Committee. 20-2-1906. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248DC2/12/303. BOWER, F.O. 1915. A notable botanist: the late Professor Gwynne-Vaughan. Weekly Herald. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/12/19. BOWER, F.O. 1917. Professor Gwynne-Vaughan. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, XXXVI, 334-339. BOWER, F.O. 1919. Botany of the Living Plant. MacMillan & Co, London. BOWER, F.O. 19240. Dr Kidston: death of an eminent palaeobotanist. Weekly Herald, 3. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/12/01. BOWER, F.O. 19246. Robert Kidston. LL.D., F.R.S.: an appreciation. Weekly Herald. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/12/01. BOWER, F.O. 1924c. Robert Kidston. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, XLIV, 248-252. BOWER, F.O. 1925. University of Glasgow Secretary of

THE 'OTHER' GLASGOW BOYS

225

Fig. 23. The remains of the Bower Building. Restoration is currently underway. Portraits and collections may have been destroyed, but the memory of the Glasgow palaeobotanists will endure. Photograph © Graeme A. Stewart, 2001.

226

JJ. LISTON & H.L. SANDERS

Court's Papers: Letter from Bower. 20-3-1925. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 55747(a). BOWER, P.O. 1926. Oldest science: early days of botany in Glasgow -V. Municipal Control. Weekly Herald. BOWER, P.O. 1935. Primitive Land Plants. Macmillan, London. BOWER, P.O. 1938. Sixty Years of Botany in Britain (1875-1935): Impressions of an Eye-Witness. Macmillan, London. BOWER, P.O. & GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T. 1902. Practical Botany for Beginners. Macmillan & Co., London. BRAID, K.W. 1973. Obituary John Walton (1895-1971). The Glasgow Naturalist, 19,71-72. CALDER, M. 1959. Catalogue of the Kidston Collection of Sections of Fossil Plants in the Department of Botany of the University of Glasgow. Hunterian Museum, Glasgow. CLEEVELY, R.J. 1983. World Palaeontological Collections. British Museum (Natural History), London. CROOKALL, R. 1938. The Kidston Collection of Fossil Plants - With an Account of the Life and Work of Robert Kidston. HMSO, London. Dix, E. 1933. On the fossil plants in the Ravenhead Collection in the Free Library and Museum, Liverpool. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, LVD, 789-838. DURANT, G.P. & ROLFE, W.D.I. 1984. William Hunter (1718-1783) as natural historian: his 'geological' interests. Earth Sciences History, 3,9-24. EDWARDS, D. 1984. Robert Kidston: The most professional palaeobotanist. Forth Naturalist and Historian, 8, 65-93. FOTHERGILL, J. 1744. An essay upon the origin of Amber. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, London:43,21-25. GEIKIE, A. 1910. Letter to Kidston. Kidston, R.W. 9-21910. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 DC2/13/96. GUNNING, A. 1995. The Fossil Grove. Glasgow Museums, Glasgow. GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T. 1899. Letter to A.M. GwynneVaughan (typed copy to Bower). Gwynne-Vaughan, A.M. 26-9-1899. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/003/004/2. GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T. 1905. Letter to A.M. GwynneVaughan (in letter from her to Bower). GwynneVaughan, A.M. 18-3-1905. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/003/004/1. GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T. 1907a. Letter to Lang. Lang, W.H. 1907. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/003/004/9. GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T. 19076. Letter to Lang. Lang, W.H. 1907. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/003/004/6. GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T. 1909a. Letter to Lang. Lang, W.H. 28-1-1909. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/003/004/12. GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T. 19096. Letter to Lang. Lang, W.H. 1909. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/003/004/13. GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T. 1910. Letter to Bower. Bower, P.O. 9-11-1910. Glasgow University Archive Services GB0248DC2/12/1/106.

GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T. 1911. Letter to Lang. Lang, W.H. 15-5-1911. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/003/004/16. GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T. 1915. Letter to Lang. Lang, W.H. Unknown date Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 GUA 2116/003/004/22. GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, H.C.I. 1916. Gwynne-Vaughan Collection of Anatomical Slides. [qQ7 1916-G]. HEMINGWAY, W. 1909. Letter from Hemingway to NHM. 29-9-1909. DF100/47, The Natural History Museum Official Archives. By permission of the Trustees of The Natural History Museum. HOFMEISTER, W.F.B. 1851. Translated by CURREY, F. (1862). On the Germination, Development and Fructification of the Higher Cryptogamia. London: Royal Society of London. HOPPING, C.A. 1957. Catalogue of Fossil Plants in the Hunterian Museum of the University of Glasgow. Hunterian Museum, Glasgow. HORNE, J. 1924. Robert Kidston, LL.D., D.Sc., F.R.S. Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society, XXI, 29-31. HUTCHESON, R.T. & CONWAY, H. 1997. The University in 1920. The University of Glasgow, 1920-1974: The Memoir of Robert T. Hutcheson. Glasgow University Library, Glasgow. KIDSTON, R.W. 1881. On the structure of Lepidodendron selaginoides (Sternberg) from the Coal-Measures, Halifax, Yorkshire. Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society of Edinburgh, VI, 97-105. KIDSTON, R.W. 1886. Catalogue of the Palaeozoic plants in the Department of Geology and Palaeontology, British Museum (Natural History), London, 8 volumes. KIDSTON, R.W 18880. Catalogue of the Collection of Palaeozoic Plants in the Science and Art Museum, Dublin. Dublin. KIDSTON, R.W. 18886. Note on the nature of the fossil trees found at Whiteinch. Transactions of the Geological Society of Glasgow, VHI, 235-236. KIDSTON, R.W. 1889. On the fossil plants in the Ravenhead Collection in the Free Library and Museum, Liverpool. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, XXXV, 391-417. KIDSTON, R.W. 1901. Carboniferous lycopods and sphenophylls. Transactions of the Natural History Society of Glasgow, VI, 25-140. KIDSTON, R.W. 1905. On the internal structure ofSigillaria elegans of Brongniart's 'Histoire des Vegetaux fossiles'. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, XLI, 533-550. KIDSTON, R.W. 1910. Letter to Bower. Bower, FO. 12-121910. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 DC2/13/176. KIDSTON, R.W. 1913. Letter to Bower. Bower, P.O. 28-11913. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 DC2/12/147. KIDSTON, R.W. 19150. Letter to Bower. Bower, P.O. 10-91915. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 DC2/13/172. KIDSTON, R.W. 19156. Letter to Bower. Bower, P.O. 21-91915. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 DC2/13/173. KIDSTON, R.W. 1915c. Letter to Bower. Bower, FO. 14-101915. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 DC2/13/174.

THE 'OTHER' GLASGOW BOYS KIDSTON, R.W. 1917. Letter to Bower. Bower, F.O. 28-61917. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 DC2/14/256. KIDSTON, R.W. & GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T. 1907. On the Fossil Osmundaceae. Part I. Transactions of the Royal Society ofEinburgh, XLV, 759-780. KIDSTON, R.W & GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T. 1908. On the Fossil Osmundaceae. Part II. Transactions of the Royal Society ofEinburgh, XLVI pt. 2 (9), 213-232. KIDSTON, R.W & GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T. 1909. On the Fossil Osmundaceae. Part III. Transactions of the Royal Society ofEinburgh, XLVI pt. 3 (23), 651-667. KIDSTON, R.W. & GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T 1910. On the Fossil Osmundaceae. Part IV. Transactions of the Royal Society ofEinburgh, XLVII pt. 3 (17), 455-477. KIDSTON, R.W. & GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T. 1911. On a new species of Tempskya from Russia. Verhandlungen der Russisch-Kaiserlichen Mineralogischen Gesellschaftzu St. Petersburg Ed. XLVIII, 1-20. KIDSTON, R.W. & GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T. 1912. On the Carboniferious flora of Berwickshire. Part I. Stenomyelon tuedianum, Kidston. Transactions of the Royal Society of Einburgh, XLVIII, pt. 2 (13), 263-271. KIDSTON, R.W. & GWYNNE-VAUGHAN, D.T. 1914. On the Fossil Osmundaceae. Part V. Transactions of the Royal Society ofEinburgh, I, pt. 2(16), 469-480. KIDSTON, R.W. & LANG, WH. 1917. On Old Red Sandstone Plants showing Structure from the Rhynie Chert Bed, Aberdeenshire. Part I. Rhynia GwynneVaughani, Kidston and Lang. Transactions for the Royal Society of Edinburgh, LI pt. 3 (24), 761-784. KIDSTON, R.W. & LANG, WH. 19200. On Old Red Sandstone Plants showing Structure from the Rhynie Chert Bed, Aberdeenshire. Part II. Additional notes on Rhynia Gwynne-Vaughani, Kidston and Lang; with descriptions of Rhynia major, n. sp., and Hornea lignieri n.g., n.sp. Transactions for the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Lllpt. 3 (24), 603-627. KIDSTON, R.W. & LANG, WH. 19206. On Old Red Sandstone Plants showing Structure from the Rhynie Chert Bed, Aberdeenshire. Part III. Asteroxylon mackiei, Kidston and Lang. Transactions for the Royal Society of Edinburgh, LII pt. 3 (26), 643-680. KIDSTON, R.W. & LANG, WH. I92la. On Old Red Sandstone Plants showing Structure from the Rhynie Chert Bed, Aberdeenshire. Part IV Restorations of the vascular cryptogams, and discussion of their bearing on the general morphology of the Pteridophyta and the origin of the organisation of land-plants. Transactions for the Royal Society of Edinburgh, LII pt. 4 (32), 831-854. KIDSTON, R.W & LANG, W.H. 19216. On Old Red Sandstone Plants showing Structure from the Rhynie Chert Bed, Aberdeenshire. Part V. The Thallophyta occurring in the peat-bed; the succession of the plants throughout a vertical section of the bed and the conditions of accumulation and preservation of the deposit. Transactions for the Royal Society of Edinburgh, LII pt. 4 (33), 855-902. LANG, W.H. 1914. Letter to Bower. Bower, P.O. 13/11/1914. Glasgow University Archive Services GB0248DC2/13/188. LANG, W.H. 19150. Letter to Bower. Bower, P.O. 4-9-1915.

227

Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 DC2/13/198. LANG, W.H. 19156. Letter to Bower. Bower, P.O. 26-101915. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 DC2/13/203. LANG, WH. 1916. Letter to Bower. Bower, P.O. 8/4/1916. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 DC2/13/210. LANG, W.H. 1924. Letter to Miller. Miller, PL. 24-7-1924. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 UGC 088/B/2/3. LANG, WH. 1925. Robert Kidston - 1852-1924. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Section B, 98, xiv-xxii. Extract translated from the original French by A. Dulau. LONG, A.G. 1996. Hitherto. The Pentland Press, Durham. MACGREGOR, M. & WALTON, J. 1948. The Story of the Fossil Grove, Victoria Park, Glasgow. City of Glasgow Public Parks and Botanic Gardens Department, Glasgow. MORRISON-LOW, A.D. & NUTTALL, R.H. 1984. A note on early fossil wood sections from the Allen Thomson Collection. Microscope, 32,23-28. ROLFE, W.D.I. 1964. Reports on the Hunterian Collections for the year 1963-64: On the Geological Collections. Hunterian Museum, Glasgow. ROLFE, W.D.I. 1966. Letter to Percy Wragge Brian. Brian, P.W. 24-11-1966. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 UGC 088/B/2/30. SALISBURY, E.J. 1961. William Henry Lang - 1874-1960. Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society,!, 147-160. SCOTT, D.H. 1916. David Thomas Gwynne-Vaughan. Annals of Botany, XXX, i-xxiii. SCOTT, D.H. 1924. Dr. Robert Kidston, F.R.S. Nature, 114, 321-322. SEWARD, A.C. 1924. Obituary. Robert Kidston, LL.D., D.Sc., F.R.S., F.R.S.E., F.G.S. Geological Magazine, 61,477-479. SINCLAIR, J. 1793. From the Communications of the Ministers of the Different Parishes. Volume 5. William Creech, Edinburgh. STAGE, H.E., PETTITT, C.W.A. & WATERSTON, C.D. 1987. Natural Science Collections in Scotland, National Museums of Scotland, Edinburgh. STEWART, W.N. & ROTHWELL, G.W. 1993. Paleobotany and the Evolution of Plants. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. URE, D. 1793. The History of Rutherglen and EastKilbride. David Niven, Glasgow. WALTON, J. 1932. Figured Slide Collection. University of Glasgow, Glasgow. WALTON, J. 1940. An Introduction to the Study of Fossil Plants. Adam & Charles Black, London. WALTON, J. 1952. Natural history. In: NEILSON, J.B. (ed.) Fortuna Domus: A Series of Lectures Delivered in the University of Glasgow in Commemoration of the Fifth Centenary of its Foundation. University Press, Glasgow, 295-311. WALTON, J. 1959. Palaeobotany in Great Britain. In: TURRILL, W.B. (ed.) Vistas in Botany. Pergamon Press, London, 230-244. WALTON, J. 1960. Prof. W.H. Lang, F.R.S. Nature, 183, 102-103.

228

J.J. LISTON & H.L. SANDERS

WALTON, J. 1961. Some memories of Chelsea at the beginning of the century. The College Courant, 13(26), 110-113. WARDLAW, C.W. 1948. Letter to Lang (recollections of Bower). Lang, W.H. Glasgow University Archive Services GB 0248 DC2/15/1/168. WATERSTON, C.D. 2000. Albeit George Long DSc(Manc), LLD(Glas). Royal Society of Edinburgh Year Book, 189-190. WATSON, J. 2005. One hundred and fifty years of palaeo-

botany at Manchester University. In: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds.) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications 241,229-257. YOUNG, J. & GLEN, D.C. 1888. Notes on a section of Carboniferous strata, containing erect stems of fossil trees and beds of intrusive dolerite, in the old whinstone quarry, Victoria Park, Lower Balshagray, near Whiteinch and Partick. Transactions of the Geological Society of Glasgow, VIII, 227-235.

One hundred and fifty years of palaeobotany at Manchester University JOAN WATSON Palaeobotany Laboratory, Williamson Building, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester Ml3 9PL, UK Abstract: The year 2001 marked the 150th anniversary of the appointment of William Crawford Williamson to the Chair of Natural History at Owens College, which later became the Victoria University of Manchester. Since 1851 a palaeobotanical presence in Manchester has been continuous, apart from 1940 to 1950. The history of the various incumbents in academic posts and their contributions are charted and discussed. They include Williamson, Weiss, Lang, Stopes, Walton and Watson. Other palaeobotanists associated with Manchester were students, museum staff or incumbents of various ancillary appointments, and there were many distinguished visitors. The total number of students registered for higher degrees is remarkably few, nearly half studying with Watson in the past 20 years. The proportion of women palaeobotanists, counting staff and postgraduate students, is very high. The research output from Manchester includes most British fossil floras, and impressive attention to devising and improving laboratory techniques from Williamson to the present day. There is evidence that palaeobotany in Manchester has been considered an anachronism even from Williamson's time and it now faces extinction in 2005.

2001 marked the 150th anniversary of the appointment of William Crawford Williamson (then aged 45) to the Chair of Natural History at Owens College, which was founded in 1851 and eventually spawned the Victoria University of Manchester. During the past 150 years a palaeobotanical presence on the teaching staff at Manchester University has been virtually continuous, apart from 1940 to 1950 following the retirement of Lang and a short period following the retirement of Calder in the mid1960s (see Fig. 1 and discussion below). The former interregnum was in the event unintentional, whilst the latter was almost certainly with the intent of bringing this anachronistic dynasty to an end. There have been seven main incumbents in academic posts, of whom four (Williamson, Weiss, Lang and Watson) now have a combined service of 148 years. Of the others (Stopes, Walton and Calder), Stopes was in Manchester for two periods totalling only 6 years and, of course, later became legendary for matters that came to overshadow her palaeobotanical legacy (Briant 1962; Hall 1977; Rose 1992; Chaloner 2005). Other palaeobotanists associated with Manchester University have been incumbents of Manchester Museum posts and various University appointments or academic visitors. The total number of postgraduate students gaining higher degrees in the field of palaeobotany is remarkably low, probably just over a dozen, with six of them studying with Watson (Fig. 1). The accumulated research output from Manchester encompasses most British fossil floras throughout the geological timescale plus much national and international involvement and collaboration. Almost all of the work was associated

with an impressive attention to devising and improving laboratory techniques. This technical acuity started with Williamson's section cutting abilities (Cash 1896) and much has been written about the true origins of his techniques. Walton (1959, p. 231), Andrews (1980, p. 76) and Long (1996, p. 204) have all related how Williamson's technique was modified from the method first published by Witham (1831), who himself learned of it third hand. There is no doubt that Williamson in turn taught the technique to Sorby, who revolutionized petrology by the use of thin sections (Cash 1896, p. 31). Advances in other laboratory techniques at Manchester continued most notably with the ingenuity of Walton (1923, 1927, 1928, 1930) and flourish to the present day (Watson & Alvin 1976; Beckett 1998; CusackDrury 2001) (see Fig. 1). This is an opportune time to reflect on the glorious golden past of palaeobotany in Manchester and to marvel at its longevity despite having so long since been passing out of fashion and favour there. Its demise now awaits the departure of the present incumbent in 2005, which will almost certainly mark its exclusion from the enormous, new institution formed in 2004 by reuniting the old 'Owens College' with UMIST as the University of Manchester.

Literature sources Much of the information in this paper is drawn from unpublished sources. Prominent amongst these is the PhD thesis of Dr Alison Kraft (2000) for which she had access to the University of Manchester archives

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,229-257.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

230

J. WATSON

Fig. \. Palaeobotanists and their research interests associated with Manchester University from 1851 to the present. All were in the Botany Department except for Hickling, D.M.S. Watson and Holden (Geology), and Joan Watson's six PhD students who were all formally assigned to the Geology Department. Other botanists with Manchester-Glasgow links are discussed by Charlton & Cutter (1998, p. 17).

including those of the Registrar and Vice-Chancellor. References to these archives appear in a general bibliographical list given by Kraft (2000) and she further gives precise details of individual documents in numerous footnotes. The page numbers for these footnotes are cited below where appropriate. Additional information has been freely drawn upon from two undergraduate essay projects undertaken by Helen Fisher (in 1977 using Manchester University Calendars, Reports to Council and other archival material as data sources) and Ruth Pickering (in 2001 using general literature). Apart from the above sources, much of the information about W.C. Williamson has been gleaned from his autobiography Reminiscences of a Yorkshire Naturalist (Williamson 1896; Thomas & Watson 1985) but, in the interest of continuity and brevity, this work is not repeatedly given a full citation in the text and is referred to as the Reminiscences.

The lavishly illustrated history of the Botany Department at Manchester by Alan Charlton & Elizabeth Cutter (1998) also includes much archival material and offers a considerably expanded background to the information presented here. In the interest of brevity, the use of University, Museum and Calendar throughout the text refer to Manchester University, Manchester Museum and Manchester University Calendars.

Pre-1851 background In 1851 neither W.C. Williamson nor palaeobotany were new to the Manchester area. There had long been a keen interest in fossil plants amongst working men in Lancashire. This is reputed to have started as a hobby in Oldham where cotton mill workers collected calcareous nodules and left them to weather on

150 YEARS OF PALAEOBOTANY AT MANCHESTER

top of the mill yard walls (Lomax 1899). The study grew and came to the notice of professional men, in particular Edward Binney, a Manchester solicitor and businessman (Binney 1912). Binney developed an interest in geology via legal work for coal-mine owners (Reminiscences, p. 78), subsequently made his fortune by patenting the manufacture of paraffin oil and eventually dedicated himself to palaeobotanical studies of plants from the Coal Measures. Binney and Williamson both came to Manchester in 1835 as young men, and in October of that year first encountered each other at the reading of a paper by Leigh & Binney (1836) to the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society. Williamson challenged the authors' conclusions concerning the age of the rocks in question (Reminiscences, p. 61) and was subsequently proved right in his interpretation (Williamson 1836). Thereafter, they conducted a lifelong uneasy relationship, which seems to have veered between collaboration and disagreement (Reminiscences, p. 195), although there is no doubt that Williamson's botanical criticisms of Binney's work were always correct. Williamson came to Manchester in 1835 (aged 19) to become Curator of the Museum of the Manchester Natural History Society (Kargon 1977), interrupting his medical studies to do so. He was introduced to Jurassic fossils at an early age by his gardener father, an avid collector along the North Yorkshire coast who became Curator of Scarborough Museum. In 1832, having completed his schooling, Williamson commenced his medical studies at the age of 16 (Reminiscences, p. 26). These first took the form of an apprenticeship with Thomas Weddell, an apothecary turned general practitioner in Scarborough, on whose kitchen table Williamson drew many of the illustrations for The Fossil Flora of Great Britain (Lindley & Hutton 1831-1837; Reminiscences, p. 35) in his ample spare time. Indeed, throughout the 3 years of his rather lax and unfinished medical apprenticeship with Weddell, Williamson was able to continue his geological and other natural history studies; his talents were already known to Sir Roderick Murchison through family connections with William Smith and were soon to impress the Rev. Prof. William Buckland. By the age of 19 Williamson had also come to the notice of Dr Phillips, a Manchester Infirmary physician with interests in geology and biology. Phillips succeeded in luring Williamson away from Scarborough, first to become Curator of the Manchester Natural History Society Museum, then to resume his medical studies as a student in Manchester and finally to qualify as a medical practitioner at University College London. At University College he met, was taught by and became a close friend of Lindley, the Professor of Botany for whom he had

231

Fig. 2. Professor William Crawford Williamson, LLD, FRS photographed holding a microscope slide beside what is thought to be his beloved microscope (Reminiscences, pp. 96 and 106) made in Manchester by John Benjamin Dancer (Butler 1986).

drawn the Yorkshire fossil plants, his youth taking Lindley greatly by surprise. On January 1st 1841 Williamson put up his brass plate in Oxford Road in Manchester, and by the time of his Owens College appointment in 1851 he had been a practicing physician and surgeon for 10 years. He was initially at some pains to avoid scientific distractions whilst establishing himself as a successful medical man, but being unexpectedly loaned a copy of Mantell's newly published Medals of Creation (Mantell 1844) Williamson was inspired to embark on a new phase of studies in microscopy. This led notably to his work on Foraminifera for which he had first got J.B. Dancer to adapt and improve his father's old Culpepper microscope (Reminiscences, p. 96). However, the results were disappointing and Williamson 'mustered courage to purchase one of Dancer's best microscopes' which to him were very costly (Reminiscences, p. 106). The coveted Dancer microscope, made in Manchester by this famous optical instrument maker (Weiss 1930; Ardern 1960; Butler 1986), is almost certainly the one that Williamson is seen with in Figure 2. As far as we know, it was the one he used throughout the many years of microscopy which eventually became exclusively palaeobotanical and lasted for the rest of his working life. However, it should be noted that Williamson's election to the Royal Society in 1854 was not for palaeobotanical research but on the strength of his scientific contributions on Volvox, Foraminifera, development of bones, scales and

232

J. WATSON

other dermal tissues of fossil and extant fish. These were his main research interests in the 1840s and 1850s (Reminiscences, pp. 126-130), carried out in his spare time from his medical practice.

Early years at Owens Under the terms of the will of John Owens (1790-1846), the college named after him was established in 1851 with the appointment of six professors, three of them full time at £350 per annum and three of them part time at £150 per year. Of the latter, W.C. Williamson was chosen for the 'Chair of Natural History, comprising Vegetable Physiology and Botany, Animal Physiology and Zoology, and Geology'. From this point, Williamson not only undertook the teaching of botany, zoology and geology single-handed until 1870, but assiduously continued his medical practice and research, which led directly to the founding of the Manchester Ear Institute of which he became surgeon. Amongst other things, he instigated evening lectures for working men and supplemented his income by giving numerous popular science lectures in surrounding towns. The many undertakings for which he found time eventually became untenable, and from 1870 new appointments eventually resulted in him relinquishing first geology (1874) and then zoology (1879), after when he remained only as Professor of Botany until his retirement in 1892. No laboratory was available at the original Quay Street site and even when the College moved to new premises on Oxford Road in 1873 only a single room was provided for Williamson's research and storage ('a poor mockery of a laboratory', Kraft, 2000, p. 28), and there was still no laboratory for practical instruction. Williamson was carrying out work on coal from around the world by the mid1870s and his 'coalhole' in which he made numerous sections for 'the black investigation' (Reminiscences, p. 158) was at his house in Fallowfield (Seward 1934, p. 210). It was not until 1887 that the laboratories and lecture theatres of the Beyer Building and Museum, designed by Alfred Waterhouse, were completed to form the Quadrangle. An Honorary LLD was conferred on Alfred Waterhouse by the College in 1895.

Highlights of the Williamson years There are about 146 publications in the list appended to Williamson's Reminiscences (1896, pp. 217-228), of which there are 23 published before his appointment in 1851, mostly non-palaeobotanical. Remarkably, his research and publications never became exclusively palaeobotanical, although the

seven or eight papers published after his retirement were all related to fossil plants. The examples of his activities cited here are selected from those for which he is particularly famous or which remain relevant and still in evidence. Williamson's palaeobotanical investigations were eventually dominated by the arborescent pteridophytes of the Coal Measures, and this is his main scientific legacy, but his early attention to Jurassic cycad-like plant fossils is also of considerable interest and remains amongst his most memorable work (Williamson 1855,1870). Based on numerous specimens of associated leaves, trunks and reproductive structures, his whole plant reconstruction of the plant then called Zamia gigas is shown in Figure 15. This was the first comprehensive study of the extinct gymnosperm group the Bennettitales, at that time still not distinguished from the Cycadales. Williamson (Reminiscences, pp. 111-115) relates a long and sorry story about the publication of this work, which he refers to as 'a memoir doomed to disaster'. It was eventually rescued from oblivion by Carruthers who saw to the publication of Williamson's paper (1870) at the same time as completing his own work on these cycad-like plants. Carruthers (Fig. 5, middle row, second from right; 1870, p. 691) created the genus Williamsonia (in honour of both W.C. Williamson and his father) for the entire reconstructed Yorkshire plant, the name that is now used for the female bennettitalean reproductive structure (Harris 1967; Watson &Sincock 1992). Williamson's most famous palaeobotanical work is his intensive study of the anatomically preserved plants in the coal balls of the Carboniferous Coal Measures of the Lancashire coalfield, published as a series of 19 monographs by the Royal Society. This work was just starting in the 1850s, with publication following considerably later, and Williamson clearly states that he 'had no intention of entering upon the long series of studies of the carboniferous plants' (Reminiscences, p. 195). Edward Binney had been investigating these plants for a considerable time (e.g. Binney 1847) and with Hooker (Hooker & Binney 1855) had published the first scientific description of the nodules that came to be known as coal balls. It was largely for this work that Binney was elected FRS in 1856. It seems quite clear that Williamson's involvement with plants from the Coal Measures, at least initially, arose from Binney's lack of botanical knowledge that he sought to rectify. Williamson's knowledgeable involvement led, of course, directly to his legendary stance on the cryptogamic nature of the Carboniferous trees, in opposition to Brongniart and other continental palaeobotanists. The saga of his 'heresies', graphically described by Williamson in his Reminiscences (Chapter 13), has been admirably retold by Andrews (1980, p. 88 et seq.). The results of Williamson's

150 YEARS OF PALAEOBOTANY AT MANCHESTER

233

Fig. 3. The large Stigmaria photographed standing in the quarry at Clayton near Bradford, Yorkshire where it was excavated in 1886. Mrs Williamson (Reminiscences, p. 186) tells the story of their visit to the quarry to see it in torrential rain.

Fig. 4. Williamson's Stigmaria as it now stands on display in the Stratigraphic Hall of Manchester Museum; photographed in 2001 shortly after revision of the accompanying display.

work, in the famous series of papers 'On the Organisation of the Fossil Plants of the Coal Measures' published in 19 parts of the Transactions of the Royal Society (part 1 in 1871; part 19 in 1893; see also the index in 1891), gained him the Royal Medal in 1874 (see figures in Thomas & Watson 1985, pp. xiv-xvi) and the Wollaston Medal of the Geological Society in 1890 (Proceedings in Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 1890; Long 1996, p. 219). In 1883 the degree of LLD was conferred on Williamson by Edinburgh University (Cash 1896). The study of Stigmaria ficoides Brongniart by Williamson (1887) was outstanding, but it should be noted that Binney, a long time previously, had a personal triumph in relation to this most common of fossils in the Coal Measures that for many years gave rise to much speculation and was considered by some to be a huge floating aquatic plant. In 1837 workmen constructing the railway between Manchester and Bolton cut through a group of large Sigillaria bases with their roots intact (Reminiscences, p. 185). It fell to Binney and the geologist Eddowes Bowman (1841) to identify Stigmaria and to pronounce that it was clearly the root of Sigillaria, so clearing up the long-standing mystery. However, the pteridophyte v. gymnosperm dispute with Brongniart and his supporters raged until almost 50 years later when Williamson's Stigmaria monograph (1887) finally dispelled all doubts (Ward 1895). This authoritative work was, of course, greatly enhanced, in the nick of time, by the discovery and inclusion of the magnificent specimen shown in Figures 3 and 4. With the help of his elder son, a Manchester solicitor, Williamson raised the money to purchase and remove the specimen from the Bradford quarry (Fig. 3) and presented it for display in the new museum at Owens College (Fig. 4), where it still 'stands without a rival for

magnitude and grandeur in any of the museums of the world' (Reminiscences, pp. 184-187).

Williamson's influence Kidston, Seward and Scott The Reminiscences, which abound in details of zoological, clinical, domestic and other miscellaneous interests with many amusing asides, give a restricted impression of the wide influence that Williamson came to have within palaeobotany in general, as well as attracting individuals to the subject. At least three young people who are known to have been inspired by Williamson became eminent palaeobotanists, Robert Kidston, Albert Charles Seward and Duckinfield Henry Scott. Williamson undertook many popular lectures, in numerous towns, becoming renowned for 'his clearness, vivacity, his hearty, straightforward, racy language, his facile use of the chalk on blackboard, [which] drew to him large audiences' (Cash 1896). It is thought (Lang 1925; Long 1996) to have been just such a Williamson lecture in Glasgow (possibly on 'Coal and Coal Plants' in 1875) that stimulated Robert Kidston and first attracted him to the study of fossil plants. In 1886 Albert Charles Seward, at the age of 23, spent a year in Manchester working with Williamson on fossil plants (Thomas 1941). Consequently, Seward's earliest papers (e.g. 1888, 1890) dealt with plants of the Coal Measures before he turned his attention to the Wealden Flora (Seward 1894, 1895), the Yorkshire Jurassic Flora and many other palaeobotanical topics during his distinguished career at Cambridge. Seward was awarded an Honorary DSc by Manchester University in 1923. Duckinfield Henry Scott first met Williamson in 1889 (Seward 1934), an event which led to him visiting Manchester in 1890 in the company of Bower (Fig. 5,

234

J.WATSON

front row, third from right; Andrews 1980, p. 95). He became so fascinated by Williamson's collection of fossil plant sections that he converted to palaeobotany, from anatomical studies of living plants, with missionary zeal (Seward 1934). Scott consequently agreed to Williamson's proposal that they should collaborate on a series of memoirs supplementary to his 'Observations' in 19 parts (Seward 1934). In 1892 Williamson retired to Clapham (aged 76), Scott (aged 38) took up the Honorary Keepership at the Jodrell Laboratory, Kew, where they undertook a very happy collaboration, completing three parts of the 'Further Observations' before Williamson's death in 1895 (Williamson & Scott 1894, 18950, b). Scott was awarded an Honorary DSc by Manchester University in 1912.

Williamson's correspondents, visits and visitors In 1985, during preparations for the facsimile printing of the Reminiscences (Thomas & Watson 1985), Watson compiled a list of Williamson's distinguished palaeobotanical and other scientific acquaintances. The handwritten list still exists and is reliable, but the various sources cannot now be cited (e.g. manuscript collections; Sotheby's sale catalogue; obituaries; footnotes). Williamson's boyhood acquaintance with William Smith, Smith's nephew John Phillips and Sir Roderick Murchison (Reminiscences, p. 11) led to an early introduction to other influential men and, by the age of 20, he was attending meetings of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, where he soon came to know Dalton, Joule and Playfair. Williamson was a prolific letter writer with correspondents known to include Darwin, Dawson, Grand' Eury, Heer, Hooker, Huxley, Kidston, Mantell, Nathorst, Prestwich and Renault, to which must be added those whom he visited and visited him (Fig. 5). There are recorded visits by him to Brongniart, Geikie, Murchison, Schimper, and his medical contemporaries Harvey, Meniere and Toynbee. Visitors to him, in addition to the British Association delegates in Figure 5, included de Candolle, Kolliker, Lyell, Solms-Laubach and Lester Ward. It is certain that these lists err on the conservative side.

Williamson's Demonstrators: Hartog, Ward and Hick A separate Chair of Geology, established in 1871, had relieved Williamson's heavy workload, but, with the addition of Medical School teaching, the pressures of Williamson's increasing workload again began to tell

on him as he also remained active in his medical practice and continued to give his popular lectures. In 1878 he was granted the assistance of a demonstrator and eventually a succession of three people occupied the post. Marcus Hartog was appointed in 1878 to assist in the teaching of new courses both in botany and zoology (Kraft 2000). This was just a year before Williamson resigned from the Chair of Zoology and Milnes Marshall was appointed to take over a new department. Hartog was in post at a most fortuitous time for rendering a great favour to Williamson (Ward 1895). With the aid of a friend in Paris he helped to set forth Williamson's proven arguments, on the Carboniferous pteridophytes, in an impeccable French manuscript for publication in France (Williamson & Hartog 1882). Ward (1895) relates how Williamson told him this story with great relish. Hartog stayed in Manchester until 1883 and was in a position to observe closely Williamson's increasing inability to cope with the world of botany changing around him (Hartog quoted by Kraft 2000, pp. 30-33). The enormous range of activities that Williamson continued to maintain is hard to comprehend at this distance in time, but it is clear that the 'New Botany' was closing in on him, initially heralded by the choice of Hartog's successor. When a replacement demonstrator was appointed to assist with teaching, Williamson played no part in choosing the appointee. The appointment of Harry Marshall Ward (Fig. 5, front row, third from left) was engineered at the suggestion of Thiselton-Dyer, Director of Kew (Fig. 5, middle row, extreme left; 1911, p. iii), via Roscoe, Professor of Chemistry, and Greenwood, the Owens College Principal. Already experienced in research mycology and plant pathology (which he continued at Manchester), Ward clearly represented the surreptitious introduction of the 'New Botany', and he took over all of the physiology and histology teaching from Williamson, as well as introducing his own new course in plant embryology (Kraft 2000, p. 48). Ward was not associated with Williamson's research and stayed in Manchester only until 1886, leaving to become Professor of Botany at Cooper's Hill, Surrey. References to Ward in the Reminiscences (p. 153) relate to Williamson's pride at seeing his protege (from his 1875 evening classes) quickly become FRS (1888) and then receive the Royal Medal in 1893. Ward became Professor of Botany at Cambridge in 1895, was awarded an Honorary DSc from Manchester University in 1902 and died prematurely in 1906, aged 52 (Thiselton-Dyer 1911). He was the father of Frank Kingdon Ward, the famous plant hunter. Ward's replacement in 1886 was Thomas Hick, who arrived with wide interests in natural history, but gradually turned to palaeobotany under

150 YEARS OF PALAEOBOTANY AT MANCHESTER

235

Fig. 5. The 'brilliant gathering of botanists' (plus one or two others; Reminiscences, p. 188) who attended the 1887 meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science in Manchester and enjoyed memorable hospitality from Professor and Mrs Williamson at their house and garden in Fallowfield (Cash 1896, p. 31). Back row, left to right: W.R. McNab (Dublin), lessen (1), M. Treub (Buitenzorg), Graf H. zu Solms-Laubach (Gottingen), A. Weismann (Freiburg), Marquis G. de Saporta (Aix-en-Provence), J.G. Baker (Kew), Ray Lankester (University College London), D'Arcy Thompson (Dundee). Middle row, left to right: Sir William Thiselton-Dyer (Kew), F. Cohn (Breslau), A. de Bary (Strasburg), WC. Williamson (Manchester), Asa Gray (Harvard), E.G. Pringheim (Berlin), W. Carruthers (British Museum), J.S. Gardner (amateur botanist, London). Front row, left to right: F.W Oliver (later at University College London), S.H. Vines (Cambridge), H. Marshall Ward (Manchester), Charles Bailey (amateur, Manchester), I.E. Balfour (Oxford), P.O. Bower (Glasgow), Rev. M.C. Potter (Cambridge), J.R. Vaizey (Cambridge).

Williamson's influence. His teaching load must have been a heavy responsibility from the start and as Williamson's health declined 'he had gradually to delegate more and more of his work to his excellent assistant, Mr Hick' (Weiss 1929). After Williamson's retirement in 1892, Weiss inherited Hick as his own excellent assistant. At this point Hick started to publish his own research in a series of short palaeobotanical papers (Hick 1894, 18950, b, 18960, b) based both on hand specimens and a large collection of slides (now in Manchester Museum). This seems to have been his personal collection of coal-ball sections that he had either made himself or acquired from others in the course of assisting Williamson. Some of Hick's work revisited Williamson's own published accounts (Hick 18960) and his work on attributing the Kaloxylon root to Lyginodendron (Hick 18950) coincided with a collaborative account of the same by Williamson & Scott (1895&). This was to be Williamson's last publication, received by the Royal Society in the month that he died (Seward 1934). Hick died in 1896 after a short illness.

Williamson's last years at Manchester When the British Association for the Advancement of Science arranged to hold the 1887 meeting in Manchester, Williamson was determined to make it successful and memorable, and 'was especially anxious to bring to it a brilliant gathering of botanists'. The Reminiscences (pp. 188-190) include an amusing account of his hard work to this end, and the amazing gathering in Figure 5 attests to his great success. The new laboratories were recently completed, the Museum building was sufficiently ready to be used by the British Association, and the Williamsons generously entertained the assembled naturalists at their house and garden. This was only 5 years before Williamson retired at the age of 76 and he undoubtedly regarded this triumph as the highlight of his last years at Manchester. Failing health caused him to retire in 1892 after 41 years of service, but he was refused a pension by the university (for fear of creating a precedent) and therefore chose to move to a London suburb (Clapham Common). This allowed Williamson to attend meet-

236

J.WATSON

Fig. 7. Four prominent members of the Botany Department staff in 1930. Right to left: William Henry Lang, Barker Professor of Cryptogamic Botany; Ernest Frederick Weiss shortly before his retirement as George Harrison Professor of Botany and Head of Department; John Walton, Lecturer in Palaeobotany, shortly before leaving to become Regius Professor of Botany at Glasgow; Irene Manton, Assistant Lecturer in Botany, later Professor of Botany at Leeds. See Charlton & Cutter (1998) for the whole photograph of which this is a portion.

ings of the Royal Society and to continue Carboniferous studies, for which he had recruited the collaboration of his younger friend D.H. Scott at Kew (Seward 1934; Walton 1959; Andrews 1980). Cleal (pers. comm. 2004) is of the opinion that Williamson's contributions in anatomical palaeobotany were so enormous and revolutionary that they have not received the accolades they deserve. It is easy to overlook the fact that similar opinions were held long ago and have been expressed by various writers (Ward 1895; Scott 1897; Seward 1934, p. 210; Andrews 1980). Similarly, the impatience and resentment that Williamson engendered in some quarters can be seen in published correspondence to Scott (Andrews 1980, p. 88; Long 1996, p. 219). It is obvious that a serious reappraisal of Williamson and his contributions in a historical context is long overdue.

The Weiss era Post-Williamson; pre-Lang Fig. 6. Above: Ernest Frederick Weiss, appointed in 1892 at the age of 26 to be Williamson's immediate successor as Professor of Botany; pencil drawing by Helen T. Cohen in 1898 shortly before his 33rd birthday. Below: Weiss's personal bookplate used for many years in all his botanical books and papers; many later donated to the Botany Department.

Following Williamson's retirement Frederick Ernest Weiss (Figs 1 and 6-8) was appointed as the second incumbent of the Chair of Botany in 1892 at the age of 26. A.C. Seward was also a short-listed candidate for the post, but he was judged not yet to have 'attained to marked eminence as a man of science'

150 YEARS OF PALAEOBOTANY AT MANCHESTER

237

Fig. 8. The group on the palaeobotany excursion from the 1930 International Botanical Congress held in Cambridge. The names are only of the palaeobotanists identified so far by Charlton & Cutter (1998, p. 65). On Chester Arnold's left is G.H. Carpenter, Keeper of Manchester Museum, and on Jongmans' left is J. Wilfred Jackson, Assistant Keeper in Geology at Manchester Museum.

(Kraft 2000, p. 87). Weiss was born in Huddersfield, but, following the death of his father, had been at school in Germany and Switzerland before entering University College London where he switched from botany to graduate in zoology and then back again to botany under the influence of F.W. Oliver (Fig. 5, front row, far left; Thomas 1953). Weiss had just completed 3 years of a lectureship and research into latex cells at University College, when he left for Manchester where he added palaeobotany to his wide research interests and remained for 38 years until his retirement in 1930. Clearly, Weiss was regarded by the appointing committee as representing the laboratory based 'New Botany'; already flourishing at most other universities, with Manchester seen as lagging behind and synonymous with old-fashioned palaeobotany under the conservative Williamson. Weiss did not disappoint; he vigorously set about expanding and diversifying facilities, introducing the teaching of ecology and physiology, and encouraging a wider range of research within the department. Weiss undertook heavy responsibilities in teaching and administration, and for the first 8 years published no original research papers. The pencil sketch in Figure 6 shows him during this time, just before his 33rd birthday. He had inherited Williamson's devoted assistant,

Thomas Hick, as the only other member of the department and together they taught all subjects including palaeobotany. Weiss also actively supervised the botanical section of the Museum, where he instigated changes that made the collections more accessible and educational for the general public. His return to research resulted in a paper on the phloem of Lepidophloios and Lepidodendron (Weiss 1901) and heralded an active period of work on various plants from the Coal Measures. It seems likely that some of this work involved the help of Hick who, until his death in 1896, assisted Weiss for 4 years. Weiss also had assistance from James Lomax who continued to provide sections, as he had for Williamson. James Lomax was a member of the Manchester Geological Society who established a thriving business in Bolton with his son (also James), the Lomax Palaeo-Botanical Laboratories, supplying thousands of coal-ball sections for teaching and research to museums and universities around the world (Howell 2005). In 1903 Owens College was granted an independent charter and became the Victoria University of Manchester. Having previously been part of a federation of colleges, along with Leeds and Liverpool, this new status allowed the university to award its own degrees for the first time and to continue to

238

J. WATSON

dents attracted to it. By 1911 Lang had already been in post for 2 years in a newly established second Chair of Botany and Stopes had just departed.

Appointment of Marie Stopes

Fig. 9. The extension to the Botany Department designed by Paul Waterhouse to blend with his father Alfred's design for the earlier Quadrangle buildings; opened by D.H. Scott in 1911. The purpose-built accommodation included a palaeobotany laboratory and south-facing roof greenhouses. The pillared balcony was later converted to a secretary's office.

expand. However, the amount of space inherited from Williamson was inadequate for the needs of an expanding department within the new university and Weiss set out to acquire more as soon as possible, including a greenhouse in the Main Quadrangle, soon known to the students as 'the Hotbed of Weiss' (Weiss 1929, p. 42). Eventually, following considerable lobbying by Weiss, a new laboratory block was purpose built for the Botany Department. Designed by Paul Waterhouse, son of Alfred Waterhouse, the Botanical Laboratories (Fig. 9) were grafted on to the Main Building (Charlton 1952, p. 171; Charlton & Cutter 1998, pp. 18-21) and officially opened by D.H. Scott on November 3rd 1911 (Weiss 1929, p. 43). A notable feature of this building at the time was the impressive roof greenhouse (labelled in Fig. 9) specially designed for the provision of the fresh material always demanded by Weiss and Lang (Manton 1973) for undergraduate practical classes. With the addition of these new laboratory facilities Manchester's Botany Department once more became the main centre for teaching and research in the north of England, with growing numbers of stu-

In 1904 Marie Carmichael Stopes (Figs 1 and 10), on Weiss's recommendation, gained a position as Junior Demonstrator in Botany, becoming the first woman on the scientific staff of the university. Stopes had graduated from University College London in 1902, where she studied under the influence of Oliver, and in 1903 moved to Munich to work with Goebel on cycad seeds for her doctorate (see Chaloner 2005). It was in Munich that she met and became attracted to Professor Kuyiro Fujii, an expert on Ginkgo biloba, also working with Goebel. He followed her to Manchester as a visitor in February 1905 and returned to Japan in July of that year. It is clear from the evidence available to Stopes' biographers (Briant 1962; Hall 1977; Rose 1992) that by then, having fallen in love with Fujii whom she intended to marry, she was desperate to follow him to Japan. Already married, but to a wife from whom he became divorced by January 1906, it is evident that Fujii gave her considerable encouragement. She thus resolved to go to Japan herself in search of angiosperms and sought funding from the Royal Society on the strength of an application based on samples that arrived from Fujii in October 1906, sent at her request from her proposed investigation site: The first one which I chose and had cut is an angiosperm! I was awfully excited and showed it to Professor Weiss and to Mr Watson. Professor Weiss was also awfully excited and shook hands with me and congratulated me' (Briant 1962). Stopes was awarded a travelling grant and left the University to travel to Japan in July 1907, probably coinciding with her temporary post expiring (Charlton & Cutter 1998), and remained there for 18 months. The complex details of this visit, and the end of her hopes to marry Fujii, have been related at length by her biographers, but whatever else happened she travelled alone in Japan doing fieldwork. She was at great pains to collect and study a Cretaceous flora of nodular petrifactions, with the results published soon after her return to England (Stopes & Fujii 1909,1910). Surprisingly, Fujii does not feature with Stopes in the student jingle of the day: Why did Frederick William Gamble? Because he couldn't Marie Stopes! Why couldn't he Marie Stopes? Because she was addicted to Weiss!

F.W. Gamble was a Lecturer in Zoology, 1894-1908, whose name happened to suit this

150 YEARS OF PALAEOBOTANY AT MANCHESTER

239

Fig. 10. The Manchester women palaeobotanists, 1904-2004. Upper left: Marie Stopes; upper right: Isabel Cookson; lower left: Mary Calder; lower right: Joan Watson.

typical student rhyme of the day. It has passed down the years to Watson via Dr Roger Wood, Reader in Cytology, who heard it from Ralph Dennell, Professor of Zoology, 1964-1974. Stopes had a great capacity for hard work, but was also a very lively character about the place, which she found very dismal, and she led a hectic life. Paying close attention to looking as feminine as possible in her dress, she set about attending and organizing social events, including departmental fancy dress parties (Briant 1962, p. 48; Hall 1977, p. 52), to the extent that Mrs Weiss wrote her a letter (Rose 1992, p. 37) warning of the inadvisability of her unconventional behaviour in regard to students. Her social encounter with Robert Falcon Scott in Manchester (Briant 1962; Rose 1992) probably arose with the award of an Honorary DSc to Scott in 1905 by Manchester University. Her palaeobotanical dealings with Captain Scott are related by Chaloner (2005) and Rose (1992, p. 65) quotes the entire letter from Scott in 1909 that put paid to Marie's hopes of joining him on his second and fatal Antarctic voyage.

Stopes' return to Manchester in May 1909 was to a post as Lecturer in Palaeobotany specially arranged for her by Weiss (Kraft 2000, p. 169; also see discussion below). On arriving back in England (via ship to Vancouver and a train across Canada), and before taking up the new Manchester post, she immediately spent 2 months writing up the Japanese research results for the Royal Society. The preliminary account (Stopes & Fujii 1909; communicated by D.H. Scott, read in May 1909) and the full paper (Stopes & Fujii 1910) were almost entirely Stopes' own work, masking her desperate disappointment and unhappiness concerning Fujii. Her return to the Botany Department coincided with the appointment of Lang to a newly established second Chair of Botany, but there is no evidence of collaboration or any particular rapport between them. It was during this second period in Manchester that her popular book Ancient Plants (Stopes 19100) was published, with the anatomical photomicrographs provided by D.M.S. Watson. It is also in this period that Stopes founded The Sportophyte, a humorous, botanical pseudo-journal that she edited and more or

240

J.WATSON

less entirely wrote using various pseudonyms. However, remaining restless, she also became embroiled in the tangled affairs of two young men friends, constantly went back home to Hampstead Heath, accepted numerous invitations to lecture about Japan and attend conferences abroad, arranged and attended dances at the Manchester Women's Union, turned her attentions to women's suffrage and again offered to accompany Captain Scott to the Antarctic (Rose 1992, pp. 58-68). By May 1910 she had been granted research facilities at University College London and in July 1910 her doctor in Hampstead advised that on health grounds she should not live in Manchester. Her appointment at Manchester University was officially terminated in November 1910 (Senate records). Marie Stopes was quite prolific in research during her short time at Manchester (Stopes 1906, 1907, 191Qa, b, 1911; Stopes & Kershaw 1910), especially considering the extent and complexity of her other documented activities and correspondence. The well-known work on coal balls with D.M.S. Watson (Stopes & Watson 1908) must have laid the foundations of her later distinguished work on coal petrology.

Early research students: Hickling, Watson and Holden Henry George Albert Hickling first came to Manchester as a geology undergraduate in 1902 (Fig. 1), when the Botany, Geology and Zoology departments were housed in the Beyer Building, with a close association between staff and students of all departments plus the Museum. This was at a time when palaeobotany was riding high everywhere, with the discoveries by Oliver (Salisbury 1952) relating to Lagenostoma (Oliver & Scott 1904) in sections of Lancashire coal balls made by Lomax (see Andrews 1980, pp. 164-165). The newly established seed-ferns caused much interest in Manchester where there were large collections of the local material, and this drew Hickling into palaeobotany research. Following his graduation in 1905 Hickling was appointed as a Demonstrator and Assistant Lecturer in Geology in 1906, was awarded an MSc in 1909 and became DSc in 1910. He produced two admirable papers on the detailed anatomy of calamite cones (Hickling 1907, 1910) and made considerable collections of plants from the Old Red Sandstone. In honour of this, Kidston and Lang named an exceptional Old Red Sandstone plant Hicklingia (Kidston & Lang 1923), the rather spectacular type specimen of which, on a beautifully trimmed slab, remains in the Manchester Museum. After moving from Manchester to Newcastle in 1920, Hickling retained palaeobotanical interests

largely in relation to his extensive and distinguished coal studies (Watson 1956). David Meredith Scares Watson became a student at the University in 1904, where he became acquainted with, and perhaps influenced by, Hickling who was 2 years ahead of him. As with all students of the time, he was left largely to his own devices and thus 'had time to read extensively, attend classes in other subjects and study in the museum', recording that 'to a very large extent Hawkins, Hickling and myself taught one another, especially palaeontology, reading the books available and using the admirable museum' (Parrington & Westoll 1974, p. 484). Watson sectioned some coal ball material, given to him by a taxidermist (Andrews 1980, p. 141), which he found to contain the seed Lagenostoma. He thus became known to Weiss and Stopes and, on the advice of Boyd Dawkins (Professor of Geology), Watson changed his main subject from chemistry to geology and found time to attend botany classes (Parrington & Westoll 1974, p. 484). Before graduating with First Class Honours in Geology, in 1907, Watson (1906) had already published his first palaeobotanical paper. He published several more palaeobotanical papers whilst still a research student (Watson 1907, 1908a, b, 1909) and was awarded a graduate studentship, becoming Beyer Fellow in 1908. This year also saw the publication of the wellknown joint paper with Stopes on coal balls (Stopes & Watson 1908). The following year he took his MSc and was appointed Demonstrator in Geology. Increasingly interested in fossil vertebrates between 1908 and 1910, he studied the collections at the British Museum (Natural History) and went to work there for a year whilst retaining the post of Honorary Lecturer in Palaeontology at Manchester. In 1911 Watson left Manchester to take up a lectureship at University College London, where he eventually became Professor of Zoology having moved totally into vertebrate palaeontology (Parrington & Westoll 1974). In 1943 Manchester University conferred an Honorary DSc on D.M.S. Watson. Henry Smith Holden graduated in 1909 with a BSc in Botany and MSc in 1911, 4 years behind Hickling and 2 years behind Watson. There is no obvious evidence of Holden being drawn into their sphere of influence, which would seem likely given the closeness of the departments. Holden's (1910, 1912) published work on wounding in fossil and extant fern petioles was supervised by Weiss whilst at Manchester and continued at Nottingham. Holden was appointed to the staff at Nottingham, where T.M. Harris later became an undergraduate bound for a medical career. Harris (pers. comm. 1960s; Chaloner 1985) was considerably influenced by Holden's teaching and credited him with saving him from taking up medicine as intended. Holden graduated with a Manchester DSc in 1921.

150 YEARS OF PALAEOBOTANY AT MANCHESTER

Weiss plus Lang Years Arrival of Lang In 1908 Professor Thomas Barker, the late Professor of Mathematics but also an amateur bryologist, left a bequest to establish a Chair of Cryptogamic Botany at the university, and to fund new Cryptogamic Research Laboratories (Charlton & Cutter 1998; Kraft 2000, p. 201). In 1909, therefore, the Barker Chair of Cryptogamic Botany was established and William Henry Lang (Figs 7 and 8), a protege of Bower at Glasgow, was always the preferred candidate. Although a medical graduate, Lang took up botany in preference and became Bower's Senior Assistant in 1896, whilst GwynneVaughan held a junior post. He had worked for a time with D. Oliver and D.H. Scott at Kew, where he took up experimental work on ferns and had become eminent in Cryptogamic botany research by 1908, when awarded the degree of DSc at Glasgow University. Lang's judicious appointment to the new Manchester chair in 1909 was greatly advantageous to all, at personal, departmental and university levels (Liston & Sanders 2005). The largely research post suited Lang so well that he subsequently rejected several offers of prestigious chairs elsewhere (Boney 200la, b) in favour of staying at Manchester until his retirement in 1940. With Lang's appointment there also commenced a long period of close connection and collaboration between Manchester and Glasgow, then the outstanding centre for palaeobotanical research with Bower in the Regius Chair (Lang 1949). This association embraced not only Lang's outstanding Rhynie work with Kidston, but also at least seven other people who swapped posts between the two universities and have been dubbed The Glasgow Mafia' (Fig. 1) (Charlton & Cutter 1998, p. 17). With the establishment of the named Barker Chair, it was deemed necessary for the senior chair also to become distinguished in this way and in 1910 Weiss was re-designated the George Harrison Professor of Botany, with an unrestricted bequest providing the funds. Weiss and Lang proved to be personally compatible, and spent 21 congenial and fruitful years with palaeobotany as the major research output of the department. From 1909 to 1911 there were four palaeobotanists, with Stopes also in post and D.M.S. Watson still associated with Manchester. After this Weiss' own research publications changed sharply from palaeobotany to his wider botanical interests; also coinciding with him temporarily becoming Vice-Chancellor from 1913 to 1915. Weiss undertook many offices, such as President of the Manchester Microscopical Society for 15 years, President of the Manchester

241

Literary and Philosophical Society (1908-1910) and was prominent in the British Association. He was elected to the Royal Society in 1917, went on to serve on its Council from 1924 to 1925, and acted as President of the Linnean Society 1931-1934. He certainly retained a close interest in and attachment to palaeobotany (Weiss 1925, 1929), which continued to dominate the Botany Department in the 1920s with the addition of Walton to the staff and Isabel Cookson as a visitor working with Lang. Early Lang years; pre-Walton Lang was particularly given to collaborative work, outstandingly with Kidston in the early years. He was more or less free from administrative duties, which were undertaken by Weiss, and his teaching duties were concentrated into a single term, so that he had ample time for research, and from 1911 the new laboratories with extensive roof greenhouses (Fig. 9) were ready for use. Lang had already been elected to the Royal Society, in 1911, before the famous Rhynie studies. Following the premature death of Gwynne-Vaughan in 1915, Lang was called upon by Robert Kidston, an old friend from his Glasgow days, to undertake a joint study of his large collection of slides from the Rhynie Chert in Aberdeenshire. This initiated a 10-year happy collaboration, with the Rhynie results published in a classic series of papers (Kidston & Lang 1917, 19200, b, 1921a, b). Lang frequently travelled to Kidston's house at Stirling during the Rhynie studies and wrote a delightfully affectionate and atmospheric account (Lang 1925, p. xix) of the great pleasures that these visits brought him. Kidston's purpose-built study was already well known to Lang (from visits with Gwynne-Vaughan in his Glasgow days) and he later described 'the study that was to become one of the best known and best loved places . . . like no other room that I have known . . . an ideal place for getting work done for it's own sake'. Lang's full description, which runs to 16 lines, is well worth taking the trouble to read. It is not clear how often Kidston visited Manchester, although he certainly travelled, and died on a visit to Wales. In 1921 he was awarded an Honorary DSc by Manchester University. The Rhynie papers, which became the most famous from amongst the prolific output of outstanding work by these two men, include their reconstructions of the plants then called Rhynia, Asteroxylon and Hornea (see Fig. 15, top) (Kidston & Lang 1921, plates 1 and 2). The original drawings, executed by Barrie Robinson in Indian ink on Bristol board, remain amongst the fossil plant col-

242

J.WATSON

lection in the Botany Department of Manchester Museum. Kidston and Lang continued their collaboration with studies of various Old Red Sandstone compressions, including the spectacular slab bearing the specimen of the plant they named Hicklingia (Kidston & Lang 1923) after George Hickling. Following Kidston's death in 1924 Lang continued to work on the Old Red Sandstone material, but in 1925 he also started a new, highly successful collaboration with a young visiting Australian, Isabel Cookson. When Cookson first visited Manchester Walton had been in post at Manchester for 2 years and thus palaeobotany was back up to the strength of four people. In addition, Lang's student Grace Wigglesworth (Figs 1 and 8 and discussion below) had become Assistant Keeper in the Museum. Appointment of Walton With the continuing expansion of the university, the Botany Department needed another lecturer and in 1923 John Walton (Figs 7 and 8) was appointed. He had graduated from Cambridge with a Botany degree in 1921, following interruption to his studies because of war service during 1915-1918, and was one of many palaeobotanists who came under the influence of Seward. In Walton's case this influence became all the stronger by his marrying Seward's daughter Dorothy. Walton was very active in research and strengthened the palaeobotanical output considerably. Some of his main achievements were the two major fossil plant techniques he developed and refined (Walton 1923, 1927, 1928) to aid the study of both petrifactions and compressions. These are the 'balsam transfer method', and the 'cellulose acetate peel method', modified versions of which (Lang 1926; Walton 1930, 1951; Joy et al 1956) have been in use ever since. The Walton balsam transfer method for compressions was modified into 'Ashby's cellulose-film transfer method' (Lang 1926) by Lang's laboratory assistant, Ernest Ashby. Walton (1927) adopted Ashby's method for specimens with a very thin film of organic material, but preferred his original method for thick coaly compressions, and Harris was still using Canada balsam at Reading in 1961. The acetate peel technique, in particular, revolutionized studies previously requiring the cutting of thin sections. Walton, continuing in the traditions at the University, engaged in the study of Carboniferous petrifactions, notably the Lepidophloios trunks preserved in volcanic ash on the Isle of Arran (Walton 1935), for which he found a refinement of the peel technique using gelatine (Walton 1930) was more successful. Some of Walton's enor-

mous peels of the Arran trunks remained for many years in the gallery at Manchester Museum illuminated from behind, but are no longer on public display, Walton's other research at Manchester included studies of material from Australia, South Africa and southern Rhodesia, published in more than a dozen papers. He was awarded the degree of DSc in 1929 whilst still a lecturer, and was promoted to Senior Lecturer in 1930, the year he left Manchester to go to the Regius Chair of Botany at Glasgow. Arrival of Isabel Cookson Isabel Cookson (Fig. 10), a Melbourne graduate, first arrived as a visitor to the Botany Department in 1925, when she started her outstanding 10-year collaboration with Lang on early land plants from Australia. She became a regular visitor and departmental funds were sometimes available to support her (Charlton & Cutter 1998, p. 61). Cookson was appointed as the Demonstrator in Mycology in 1926-1927; she returned in 1929-1930 when she was elected Honorary Research Fellow; for her last visit in 1933-1934 she was awarded a Grisedale Scholarship by the University. The Lang and Cookson collaborative research was on specimens from Lower Palaeozoic deposits, then of imprecise age, in Victoria. Lang & Cookson (1927) quickly published photographs and preliminary notes on the material, including leafy shoots of a then unnamed plant with comments on the stratigraphic problems, noting that the appearance of the flora in general suggested an age that could be Middle Devonian. This was followed by a second paper (Lang & Cookson 1930) that suggested a Silurian age based on graptolite evidence. The leafy shoots in the flora were, of course, the plant they later named Baragwanathia (Lang & Cookson 1935), by then regarded as undoubtedly Upper Silurian, but subsequently the subject of considerable dispute about the evidence for the age of the sediments. Using evidence from graptolites, an Upper Silurian (Ludlow) age for Baragwanathia has been restated by Garratt et al (1984). The amiable, successful collaboration of Lang and Cookson bred lasting pleasant memories, with Lang honouring Cookson by naming one of his simple vascular land plants Cooksonia (Lang 1937) and when Cookson died in 1973 she left a bequest to the Botany Department in Manchester, 'in memory of a valuable and happy time spent there in the time of the late Professor W.H. Lang'. After a final Baragwanathia paper (Cookson 1935) Cookson became an accomplished micropalaeontologist and palynologist, and remained active in research until shortly before she died.

150 YEARS OF PALAEOBOTANY AT MANCHESTER

Retirement of Weiss

Weiss retired in 1930 after serving for 38 years. He remained active as Emeritus Professor, increasing his publication rate considerably. He was awarded an Honorary of LLD degree by the University in 1931 and was called upon 10 years after his retirement to assist in choosing Lang's successor (Kraft 2000, p. 279; discussion below). He donated a considerable number of his palaeobotanical books and papers to the Botany Department Library when he left Manchester, and his distinctive bookplate (Fig. 6) remained a familiar reminder of him until the 1980s when the library was finally disbanded. In later retirement Weiss lived near Guildford and became very active in the Royal Horticultural Society (Thomas 1953). On Weiss's retirement, Walton was on a shortlist of five candidates for the George Harrison Chair of Botany, but was unsuccessful (Kraft 2000, p. 216) and at that point was promoted to Senior Lecturer. In the event, the successful candidate (W. Robinson, a mycologist) died before taking up the Chair and J.M.F. Drummond (a physiologist, not originally a candidate), who had succeeded Bower in the Regius Chair at Glasgow, was appointed in his place (Kraft 2000, p. 216). The vacant Regius Chair of Botany was then offered to Walton, who accepted and remained at Glasgow from 1930 until he retired in 1962. Weiss' retirement and Walton's departure to Glasgow left Lang as the only palaeobotanist at Manchester, albeit with Cookson still visiting and soon to be joined by two research students, Albert Long and W.N. Croft. Lang was also working closely with Irene Manton who had been appointed as an Assistant Lecturer in 1929. Later Lang years; post Weiss and Walton 1930 marked a juncture of considerable but inevitable change for Lang. He had been able to avoid duties on various University committees for most of his career, despite being expected to take them up as he grew in seniority. However, when Weiss retired Lang became the senior member of Senate and could no longer avoid participation in these matters that claimed an increasing proportion of his time (Salisbury 1961). Lang's research output diminished markedly; having published four papers in 1929, he published a total of only six papers between 1930 and his retirement in 1940. Weiss, on the other hand, freed from such onerous duties, published at least 11 papers in the same 10-year period. By 1930 the Botany Department staff had risen to eight in number, including Irene Manton (Fig. 7), who was appointed as Assistant Lecturer in 1929. Manton's happy impressions below therefore relate

243

to the last year that Weiss and Lang were in office together. The following is contained in a letter from Irene Manton to Helen Fisher (undergraduate essay 1977): I had never before known a department with two Professors and these two were unique, both F.R.S., both very approachable and both very keen on their work as well as helping the young. I owe almost everything I know to Lang for whom I demonstrated from 1929 till he retired in 1942 [sic]. He was a great teacher and the combination of teaching the fossils in their proper taxonomic groupings with living relatives was both enthralling and wholly new to me.

Figure 7 is part of the 1930 departmental photograph with Weiss, Lang, Walton and Manton sitting together. The full photograph, which can be seen in Charlton & Cutter (1998, p. 99), was probably taken early in the summer of 1930, around examination time. It includes Grace Wiggles worth from the Museum (wearing the same dress as in Fig. 8) and the mycologist Barbara Colson, who was later appointed at Reading by Harris (see discussion below). In August 1930, shortly before Weiss' retirement and Walton's move to Glasgow, the Botany Department and Museum were visited by a large and notable international gathering of palaeobotanists (Fig. 8), participants in the palaeobotanical excursion for delegates to the Vth International Botanical Congress in Cambridge. Not all the people in Figure 8 have been identified and any additional names would be most welcome, as would the whereabouts of any account of the visit known to have been given by a participant.

Lang student's: Long and Croft Albert George Long became an undergraduate at the university in 1934, taking a degree in Botany. He was very interested in palaeobotany throughout his student days and visited many of Lang's localities. After graduating in 1937, he remained at Manchester to work with Lang on coal balls from Lancashire and Yorkshire, and graduated with an MSc in 1938. In 1939 Long applied for the post of Assistant Lecturer in Botany but was unsuccessful, the job going to T.G. Tutin, who had at one time dabbled in palaeobotany at Cambridge (Tutin 1932). This was probably a deep disappointment to Long (1996), who then decided to take up school teaching out of necessity. He also continued to be very active in palaeobotany research at his home in Berwickshire, with Walton as his mentor in Glasgow. His work was largely published after leaving Manchester but at least one paper (Long 1943) carries the Manchester University address, and his lingering affection for the people and place, which was perhaps his spiritual home, shines out in

244

J. WATSON

his autobiography (Long 1996). In 1967 he was awarded the degree of DSc by Manchester University for his distinguished work on Lower Carboniferous seeds. William Noble Croft was a Cambridge graduate who, in 1937 (Long 1996, p. 45), arrived in Lang's laboratory to be instructed in and carry out palaeobotanical research. He had been working with O.T. Jones (Edwards 1954) on the Old Red Sandstone of the Welsh Borders where he discovered plant remains in the Senni Beds. He then worked with Lang in Manchester on this material until 1939, when he was successful in obtaining a post as a palaeobotanist at the British Museum (Natural History) (Andrews 1980, p. 124). Albeit Long was also a candidate for the BM (NH) post, and having become friendly they travelled to London together by train on January 19th 1939 for interviews by the Civil Service Commission at Burlington House (Long 1996, p. 61). On January 24th Long recorded that Croft had got the post. Croft left Manchester in March for South Kensington and, having sold his motorcycle, he sent Long (1996, p. 63) a gift of £3 towards the expenses of his British Museum interview in London. Croft's work with Lang on the Lower Devonian flora continued and was eventually published in an impressive joint paper (Croft & Lang 1942). Croft died prematurely in 1953 at the age of 37 (Edwards 1954).

Retirement of Lang Lang had intended to retire in 1938, but was persuaded to defer his resignation at the instigation of Weiss (Kraft 2000, p. 279). It is clear that Lang's departure from the Barker Chair after 31 years as Head of Cryptogamic Botany was a seriously problematic time, with the choice of his successor decidedly contentious (Kraft 2000, pp. 282-288). Lang wished to see Irene Manton succeed him, as someone who would maintain the strong tradition of research excellence in cryptogamic botany, with the Barker Chair specifically endowed for this purpose. Lang's choice of Manton had the endorsement of Weiss, but Drummond was seriously opposed to her appointment (reasons unspecified by Kraft 2000) and, because of this, Manton was precluded as a candidate. Thus, when the shortlist included T.M. Harris he became the preferred candidate but withdrew at an early stage 'entirely due to the situation of the university in the heart of a great industrial city' (Harris quoted by Kraft 2000, p. 284). Following this disappointment Lang and Weiss, supported by Bower, stated a strong personal preference for the cryptogamic botanist S. Williams, a Manchester graduate then at Glasgow. However, Drummond strongly favoured his old Glasgow colleague C.W.

Wardlaw, then working in the West Indies on diseases of bananas. Wardlaw was, in the event, appointed with considerable misgivings in many quarters; ill founded as it turned out. Lang was obviously an extraordinary person, not only highly accomplished and respected professionally but also much liked for his many endearing personal qualities by all who knew him. Irene Manton writing in 1973 paid warm tribute to him as one of 'the very great' who had transformed her botanical life. Of the past Manchester palaeobotanists it is Lang above all others whom one would wish to have known. Lang received the Honorary Degree of LLD from Manchester University in 1942; a most appropriate honour given his taste for literary and artistic interests which he pursued assiduously in retirement. He had been awarded a Royal Medal in 1931 and was awarded the Linnean Gold Medal in 1956 (Salisbury 1961).

Palaeobotanical interregnum, 1940-1950 With Lang's retirement in 1940 there was no longer a palaeobotanist on the staff at Manchester, Albert Long having failed to secure the assistant lectureship in 1939. Wardlaw's appointment thus marked a complete break with the Williamson-Weiss-Lang palaeobotanical chain but, far from being a death knell, the old tradition was yet to re-emerge. Wardlaw, a Glasgow graduate and lecturer in the time of Bower, had undertaken research allied to Bower's interests prior to becoming a plant pathologist. On his return to academic life he chose to turn to research on the morphogenesis of ferns, familiar to him from his Glasgow work and consistent with the endowed Barker Chair in Cryptogamic Botany. Irene Manton also remained in the department, continuing her fern cytology work, until 1945 when she was appointed to the Chair of Botany at the University of Leeds. In the immediate post-war years a special University Grants Committee scheme provided new university posts in areas of weakness in coverage (Charlton & Cutter 1998, p. 53). At Manchester in 1949 this was perceived to be palaeobotany, presumably supported by Wardlaw, and a Lectureship in Palaeobotany was established jointly with the Department of Geology.

Appointment of Mary Calder In 1950 Mary Calder (Figs 1 and 10) was appointed as Senior Lecturer in Palaeobotany, coming from the University of Glasgow where she had been the palaeobotanical protegee of Walton. Calder had

150 YEARS OF PALAEOBOTANY AT MANCHESTER

Fig. 11. Helen Fisher, Watson's first research student, at the Royal Botanical Garden, Mount Tomah, New South Wales in 1999. Right to left: Fisher, Watson, Wollemia nobilis (Araucariaceae) transplanted from its 1994 discovery site in Wollemi National Park, New South Wales.

been engaged for her PhD in studying Kidston's slide collection (e.g. Calder 1934) and later other Carboniferous plants (Calder 1938). At Manchester she immediately turned her attentions to a collection of petrified Mesozoic conifers from Patagonia (Calder 1953) in the British Museum (Natural History), but otherwise she was not noticeably active in research. Calder was something of a mystery figure, leaving behind a reputation in both departments of being elusive and with the claim that she had a hiding place; Botany thinking she must be in Geology whilst Geology were thinking she must be in Botany. For the latter half of her tenure Calder was joined by D.L. Smith, also from Glasgow and also a student of Walton's with Carboniferous palaeobotanical interests (Fig. 1) (Smith 1959). Smith was appointed in 1959 and moved to Belfast in 1964 (Charlton & Cutter 1998, p. 62). According to Senate minutes (Peters pers. comm. 2004) Calder officially retired in 1966, the same year as Wardlaw (Charlton & Cutter 1998, pp. 53, 60 and 69). However, there is some doubt about the exact date of her departure as Cutter (pers. comm. 2004) has a distinct memory of a 1964 joint leaving party when she herself left for California. This coincides with Watson's recollection that, when visiting from St Andrew's and working in the Museum, Calder was not in Manchester during the summer of 1965; nor from March 1966 when Watson's husband took up his Manchester post and consequently Watson never met Mary Calder. She moved back to Scotland, to live at Milngavie near Glasgow, and left a substantial bequest to the University of Glasgow. Calder's retirement marked a short gap in the line of palaeobotanists whilst it was decided whether to re-appoint to the post, and where a new person would be housed. In the Botany Department this task fell to David Valentine, who was appointed as

245

Fig. 12. 2001 reunion of Watson's 1990s research team. Left to right: Peta Hayes, Joan Watson, Helen Cusack, Susannah Lydon, Katherine Lloyd-Bostock, James Beckett (with Nuala Beckett).

Wardlaw's replacement in 1966. The vacant palaeobotany post was filled with reluctance on the part of both departments, neither willing to relinquish its half post but not really wanting a palaeobotanist. There is no doubt that Calder's lack of visibility affected attitudes to palaeobotany, which by the time of her retirement was again considered an anachronism in some quarters. She had published only one serious paper during her Manchester years, so that the 26 years following Lang's retirement were singularly unproductive. The professors eventually settled for agreeing to appoint someone who could undertake non-palaeobotanical teaching in both departments; botany to pharmacy students in one and invertebrate palaeontology in the other. The post was advertised in 1968 and Joan Watson (Figs 1 and 10-12) was the successful candidate, in competition with her friend and co-student from Reading University, Barry Thomas. The manner in which the Lectureship in Palaeobotany survived at that time provided an inauspicious background to Watson's appointment.

Appointment of Joan Watson In January 1969 Joan Watson took up the post of Lecturer in Palaeobotany in the departments of Botany and Geology. Watson was a PhD student with T.M. Harris at Reading University Botany Department where she began her revision of the English Wealden fossil flora, not seriously studied since Seward's original work (Seward 1894, 1895). Then the only research student in that department, and Harris's first for several years, she was accorded a status greatly to her benefit in every way, and she and Harris soon established a close working rapport which continued until he died in 1983. Watson's

246

J.WATSON

marked tendency to collaborative research represents the single aspect of her working life that rejects the strong advice of Harris, namely to avoid collaborative work and joint publications at all costs. After PhD graduation in 1964 Watson married and moved with her husband (C.M.B. Henderson) to St Andrews University, where she continued her Wealden research in the Botany Department. Her husband transferred to a post in Manchester University in March 1966, bringing Watson back to the city of her birth as well as, arguably, the birthplace of modern English palaeobotany. March-December 1966 was spent carrying out research in the Manchester Museum where John Franks, the Keeper of Botany, was pleased to have another palaeobotanist in residence. In January 1967 Watson was appointed as Curator-Librarian in the Geology Department at Experimental Officer grade, a post in which research during working hours was specifically forbidden. She held this office for 2 years, but carried out the duties for a third year, along with her lectureship, until a successor was appointed. With the joint lectureship Watson became somewhat loosely assigned to Cryptogamic Botany (now defunct since 1986), but has always remained resident in the Geology Department up to the present day. She set about re-establishing vigorous palaeobotanical research, albeit in an entirely new mode for Manchester, with her expertise lying in cuticle studies of Mesozoic compression fossils. She was then working alone, entirely in the mould of Harris, at a time just before use of the scanning electron microscope (SEM) became a serious proposition. However, her activities were seriously hampered in the early years by the lack of equipment and laboratory facilities, with hydrofluoric acid initially used outdoors, as it had been at Reading in 'Nature's own fume cupboard' (Harris pers. comm., 1961). The purchase of a moveable fume cupboard with charcoal filters improved matters enormously in 1982, and this remains in use for Schulze's solution in 2005. The acquisition of a ducted fume cupboard in a research laboratory specifically for palaeobotany was finally achieved in 1994. The two aged microscopes used by Watson for several years (Charlton & Cutter 1998, p. 37) were no great disadvantage at first, since her Reading training with Harris had included similar microscopes, lamps made from condensed milk tins, bull's-eye lenses and Fairy Liquid containers used as wash-bottles. However, the considerable drawback was that her primitive facilities precluded even considering the supervision of a research student. This was eventually overcome by the use of surplus teaching microscopes bought when the Botany Department moved from the old Beyer Building in the Quadrangle into the Williamson Building. Her

ally in such underground acquisitions was her only colleague of like interests, Alan Charlton, with whom in the early years she shared the thankless task of teaching botany to pharmacy students. Charlton, with a formidable intellect and a fount of botanical knowledge, always put his help generously at her disposal and became Watson's most valued colleague. They collaborated on two palaeobotanical papers, Stigmaria (Charlton & Watson 1982), in true Manchester Coal Measures tradition, and a Tertiary palm (Charlton et al. 1991); both studies owing much to Charlton's expertise in developmental botany and anatomy, then enhanced by new microscopes. Watson's seemingly impossible dream of a research photomicroscope during the Valentine era became a reality in 1980 following Elizabeth Cutter's appointment to the George Harrison Chair of Botany as Head of Department. The Leitz Dialux purchased then (with others for Cutter, Charlton et al.) remains in constant use and is quite the equal of Williamson's Dancer in the joy it has engendered. Watson was awarded a DSc by the University of Durham in 1992, at the same time as her husband. Like Lang, Watson was never inclined to sacrifice her research to involvement in administration and had previously eschewed any thought of promotion from lecturer. However, in 1992 she made her own successful case to the University for a Readership in Palaeobotany, although mindful of the dangers of loss of tenure (imposed by the Education Reform Act 1988), Watson had this preferment kept in abeyance for several years. In 1999, following the resolution of a dispute with the University, she formally became Reader in Palaeobotany. Watson's research Watson published the first part of her Wealden flora revision in 1969, but the necessity for SEM studies became increasingly obvious and subsequent parts were inevitably delayed when this advance in technique rendered all plants groups in need of further revision. From 1969 to 1977 Watson's English Wealden researches led to other Lower Cretaceous studies abroad, particularly seeking out missing type specimens. In connection with her conifer investigations (Reymanowna & Watson 1976; Watson 1977, 1982) she began her long-standing and happy collaborations with Ken Alvin (also from the Harris stable) whilst on sabbatical leave at the British Museum (Natural History) in 1974. Prior to this, use of the SEM for fossil cuticles had been by sharing a 2-hour fortnightly slot with a Zoology colleague (John Dalingwater) on the SEM in the Department of Textile Technology at UMIST Alvin's unlimited access to the SEM at Imperial

150 YEARS OF PALAEOBOTANY AT MANCHESTER

247

Fig. 14. Wealden field party at Fairlight in 1997, the second year of comprehensive collecting of stratigraphically constrained plant debris material throughout the Weald and Wessex basins (see Watson et al. 2001). Left to right: David Batten, Helen Cusack, Susannah Lydon, Michael Henderson.

Fig. 13. Women palaeobotany students 1982-2000. Upper left: Caroline Sincock; upper right: Nicola Hall; lower left: Lucy Thompson: lower right: Katherine Lloyd-Bostock.

College was a great luxury that accelerated recognition of the importance of the extinct Mesozoic conifer family Cheirolepidiaceae by Alvin et al. (1978), with their initial findings displayed in 1975 at the Xllth International Botanical Congress in Leningrad. Alvin and Watson continued their collaboration (Watson & Alvin 1976), which after Alvin's retirement (and move to Worcester) was carried out by post, telephone and visits to Manchester by train. The resulting publications were both individual (Alvin 1982; Watson 1988) and joint (Alvin et al. 1994; Watson & Alvin 1996), with the last shortly before his final illness (Watson & Alvin 1999). After completing her efforts to track down missing type specimens of Lower Cretaceous species in various national museums abroad, Watson returned to the study of the English Wealden debris beds. She had first encountered the Cheirolepidiaceae (Watson 1964, 1969, 1977) in a bag of plant debris collected with Harris and Maria Reymanowna near Hastings in 1962, but then turned to reassessing old specimens in museum collections and delayed extensive new collecting until 1996. Watson and Lydon are currently engaged in a stratigraphic study of debris material, collected in the Weald and Wessex basins over several seasons with field assistance from Cusack, Henderson and Batten (Fig. 14). Laboratory treatment, sorting and storage of the plant debris continues as a long, co-operative process and has involved several other people including undergraduate project students, two of whom, Lucy Thompson (Fig. 13) and Catherine Lloyd-Bostock (Figs 12 and 13), con-

tinued as volunteers following graduation. Peta Hayes (Fig. 12), now in the Palaeontology Department of the Natural History Museum, London, followed Beckett as Watson's Research Assistant in 1994 and, along with Lucy and Kate, processed enormous quantities of Wealden debris, skilfully isolating numerous new Wealden plants, some of them described by Lydon (2000) and Cusack Drury (2001). Lucy Thompson (Manchester Biology-Geology graduate 1995) discovered the first intact Hirmeriella cones in the English Wealden, whilst Kate Lloyd-Bostock (Manchester Biology graduate 1996) accumulated and sectioned large numbers of conifer male cones.

Watson's research students In 1978 Helen Fisher (Figs 1 and 11), a Manchester Botany graduate, became Watson's first research student, working on non-cheirolepidiaceous Wealden conifers. Fisher, a model undergraduate, undertook a Final Honours essay on 'Manchester and Palaeobotany in the Nineteenth Century' (freely drawn upon here) and as a post-graduate she set the pattern for Watson's succession of six carefully selected and highly successful PhD research students (Figs 1 and 11-13). All become serious collaborators with her and, except for Beckett, have contributed to the continuing revision, expansion and reconstruction of the English Wealden flora. •

Helen Fisher (PhD, Fisher 1981; Fisher & Watson 1983; Watson & Fisher 1984; Watson et al. 1987, 1988), who now lives in Sydney, Australia, retains her interest in conifers (Fig. 11) and remains in close contact with Watson, with whom a Wealden conifer monograph remains in preparation.

248

•

•

•

•

•

J.WATSON

Caroline Sincock (Figs 1 and 13) who studied the Bennettitales (PhD, Sincock, 1985; Sincock & Watson 1988; Watson & Sincock 1992) later became a Patent Officer in Glasgow where she still remains in a business career. Nicola Harrison nee Hall (Figs 1 and 13), a Manchester Biology-Geology graduate, studied the Ginkgoales and Czekanowskiales (PhD, Hall 1987; Watson & Harrison 1998). She became Head of Library and Information for ICI, Wilton and continues to co-author papers with Watson and Lydon (Watson et al. 1999, 2001). James Beckett (Figs 1 and 12), a Manchester Biology graduate, became Watson's Research Assistant in 1993, funded by a Leverhulme Trust Fellowship. He then embarked on a study of the conifers collected by Sidney Ash from the Triassic, Chinle Formation of SW USA (PhD, Beckett 1998). A co-authored monograph by Beckett, Watson & Ash is in preparation. Beckett is now a senior biology teacher and Honorary Research Associate of Manchester University. Susannah Lydon (Figs 1, 12 and 14), a Manchester graduate in Biology-Geology, brought her computing expertise to the Palaeobotany Laboratory and created its first searchable database for the stratigraphical debris collection. Lydon also expanded the study of Wealden Czekanowskiales and Ginkgoales started by Hall (Watson et al. 1999). Now in the Earth Sciences Education Unit at Keele University, she is the only one of Watson's students to have remained in an academic post. As an Honorary Research Fellow, she remains Watson's active collaborator and co-author of several papers (Lydon et al. 2003; Sun et al. 2003; Watson & Lydon 2004). Helen Cusack Drury (Figs 1, 12 and 14) graduated in Biology-Geology at Manchester one year after Lydon, who helped to lure Cusack into palaeobotany research. Her comprehensive study of the Wealden cycads (PhD, Cusack Drury 2001; Watson & Cusack in prep) is a model of classical investigation with meticulous, dexterous and innovative laboratory technique, which she soon discovered to be her forte. Cusack (Mrs Stephen Drury), now a biology teacher, is an Honorary Research Associate of Manchester University.

Linnean Society Meeting In April 1972 Watson organized a meeting of the Linnean Society Palaeobotanical Group at Manchester on 'Current Progress in Palaeobotany in Britain'. This comprised 1 day of talks, refreshments

in the Stratigraphical Hall of the Museum, supper at Watson's house and a field day collecting from a plantrich shale in the Millstone Grit at Hoghton Bottom, near Blackburn (Lacey 1951). The records of this meeting are sparse but an approximate list of participants can be drawn up from the programme and correspondence. The chairmen of the three lecture sessions were Franks, Harris and Chaloner. The speakers were Eagar, David Edwards, Dianne Edwards, Chaloner, Hill, Barnard, Batten, Lynn Allen and Boulter. Other known participants were Keith Allen, Alvin, Boersma, Holmes, Hughes, Hutt, Jonker, van Konijnenburg, Lacey, Long, Mortimer, Oldham, Schaarschmidt, Sporne, Thomas, Watson and Wesley. The only similar meeting arranged by Watson was a non-residential Palaeontological Association Review Seminar on 'Plants of the Coal Measures' in 1981, but with the many participants arriving on an informal basis no records were kept.

Manchester Museum The Manchester Museum, as originally established in 1868, was an integral part of the University with the Professors of Geology, Zoology and Botany formally engaged in active scientific supervision roles. Access to the collections was also readily available to students and was clearly a source of inspiration to D.M.S. Watson (see discussion above). Throughout the years of Williamson, Weiss and Lang the palaeobotanical connections between the Museum and the Botany and Geology departments remained both physically and academically close. The public Museum Lectures by the professors were a regular feature each year (University Calendars), together with the Inaugural Lecture by a distinguished visiting speaker: D.M.S. Watson in October 1943 on 'Food and Agriculture', reflecting his service on the Food Policy Committee of the War Cabinet; H.G.A. Hickling in October 1946 on 'Coal, Coalfields and Coal Forests'. Lang gave a Museum Lecture in November 1942 on 'Early Fossil Plants and Evolution' 2 years after his retirement. By the 1970s the Museum Lectures for the public had become moribund, a warm Saturday refuge for the residents of the nearby Salvation Army Hostel, and, to the relief of the professors who had to deliver them, they were eventually abandoned as a routine obligation. Various palaeobotanical papers published by members of the Museum staff (Bolton 1895, 1897; Jackson 1910) were related to their Carboniferous stratigraphical studies and concerned hand specimen material. Herbert Bolton (Assistant Keeper in Geology, 1889-1898) gives a long checklist of plant species from the Lancashire Coal Measures (Bolton 1897, p. 241; modified from Kidston 1892), noting ruefully that the list is by no means complete

150 YEARS OF PALAEOBOTANY AT MANCHESTER

because most palaeobotanists have put their energy and skill into studying the anatomical structure of 'vegetable tissues in nodules' (i.e. coal balls) whilst less assiduously studying the external features. Wilfred Jackson (Fig. 8, front row, extreme right) was Assistant Keeper in Geology from 1907 to 1945, but remained active into his 90s (Bishop 1982) and was able to assist Thomas & Watson (1976) regarding the 114-foot Lepidodendron that had been in his charge 30 years previously. Both Bolton (1893, 1894) and Jackson (1952) published catalogues of the type and figured specimens in the Museum, including the fossil plants but excluding those held in the Botany Department of the Museum. Grace Wigglesworth, who was Assistant Keeper in Botany from 1906 until 1944, did not publish, but regularly gave the public Museum Lectures and Demonstrations on palaeobotanical topics. In 1943-1944, shortly before her retirement, Miss Wigglesworth was examining Hepaticae from Ceylon and Malaya (Manchester University Calendar 1944-1945, p. 395), presumably the large collection presented to the Museum by Lang in 1941 (Manchester University Calendar 1941-1942, p. 367). The Manchester Museum Archive (S. Alberti pers. comm. 2004) includes the minutes of the Museum Committee, March 20th 1944 noting Wiggles worth's impending retirement on October 1st 1944, delayed a year after the age limit because of World War II. It was probably with Lang's retirement that the palaeobotanical ties started to loosen and further decline came with post-war changes in the Museum as a whole. Moving closer to its civic ties, enlargement of the Museum was accompanied by elevation of the Keeper to Director and the Assistant Keepers to Keepers of Botany and Geology, ultimately with their own Assistant Keepers. In the 1960s the physical ties to the Museum were broken with the Geology, Zoology and Botany departments moving, in that order, to the Williamson Building on the opposite side of the Oxford Road. By the time the move was completed in 1970 (Charlton & Cutter 1998, p. 22) increasing isolation from the Museum had already become inevitable. John Franks was by then Keeper of Botany (1959-1994) and publishing on the well-known Trafalgar Square deposits (Franks et al 1958; Franks 1960) and some palaeobotany (Franks 1963), but more and more he turned to collecting the flora of Turkey and engaged in Herbarium matters. When Franks provided Watson with research space in his department he was much less active in palaeobotany but had recently (Franks 1965) published a method of palynological preparation using hydrofluoric acid without a fume cupboard. From 1969 Watson routinely used the Museum Botany Department collections of fossil plants for undergraduate teaching, with

249

technical assistance to wheel them across Oxford Road on a trolley. Eventually, with the demise of the Botany Department in 1986 (Charlton & Cutter 1998), the accompanying loss of technical help and the rapid increase in road traffic, this became an unsustainable arrangement. However, use of the Museum Stratigraphical Hall was an attractive and viable alternative for practical palaeobotany teaching until the late 1990s when a Heritage Lottery Fund award resulted in closure for major refurbishment. The inevitable modernization of the exhibits for the 2003 reopening has resulted in a considerably diminished fossil plant display aimed at the general public, although Williamson's Stigmaria still dominates, an ineradicable witness to, and reminder of, a golden age.

Women at Manchester The position of women at Manchester is of some interest. Starting with Marie Stopes, who was clearly a crusader, the appointment of women to the main palaeobotanical academic posts is three out of seven (Fig. 1), which is amazingly high. However, if Isabel Cookson plus research students are taken into account the proportion of women rises even higher, eventually becoming dominant. In palaeobotany the number of women academic staff, demonstrators and postgraduates from 1904 to 2004 is probably 11 or 12 out of a total of 18 people (Fig. 1). The precise number of all palaeobotany postgraduates is somewhat uncertain because figures for the Geology Department are obscure (apart from Hickling and D.M.S. Watson) with a total of only 10 identified with certainty at present, six of whom (Fig. 1) - five of them women - worked with Watson (Figs 1 and 11-14). At least one other woman research student, Miriam Bishop (Grisedale Scholar in Cryptogamic Botany 1930-1931), is not shown in Figure 1, for reasons of uncertainty. Kraft (2000, pp. 277) cites Bishop both as a bryologist and as a palaeobotanist; she might have been both, but no palaeobotanical publications have been traced to her. The trend to engage women continued with Grace Wigglesworth (Figs 1 and 8), who graduated with a BSc in 1903, a palaeobotany MSc in 1906 and became Assistant Keeper in Botany at Manchester Museum, where she remained in post until her retirement in 1944. She was appointed when Weiss, as Professor of Botany, was 'charged with the scientific supervision of the respective department[s] of the Museum' (Manchester University Calendars). Marie Stopes had been appointed to be Demonstrator in Botany in 1904 on a strong recommendation from Weiss (Kraft 2000, p. 169) and Stopes' later return to a new lecturer's post in Manchester, following her sojourn in Japan, was clearly engineered by Weiss. This followed a heart-

250

J.WATSON

outpouring letter that Slopes sent to him from Tokyo in 1908 (Briant 1962, p. 60; Hall 1977, p. 71; Rose 1992, p. 54), to which any reply from Weiss has not survived but he was able to make special arrangements to have her appointed as Lecturer in Palaeobotany in 1909. It is probably significant that Weiss' wife Evelyn enthusiastically supported moves to open up university education to women, being closely and actively involved with Ashburne Hall, the first residence established for women students in 1899 (Kraft 2000, p. 83). Lang also appears to have favoured women with research scholarships (Kraft 2000, pp. 212-213) and staff appointments (Charlton & Cutter 1998, pp. 60-62). He first appointed Kathleen Drew as an Assistant Lecturer in Mycology in 1923 and when she resigned to marry in 1928 Katherine Massey was appointed. Massey left after a year to marry T.M. Harris, then at Cambridge, and was replaced by Barbara Colson. Lang also appointed Irene Manton in 1929. In addition, Isabel Cookson was on one of her regular visits in 1929-1930. Manton's great regard and obvious affection for Lang has been related above, but she was employed to work closely with him, whereas Barbara Colson who was a mycologist also seems to have been drawn into the close Lang circle. In 1939 Colson left Manchester to become Lecturer in Mycology at Reading University where Harris had then been Professor for 6 years. At Reading in 1961 Watson came to know her as Dr Barbara Maxted, usually called Mrs Maxted. When Watson gained her PhD in 1964 Barbara Maxted made her a generous gift of an enormous and varied collection of palaeobotany reprints, accumulated from Lang whilst she was at Manchester, some of them bearing Weiss' bookplate (Fig. 6). These formed the nucleus of Watson's extensive reprint library, the mainstay of all who use the laboratory today. She also gave her a box of Devonian fossil plants collected with Professor Lang on a trip to Shetland, but these specimens still remain neatly wrapped and labelled in 1940 newspaper, awaiting a more worthy recipient. The 1930 photograph from which Figure 7 was extracted (Charlton & Cutter 1998, p. 66) shows the preponderance of female students, 14 women and four men. It also seems that the Botany Department was according postgraduate women unusual prominence, at least until they left to marry, whereupon they usually only returned in an honorary position (Charlton & Cutter 1998). Kraft (2000, p. 209 et seq.) has given a detailed analysis of how Weiss and Lang boosted postgraduate research activity by the use of various scholarship funds and honorary positions, pointing out that in the main they were given to 'married women and as such they provided a means to circumnavigate University regulations that otherwise prevented the employment of married women'.

By the time of Lang's retirement in 1940 World War II had intervened and changed everything. Wigglesworth's incumbency in the Museum outlasted the departure of Weiss, Lang and those who worked with them, except for Manton. On her retirement in 1944, 4 years after Lang's retirement, there is no archival evidence of any event or presentation acknowledging her 38 years of service to the Museum and University (Alberti pers. comm., 2004). At that stage no palaeobotanist remained on the staff in Manchester until the appointment of Mary Calder in 1950.

The palaeobotanical legacy Specimens Large specimens from the Coal Measures are the outstanding specimen legacy in the Manchester Museum, with the famous Williamson Stigmaria ever dominant (Fig. 4). Other impressive slabs include figured specimens such as branching Lepidodendron with cones, Sigillaria trunks and the casts of Binney's famous Stigmaria from the Bolton railway. Of equal importance, although lacking dramatic visual impact, is the set of plaster casts made from the famous 114-foot Lepidodendron found by Lomax in the roof of a coal seam at Bolton (Thomas & Watson 1976). Unfortunately, most of these specimens, together with Walton's very large peels, are no longer on public display, the old 'fossil forest' having recently been dismantled and replaced by Triassic reptile footprints. More fortunately, the collection of Yorkshire Jurassic plants in the Geology Department of the Museum is readily accessible again, after years of having brown paper stuck down over the tops of the drawers, a 1970s innovation. A supplement to Jackson's (1952) catalogue of type and figured specimens compiled by Nudds (1992) lists fewer than 40 fossil plants figured between 1952 and 1992, and also excludes the Botany Department collections. Manchester Museum is the repository for certain important slide preparations in the Botany Department, but the collections of slides are surprisingly modest. Most of the famous material studied at Manchester by Williamson and Lang was acquired by the British Museum (Natural History) long ago; Williamson's slides by purchase, and Lang's slides and Old Red Sandstone specimens by bequest. Watson also deposits all her material at South Kensington.

Techniques The development of palaeobotanical techniques to meet specific research needs, first by Williamson

150 YEARS OF PALAEOBOTANY AT MANCHESTER

and then by Walton, is an outstanding legacy and a continuing feature of the Manchester laboratory. In particular, modifications of the acetate peel and transfer methods of Walton (see above) have become the world standard. However, the development of techniques has continued with Watson and her students, particularly in relation to the successful preparation of cuticle from highly cleated compression fossils in old museum collections. Advances in cuticle studies of such specimens by Watson et al have arisen from the need to prepare, mount and extract information from the minutest scraps of poorly preserved cuticles. This has led to many subtle refinements of SEM techniques, including the designing of custom-made SEM stubholders, stubs and tools. Beckett (1998) and Cusack Drury (2001) in particular have impressive technical skills. Beckett has perfected methods allowing him to: reclaim cuticles from ancient dried-up slides, for restudy by SEM; do vice versa with old SEM mounts for the light microscope; view both surfaces of a prepared cuticle; and reverse all processes at will. Cusack has performed wonders on the Wealden cycads with a bottle of nail varnish, a one-haired sable brush and a sharpened bamboo stick.

Reconstructions Reconstructing whole plants from fossil fragments (Fig. 15) became something of a tradition at Manchester, starting with Williamson's 1870 drawings ofZamia gigas (Fig. 15, bottom left). He was an accomplished artist, having drawn fossils since he was a boy and was invited to undertake the illustrations for Lindley & Hutton (1831-1937). Williamson's precise technique for his exquisite drawings is not clear but was presumably pen and ink at some stage (see portrait in Andrews 1980, p. 90). He was certainly a talented artist and did all his own drawings. Walton (1959) recalls Seward telling him how 'when Williamson took up a pencil his hand was so shaky that it was difficult to believe that he could draw at all, but once his wrist was resting on the paper the tremor completely disappeared and his pencil was completely under his control'. Williamson was also an accomplished watercolour artist and his younger son was the eminent lithographer John Copley (see Fig. 16). The famous reconstructions of the Rhynie chert plants, then named Rhynia, Hornea and Asteroxylon (Fig. 15, top row), were redrawn from sketches for Kidston and Lang by Mr J. Barrie Robinson. They are executed in Indian ink on Bristol board and remain in the Botany Department of Manchester Museum. Watson has reconstructed various Lower

251

Cretaceous pteridophytes (Watson & Batten 1990) and gymnosperms (e.g. Watson 1988; Watson & Sincock 1992), the latest of which are Wealden cycad male and female cones (Fig. 15, bottom right) in collaboration with Cusack. Watson's reconstructions are all made in collaboration with her draughtsman colleague Richard Hartley, a keen plantsman who can work to strict botanical requirements in bringing fossils back to life. Lydon, Watson and Hartley are now also engaged in landscape reconstructions for Lower Cretaceous environments, somewhat inspired by the scenes that Edward Vulliamy drew for Seward (1931) in Plant Life through the Ages.

The future It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that palaeobotany in Manchester University soon faces extinction. Changes in curriculum within the School of Biological Sciences at Manchester have resulted in the withdrawal of Watson's palaeobotany course as a Final Honours option during her last year in post, 2004-2005. Renamed 'Plant Life through the Ages' (in response to exhortations to modernize) this course has been a last bastion of hands-on practical work in the tradition of Weiss and Lang, with students able to handle fossil plants alongside their living relatives. The course ran for the last time in a geological guise (Prefix GY rather than BS) from October to December 2004 and it is difficult to see that the teaching of palaeobotany at Manchester can survive any longer. A £3.3 million government award has recently funded the Williamson Research Centre for Molecular Environmental Sciences, ceremonially opened in October 2001 by the new University Chancellor (Miss Anna Ford) in the presence of Williamson's grandson, the distinguished actor Peter Copley (Fig. 16). A fossil Ginkgo leaf adorns the publicity brochure and a gleaming new Environmental SEM awaits anyone who can afford the hourly charges. In January 2004 David Batten was appointed to an Honorary Professorship in Earth Sciences, joining Watson and Lydon for collaborative Wealden research. Thus, activity remains high, although funds are low, but 2005 will certainly mark the formal end of a palaeobotanist in Manchester in a tied appointment. I am extremely obliged to the authors mentioned above, whose unpublished work I have freely drawn upon and without which I could not have attempted to draw up this account. I am most grateful to, and warmly thank, the following for their invaluable help: M. Henderson for making the digital figures, R. Hartley for constructing Figure 1 and the cycad reconstructions in Figure 15, and S. Alberti and J. Peters for archival delving.

252

J.WATSON

Fig. 15. Fossil plant reconstructions by Manchester palaeobotanists, 1870-2004. Lower left: a selection of Williamson's drawings from his 1870 paper on the Yorkshire Jurassic bennettite, then called Zamia gigas. His drawing methods are not specified in the Reminiscences. Upper half: drawings of the plants reconstructed from the Rhynie chert redrawn for Kidston & Lang (1921) by Barrie Robinson. They are in Indian ink on Bristol board with freehand lettering (originals in Manchester Museum). Lower right: © Joan Watson 2004. Reconstructions of Wealden male and female cycad cones, computer generated by Richard Hartley for Watson & Cusack (in prep).

150 YEARS OF PALAEOBOTANY AT MANCHESTER

Fig. 16. The actor Peter Copley with the oil painting (by H. Brothers) of his grandfather, William Crawford Williamson, which now hangs in the foyer of the Williamson Building. Peter Copley's father, John Copley, Williamson's son by his second wife, adopted his mother's family name as a professional artist. Photograph taken on the occasion of the opening of the Williamson Research Centre for Molecular Environmental Sciences, October 2001.

References ALVIN, K.L. 1982. Cheirolepidiaceae: biology, structure and palaeoecology. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology,37,71-98. ALVIN, K.L., SPICER, R. & WATSON, J. 1978. A Classopollis-contaimng male cone associated with Pseudofrenelopsis. Palaeontology, 21, 847-856. ALVIN, K.L., WATSON, J. & SPICER, R.A. 1994. A new coniferous male cone from the English Wealden and a discussion of pollination in the Cheirolepidiaceae. Palaeontology,37,173-180. ANDREWS, H.N. 1980. The Fossil Hunters: In Search of Ancient Plants, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY. ARDERN, L.L. 1960. John Benjamin Dancer. Library Association, North Western Group, Occasional Papers, 2. BECKETT, J.M. 1998. Conifers of the Triassic Chinle Formation of the south-western U.S.A. PhD Thesis, University of Manchester. BINNEY, E. 1847. On fossil Calamites found standing in an erect position in the Carboniferous strata near Wigan, Lancashire. Philosophical Magazine, 31, 259-266. BINNEY, J. 1912. The Centenary of a Nineteenth Century Geologist: Edward William Binney F.R.S. Barnicott & Pearce, Taunton. BISHOP, M.J. 1982. Dr J. Wilfred Jackson (1880-1978). A biographical sketch. In: The Cave Hunters. Derbyshire Museum Service, 25^8. BOLTON, H. 1893. Catalogue of the Types and Figured

253

Specimens in the Geological Department. Manchester Museum Handbook. BOLTON, H. 1894. Supplementary List of Type and Figured Specimens in the Geological Department, Manchester Museum, Owen's College. Report of the Museums Association for 1894, 250-254. BOLTON, H. 1895. Note on some fossil trees at Doulton's Delf, St. Helen's, Lancashire. Transactions of the Manchester Geological Society, 23, 1-8. BOLTON, H. 1897. The Lancashire Coal Field. Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences, 16, 224-251. BONEY, A.D. 200la. The Best Laid Schemes Gang aft A'Gley: Retirement and other Plans of a Regius Professor of Botany, 1919-1925. Part 1. The Linnean. Newsletter and Proceedings of The Linnean Society of London, 17, (2), 27-38. BONEY, A.D. 20016. The Best Laid Schemes Gang aft A'Gley: Retirement and other Plans of a Regius Professor of Botany, 1919-1925. Part 2. The Linnean. Newsletter and Proceedings of the Linnean Society of London, 17, (3), 29-41. BOWMAN, J.E. 1841. Observations on the characters of the fossil trees lately discovered on the line of the Bolton Railway, near Manchester. Transactions of the Manchester Geological Society, 1, 112-140. BRIANT, K. 1962. Marie Slopes: A Biography. Hogarth Press, London. BUTLER, S. 1986. Microscopy and medicine. In: The Social History of the Microscope. Whipple Museum of the History of Science, Cambridge, 10-16. CALDER, M.G. 1934. Notes on the Kidston Collection of fossil plant slides. No. V. On the structure of two Lower Carboniferous lepidodendroid stems, one of the Lepidophloios wiinschianus type and the other of the Lepidodendron fuliginosum type. No. VI. On the structure of two lepidodendroid stems from the Carboniferous flora of Berwickshire. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 58, 113-124. CALDER, M.G. 1938. On some undescribed species from the Lower Carboniferous of Berwickshire; together with a note on the genus Stenomyelon Kidston. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 59, 309-331. CALDER, M.G. 1953. A coniferous petrified forest in Patagonia. Bulletin of the British Museum, Natural History (Geology), 2, 97-138. CARRUTHERS, W. 1870. On fossil cycadean stems from the secondary rocks of Britain. Transactions of the Linnean Society, 26, 675-708. CASH, W. 1896. In memorium: William Crawford Williamson, LL.D., F.R.S. The Naturalist, 21, 25-33. CHALONER, W.G. 1985. Thomas Maxwell Harris 8 January 1903-1 May 1983. Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society, 31, 229-260. CHALONER, W.G. 2005. The palaeobotanical work of Marie Slopes. In: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) The History of Palaeobotany. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,127-135. CHARLTON, H.B. 1952. Portrait of a University 1851-1951. Manchester University Press, Manchester. CHARLTON, W.A. & CUTTER, E.G. 1998. 135 Years of Botany at Manchester. University of Manchester, Manchester. CHARLTON, W.A. & WATSON, J. 1982. Patterns of arrange-

254

J.WATSON

ment of lateral appendages on axes of Stigmaria ficoides (Steinberg) Brongniart. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 84, 209-221. CHARLTON, W.A., WATSON, J. & BATTEN, DJ. 1991. A fossil palm at the back doorstep of Hastings Museum. Tertiary Research, 13,1-9. COOKSON, I.C. 1935. On plant remains from the Silurian of Victoria, Australia, that extend and connect floras hitherto described. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 225 B, 127-148. CROFT, WN. & LANG, W.H. 1942. The Lower Devonian flora of the Senni Beds of Monmouthshire and Breconshire. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 231B, 131-163. CUSACK DRURY, H.A. 2001. Cycadales of the English Wealden. PhD Thesis, University of Manchester. EDWARDS, W.N. 1954. William Noble Croft. Proceedings of the Geological Society, London, 1515, cxxxii-cxxxiii. FISHER, H.L. 1981. A revision of some Lower Cretaceous conifer species. PhD Thesis, University of Manchester. FISHER, H.L. & WATSON, J. 1983. A new conifer species from the Wealden beds of Feron-Glageon, France. Bulletin of the British Museum, Natural History (Geology), 37,99-104. FRANKS, J.W. 1960. Interglacial deposits at Trafalgar Square, London. New Phytologist, 59,145-152. FRANKS, J.W. 1963. On some alethopterid pinnules from the Permian of Autun. Annals of Botany, 27,447-452. FRANKS, J.W. 1965. The preparation of samples for pollen analysis. Pollen et Spores, 7, 573-575. FRANKS, J.W, SUTCLIFFE, A.J., KERNEY, M.P. & RUSSELLCOOPE, G. 1958. Haunt of elephant and rhinoceros: the Trafalgar Square of 100,000 years ago - new discoveries. The Illustrated London News, 232 (6210), 1011-1013. GARRATT, M.J., TIMS, J.D., RICKARDS, R.B., CHAMBERS, T.C. & DOUGLAS, J.G. 1984. The appearance of Baragwanathia (Lycophytina) in the Silurian. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 89, 355-358. HALL, N.A. 1987. A taxonomic revision of some Mesozoic Ginkgoales, Czekanowskiales and related Gymnosperms. PhD Thesis, University of Manchester. HALL, R. 1977. Marie Stopes: A Biography. Andre Deutsch, London. HARRIS, T.M. 1967. Williamsonia gigas. Phytomorphology, 17, 359-364. HICK, T. 1894. On the primary structures of the stem of Calamites. Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, Series 4,8, 158-170. HICK, T. 18950. On Kaloxylon Hookeri, Will, and Lyginodendron Olhamium, Will. Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, Series 4, 9, 109-117. HICK, T. 18956. On the structure of the leaves of Calamites. Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, Series 4,9, 179-190. HICK, T. 18960. OnRachiopteris cylindrica, Will. Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, 41,1-15.

HICK, T. 18966. On a sporangiferous spike, from the Middle Coal Measures, near Rochdale. Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, Series 4,10,73-79. HICKLING, G. 1907. The anatomy of Palaeostachya vera. Annals of Botany, 21, 369-386. HICKLING, G. 1910. The anatomy of Calamostachys binneyana Schimper. Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, 54, 1-16. HOLDEN, H.S. 1910. Preliminary note on periderm formation in filicinean petioles. Annals of Botany, 24,611. HOLDEN, H.S. 1912. Some wound reactions in filicinean petioles. Annals of Botany, 26,777-793, pis 73,74. HOOKER, J.D. & BINNEY, E. 1855. On the structure of certain limestone nodules enclosed in seams of bituminous coal, with a description of some Trigonocarpus contained in them. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 145, 149-156. HOWELL, A.C. 2005. James Lomax (1857-1934): palaeobotanical catalyst or hindrance? In: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds). History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,137-152. JACKSON, J.W. 1910. On the discovery of Archaeosigillaria vanuxemi (Goppert) at Meathop Fell, Westmorland, with a description of the locality. Geological Magazine, 7,78-81. JACKSON, J.W. 1952. Catalogue of Types and Figured Specimens in the Geological Department of the Manchester Museum. Manchester Museum Publication, 6. JOY, K.W, WILLIS, A.J. & LACEY, W.S. 1956. A rapid cellulose peel technique in palaeobotany. Annals of Botany, 20, 635-637. KARGON, R.H. 1977. Science in Victorian Manchester. Enterprise and Expertise. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD. KIDSTON, R. 1892. Notes on some fossil plants from the Lancashire Coal Measures. Transactions of the Manchester Geological Society, 13,401-428. KIDSTON, R. & LANG, W.H. 1917. On Old Red Sandstone plants showing structure, from the Rhynie Chert Bed, Aberdeenshire. Part I. Rhynia Gwynne-Vaughani. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 51, 761-784. KIDSTON, R. & LANG, W.H 1920a. On the Old Red Sandstone plants showing structure, from the Rhynie chert bed, Aberdeenshire. Part II. Additional notes on Rhynia gwynne-vaughani, Kidston and Lang; with descriptions of Rhynia major n. sp., and Hornea lignieri, n. g., n. sp. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 52, 603-627. KIDSTON, R. & LANG, W.H 19206. On the Old Red Sandstone plants showing structure, from the Rhynie chert bed, Aberdeenshire. Part III. Asteroxylon mackiei, Kidston and Lang. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 52, 643-680. KIDSTON, R. & LANG, W.H. 19210. On Old Red Sandstone plants showing structure, from the Rhynie Chert Bed, Aberdeenshire. Part IV. Restorations of the vascular cryptogams, and discussion of their bearing on the general morphology of the Pteridophyta and the

150 YEARS OF PALAEOBOTANY AT MANCHESTER origin of the organisation of land-plants. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 52, 831-854. KIDSTON, R. & LANG, W.H. 19216. On the Old Red Sandstone plants showing structure, from the Rhynie chert bed, Aberdeenshire. Part V. the Thallophyta occurring in the peat-bed; the succession of the plants throughout a vertical section of the bed, and the conditions of accumulation and preservation of the deposit. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 52, 855-902. KIDSTON, R. & LANG, W.H. 1923. Notes on fossil plants from the Old Red Sandstone of Scotland. I. Hicklingia edwardii, K. and L. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 53,405^07. KRAFT, A. 2000. Building Manchester Biology 1851-1963: national agendas, provincial strategies. PhD Thesis, University of Manchester. LACEY, W.S. 1951. A rich plant-bed in the Millstone Grit near Blackburn, Lancashire. The Naturalist, 76, April-June, 49-50. LANG, W.H. 1925. Robert Kidston - 1852-1924. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Obituary Notices of Fellows Deceased, 98 B, xiv-xxii. LANG, W.H. 1926. A cellulose-film transfer method in the study of fossil plants. Annals of Botany, 40, 710-711. LANG, W.H. 1937. On the plant-remains from the Downtonian of England and Wales. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 227B, 245-291. LANG, W.H. 1949. Frederick Orpen Bower 1855-1948. Obituary Notices of Fellows of the Royal Society, 6, 347-374. LANG, W.H. & COOKSON, I.C. 1927. On Some Early Palaeozoic Plants from Victoria, Australia. Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, 71,41-51. LANG, W.H. & COOKSON, I.C. 1930. Some fossil plants of early Devonian type from the Walhalla Series, Victoria, Australia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 219B, 133-163. LANG, W.H. & COOKSON, I.C. 1935. On a flora, including vascular land plants, associated with Monograptus, in rocks of Silurian age, from Victoria, Australia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 224B, 421-449. LEIGH, J. & BINNEY, E.W. 1836. Observations on a patch of red and variegated marls, containing fossil shells, at Collyhurst, near Manchester. Philosophical Magazine, 8, 571-573. LINDLEY, J. & HUTTON, W. 1831-1837. The Fossil Flora of Great Britain: or Figures and Descriptions of the Vegetable Remains found in a Fossil State in This Country: 3 vols, London. Volume 1 (1833); Volume 2 (1835); Volume 3 (1837). James Ridgeway, London. LISTON, J.J. & SANDERS, H.L. 2005. The 'other' Glasgow Boys: the rise and fall of a school of palaeobotany. In: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds). History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,197-227. LOMAX, J. 1899. Recent investigations on plants of the Coal Measures. Transactions of the Manchester Geological Society, 26,237-262. LONG, A.G. 1943. On the occurrence of buds on the leaves

255

of Botryopteris hirsuta Will. Annals of Botany, 26, 133-146. LONG, A.G. 1996. Hitherto. Pentland Press, Cambridge. LYDON, S.J. 2000. Distribution of dispersed plant cuticles in the English Wealden with systematic revision of the Ginkgoales and allied gymnosperms. PhD Thesis, University of Manchester. LYDON, S.J., WATSON, J. & HARRISON, N.A. 2003. The lectotype of Spenobaiera ikorfatensis (Seward) Florin, a ginkgophyte from the Lower Cretaceous of Western Greenland. Cretaceous Research, 46,413-421. MANTELL, G. 1844. The Medals of Creation, Volumes 1 and 2. H.G. Bohn, London. MANTON, I. 1973. Explanations: how it all began. British Fern Gazette, 10, 285-292. NUDDS, J.R. 1992. Catalogue of type, figured and referred fossils in the geological department of the Manchester Museum. Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society, 49, 81-94. OLIVER, F.W. & SCOTT, D.H. 1904. On the structure of the Palaeozoic seed Lagenostoma lomaxi, with a statement of the evidence upon which it is referred to Lyginodendron. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B 197B, 193-247. PARRINGTON, F.R. & WESTOLL, T.S. 1974. David Meredith Seares Watson 1886-1973. Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society, 20,483-504. REYMANOWNA, M. & WATSON, J. 1976. The genus Frenelopsis and the type species Frenelopsis hoheneggeri (Ettingshausen) Schenk. Acta Palaeobotanica, 17, 17-26. ROSE, J. 1992. Marie Slopes and the Sexual Revolution. Faber & Faber, London. SCOTT, D.H. 1897. William Crawford Williamson. Proceedings of the Royal Society 1896-1897, Obituary Notices of Fellows Deceased, 60, xxvii-xxxii. SALISBURY, EJ. 1952. Francis Wall Oliver 1864-1951. Obituary Notices of Fellows of the Royal Society, 8, 229-240. SALISBURY, EJ. 1961. William Henry Lang 1874-1960. Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society, 1, 147-160. SEWARD, A.C. 1888. On Calamites undulatus (Sternb.). Geological Magazine, 5, 289-291. SEWARD, A.C. 1890. Specific variation in Sigillariae. Geological Magazine, 5, 213-217. SEWARD, A.C. 1894. The Wealden Flora, Volume I. Thallophyta-Pteridophyta. Catalogue of the Mesozoic Plants in the Department of Geology. British Museum (Natural History), London. SEWARD, A.C. 1895. The Wealden Flora, Volume II. Gymnospermae. Catalogue of the Mesozoic Plants in the Department of Geology. British Museum (Natural History), London. SEWARD, A.C. 1931. Plant Life Through the Ages. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. SEWARD, A.C. 1934. Duckinfield Henry Scott 1854-1934. Obituary Notices of Fellows of the Royal Society, 1, 205-227. SINCOCK, C.A. 1985. Revision of Lower Cretaceous bennettitalean plants from England and Germany. PhD Thesis, University of Manchester. SINCOCK, C.A. & WATSON, J. 1988. Terminology used in

256

J.WATSON

the description of bennettitalean cuticle characters. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 97, 179-187. SMITH, D.L. 1959. Geminitheca scotica gen. et sp. nov.: a pteridosperm from the Lower Carboniferous of Dunbartonshire. Annals of Botany, 23,477^91. STOPES, M.C. 1906. Coal-balls found in coal seams. The Naturalist, 31, 336-337. STOPES, M.C. 1907. The relation of the concretionary nodules of the Yarra to the calcareous nodules known as 'coal-balls'. Geological Magazine, 4,106—108. STOPES, M.C. 19100. Ancient Plants. Blackie & Son, London. STOPES, M.C. 19Wb. The internal anatomy of 'Nilssonia orientalis\ Annals of Botany, 24, 389-393. STOPES, M.C. 1911. The 'Dragon-tree' of the Kentish Rag. Geological Magazine, 8, 55-59. STOPES, M.C. & FUJII, K. 1909. Studies on the structure and affinities of Cretaceous plants. Proceedings of the Royal Society, 81B, 559-561. STOPES, M.C. & FUJII, K. 1910. Studies on the structure and affinities of Cretaceous plants. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 201B, 1-90. STOPES, M.C. & KERSHAW, E.M. 1910. The anatomy of Cretaceous pine needles. Annals of Botany, 24, 395-402. STOPES, M.C. & WATSON, D.M.S. 1908. On the present distribution and origin of the calcareous concretions in coal seams known as 'coal balls'. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 200B, 167-218. SUN, G., LYDON, S.J. & WATSON, J. 2003. Sphenobaiera ikorfatensis (Seward) Florin from the Lower Cretaceous of Huolinhe, Eastern Inner Mongolia, China. Palaeontology, 46,423-430. THISELTON-DYER, W.T. 1911. Harry Marshall Ward, 1854-1906. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Obituary Notices of Fellows Deceased, 83B, i-xiv. THOMAS, H.H. 1941. Albert Charles Seward 1863-1941. Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society, 3, 867-880. THOMAS, H.H. 1953. Frederick Ernest Weiss 1865-1953. Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society, 8, 601-608. THOMAS, B.A. & WATSON, J. 1976. A rediscovered 114foot Lepidodendron from Bolton, Lancashire. Geological Journal, 11,15-20. THOMAS, B.A. & WATSON, J. 1985. Forward to 'Reminiscences of a Yorkshire Naturalist', William Crawford Williamson, Edited by his wife. Facsimile reprint edited and published by J. Watson & B.A. Thomas, Manchester. TUTIN, T.G. 1932. A Cretaceous gleicheniaceous fern from Western Greenland. Annals of Botany, 46,503-508. WALTON, J. 1923. On a new method of investigating fossil plant impressions or incrustations. Annals of Botany, 37,379-391. WALTON, J. 1927. A note on the technique of investigating Coal-Measure plants. Annual Report and Transactions of the Manchester Microscopical Society 1926,51-55. WALTON, J. 1928. Recent developments in palaeobotanical technique. Congres de Stratigraphie Carbonifere, Heerlen, 7-11 Juin 1927,749-754. WALTON, J. 1930. Improvements in the peel-method of preparing sections of fossil plants. Nature, 125,413.

WALTON, J. 1935. Scottish Lower Carboniferous plants: the fossil hollow trees of Arran and their branches (Lepidophloios wunschianus Carruthers). Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 58, 313-337. WALTON, J. 1951. Notes on the preparation and permanence of peel sections. Troisieme Congres de Stratigraphie et de Geologie du Carbonifere, Heerlen, 1951, 651-653. WALTON, J. 1959. Palaeobotany in Great Britain. Vistas in Botany. Pergamon Press, London, 230-244. WARD, L.F. 1895. Saporta and Williamson and their work in palaeobotany. Science, N.S., 2,141-15. WATSON, D.M.S. 1906. On a 'fern' synangium from the Lower Coal Measures of Shore, Lancashire. Journal of the Royal Microscopical Society, 1-3, pis 1-3. WATSON, D.M.S. 1907. On a confusion of two species (Lepidodendron Harcourtii Witham, and L. Hickii, sp. nov.) under Lepidodendron Harcourtii, Witham, in Williamson's XIX. Memoir; with a description of L. Hickii, sp. nov. Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, 51, No. 13. WATSON, D.M.S. 19080. The cone of Bothrodendron mundum (Will.)'. Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, 52, No. 3. WATSON, D.M.S. 1908&. 'On the Ulodendroid scar'. Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, 52, No. 4. WATSON, D.M.S. 1909. On Mesostrobus, a new genus of lycopodiaceous cones from the Lower Coal Measures, with a note on the systematic position of Spencerites. Annals of Botany, 23,379-397. WATSON, D.M.S. 1956. Henry George Albert Hickling 1883-1954. Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society, 2,149-156. WATSON, J. 1964. Revision of the English Wealden fossil flora. PhD Thesis, University of Reading. WATSON, J. 1969. A revision of the English Wealden Flora, I. Charales - Ginkgoales. Bulletin of the British Museum, Natural History (Geology), 17,207-254. WATSON, J. 1977. Lower Cretaceous conifers of the Cheirolepidiaceae from the U.S.A. and England. Palaeontology, 20, 715-749. WATSON, J. 1982. The Cheirolepidaceae: a short review. Phyta, Pant Commemorative Volume, 256-273. WATSON, J. 1988. The Cheirolepidiaceae. In: BECK, C.B. (ed.) The Origin and Evolution of Gymnosperms. Columbia University Press, 382-447, New York. WATSON, J. & ALVIN, K.L. 1976. Silicone rubber casts of silicified plants from the Cretaceous of Sudan. Palaeontology, 19,641-650. WATSON, J. & ALVIN, K.L. 1996. An English Wealden floral list, with comments on possible environmental indicators. Cretaceous Research, 17, 5-26. WATSON, J. & ALVIN, K.L. 1999. The cheirolepidiaceous conifers Frenelopsis occidentalis Heer and Watsoniocladus valdensis (Seward) in the Wealden of Germany. Cretaceous Research, 20, 315-326. WATSON, J. & BATTEN, D.J. 1990. A revision of the English Wealden Flora II. Equisetales. Bulletin of the British Museum, Natural History (Geology), 46, 37-60. WATSON, J. & FISHER, H.L. 1984. A new conifer genus from

150 YEARS OF PALAEOBOTANY AT MANCHESTER the Lower Cretaceous Glen Rose Formation, Texas. Palaeontology, 27,719-727. WATSON, J., FISHER, H.L. & HALL, N.A. 1987. A new species of Brachyphyllum from the English Wealden and its probable female cone. Review of Palaeobotany andPalynology, 51,169-187. WATSON, J., FISHER, H.L. & HALL, N.A. 1988. The holotype of the Wealden conifer Brachyphyllum punctatum Michael. Palaeontology, 31,1029-1031. WATSON, J. & HARRISON, N.A. 1998. Abietites linkii (Romer) and Pseudotorellia heterophylla Watson coniferous or ginkgoalean? Cretaceous Research, 19, 239-278. WATSON, J. & LYDON, SJ. 2004. The bennettitalean trunk genera Cycadeoidea and Monanthesia in the Purbeck, Wealden and Lower Greensand of southern England: a reassessment. Cretaceous Research, 25, 1-26. WATSON, J., LYDON, SJ. & HARRISON, N.A. 1999. Consideration of the genus Ginkgoites Seward and a redescription of two species from the Lower Cretaceous of Germany. Cretaceous Research, 20, 719-734. WATSON, J., LYDON, SJ. & HARRISON, N.A. 2001. A revision of the English Wealden Flora, III. Czekanowskiales, Ginkgoales & allied Coniferales. Bulletin of the Natural History Museum (Geology Series}, 57, 29-82. WATSON, J. & SINCOCK, C.A. 1992 for 1991. Bennettitales of the English Wealden. Monograph of the Palaeontographical Society, London, Publication No 588, part of Vol. 145. WEISS, FE. 1901. The phloem of Lepidophloios and Lepidodendron. Memoirs of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, 45, (7), 1-22. WEISS, F.E. 1925. Plant structure and environment with special reference to fossil plants. Journal of Ecology, 13,301-313. WEISS, F.E. 1929. Fifty years' growth of the Botanical Department of Owens College and the University. Old Owensian Journal, December, 40-46. WEISS, F.E. 1930. Microscopy in Manchester. Annual Report and Transactions of the Manchester Microscopical Society, 1929, 36—54. WILLIAMSON, W.C. 1836. On the limestones found in the vicinity of Manchester. Philosophical Magazine, Series 3,9, 241-249, 348-356.

257

WILLIAMSON, W.C. 1855. On the scaly heads or collars from Runswick Bay, supposed to belong to Zamia gigas. Yorkshire Philosophical Society Proceedings, 1,45-51. WILLIAMSON, W.C. 1870. Contributions towards the history of Zamia gigas, Lindley and Hutton. Transactions of the Linnean Society of London, 26, 663-674. WILLIAMSON, W.C. 1871. On the organisation of the fossil plants of the Coal-Measures, Part 1. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 161B, 477-510. WILLIAMSON, W.C. 1887. A Monograph on the Morphology and Histology of Stigmaria ficoides. Palaeontographical Society Monographs, 40,1-62. WILLIAMSON, W.C. 1891. General, morphological, and histological index to the author's collective memoirs on the fossil plants of the Coal Measures. Part I. Memoirs and Proceedings of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society, Series 4,4,1-16. WILLIAMSON, W.C. 1893. On the organisation of the fossil plants of the Coal-Measures Part XIX. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 184B, 1-38. WILLIAMSON, W.C. 1896. Reminiscences of a Yorkshire Naturalist. Redway, London. WILLIAMSON, W.C. & HARTOG, M. 1882. Les Sigillaires et les Lepidodendrees. Annales des Sciences Naturelles. Botanique, series 6,13, 337-352. WILLIAMSON, W.C. & SCOTT, D.H. 1894. Further observations on the organisation of the fossil plants of the Coal Measures. Part I. Calamites, Calamostachys and Sphenophyllum. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 185 B, 863-959. WILLIAMSON, W.C. & SCOTT, D.H. 18950. Further observations on the organisation of the fossil plants of the Coal Measures. Part II. The roots of Calamites. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 186 8,683-701. WILLIAMSON, W.C. & SCOTT, D.H. 1895&. Further observations on the organisation of the fossil plants of the Coal Measures. Part III. Lyginodendron and Heterangium. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 186 B, 703-779. WITHAM, H.T.M. 1831. Observations on Fossil Vegetables Accompanied by Representations of Their Internal Structure as Seen Through the Microscope. W. Blackwood, Edinburgh.

This page intentionally left blank

Half a century of palynology at the University of Sheffield CHARLES H. WELLMAN Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Alfred Denny Building, Western Bank, Sheffield S10 2TN, UK Abstract: Research into the then fledgeling scientific discipline of palaeopalynology was introduced to the University of Sheffield in 1949 following the appointment of Leslie Moore. A thriving Palynology Research School soon developed, and has fluorished to the present day. The development and subsequent evolution of the Sheffield Palynology School is described, with a commentary on how this mirrors (and, to a certain extent, has influenced) the general development of the subject area, that in itself reflects changing academic and industrial interests. More than 300 postgraduate students have graduated through the Sheffield Palynology School, and their theses/dissertations are listed in full for the first time, providing an historical archive of palynological research undertaken in Sheffield.

Palynology is a broad discipline straddling the interface between the geological and biological sciences. It is of diverse scientific interest, and also an important tool utilized in a number of essential industries (e.g. fossil fuel exploration). The roots of palynology lie in palaeobotany, where acid maceration techniques were developed for the study of fossil spores and pollen. However, the remit of palynology has expanded over time, and it now embraces all organic-walled microfossils that can be recovered using 'palynological techniques', in addition to their subfossil and extant counterparts. It is often the case that the history of a scientific discipline is strongly influenced by the success of distinct research clusters. Occasionally the lifespan of such a research cluster exceeds that of its founders, and continues to flourish and influence the science through a number of academic/scientific generations. The 'Sheffield palynology school' is an example of this phenomenon, having been in operation for over half a century, and in the process passing through several academic/scientific generations. Palynology, particularly aspects involving fossil palynomorphs (palaeopalynology), has been studied continuously at the University of Sheffield since 1949. During this period the contribution of Sheffield palynology to the subject has been enormous, in terms of academic output and industrial application (particularly with respect to the fossil fuels exploration and development industries) and, most importantly, in terms of the training of a large number of postgraduate students. Many of these students have gone on to play key roles in the development of academic and industrial palaeopalynology (see Spinner 1986). When considering the history of palynology in his classic textbook Paleopalynology, Traverse (1988, p. 3) notes that 'In the English-speaking world, probably no other one institution has had the impact of the University of Sheffield...'.

In this paper the history of Sheffield palynology will be examined. The foundation of Sheffield palynology will be considered in terms of the early development of the subject in the national and international arena, and the evolution of the school in terms of wider developments and trends in the palynological sciences. The numerous staff and research students will be considered in terms of their contribution to the subject (academic and industrial). Finally, the value of the vast legacy of Sheffield palynology (collections; library; scientific data) will be evaluated. The Appendix lists all MSc, MPhil and PhD theses completed by students of palynology at the University of Sheffield and will be referred to throughout the remaining text.

The beginning (1949-1959) The introduction of palynology to the University of Sheffield can be traced to the appointment of Professor Lesley Rowsell Moore (Figs 1 and 2). Moore was born in 1912 in a small town (Midsomer Norton) on the Bristol-Somerset Coalfield. Mining was still very active on this coalfield during his childhood, and Moore's early interests in the local industry sparked a lifelong passion for coalfield geology. Moore studied for his BSc in Geology at the University of Bristol where his interest in coalfield geology flourished. Following his undergraduate degree, he began PhD research under the guidance of Sir Arthur Trueman, researching the geology of British coalfields. After being awarded a doctorate, Moore occupied lecturing and research posts in the geology departments at the universities of Cardiff, Glasgow and Bristol, before being appointed to the Sorby Chair of Geology at the University of Sheffield in 1949. It is noteworthy that at the time of this appointment Moore was only 37 years of age. By this time,

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,259-279.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

260

C.H.WELLMAN

Fig. 2. Leslie R. Moore in a more formal pose.

Fig. 1. Leslie R. Moore relaxing at work. however, he had published widely on various aspects of the geology of a number of British coalfields (e.g. Moore & Trueman 1937, 1939; Moore 1941, 1945). He was well acquainted with, and in fact a practitioner of, the biostratigraphical use of plant macrofossils for correlation of Coal Measure deposits (e.g. Moore 1941). He was also aware, however, of the work of Raistrick and colleagues who were utilizing spores to correlate individual coal seams (Raistrick 1934; Millott 1939; Knox 1942; and see also Marshall 2005). Moore was fascinated by this research, and had taken it one step further by attempting to relate dispersed spores to their parent plant via studies of in situ spores. Clearly such research was of enormous palaeobotanical interest, in addition to enabling integration of biostratigraphical schemes based on dispersed spores and plant megafossils. The paper was read at the Geological Society on 5 December 1945, and published in the Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London in 1946 (Moore 1946). Immediately this classic paper aroused considerable debate (see written discussion appended to the published paper) and it is rightly considered a benchmark paper. Even today a major aim of palynologists/palaeobotanists is to integrate the plant megafossil/dispersed spore fossil records. It was with these interests in mind that Moore took up his position in the small Geology Department of the University of Sheffield. One of the major tasks undertaken by Moore upon his appointment at Sheffield was to expand teaching

and research in geology within the university, particularly within the Faculty of Pure Science. Up to that time most geology teaching had been as part of Applied Science courses (Moore 1962). The Geology Department at that time was small, occupying what many former students will remember as the Office, Library and Museum on the top (G) floor of the Applied Science Building fronting onto Mappin Street, overlooking St George's churchyard. However, in addition to his efforts in revitalizing teaching and expanding the Geology Department, Moore also found time to realize his scientific ambitions with the creation of a research school in palynology. The 1950s proved to be a decade of expansion. It was a time, following World War II, when there was a great demand for exploration and exploitation of natural resources, for example fossil fuels. In 1952 Lesley Moore appointed Charles Downie, whom he had known as an undergraduate student in Glasgow, as a lecturer in the Department of Geology. Although expressing an initial interest in research on fossil nonmarine bivalves, Downie was encouraged by Moore to review earlier work on marine microfossils by various European scientists (e.g. Eisenack 1931; Wetzell 1933; Deflandre 1937) with a view to recovering such fossils from British rock sequences. Downie combined teaching with work on his PhD thesis, entitled 'Nature and Origin of the Kimmeridge Oil Shale', which was successfully presented in 1955. In this thesis he described in detail the stratigraphy of the Kimmeridge Oil Shale, but also reported on the presence of high numbers of palynomorphs (spores, pollen, dinoflagellate cysts and acritarchs), in addition to other microfossils (coccoliths, foraminifera and radiolaria). The presence of diverse marine palynomorphs inspired Downie's interest in marine paly-

PALYNOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD

nology. Some of the findings of his thesis work are presented in Downie (1957). During the course of his doctoral work, Downie had rediscovered a relatively neglected paper by Lewis (1940) on microfossils (including acritarchs and chitinozoans) from Ordovician deposits of North Wales. This paper may well have been pivotal in stimulating his interest in the marine palynology of the Lower Palaeozoic, an interest that was to form a large part of his research in later years, and for which he is still famous. The classic papers of Downie (1958, 1959) report his early studies on Palaeozoic acritarchs. Downie, personally and with his many research students, went on to explore the marine palynomorphs from throughout the stratigraphic column, and was a world authority on the study of these microfossils. A more detailed review of the life and career of the late Charles Downie is presented by Sarjeant (1984) and Owens & Sarjeant (2000). The early 1950s also saw the start of PhD research, under the supervision of Moore, by several palynologists who are now well known. Roger Neves, Herbert Sullivan, Leonard Love and Frank Spode began work on the Carboniferous of the British Isles, John Richardson on the Devonian of the British Isles and George Hart on the PermoCarboniferous of East Africa. All of these early theses concentrated on spores and pollen. It was not long, however, before Downie began supervision of his first PhD students, working on marine palynomorphs: Bill Sarjeant and David Wall studied the marine palynology of some British middle and lower Jurassic sequences, respectively. Much of the work in these theses was to be published in the next decade and constitutes an important part of the early foundations of palynomorph taxonomy and their use in biostratigraphical correlation. Other aspects of palynology were also explored. For example, a paper of particular interest was published by Neves (1958) describing the different composition of Carboniferous spore assemblages relating to lithology and depositional environments. This paper was later to be considered as a benchmark in the development of the science, and was a forerunner of subsequent work on the complex relationship between palaeoecology and palaeoenvironments. Any review of the 1950s would be incomplete without some comment on the facilities for palynological research. At this time George Bryant was Chief Technician, and was instrumental in the development of palynological processing techniques. In the early years samples were prepared in a single fume cupboard in the office, but by the mid-1950s new accommodation became available on the (F) floor below at the Broad Lane end of the building. Here a small preparation laboratory was established amongst other research facilities, for example

261

igneous and sedimentary petrology. A further micropalaeontology laboratory was also provided for microscope study of prepared material. Techniques were basic: hydrochloric and hydrofluoric acids for disintegration and removal of mineral matter; and bromine, fuming nitric acid and Schultz's solution for oxidation. Sore throats and minor acid burns were common. However, this was the time when palynological techniques were being pioneered, and innovative techniques developed at Sheffield contributed to improvements in palynological processing. As the Sheffield Palynology School increased in numbers, the laboratory workload naturally increased. This strain was relieved in the late 1950s when Barrie Dale was appointed as a technician dedicated to palynological processing. At this time microscopical analysis was undertaken using standard monocular petrological microscopes (see Sarjeant 1984). Photography was carried out under the supervision of George Bryant using simple attachment cameras and external lighting. The introduction to printing of photographs in the tiny darkroom in the roof of the building was an 'experience' for many students. Library facilities were limited and considerable time was given over to compiling catalogues of published taxa. Many of these handwritten card indexes survive to this day. So too does the vast reprint collection that began to accumulate on all aspects of palynology, and has been added to ever since. The '1950s' also saw the beginning of co-operation with fellow workers in North America and western Europe, with the establishment at the Heerlen Carboniferous Congress in 1958 of the still extant and thriving 'Commission Internationale de Microflore du Paleozoique' (CIMP). These relationships were to expand in future decades, Sheffield hosting many CIMP meetings, and remain to this day. A regular visitor in the 1960s was Professor Leonard R. Wilson from Oklahoma, USA, and latterly many postgraduates gained employment in the USA becoming recognized, informally, as the 'Sheffield Mafia' at annual meetings of the American Association of Stratigraphic Palynologists (AASP).

Consolidation (the 1960s) The 1960s saw further expansion of teaching and research in palynology within the rapidly expanding and thriving Geology Department. In 1959 Roger Neves had returned from a period of National Service and had been appointed to the academic staff after successfully defending his PhD thesis. Leonard Love and Herbert Sullivan also joined the academic staff, although both left for positions in North America in the next few years. With the increase in academic staff Moore began to spread postgraduate

262

C.H.WELLMAN

supervision, which allowed him to pursue a further research interest in aspects of palaeomicrobiology, particularly into searching for evidence of microbial attack on fossil spores and other plant material (Moore 1963). Neves began to supervise doctoral students working on spores/pollen, and in the early years of the 1960s new postgraduates included Alan Marshall, David Mishell and Bernard Owens working on miospores of the British Carboniferous. Bob Wagner, a palaeobotanist who had joined the academic staff, encouraged Ted Spinner to begin work on Carboniferous megaspores. Marine palynology was also thriving, instigated by Downie who continued supervision of PhD students: David Wall working on Liassic material, Graham Williams on Tertiary dinoflagellates and Tony Jenkins on Silurian chitinozoans. These were soon joined by Dick Lister, also working on the Silurian, but concentrating on acritarchs. M.A. Husain (University of Karachi, Pakistan) was the first of many overseas visitor to register for a PhD degree, and studied Lower Tertiary dinoflagellates of SE England. By the middle of the decade a steady stream of PhD students were emerging. Keith Gueinn, Dick Neville, Hassan Sabry and John Williams commenced research largely upon the Scottish Carboniferous, and Geoff Eaton started research on some Tertiary sequences of the Isle of Wight, UK. In the mid-1960s there were further changes to the staff profile. Since completing his PhD, Ted Spinner had held a Research Fellowship in the department, and joined the staff in 1965. Mavis Butterworth (formerly of the National Coal Board) spent a productive 2-year Research Fellowship in the department before accepting a lectureship at the University of Aston. There were also changes to the palynology laboratory. In 1963 Barrie Dale moved to Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (Massachusetts, USA) to join David Wall, who was now conducting seminal work at that establishment. He was replaced by Peter Shepherd. As the palynology laboratory witnessed an ever-increasing workload, Paul Higham was appointed in 1966 to work alongside Peter Shepherd. With increased staffing levels came refinements in preparation techniques and more organized work procedures in what was becoming a very busy laboratory. Novel processing techniques continued to be developed in Sheffield (e.g. Neves & Dale 1963) as palynological processing techniques were further refined. A large number of publications appeared in this decade, as might be expected considering the increasing staff numbers and the large number of doctoral students. Many of these publications concentrated on the basic taxonomy vital to the fledgling discipline of palaeopalynology (e.g. Love 1960; Neves 1961; Downie 1963; Sullivan 1964; Spinner 1965; Butterworth & Spinner 1967). However, the

biostratigraphical value of palynomorphs was recognized and most of the taxonomic works also explored the stratigraphical distribution of palynomorphs, and in this way early biostratigraphical schemes began to be developed. An important event, and one that was to have a dramatic impact on Sheffield palynology, was the discovery of North Sea oil and gas in 1966. The biostratigraphical use of palynology had been established soon after the birth of the science. Palynomorphs are exceptional biostratigraphical tools: often they exhibit rapid and perceptible evolution in morphology, and because of their miniscule size and occurrence in vast diversity and abundance (often thousands per gram of rock) small fragments of borehole core or cuttings can easily be age dated and used in palaeoenvironmental interpretation, or even thermal maturation analysis. From the inception of palynology at Sheffield, Moore and colleagues had undertaken commercial work for the coal-mining industry and had, in turn, received industrial support. By the time that North Sea oil was discovered Sheffield palynology already had a worldwide reputation for excellence in stratigraphical palynology. With the discovery of North Sea oil there was now an expanding market keen to exploit Sheffield's palynological expertise, and Sheffield palynology students were in great demand. News of the potential of palynology as an exploration tool had spread rapidly, and palynology was being routinely utilized by hydrocarbon exploration companies throughout the globe. Driven by the industrial demand for palynologists, in 1967 Lesley Moore instituted a new postgraduate course leading to the award of an MSc degree in Palynology. This degree scheme was to make an important contribution to the university's national and international reputation for research training in palynology and is of great significance to the history of stratigraphical palynology. The course was of 1-year's duration, with a taught part consisting of lecture and practical programmes, followed by an original research dissertation. Assessment was by written examination papers and satisfactory completion of the dissertation. Initially Charles Downie and Roger Neves taught most of the course and the external examiner was Professor T. Neville George (University of Glasgow). The course developed a strong stratigraphic application of palynology and was considered vocational in this aspect and was approved by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) for postgraduate awards. Only a small number of graduates holding a good Honours Bachelor degree (predominantly in Geology) were admitted to the course. John Utting and Rex Harland, well known names in palynology today, were among the first candidates to be awarded the MSc degree. Many of the early MSc graduates

PALYNOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD

gained employment directly in the oil industry, although others preferred to stay at Sheffield and extend their research and study for a PhD degree qualification.

Oil industry driven expansion (the 1970s) Throughout the 1970s there was a regular cohort of MSc students and a steady stream of PhD students (many of whom had graduated from the MSc). The MSc programme was supported by the NERC, but cohorts were supplemented by home students supported by industrial and private funding, and overseas students supported by their home industries and/or government. Similarly, PhD students included home and overseas students, supported in similar ways. Thus, the research school began to develop a more cosmopolitan aspect in membership, with an increasing proportion of students from overseas. Original project material was required for all of these students, and projects became more varied. By this time projects were derived from throughout the Phanerozoic, and not only confined to British material, as many overseas students brought their own material with them, and some home students also collected (or were provided with) material from outside of the UK. During the 1970s 32 students successfully completed MSc degrees, and 23 PhD theses were completed and accepted (see the Appendix). Many of the MSc and PhD graduates were quickly employed by large oil companies or smaller companies 'servicing' the petroleum industry. Others gained appointments to geological surveys or academic posts in universities. Three of the PhD students from the 1970s, Professors Geoff Clayton, Ken Higgs and Paul Hill went into academia and have developed strong palynology schools at Trinity College Dublin, University College Cork and the University of Derby, respectively. Many of the publications in the 1970s began to amalgamate the taxonomic and stratigraphical work of previous years into biostratigraphical schemes. For example, Neves et al. (1973) brought together work by members of the research school on the Lower Carboniferous of Britain, proposing a series of concurrent range zones that enabled a more precise subdivision and correlation of the sequences in northern Britain. Owens et al. (1977) amalgamated much of the work on the Namurian, proposing a series of biozones for use in subdivision and correlation in northern Britain. Clayton et al. (1977) compiled a miospore zonation scheme for the Carboniferous of western Europe, drawing from the research of members of the Sheffield school and colleagues working on the Continent, which still forms the basis for Carboniferous spore biostratigraphy even today.

263

In the later part of the decade the maturity of the Palynology School became apparent. Its founder, Leslie Moore, retired in 1977. He had succeeded in turning the Geology Department in Sheffield into one of the largest in the UK, while also creating the highly successful Palynology Research School. Charles Downie succeeded him as the fourth Sorby Professor of Geology and also took over the responsibility of Head of Department. Changes were also afoot in the palynology laboratories. In 1974 Peter Shepherd left the university and was replaced by Steve Ellin. It is interesting to note that the palynology staff were not confined to teaching and research within the subject area of palynology. Palynology always remained a research school within the larger, all encompassing, Geology Department. Downie, Moore, Neves and Spinner all taught various aspects of undergraduate geology. For example, Downie taught undergraduate stratigraphy classes, where he insisted on the unconventional approach of beginning his course in the Quaternary and working down through the stratigraphic column before finishing in the Precambrian. Not for nothing did the undergraduate students nickname him 'Professor Upside Downie'! The palynologists also continued research collaboration with the geology staff. An excellent, if not rather unusual, example was the Kilimanjaro project. In 1954 and 1957 members of the Sheffield Geology Department, including Downie, Moore and Neves, had taken part in expeditions to Kilimanjaro to study the East African volcanic complex. These field trips enabled preparation of the first geological map of the mountain, and Downie & Wilkinson (1972) published a definitive memoir on the geology of Kilimanjaro.

Turbulent times (the 1980s) The 1980s proved to be a turbulent decade for the Geology Department, and thus by implication the included palynology school. This was a consequence of: (i) inevitable changes in staffing; (ii) university internal politics; and (iii) national politics. At the start of the decade Professor Barry Dawson succeeded Downie as Head of Department. Fairly soon afterwards there was another change as Professor Alan Spears took over this role in the middle of the decade. In 1984 Charles Downie and Roger Neves retired from the academic staff as fulltime members, although they remained associated with the Palynology School on a part-time basis. At the same time other senior members of the geology staff left the university. Most of these staff were appointments made by Leslie Moore in his early years as Head of Department when he had begun to expand and develop the department. Accordingly,

264

C.H.WELLMAN

there was a cohort of staff that reached retirement age at roughly the same time. These departures left the department vulnerable as replacements were not forthcoming. At the same time new government policy dictated that university education in the UK was to be reviewed. Each subject area was to be scrutinized, with a view to improving efficiency and capitalizing on national resources. The process was begun with Earth Sciences, in what was known as the University Grant Committee Earth Sciences Review. The weakened department was easy prey for the Earth Sciences Review, and the report published in 1987 recommended closure. From 1988 the university terminated the single Honours Geology degree, but continued with the Natural Environmental Sciences degree (delivered jointly by Biology, Geography and Geology). Obviously the potential closure of the Geology Department had major implications for the Palynology School and discussions were held on its future. Ironically, the MSc and PhD programmes were still thriving and the graduates continued to be in great demand by industry. The number of fulltime palynologists on the academic staff had, however, been reduced to one: Ted Spinner. Initially the possibility of transfer to another university that ran a Micropalaeontology course was considered. However, the Geology Department remained open as the university deliberated on the fate of geology at the University of Sheffield. At this time, the Palynology School reorganized. The 'Centre for Palynological Studies' (CPS) was created with Ted Spinner as its first Director. Alongside the CPS, an 'Industrial Palynology Unit' (IPU) was informally set up. Downie and Neves were responsible for the IPU, which concentrated on industrial palynological concerns. Regardless of the problems experienced by the Sheffield Geology Department, the oil industry still needed palynology and trained palynologists. The NERC were aware of these needs. Following a review they continued support for the MSc course that continued to thrive. Support by industry also continued and included foundation of a Research Fellowship sponsored by Conoco, and funding of PhD studentships by a variety of other oil companies. The bulk of the MSc teaching was undertaken by Ted Spinner and Wolfgang Wille. Wille worked for the IPU from 1984 to 1985, before being appointed to the Conoco Research Fellowship in 1985. Teaching was also strengthened by Ken Doming who started teaching as an external on a part-time basis. Doming was a former student of Downie, and had also worked for him as a Research Assistant in the late 1970s. Throughout the history of the MSc degree, use had been made of external lecturers. Many of these were Sheffield graduates, now working in industry or for other scientific

organizations. Thus, individuals such as Harold Smith (National Coal Board) and Rex Harland and Geoff Warrington (British Geological Survey) were appointed as honorary lecturers, and would visit Sheffield and teach MSc classes in their particular areas of expertise, therefore ensuring a more rounded training for the students. Many companies also provided what were known informally as 'day lecture visits', whereby members of their staff visited Sheffield to teach and advise the students, and thus broaden the experience of members of the research school. One of the successes of the newly created CPS was the establishment of an informal advisory committee. Membership included academic staff, the external examiner, and other members drawn from industrial companies and public institutions involved in palynological work. The annual committee meeting was held at the end of the MSc year: in the morning the committee met, and in the afternoon each MSc student presented the results of their dissertation. The major contribution of the committee was to advise on the needs of industry, thus allowing employers a direct input into the MSc course contents. The final presentations of the MSc students that followed was an occasion when the large gathering of academics and industrialists had a chance to meet MSc students and listen to them present the findings of their projects. These were nervous times for the students, but an excellent opportunity for external visitors to assess potential employees or PhD students. By this time Professor T. Neville George had been succeeded as external examiner by Professor Bill Lacey, followed by Professor Alan Hibbert. Throughout the 1980s the laboratory was kept as busy as ever by the sheer volume of MSc and PhD students. A large volume of industrial processing (i.e. processing samples for various companies and consultants) was also undertaken. The industrial work helped finance the laboratory, in addition to keeping the technicians busy and various students helpers in pocket! In 1984 Paul Higham left the palynology laboratories as he took up appointment as Departmental Manager. Steve Ellin took over the running of the laboratories, and was joined by a new technician, Denise Darwin. Owing to pressures on the laboratory and technicians, a new feature introduced was the possibility of funding PhD research through working in the laboratory. MSc graduates were given the opportunity to study for a funded PhD, in exchange for processing industrial samples in the laboratory. There is a long list of excellent PhDs produced by students funded in this way, and known affectionately as 'sieve monkeys'. Initially much of this was organized through the IPU, with Duncan McLean and Tony Loy prominent early examples. Funding by this means also ensured a

PALYNOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD

steady stream of doctoral students, at a time when it was becoming increasingly difficult to find PhD funding from traditional means (i.e. government grants and industry). In spite of the changes and difficulties encountered during the 1980s, research and teaching flourished in this decade, 23 PhDs and 90 MSc degrees being completed (see the Appendix). Study of records indicate that the completions were distributed equally throughout these turbulent times. Research on Jurassic and Cretaceous material formed a large proportion of the MSc dissertations of this decade, a reflection of the importance of strata of this age in North Sea oil exploration at this time. Interestingly, seven dissertations were completed as part of a preliminary palynological investigation of the Cretaceous of the James Ross Island, Antarctica. The material was provided by the British Antarctic Survey, and heralded the beginning of a long and fruitful collaboration. Publications remained plentiful during the 1980s. The staff had continued to publish, predominantly on Carboniferous miospores and megaspores (Neves and Spinner), and marine palynology of all ages (Downie). Notable publications in this decade included Doming (198la, b) who reported on a study of acritarchs from the Late Silurian of AngloWelsh Basin. This work developed the acritarch biostratigraphy for this basin, in addition to relating acritarch assemblages to palaeogeography and palaeoenvironment.

Changing of the guard (the 1990s) Despite the recommendation of the Earth Sciences Review in 1987 to close the Geology Department, it had remained open while the university authorities deliberated on the future of geology at the University of Sheffield. Finally, in August 1990, the Geology Department was closed. The Geology Department was formally divided into the Centre for Palynological Studies (containing the palynologists) and the Earth Sciences Unit (containing the remainder of the geologists). Both were placed under the administration of the Department of Animal and Plant Sciences. With this major administrative change came relocation. The Earth Sciences Unit was relocated into the Dainton Building of the main university campus, but the Centre for Palynological Studies remained in Mappin Street. The CPS was re-established on the top G floor, with the laboratories and teaching facilities on the Broad Lane end of the F floor below. This space was more than adequate and the well-worn furnishings and facilities had a comfortable feel. Although separated by several hundred metres from the Earth Sciences Unit, contact was maintained by

265

the undergraduate teaching duties of the palynology staff, location of facilities (e.g. map room, drawing office), and administration links with Paul Higham (departmental manager) and Pat Mellor (departmental secretary). Good external relationships were established by the regular holding of guest lectures, days usually associated with a home-made buffet lunch, and playing host to meetings of the palynology section of the British Micropalaeontology Society and the CIMP. There was an important breakthrough in 1991 when the university created a new lectureship in palynology to which David Jolley was appointed. Jolley, who had obtained his MSc and PhD as a member of the Sheffield Palynology School, had been employed as a palynologist for Robertson Research Ltd. His main interest was in the Tertiary (particularly pollen), but he was also well acquainted with Mesozoic palynology. The appointment of Jolley eased the administrative and teaching load of Spinner, and meant that once again palynology staff numbers and breadth of coverage was increased. University politics, a feature of the 1990s, was moving at a rapid pace. Geology resurfaced in 1993 when a new department was created (Department of Earth Sciences) and a single Honours Geology degree reintroduced. The Department of Earth Sciences reuniting the Centre for Palynological Studies with the Earth Sciences Unit. The new department was initially headed by Professor Alan Spears, but in 1995 he was succeeded by Professor Cameron MacLeod. With the reunification of palynology with the rest of geology, the desirability of relocating to the Dainton Building was discussed on many occasions, and was soon to become a reality. During this period teaching of the MSc course was shared by Ted Spinner, David Jolley, Ken Doming and Rex Harland, with other contributions from Geoff Warrington, Harold Smith, Duncan McLean and Tony Loy. Dr John Richardson (Natural History Museum, London) completed a period as external examiner, followed by Professor Paul Hill (University of Derby) and Professor Geoffrey Clayton (Trinity College Dublin). The course was reviewed and approved twice by the NERC, including one visit of a working party. In 1997 Ted Spinner retired. His retirement was marked by a special dinner at the Tapton Hall of Residence, organized by Tony Loy and Pat Mellor. Over 100 former Sheffield palynology students attended. There was representation spanning the entire history (some 50 years) of the Palynology School, with former members travelling from as far afield as the USA. The gap left by the retirement of Ted Spinner was filled with two appointments. Professor Bernard Owens was brought in, on a part-time basis, to act as Director of the newly renamed 'Centre for

266

C.H.WELLMAN

Palynology'. Owens had completed his BSc studies at Sheffield and had been Roger Neves' first PhD student. Following postdoctoral research in Canada he had returned to the UK and spent the remainder of his career working for the British Geological Survey. The British Geological Survey has a strong grouping of palynologists, including many products of the Sheffield Palynology School: these have included Rex Harland, Stewart Molyneux, Jim Riding, Nick Turner and, more latterly, Mike Stephenson. The second appointment to a lectureship was filled in early 1997 by Charles Wellman. Unlike all of the previous lecturers in the Sheffield Palynology School, Wellman had at no time studied at Sheffield, although he could claim some descent as John Richardson had been one of his PhD supervisors. Wellman worked on Ordovician-Devonian spores, and was particularly interested in using studies of in situ spores to integrate the plant megafossil/dispersed spore fossil records, in addition to transmission electron microscope analysis of spore wall ultrastructure. At the same time Duncan McLean was appointed as an industry funded appointment, and took over responsibility for industrial Eventually the decision was made to physically unite the Department of Earth Sciences by reuniting palynology with the remaining geologists. By early 1998 the Centre for Palynology had joined the Department of Earth Sciences in the Dainton Building. One of the great advantages of this relocation was the creation of a new, state-of-the-art, palynology laboratory, largely designed by Steve Ellin. A vast improvement, the new laboratory has natural light with easy vehicle access for the delivery of rock samples and chemicals. The interior is designed for efficient use of space, is well ventilated and is well suited for training inexperienced people in palynological techniques. There are four separate rooms: one for rock washing and crushing; one for acid maceration (containing four large fume hoods); one for slide preparation; and one for chemical storage. Following the retirement of Denise Darwin, two former students of the centre, Hisham Bakri and Awad Ibrahim, spent periods of time working with Steve Ellin in the laboratory, before both eventually left for positions in palynological consultancies. Teaching of the MSc continued in the new setting, with a specially adapted MSc room. The bulk of the teaching was undertaken by full-time staff (Jolley, McLean, Owens and Wellman) with invaluable expert contributions from honorary lecturers and other external staff (Doming, Harland and Riding). The Masters course continued to fill with well-qualified undergraduates that had competed for the NERC-funded places, and was supplemented by overseas students that continued to find the course attractive. However, palynological jobs in the oil

industry were becoming fewer. This was largely a reflection of the maturity of the palynological sciences, which had been producing an uninterrupted supply of well-qualified potential recruits. However, it also reflected fluctuations in the buoyancy of the oil industry. As ever, the oil industry remained fickle and employment prospects were largely dependent on the price of a barrel of oil. Nonetheless, many MSc graduates, and the majority of PhD graduates, continued to find employment in the oil industry. Both the resurrected Department of Earth Sciences and the physical reunification of palynology with geology was short lived. In a radical policy change in 1999 the university decided to stop teaching single Honours Geology and close the Department of Earth Sciences. The importance of maintaining intact the Centre for Palynology was acknowledged and its administration was moved wholesale into the Department of Animal and Plant Sciences. The remaining geologists were dispersed into the departments of Chemistry, Civil and Structural Engineering, Geography and Engineering Materials. The initial impact of this administrative change for palynology was limited. As the final cohorts of geology students were processed, the staff continued to teach geology courses, while beginning to contribute to teaching in the Department of Animal and Plant Sciences. By 2001 there were no single Honours Geology students left, and Jolley/Wellman's undergraduate teaching lay entirely within the Biology degrees. A new generation of undergraduate, with a very different background, was being introduced to the science of palynology. Throughout the 1990s membership of the research school remained in great demand and 21 PhDs and 69 MScs were completed (see the Appendix). The international feel of the school was maintained with students from Libya, Malaysia, Nigeria, Oman, Saudi Arabia and Sudan. Ten more dissertations were completed on Antarctic material, a continuation of the collaboration with the British Antarctic Survey that had begun in the previous decade. This decade saw greater public recognition of the originality and high quality of the research carried out by members of the Master's course in their dissertations. In 1992 a special issue of the journal Antarctic Science was dedicated to nine papers on the palynology of the James Ross Island Area of the Antarctic (Pirrie et al 1992). These nine papers represented the work of the joint Sheffield Palynology School-British Antarctic Survey collaboration. Eleven MSc students featured as authors, and seven of the papers were under the individual authorship of students of the MSc course. MSc and PhD research projects remained diverse, but changes in staffing saw changing emphasis. Following the appointments of Jolley and, more latterly, Wellman there was an increasing

PALYNOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD

number of MSc dissertations and PhD theses involving Tertiary palynology and Ordovician-Devonian spores, respectively. Experimental work conducted in the laborotaries was also published, including Ellin & McLean (1994) and Jones (1994) on the application of microwave technology to the digestion of sediments and oxidation of kerogen. Staff publications also continued. In the early 1990s Spinner continued to publish his work on Carboniferous megaspores and miospores. In the latter part of the decade the centre's expertise in Carboniferous palynology was maintained by publications from McLean, and latterly by Owens after he joined the centre. Jolley began publishing his work on the Tertiary, particularly pollen studies, but also including studies on marine palynomorphs. The research was based largely in two areas: eastern England (e.g. Jolley 1992) and NW Scotland (the British Tertiary Volcanic Province) (Bell & Jolley 1997). Following his appointment in 1997 Wellman has continued his work on Ordovician-Devonian spores in his attempts to shed light on the origin and early diversification of land plants (e.g. Wellman & Gray 2000). More novel work included his transmission electron microscope studies of spore wall ultrastructure, and its value in assessing affinities of early land plant spores, in addition to shedding light on spore wall formation in these ancient plants (e.g. Wellman^ al 1998; Wellman 2002).

The present In 2000 the NERC undertook a thorough review of the provision of all Master courses in the UK. Sadly, it was decided to stop funding places for the Sheffield MSc in Palynology. This decision was no reflection on the course, which was still viewed as valuable and held in high esteem, but rather it reflected a change in policy. Essentially, it was considered that courses close to industry would have to rely on industrial funding. Sadly, this is not a viable option with the modern palynology industry, as the major oil companies employ few palynologists, preferring to rely on smaller service companies to undertake their palynological work. Unfortunately, few of these service companies are of sufficient size to finance a significant number of MSc students. In light of this it was decided that without the guaranteed NERC-funded places, recruitment of sufficient numbers (i.e. selffunding home students and funded overseas students) would be problematic, and it was no longer viable to run the courses. Thus, the MSc was discontinued, and the graduates of the 2000-2001 cohort were the last of a long lineage stretching back to 1967. Two hundred and five students graduated with an MSc in Palynology over these 35 years, a high proportion of these students going on to work

267

directly in palynology. The end of the MSc was a great loss for the Sheffield Palynology School, not only because of the prestige it brought, but, in particular, because the annual cohort of students provided a focus for the centre. However, small MSc groupings are becoming increasingly unpopular in British academia because they are not cost effective and tie up much staff time. Perhaps they are a thing of the past, in the current academic climate, and the loss of the MSc was an inevitability. The major impact of the loss of the MSc is the smaller number of students in the Palynology School. However, the doctorate programme remains strong, with PhD students, including home students, funded through the Department of Animal and Plant Sciences and industry, in addition to overseas students. Regular individually tailored short courses in palynology also continue, and are particularly popular with overseas visitors. Since being relieved of MSc teaching, Jolley and Wellman's commitment to undergraduate teaching has increased. Because of this increasing commitments to biology teaching, it was considered to beneficial to move Jolley and Wellman into the Alfred Denny Building, which houses all of the staff of the Department of Animal and Plants Sciences. The move took place in 2001, when the palynology offices, library and collections were transferred. However, the palynology laboratory remains in the Dainton Building, as the cost of moving such a new and expensive laboratory is prohibitive. However, the Alfred Denny Building is the next building uphill from the Dainton Building on Western Bank, so commuting between the two locations is unproblematic. Responsibility for the laboratory has been given to McLean, who controls the industrial side of the palynology operation. David Bodman, a member of the final MSc cohort, has joined Steve Ellin in the laboratory, which remains extremely busy undertaking commercial work and academic processing. It is reassuring to note that novel techniques are still being pioneered in the laboratory (e.g. Harvey 2000). A change in emphasis in research is noticeable. While staff and students still undertake traditional research in palynostratigraphy, more diverse projects have commenced that encourage collaboration with staff in the Department of Animal and Plant Sciences. These include the use of palynology in interpreting past environmental change (e.g. Royer et al. 2000), including the use of isotopic anlysis of palynomorphs (Beerling & Jolley 2000), and the use of palynomorphs in the interpretation of phylogenetic relationships, for example among land plants (e.g. Wellman 2002). Recent PhD students are also involved in examination of (palynologically retrieved) cuticles, where stomatal distribution is used to interpret past atmospheric composition, and

268

C.H.WELLMAN

isotopic composition of spores and pollen again used to interpret past environments.

The future Palynology remains a large grouping, and is a strong and discrete unit within the Department of Animal and Plant Sciences. Fundamental palynostratigraphy is still practiced, but more novel research is also undertaken. Much of this reflects the current paradigm shift in the geological and biological sciences, that accepts that these disciplines are interrelated through the relationship between the evolution of life and changing environment (global change). All sciences evolve, and palynology is no exception. Much of the past half century was spent undertaking fundamental taxonomic work on palynomorphs and plotting their temporal-spatial distribution. Such basic work was vital for the fledgling discipline. However, a new generation of palynologists is building on this vital work by utilizing this database to shed light on patterns of biological and environmental evolution throughout geological time. The Sheffield Palynology School is now ideally placed to continue this work, at the interface between the biological and geological sciences. Disciplines must adapt to the changing academic and industrial climate in which they find themselves. This has been a feature of the first half century of the Sheffield Palynology School. A fine example was the shift in emphasis from supporting the coalmining industry to the oil industry, mirroring the decline of the former in the UK and the expansion of the latter. The Sheffield Palynology School remains in a strong position, with young staff members ensconced in a strong department. Obviously directions must switch in order to adapt, whilst maintaining the sense of history of the school. This sense of history is linked to the vast legacy of the school. What is the legacy of the first half century?

The legacy The pioneers of Sheffield palynology retired some years ago, although it is reassuring to note that many are still with us. However, the first wave of PhD students are now joining them in retirement. Despite this, many palynology positions throughout the globe remain filled with graduates of the Sheffield Palynology School. These are no longer the pioneers or the early generation of PhDs, but represent subsequent generations of PhD and MSc students. The lasting legacy of the first half century of the Sheffield Palynology School must be the students themselves. They have gone on to influence the development of palynology (academic and industrial) and are thus critical to its history as a science. A brief perusal of

the listings of MSc and PhD students in the Appendix reveals numerous well-known palynologists that have helped forge modern palynology. Nonetheless, one must not forget that palynology is a specimen-based subject. The academic toils of all of the members of the Sheffield Palynology School remain housed in the centre and are available for inspection. Much of the information in the PhD theses and MSc dissertations remains unpublished. These theses, in excess of 300 to date, are available in the Centre for Palynology library. They contain a huge wealth of palynological data, derived from an unimaginable number of hours of processing and microscope work. The Appendix lists all of the theses and dissertations produced by the Sheffield Palynology School to date. All rock samples, wet residues, and slides relating to student projects and staff research are also stored in the centre and are freely available for inspection. These include a large number of type specimens. These collections have also been supplemented by others deposited with the centre for curation. For example, the late Jane Gray's (University of Oregon, USA) collections are housed in the centre (Shear 2000), as is much of the material from the University of Wales, Aberystwyth, deposited after the termination of palynology at this institution. The centre also has an enormous collection of palynological literature, amassed by the centre's staff and students over the last half a century. Many of these originals are irreplaceable. Analysis of the Sheffield thesis/dissertation database is highly instructive and reflects the historical development of palynology at Sheffield. Some basic graphs are illustrated (Figs 3 and 4) demonstrating the temporal and spatial distribution of material described in the theses/dissertations. Some trends are clear, such as the dominance of Carboniferous and Jurassic work. Others are rather unexpected, for example the paucity of PhD work on the Silurian and Devonian. It is even more instructive to examine the distribution of theses/dissertations in a chronological context. In this way the influence of individual academic staff and trends in industry become clear. Space does not permit such an analysis here, but the database is presented in full for analysis by interested parties. This historical sketch developed out of discussions with numerous members of the 'Sheffield Palynology School': both past and present. I am particularly grateful to Ted Spinner who encouraged me to write it, in the hope that a 'neutral' non-graduate of Sheffield could provide an unbiased account. Ted provided a detailed historical framework. S. Ellin and D. McLean prepared much of the theses/dissertation information, and together with P. Higham and T. Carswell provided vital discussion. I must take responsibility, however, for any interpretation included herein. This review is dedicated to the memory of Professor Leslie R. Moore who died, aged 91, on the 13th November 2003.

PALYNOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD

269

Fig. 3. A breakdown of PhD, MPhil and MSc theses according to the age of material analysed (note that where a thesis concerns more than one age, it is recorded as a percentage breakdown).

Fig. 4. A breakdown of PhD, MPhil and MSc theses according to location of the material analysed (note that where a thesis considers material from more than one location, it is recorded as a percentage breakdown).

270

C.H.WELLMAN

Appendix PhD, MPhil and MSc theses produced in the Sheffield palynology school, arranged in chronological order under each category. Figures 3 and 4 graphically illustrate the breakdown in thesis with respect to age and location of material, respectively.

PhD DOWNIE, C. 1955. The nature and origin of the Kimmeridge Oil Shale. LOVE, L.G. 1959. The Scottish Lower Carboniferous Oil Shales with particular reference to the upper part of the Lower Oil Shale Group. NEVES, R. 1959. An investigation into the Namurian microflora of parts of the southern Pennines Basin. SARJEANT, W.A.S. 1959. Organic-shelled microplankton of the Callovian and Oxfordian. SULLIVAN, H.J. 1959. The description and distribution of miospores and other microfloral remains in some sapropelic coals and their associated mimic coals and their carbonaceous shales. RICHARDSON, J.B. 1960. A study of the microflora of the Middle Old Red Sandstone, Orcadian Basin. HART, G.F. 1961. Microfloral assemblages from the Katewaka-Mchuchuma and Songwe-Kuwira coalfields, Tanganyika Territory, East Africa. OWENS, B. 1963. A palynological investigation of the Namurian and Westphalian sediments of the Stainmore Outlier, Westmorland. WALL, D. 1963. Liassic microplankton, spores and pollen grains from Britain. WILLIAMS, G.L. 1963. Organic walled microplankton of the London Clay. SPINNER, E.G. 1964. Megaspores and miospores from the Forest of Dean Coalfield. JENKINS, W.A.M. 1965. Ordovician chitinozoa from Shropshire. MARSHALL, A.E. 1966. Miospore assemblages associated with seam-splitting in the Fenton and Silkstone coal seams. MISHELL, D. 1966. Namurian and Westphalian miospores from the Bowland Fells and Ingleton Coalfield. HUSAIN, M.A. 1967. Dinoflagellates and acritarchs from the Eocene and Paleocene of south-east England. LISTER, T.R. 1968. Chitinozoa, acritarchs and spores of the Ludlow Series of Shropshire. EATON, G.L. 1969. Dinoflagellate cysts and acritarchs from the Bracklesham Beds of the Isle of Wight. GUEINN, K.J. 1969. An investigation into the Namurian and lower Westphalian spores and pollen of the Midland Valley of Scotland.

NEVILLE, R.S.W. 1969. The stratigraphic distribution of miospores in the Lower Carboniferous of East Fife, Scotland. SABRY, H.S.M.Z. 1969. An investigation of the fossil spores and pollen in the Carboniferous rocks of the Sanquhar Coalfield, Dumfriesshire, Scotland. BURNS, D.A. 1970. Electron microscope studies of Recent and fossil algae. DOLBY, G. 1970. A palynological investigation into the Devonian/Carboniferous transition measures in south west Britain and southern Eire. UTTING, J. 1970. Karoo stratigraphy and palynology of the upper Luangwa valley and lower Karoo palynology of the mid-Zambesi valley, Zambia. IOANNIDES, N.S. 1971. Palynological investigation of the Lower Carboniferous measures of the Spilmersford and D'Arcy boreholes, the Lothians, Scotland. LENTIN, J.K. 1971. An investigation of some aspect of palynofacies at the Namurian-Westphalian boundary in the Southern Pennines Province. RASUL, S.M. 1971. A systematic and stratigraphic study of the Tremadoc acritarchs of Shropshire. WILLIAMS, I.E. 1971. Carboniferous miospores from the Brampton district, northern England and the Archerbeck Borehole, Dumfriesshire. CLAYTON, G. 1972. Lower Carboniferous miospores from the Cockburnspath-Skateraw region of south-east Scotland. REID, PC. 1972. The distribution of dinoflagellate cysts, acritarchs and pollen in coastal sediments from the British Isles. BUJAK J.P. 1973. Microplankton from the Barton Beds of the Hampshire Basin, England. LIENGJARERN, M. 1973. Dinoflagellate cysts and acritarchs from the Oligocene beds of the Isle of Wight. SINANOGLU, E. 1973. Lower Carboniferous miospores from the East Linton borehole, East Lothian, and the lower and middle Border Groups of the Langholm area, Scotland. HILL, PJ. 1974. Acritarchs from the Llandovery and lower Wenlock of Wales and the Welsh Borderlands. MORBEY, SJ. 1974. A palynological study of the Rhaetian Stage in the Kendelbachgraben, Austria and the upper Triassic Parva and Rhaetic formations in a borehole at Bunny Hill, Nottinghamshire, England. POTTER, T.L. 1974. The stratigraphic palynology of some Cambrian successions in North Wales, England and north-west Spain. SPODE, F. 1974. A micropalaeontological investigation of the Mansfield Marine Band. HIGGS, K.T. 1975. Stratigraphic palynology of the Upper Devonian and Lower Carboniferous sed-

PALYNOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD

iments at Ringabella Bay, County Cork, and Hook Head, County Wexford, Eire. THIRAMONGKOL, V. 1976. A palynological investigation of the basal Cretaceous measures in East Yorkshire, north Lincolnshire and Norfolk. DENISON, C.N.D. 1977. The microplankton of the Thanetian/Ypresian boundary in S. E. England and their stratigraphic and paleoecological significance. AL-JUBORI, F.H.K. 1979. Palynological investigations into the Bajocian (Scarborough Formation) marine transgression of East Yorkshire. BOOTH, G.A. 1979. Lower Ordovician acritarchs from successions in England and North Wales. LAM, K.A. 1979. A palynological investigation of the Brora Boulder Beds (Kimmeridgian-lower Portlandian) of Sutherland, N.E. Scotland. TURNER, R.E. 1979. Acritarchs of Llandeilo and Caradoc age from classic localities in Britain. FENTON, J.P.G. 1980. Palynological investigation of the middle Toarcian-lower Callovian strata of Lincolnshire and Northamptonshire, eastern England. WELSH, A. 1980. Stratigraphical palynology of early Dinantian strata in Cumbria. AL-BEERKDAR, A.M.R.H. 1981. A study of the Aptian/Albian dinoflagellate cysts of southern England. ISLAM, M.A. 1981. Early and middle Eocene organic microplankton of the Anglo-Belgian Basins. MOLYNEUX, S.G. 1981. The micropalaeontology and age of the Manx Group, Isle of Man. PARRY, C.C. 1981. Palynofacies studies of the Middle Jurassic Brent Group in parts of the East Shetland Basin, Northern North Sea. PORTER, R. 1981. The Stratigraphical palynology of the Lias-Oxfordian succession of the Brora Outlier, Sutherland. KITELEY, R.J. 1982. Detailed studies of the Callovian and Oxfordian microplankton from the Warboys and Warlingham boreholes. WOOLLAM, R. 1982. Middle Jurassic dinocysts from southern England. MASOOD, K.R. 1983. Studies on the Gondwana flora of the Salt Range, Pakistan. POWELL, A.J. 1983. Miocene dinoflagellate cysts of the Piedmont Tertiary Basin, Italy. OLOTO, I.N. 1984. A palynological study of the late Cretaceous and Tertiary boreholes from Southern Nigerian sedimentary basin. EL-BEIALY, S.Y. 1985. Late Tertiary dinocysts from the Nile Delta and comparison with a western Mediterranean site. RAZZO, M.J.H. 1985. The Westphalian palynomorphs from selected sequences in the Nottinghamshire and Yorkshire Coalfield. SAID, U.B. 1985. Megaspores from Lower Carboniferous strata of Dumfriesshire, Scotland.

271

RIDING, J.B. 1986. Jurassic dinoflagellate cysts from the Nettleton Bottom borehole, Lincolnshire and other associated sections in northern and eastern England. DAVIS, J.E. 1987. The Jurassic palynology and stratigraphy of the Detention no. 1 borehole, Kent. BROWN, S. 1988. A palynological investigation of the Eocene/Oligocene boundary problem in the west European context. FORBES, G.A. 1988. Late Jurassic palynology of the Lusitanian Basin north of Lisbon. LUCAS, F.A. 1988. Palynology and palaeoenvironment of late Cretaceous and Tertiary sediments in hydrocarbon boreholes of the Anambra Basin and the Niger Delta. WALTON, W. 1988. Palynostratigraphy and palynofacies study of the Middle Jurassic (Aalenianearly Callovian) strata of the Sea of the Hebrides and Inner Hebrides basins, NW Scotland. WILLIAMS, P.D.B. 1988. The palynology and palynofacies of the Middle Jurassic in blocks 9/18 and 9/19 (U.K. sector) in the Northern North Sea. TURNER, N. 1989. A palynological study of Carboniferous strata from the Clee Hill Outlier, Shropshire, England. JIANG, Q. 1990. Palynologic investigation of Jurassic sections in the Lyell and Murchison fields, Northern North sea. KEATING, J.M. 1991. A palynological study of the Jurassic (Pliensbachian to Oxfordian) strata of the north west Hutton Field, Northern North Sea. BUTLER, N. 1992. The palynology of the basal Viking, Brent & top Dunlin groups (Jurassic) from the northwest Hutton Field, Northern North Sea. JOLLEY, D.W 1992. Palynofloral studies of selected late Palaeocene to early Eocene localities of northwest Europe. HOGG, N.M. 1993. A palynological investigation of the Scalby Formation (Ravenscar Group, Middle Jurassic) and adjacent strata from the Cleveland Basin, north east Yorkshire. McLEAN, D. 1993. A palynostratigraphic classification of the Westphalian of the Southern North Sea Carboniferous Basin. OSTERLOFF, P.L. 1993. An investigation of the palynology of some late Namurian and early Langsettian strata from the central Pennines, England. SNAPE, M.G. 1993. A palynological study of the Ordovician to Devonian sediments of the And Atlas, Morocco. EL-MEDAWI, A.D. 1994. Palynology of the Upper Cretaceous and Cretaceous/Tertiary boundary of well C3-65, Sarir area, SE Sirte Basin, Libya. BOOTH, C.A. 1995. The geochemistry, mineralogy, palynology and petrology of the Clowne Coal Seam, North Derbyshire.

272

C.H.WELLMAN

SMITH, S.W. 1995. Marine palynology and palynostratigraphy of the interval Callovian to early Oxfordian (Jurassic) of the Yorkshire coast. DODSWORTH, P. 1996. The stratigraphy, palynology and palaeoenvironments of selected Northern Hemisphere upper Cenomanian-lower Turonian (Cretaceous) sections. LOY, A. 1996. Jurassic palynostratigraphy of the Murchison Field. SUMNER, P.W. 1996. A palynological investigation of the Toarcian sediments of North Yorkshire. WILSON, S.J. 1996. High resolution comparative palynostratigraphy and palaeoecology of Oligocene sequences in the terrestrial basins of the western British Isles and the marine North Sea Basin. Yi, S.H. 1996. A study of late Cretaceous and Tertiary palynology from the Yellow Sea Basin, west coast of South Korea. IBRAHIM, A.B. 1997. A palynological investigation of the Jurassic/Cretaceous boundary in the offshore coastal basin, Tanzania, East Africa. JAIS, J.H.M. 1997. Oligocene to Pliocene quantitative stratigraphic palynology of the Southern Malay Basin, offshore Malaysia. STEPHENSON, M.H. 1998. Stratigraphic and systematic palynology of Permian and PermoCarboniferous rocks of Oman and Saudi Arabia. BROXAP, R. 1999. Integrated palynology and magnetostratigraphy of the London Clay Formation (Ypresian) from the Isle of Sheppey, southeast England. FITZGERALD, J.A. 1999. Pollen and spore assemblages from the Oligocene Lough Neagh Group and Danaghy Formation, Northern Ireland. HARRINGTON, G. 1999. North American palynofloral dynamics in the late Palaeocene to early Eocene basins. ABUSHAM, E.A. 2000. A palynology and palynofacies investigation of the Lower Carboniferous of the Midland Valley of Scotland. JONES, R.A. 2000. A palynological investigation of Triassic Lower Mercia Mudstone Group strata from the Irish Sea and Cheshire Basins and an investigation of palynological sample preparation using microwave digestion systems. HARVEY, C. 2001. Palynology and coal analysis of the Devonian Campo Chico Formation, western Venezuela. OKONKWO, C.L. 2001. Palynostratigraphy and palaeoenvironmental studies of the Oligocene and early Miocene sequences onshore, Niger Delta Basin, Nigeria. MOHIUDDIN, U. 2001. Palynology and palynofacies of the Late Cretaceous of Oman.

MPhil KHALED, A.A. 1989. A palynological investigation of part of the lower Kimmeridge Clay at Donington, Lincolnshire and Reighton, North Yorkshire, England. MAYAGILO, J.F. 1989. An investigation of the palynology of the Upper Jurassic-lower Cretaceous strata from Songo Songo 5 well offshore south east Tanzania. ISHAK, S.B. 1991. Miospores of the NamurianWestphalian age from the Farnham Borehole, Yorkshire. AHMED, H.B.M. 1994. A palynological investigation of the lower section of the Abanus no. 1 well; Muglad Basin, south central Sudan.

MSc FRYER, K. 1967. The palynology of the lower (grey) Downtonian rocks at Downton Castle, Herefordshire. HARLAND, R. 1967. A palynological investigation of the Pleistocene deposits at Kirmington, Lincolnshire. UTTING, J. 1967. Miospores from the Lower Limestone Shales, Avon Gorge. DORAN, R.P.J. 1968. Miospores from the Carboniferous sediments of Machrihamish, Argyllshire. STAVRINOS, G.N. 1968. Kimmeridgian microplankton, spores and pollen from Clavell's Hard, Dorset. CRANE, M.D. 1970. Studies on the spores of some Carboniferous Pecopterid fructifications. WISEMAN, J.F. 1970. A palynological investigation of the Recent sediments of the Humber River. COLLINS, A.G. 1971. Miospores from the Scremerston Coal Group of Northumberland. GREY, K. 1971. A study of the Lower Carboniferous miospore assemblages from the Lower and Middle Border Groups of the Langholm area, Dumfriesshire, Scotland. WHITAKER, M.F. 1971. A palynological investigation of the Lower Limestone Group Northumberland. BELL, D.G. 1973. Palynomorph variation in the Wenlock Limestone of Shropshire. BRADFIELD, G.A. 1973. Dinoflagellate and acritarch assemblages from the Gargasian, upper Aptian of Gargas, South France. DUXBURY, S. 1973. A study of the microplankton of the higher beds of the Speeton Clay of Speeton, Yorkshire. GARDINER, P.D. 1973. A palynological investigation of the Middle Limestone Group of northeastern Northumberland. MALONEY, R.J.D. 1973. Palynomorphs from the Buanji Series of Tanzania.

PALYNOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD

DODD, M. 1974. Spores and pollen from the uppermost Bajocian, Bathonian and lower Callovian rocks of East Yorkshire. PERRY, S.P.G. 1975. Microplankton from the Upper Jurassic and Lower Cretaceous of St. Leonhard, near Salzburg, Austria. WILKINSON, G.C. 1975. Palynomorphs from the Toarcian and lower Bajocian sediments of the Yorkshire Basin. BROCKLEY, P. 1976. A palynological study of sediments of the Upper Estuarine Series (Bathonian) Clipsham New Quarry, Leicestershire. CONWAY, B.H. 1976. Jurassic palynomorphs from Zohar 5, Yinnon 1 and Kidod 2 boreholes in southern Israel. FENTON, D. 1976. A systematic study of the microplankton of the Portland Sand (Upper Jurassic), from the Isle of Purbeck, Dorset, England. LOVE, C. 1976. Chitinozoa of the Wenlock Shales (Silurian) of Shropshire, England. CLEE, P.M. 1977. A palynological investigation of the Rhaeto-Liassic succession at Lavernock Point, South Wales. MAKOOI, K. 1977. A study of the Valanginian and Hauterivian microplankton assemblages from Angles, south-east France. VASSILIOU, D. 1977. An investigation of the microplankton of the Priabonian of northern Italy. WESTON, J.R. 1977. A study of the microplankton from the latest Kimmeridge Clay and earliest Portland Sand of Chapman's Pool, Dorset. WOOLLAM, R. 1977. A palynological study on part of the Oxford Clay from the East Midlands, England. ZAHIRI, A. 1977. Dinoflagellate and acritarch assemblages from the Barremian type section (Lower Cretaceous) at Angles, south-east France. LEIGH, M.A. 1978. Tournaisian miospores from the Pinskey Gill Beds, Ravenstonedale, Cumbria. WALTHAM, S.E. 1978. A micropalaeontological investigation of the upper Pliensbachian Cleveland Ironstone Formation. WHITELEY, M.J. 1978. Devonian miospores from the Key Point well, Isle Vanier, Parry Islands, Arctic Canada. ARMSTRONG, H.A. 1979. The palynology of the Gastrioceras subcrenatum marine band and associated sediments at Langsett, South Yorkshire. CADMAN, N.M. 1979. A palynological study of the Bajocian sediments of Cloughton Wyke, North Yorkshire. CHRISTMAS, J.S.G. 1979. Givetian spores from the Sophie Point well, Parry Islands, Arctic Canada.

273

COLE, J.M. 1979. Palynology of the Lower Carboniferous Cementstone Group of the Merse of Berwick. HUNT, C.O. 1979. A palynological investigation of the Lulworth Beds of Durlston Bay, Dorset. WATSON, D.P. 1979. Carboniferous miospores from the Prestatyn district, northeast Wales. PALEY, W.J. 1980. A palynological study of the Westphalian A/B boundary stratotype, Duckmanton, north Derbyshire. RIDING, J.B. 1980. A palynological study of the lower Bajocian sediments of Jackdaw Quarry, Stanway Hill, Gloucestershire. TOOBY, K.M. 1980. Palynology and palynofacies of the Oxfordian-Kimmeridgian boundary at Black Head, Dorset, England. DAVIS, J.E. 1981. A palynological investigation into the middle to upper Bathonian strata from Woodeaton, Oxfordshire. FORBES, G.A. 1981. Palynology of the Snowshill Hill Quarry section (lower to middle Bathonian), Gloucestershire. GIBBONS, KM. 1981. The palynology of the Gastrioceras cancellatum and Gastrioceras cumbriense marine bands and associated sediments at Orchard Farm and Hipper Sick, Derbyshire. HARDING, A.M. 1981. Palynomorphs from the Toarcian and lower Bajocian sediments of Crickley Hill and Wotton Hall quarry, the Cots wolds. RAZZO, M.J.H. 1981. A palynological investigation of the Mansfield Marine Band and associated measures. ARCHARD, G.M. 1982. A palynological study of the upper Triassic to Lower Jurassic strata of St. Audries Bay, West Somerset. BLACK, S.M. 1982. Conodont biostratigraphy and thermal maturity of Carboniferous sediments in the Rookhope borehole, Northumberland. EVANS, E. 1982. A palynological investigation into middle and upper Oxfordian sediments at Bran Point, Dorset. FLETT, S.D. 1982. A palynological investigation of the upper Pliensbachian and lower Toarcian sediments of the Holwell reserves and Tilton railway cutting, Leicestershire. HOOKER, N.P. 1982. The palynology of the Chipping Norton and Sharp's Hill formations (early-middle Bathonian), Sharp's Hill Quarry, Oxfordshire, England. HUMBLE, E.M. 1982. A palynological investigation into upper Bathonian strata from Elm Farm Quarry, Stratton Audley, Oxfordshire. JACOBSEN, S.L. 1982. A palynological investigation of the Lower Cretaceous beds of Woods Hill Quarry, Nettleton, North Lincolnshire. MCPHILEMY, B. 1982. A palynological investigation

274

C.H.WELLMAN

of coal fragments found on six Roman Villa sites in England. MILES, N. 1982. A palynological investigation of the Dersingham beds in the Hunstanton borehole. PEARCE, J.M. 1982. A palynological investigation of the Bathonian-Callovian interval in the Bicker Borehole, Lincolnshire. RENSHAW, D.K. 1982. A palynological investigation of the lower to middle Bathonian sediments of the Hampen railway cutting, near Cheltenham, Gloucestershire. SAID, U.B. 1982. A palynological study of Lower and Middle Coal Measures in the Michael, Frances and Julian pits, East Fife, Scotland. TYKOEZINSKI, H.G.R. 1982. A palynological study of middle and upper Bathonian sediments of the cement works quarry at Shipton-on-Cherwell, Oxfordshire. BRAHAM, W. 1983. A palynological investigation of the beds adjacent to the Hauterivian-Barremian boundary in the Speeton Clay Formation, Speeton, Yorkshire. EBDON, C.C. 1983. An investigation of the microplankton from the Palaeocene sequences in the Phillips 16/29a-Al and 16/29a-2x British North Sea wells. HINES, R.K. 1983. A palynological investigation of the Rhaeto-Liassic succession of the south coast of England : with special reference to Tolcis Quarry, Charton Bay and an offshore borehole. POWELL, A. 1983. Lower Carboniferous miospores from the Cementstones of Bracken Bay, Ayrshire, Scotland. RUTHERFORD, M. 1983. Palynomorphs from Toarcian, Aalenian and lower Bajocian sediments of Rosedale, North Yorkshire Moors. SHAW, D. 1983. A palynological investigation of some Toarcian and lowest Aalenian sediments of the isles of Skye and Raasay. STRONACH, C.H. 1983. Palynomorphs from the Toarcian and Aalenian of Hasty Bank, Yorkshire. WILLIAMS, G. 1983. Palynofacies and palynostratigraphy of two Ness Formation cores, Thistle Field. BAILEY, D.A. 1984. Palynology of upper Toarcian to lowest Bathonian strata from Dorset, England. BOON, G. 1984. A systematic investigation into the palynology of the Ampthill Clay in the region of Humberside, N.E. England. CARSS, G.C. 1984. A palynological investigation of the upper Volgian to Hauterivian horizons in the B.G.S. Skegness borehole, Lincolnshire. ERRINGTON, J. 1984. A palynological study of the Middle Limestone Group at Beadnell and Seahouses, Northumberland. LESTER, MJ. 1984. A palynological study of the Upper Jurassic and Lower Cretaceous sediments of Androya, northern Norway.

LOY, A. 1984. A palynological investigation of the Scalby Beds (Middle Jurassic) of northeast Yorkshire. MCLEAN, D. 1984. Namurian palynology of the Farnham Borehole, Knaresborough. MILNER, PS. 1984. Palynology of the Ampthill Clay and Kimmeridge Clay formations in the Vale of Pickering, North Yorkshire. MINNIS, J. 1984. A taxonomic and stratigraphic study of Aptian-early Albian dinoflagellate cysts from well 15/28a-3, Outer Moray Firth Basin, Northern North Sea. QUINCEY, J.M. 1984. Palynological investigation of the Upper Jurassic and Lower Cretaceous from the Gayton borehole, Norfolk. RICH, B. 1984. The palynology of the Cementstone Group at Longhill Point, Ayrshire. SPRIGGS, P.D. 1984. A palynological study of Namurian coals and associated sediments of Rossendale. VARNEY, T. 1984. A palynological investigation across the lower/upper Kimmeridgian boundary of the type section from Kimmeridge Bay, Dorset. WILLIAMS, N. 1984. A palynological investigation of the Staffin Shale Formation, Isle of Skye, (Callovian to Kimmeridgian), with observations on the stratigraphic distribution of Jurassic dinocysts in northwest Europe. ALDERSON, A. 1985. Palynological investigation of the lower Eocene (London Clay) sequence in the British Geological Survey Hadleigh borehole, Essex. BRITTAIN, S.J. 1985. Palynology of the London Clay Formation at Alum Bay, Isle of Wight. CAMPION, N.P. 1985. Dinocysts from the Sandringham Sands of the B.G.S. Hunstanton and B.G.S. Marham boreholes, Norfolk. CARROLL, F. 1985. Palynological assemblages from the Calciferous Sandstone Measures at Crail and Fife Ness, East Fife, Scotland. GOODALL, J.G.S. 1985. A palynological investigation of the Lower Cretaceous of Hastings, Sussex. HAYNES, R.C. 1985. A palynological study of the Kimmeridge Clay from Dorset. JAKEMAN, M.D. 1985. A palynological investigation of the type section of the Berriasian stage, Lower Cretaceous, at Berrias, Ardeche, southeast France. LATHAM, M. 1985. Palynological investigation of the upper Callovian-middle Oxfordian strata of the Worlaby E borehole, South Humberside, England. RICCIARDIELLO, G.A. 1985. A palynological investigation into the Middle Jurassic of the Worlaby 'E' borehole, South Humberside, England. ROBESON, D. 1985. Dinantian miospores from

PALYNOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD

Cementstones of the Scottish Border Basin, Roxburghshire and Berwickshire, Scotland. TODD, C. 1985. A palynological study of an Upper Bathonian to a Middle Callovian sequence in the Peterborough area, Cambridgeshire. WHELAN, G.M. 1985. A preliminary palynological study of some Cretaceous and Tertiary sediments from James Ross and Seymour islands, Antarctica. BRINDLEY, S.A. 1986. A palynological investigation of the Burdiehouse Limestone and associated strata from the Burntisland area of Fife, Scotland. BUTLER, N. 1986. Dinoflagellate cysts from the Ryazanian and Valanginian (Lower Cretaceous) of B.G.S. cored borehole 81/43, 80km ENE of Speeton Cliff, Yorkshire. CROOKES, J.R.J. 1986. A palynological study of the upper Namurian and lower Westphalian strata around the Crich area, Derbyshire, England. DAWSON, F.S. 1986. A study of the Barremian to Aptian palynomorph assemblages from Atherfield, Isle of Wight. JOLLEY, D.W. 1986. Palynology of some London Clay exposures from the Ipswich area. LEWIS, T.M. 1986. A palynological investigation of the Rhaetian strata at Three Arch Bridge rail cutting south-west of Shepton Mallet. SEARLE, D.M. 1986. A palynological investigation of the late-Lower to Middle Jurassic sediments from the Wessex Basin, England. SUMMERS, I.G. 1986. Palynology of the Middle Coal Measures exposed in the coastal section between Tynemouth and Seaton Sluice, Northumberland, England. WATKINS, C.L. 1986. The palynology of the Lower Kimmeridge Clay at Westbury, Wiltshire, England. DEAN, A. 1987. Chitinozoa and acritarchs fron the Much Wenlock Limestone Formation, Harley Hill, Shropshire. JARVIS, D.E. 1987. The palynology of the upper part of the London Clay (B.G.S. Hadleigh borehole), Essex. MAYLE, F.E. 1987. A study of the Upper Carboniferous miospores from the Waters Farm borehole, North Yorkshire. PAGE, A.P. 1987. Pollen and spore assemblages from the Ketewaka Coalfield of Tanzania. SANDERSON, P. 1987. A palynological investigation of the Westphalian A/B boundary stratotype, Duckmanton, Derbyshire. SWIRE, P.H. 1987. Palynology of the Valanginian to early Hauterivian of B.G.S. borehole 81/43 in the southern North Sea Basin. CAGE, K. 1988. The chitinozoa of the Much Wenlock Limestone Formation (Silurian) of Shropshire, England. DE SILVA, RE. 1988. Palynological analyses of

275

Callovian strata from the Wurttenburg region of the Swabian Alb, S. W. Germany. DUANE, A.M. 1988. The Quaternary palynology of cores from the Porcupine Basin, offshore western Ireland. ELLIS, R.R 1988. The palynology of the Upper Namurian-Lower Westphalian strata exposed at Todmorden, Lancashire. FITZPATRICK, M.E.J. 1988. A study of Lower Cretaceous palynomorphs from the Porcupine Basin, offshore western Ireland. KEATING, J.M. 1988. A preliminary investigation of the Upper Cretaceous palynology of north west James Ross Island, Antarctica. MARSHALL, R.W. 1988. A preliminary investigation of the palynology of the Upper Cretaceous Marambio Group from north west James Island, Antarctica. MUNGAI, M.W. 1988. A palynological investigation of the Kimmeridgian-Tithonian boundary beds of Mombasa, Kenya. NEWHAM, S. 1988. A study of the palynology from the Cretaceous, Kotick Point and Whiskey Bay formations, N. W. James Ross Island, Antarctica. PIPER, A.T. 1988. A preliminary palynological investigation into the Cretaceous strata of north west James Ross Island and Vega Island, Antarctic Peninsula. SOANES, C.M. 1988. A palynological reinvestigation of the upper Devonian and lower Carboniferous sediments at Burrington Combe in the Mendip Hills, Somerset, England. SOLMAN, T.A. 1988. An investigation into the palynology of Bed 32, Lower Kimmeridge Clay, North Wootten borehole, Norfolk. SPENCER JONES, M. 1988. Lower-middle Cretaceous palynomorphs from the western coastline of James Ross Island, Antarctica. AL-RUWEHY, N.M. 1989. The palynostratigraphy of the Cipit (Tschapitbach) area. CORNICK, RE. 1989. A palynological investigation of the Upper Namurian and Lower Westphalian A succession of the southern Pennines, Derbyshire. HOGG, N.M. 1989. A palynological investigation of the Yons Nab Beds of the Ravenscar Group (Middle Jurassic), northeast Yorkshire. SMITH, S.W 1989. An investigation into the marine palynology of the Lopez de Bertodano sediments (late Cretaceous), Cape Lamb, Vega Island, northern Antarctic Peninsula. SNAPE, M.G. 1989. A palynological investigation of the Nordenskjold Formation, north-west James Ross Island, Antarctica. WHELAN, M.N.A. 1989. A palynological investigation of samples from the Santa Marta Formation (Late Cretaceous), northwest James Ross Island, Antarctica.

276

C.H.WELLMAN

WOOD, S.E. 1989. A palynological study of the Late Cretaceous Lopez de Bertodano Formation, Humps Island, Antarctic Peninsula. BROOK, C.A. 1990. A palynological study of the Duckmantian (Westphalian B) strata exposed at Godkin opencast site, Nottinghamshire. DOLDING, P. 1990. An investigation into the palynology of the Upper Cretaceous sediments (Lopez de Bertodano Formation), of Humps Island, northern Antarctic Peninsula. MOSQUERA, M. 1990. A palynological investigation of the Late Cretaceous strata of the Lopez de Bertodano Formation, False Island Point, Vega Island, northern Antarctic Peninsula. MURPHY, PJ. 1990. A palynological investigation of sediments from the Santa Marta Formation, James Ross Island, Antarctica. OLIVER, N.S. 1990. Palynological investigation of the uppermost Santa Marta Formation, James Ross Island, Antarctica. ABBOTT, W. J. 1991. Acritarchs of the Much Wenlock Limestone Formation of the northern Wenlock Edge region, Shropshire, England. BURKE, T.G. 1991. A palynological investigation of a cored section from part of the Kimmeridge Clay formation in the northern North Sea, U.K. sector. BOTTOMLEY, R.J. 1991. Palynofloral sequence stratigraphy of Cenomanian outcrop samples from the Central Highlands of Papua New Guinea. CLARKE, C. 1991. A palynological investigation of Eocene marine sediments from Seymour Island, Antarctic Peninsula. COCOZZA, C. 1991. A palynological investigation of the La Meseta Formation (Tertiary) Seymour Island, Antarctica. DODSWORTH, P. 1991. A detailed palynostratigraphy of the late Cenomanian (Cretaceous) Black Band succession (Chalk Group, Eastern England) and a complementary geological survey. GEERCKE* I.M. 1991. A palynological investigation into the Silurian rocks of the Lower Elton Formation, Shropshire, England. JONES, R.A. 1991. A palynological investigation of lower Mercia Mudstone strata from the Wirral and Liverpool. SUMMER, P.W. 1991. A palynological investigation of Rabot Formation sediments from Ekelof Point, James Ross Island, Antarctica. TARGARONA, J. 1991. Aptian-Albian microfloral assemblages from the Maestrat Basin, northeastern Spain. BROXAP, R. 1992. Palynological studies from Holocene sediments from the north west coast of Wales: a proposed estuarine model and environmental interpretation.

ORIAFO, P.I. 1992. Palynostratigraphy of Well EA-1, offshore western Niger Delta, Nigeria. REES-JONES, R.E. 1992. A palynological and geochemical study of the Mansfield Marine Band at Stairfoot, Barnsley, South Yorkshire. SNOW, D. 1992. Restricted estuarine environments: a modern palynological investigation of the rivers Orwell and Deben, Suffolk, England. DONOGHUE, P.C.J. 1993. The palynology and stratigraphy of the Gorstian-Ludfordian stage boundary at Leinthall Quarry, Ludlow Anticline, Herefordshire. HASSAN, K.B. 1993. Palynological study of late Pliestocene deposits at Pantai Remis, Malaysia. McHuGH, S. 1993. Miospores from the Upper Limestone Group and Millstone Grit of the Alnwick district, north Northumberland, England. WASHINGTON-EVANS, J. 1993. A palynological investigation of the Ludlow #24 core from Whitcliffe Common, Ludlow, Shropshire. BAGSHAW, K. 1994. The palynology of coal bearing strata from parts of the Scremerston Coal Group and the Middle Limestone Group of Northumberland. EVANS, A.J. 1994. A palynological investigation into the Silurian marine sediments at Gullet Quarry, Malvern Hills, Worcestershire, U.K. FITZGERALD, J.A. 1994. A palynological study of the Langsettian strata from Sholver Quarry, Besom Hill, Oldham. WOOLLEY, W.N.L. 1994. Palynology of the Dart Estuary: a taphonomic perspective. BLACK, R.D. 1995. The palynology of the Oxfordian/Kimmeridgian boundary beds at Middlegate Quarry, South Ferriby, South Humberside. BURGESS, O.D. 1995. A palynological investigation of early Eocene dinoflagellate cysts and acritarchs from Division A3 of the London Clay in the London Basin, Borehole Location 2600/2070. CATO, G.D. 1995. A palynological and palaeoenvironmental investigation of the Westphalian B sediments of Hartley Bay, Northumberland. FARRIS, M.A. 1995. A palynological investigation of the Middle Jurassic Scalby Formation, Long Nab Member of northeast Yorkshire: with reference to lithofacies/palynological assemblage relationships. KENNETH, A.D. 1995. A palynological study of the uppermost Scalby Formation (Jurassic) from a borehole at Cloughton, north Yorkshire. MILBURN, W.N. 1995. The palynology and stratigraphy of upper Ordovician-lower Silurian deposits from Woodland Bay, Girvan. PARAMOR, K. 1995. Lower Langsettian miospore assemblages from the Goyt Valley, Peak District, U.K.

PALYNOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD

STOPPARD, A.P. 1995. An investigation of the Carboniferous (Namurian) spore flora of the Alexandra Parade borehole, Glasgow. DOYLE, R.0.1996. The palynology and palynofacies of the type Kildonnan Member, Leak Shale Formation (Bathonian), Isle of Eigg, North West Scotland. CHARLESWORTH, M.G. 1996. High resolution marine band palynology of the mid-Langsettian, Hanson Brick Works, Elland, West Yorkshire. EDWARDS, M. 1996. The Miocene of the North Atlantic, Hebridean to West Shetland Shelf areas. A palynological and palaeoenvironmental investigation. OSEGBO, F.N. 1996. Palynology of late Neogene (late Miocene-early Pliocene) strata of well Npete-1, south-western Niger Delta, Nigeria. SNAITH, D. 1996. A palynological investigation of the Craighead borehole, Central Coalfield, Midland Valley, Scotland. STEPHENSON, M. 1996. A palynological investigation into the coals and carbonaceous mudstones of Morupule Colliery, Botswana. TROUT, M. 1996. A palynological investigation of the sediments of the Scalby Formation, Ravenscar Group, Middle Jurassic, North Yorkshire, U.K. WILDE, D. 1996. A palynological investigation of the post-Balder sequence (late Paleocene-early Oligocene) of Shell WOS well 206/5-1. WILSON, T.A. 1996. The palaeoenvironments of the Lambeth Group and their correlation across south London. BLANKS, P. 1997. Tertiary micro and macrofloras of the Skye, Rhum and Mull lava fields, British Volcanic Tertiary Province. BUNTING, G. 1997. A palynological analysis of the Ghazij Formation (lower Eocene), from Mari X-3 well in the Mari Gas Field, Middle Indus Basin, Pakistan. EL-HARBI, A. 1997. Palynostratigraphy of the uppermost Devonian in the Ghadames Basin, northwest Libya. HARVEY, C. 1997. A palynological investigation of the late Wenlock Farley Member, Coalbrookdale Formation, Shropshire, England. MOHIUDDIN, U. 1997. A quantitative analysis of Ordovician palynomorphs of Oman. WESTON, R.H. 1997. The palynology of the late Miocene of BGS borehole 90-12/90-12a from the Hebrides Shelf, North Atlantic. CLARKE, H. 1998. Cretaceous palynology of well Mucua-1, Kwanza Basin, Angola. EADES, EJ. 1998. The biostratigraphy and depositional environment of some early Oligocene sediments from Stopchen, Germany. EL-MARYAMI, S.M. 1998. A palynological investigation of the Albian sediments of Dover Harbour, south-eastern England.

277

FINUCANE, D.S. 1998. A palynological investigation of the Eocene Ghazij Formation and Kirthar Formation of the Middle Indus Basin, Pakistan. GADDAH, K.M. 1998. A palynological study of the Albian sediments (Gault and Lower Greensand) of the Harwell BH. 3, south England. HUGHES, G.M.G. 1998. A palynological investigation of Tremadoc acritarchs from the Welsh Borderlands and Wiltshire, England. RIDDELL, C.D. 1998. Palynological interpretation and correlation of Late Palaeocene sediments from the London Basin. RIORDAN, M. 1998. Reworked palynomorphs in the Duckmantian (Westphalian B, Upper Carboniferous) from the Midland Valley of Scotland. SOFFLET, B.J. 1998. Lateral palynological assemblage variation associated with the Namurian Kinderscout Grit in West Yorkshire. WEATHERALL, P.M. 1998. The biostratigraphy and depositional environments of the Ludlow-Pridoli transition at Woodbury Quarry, Herefordshire, U. K. ATKINSON, E.L.C. 1999. A palynological study of the middle Cretaceous sediments of the Oju and Obi area, Benue State, Nigeria. AUSTIN-SMITH, R.J. 1999. A palynological investigation of the Silurian deposits within the North Esk inlier, the Pentland Hills, Scotland. BARTLETT, M.C. 1999. A palynological investigation of the late Palaeocene pollen and spores from the Lambeth group deposits of East Anglia using samples from the Sizewell C3 borehole core. Location TM 475/635. EDHEM, M. 1999. Santonian-upper Albian palynology of well Mucua-1, Kwanza Basin, Angola. FAIRCLOUGH, A. 1999. A palynological review of the mid-Carboniferous boundary of northwest Arkansas, mid-continent of America. LAVENDER, K. 1999. Lower Devonian spores from the Strathmore region of the Scottish Midland Valley. MUFTAH, A.M. 1999. A palynological investigation of late Ordovician-early Silurian subsurface deposits from the Murzaq Basin, south-west of Libya. ABUHMIDA, F. 2000. Palynological investigation of the Upper Silurian (Acacus Formation) of well A1-NC40B, Ghadames Basin, northwest Libya. ANDERSON, L.C. 2000. Namurian and Westphalian palynology of the Throckley borehole, Newcastle upon Tyne. CAMPBELL, N. 2000. A palynological investigation of the Camberley Sand Formation of the London Basin. COOPER, J. 2000. Palynological analysis of the Middle Devonian Elk Point Group in Alberta, Canada.

278

C.H.WELLMAN

COUPLAND, M. 2000. Palynomorphs from the Middle to Upper Devonian Catskill Delta, New York State, USA. EWIN, T. 2000. A palynological investigation of the Late Permian Hilton Plant Beds, Hilton Beck, Cumbria, England. BODMAN, D. 2001. A palynological study of the Barrock Park borehole, Cumbria, NW England. GILL, F. 2001. Palynology of the Middle Devonian Huergas Formation, northern Spain. SIMPSON, K. 2001. Miospore assemblages from the Lower Carboniferous, Visean, sediments of East Fife, Scotland. WEDDELL, T. 2001. Lower Devonian strata from the south shore of the Restigouche River, New Brunswick, Canada.

References BEERLING, DJ. & JOLLEY, D.W. 2000. Fossil plants record an atmospheric 12CO2 and temperature spike across the Palaeocene-Eocene transition in NW Europe. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 155, 591-594. BELL, B.R. & JOLLEY, D.W. 1997. Application of palynological data to the chronology of the Palaeogene lava fields of the British Province: implications for magmatic stratigraphy. Journal of the Geological Society, London, 154,701-708. BUTTERWORTH, M.A. & SPINNER, E. 1967. Lower Carboniferous spores from North-west England. Palaeontology, 10, 1-24. CLAYTON, G., COQUEL, R., DOUBINGER, J., GUEINN, K.J., LOBOZIAK, S., OWENS, B. & STREEL, M. 1977. Carboniferous miospores of Western Europe: illustration and zonation. Mededelingen Rijks Geologische Dienst, 29,1-11. DEFLANDRE, G. 1937. Microfossiles des silex cretaces. Deuxieme partie. Flagelles incertae sedis. Hystrichosphaerides. Sarcodines. Organismes divers. Annales de Paleontologie, 26, 51-103. DORNING, KJ. 198 la. Silurian acritarchs from the type Wenlock and Ludlow of Shropshire, England. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 34, 175-203. DORNING, KJ. 1981£. Silurian acritarch distribution in the Ludlovian shelf sea of South Wales and the Welsh Borderland. In: NEALE, J.W. & BRASIER, M.D. (eds) Microfossils From Recent and Fossil Shelf Seas. Ellis Horwood, Chichester, 31-36. DOWNIE, C. 1957. Microplankton from the Kimmeridge Clay. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 112,413^34. DOWNIE, C. 1958. Microplankton from the Shineton Shale (Tremadocian). Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society, 31, 331-349. DOWNIE, C. 1959. Hystrichospheres from the Silurian Wenlock Shale of England. Palaeontology, 2, 56-71. DOWNIE, C. 1963. 'Hystrichospheres' (acritarchs) and spores of the Wenlock Shales (Silurian) of Wenlock, England. Palaeontology, 6, 625-652.

DOWNIE, C. & WILKINSON, P. 1972. The Geology of Kilimanjaro. Department of Geology, The University, Sheffield. EISENACK, A. 1931. Neue Mikrofossilien des baltischen Silurs. 1. Palaontologische Zeitschrift, 13,74-118. ELLIN, S.J. & MCLEAN, D. 1994. A new hydrofluoric acid digestion technique for palynological preparations. Palynology, 18, 23-31. HARVEY, C. 2000. An oxidation and stable mounting technique for geomermally altered Upper Devonian palynomorphs from western Venezuela. Journal of Micropalaeontology,2§, 123-125. JOLLEY, D.W. 1992. Palynofloral association sequence stratigraphy of the Paleocene Thanet Beds and equivalent sediments in eastern England. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 74, 207-237. JONES, R.A. 1994. The application of microwave technology to the oxidation of kerogen for use in palynology. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 80, 333-338. KNOX, E.M. 1942. The microspores of some coals in the Productive Coal Measures of Fife. Transactions of the Institute of Mining Engineers, 101, 98-112. LEWIS, H.P. 1940. The microfossils of the Upper Caradocian phosphate deposits of Montgomeryshire, N. Wales. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 25,1-39. LOVE, L.G. 1960. Assemblages of small spores from the Lower Oil-Shale Group of Scotland. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 67,99-126. MARSHALL, J.E.A. 2005. Arthur Raistrick: Britain's premier palynologist. In: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) The History of Palaeobotany. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,161-179. MILLOTT, J.O'N. 1939. The microspores in the coal seams of North Staffordshire. Part 1: The Millstone Grit-Ten Foot Coals. Transactions of the Institute of Mining Engineers,96, 311-353. MOORE, L.R. 1941. On the presence of Namurian in the Bristol district. Geological Magazine, 78,279-292. MOORE, L.R. 1945. The geological sequence of the South Wales Coalfield: the 'South Crop' and Caerphilly basin and its correlation with the Taff Valley sequence. Proceeding of the South Wales Institute for Engineering, 60, 141-252. MOORE, L.R. 1946. On the spores of some Carboniferous plants; their development. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 102,251-298. MOORE, L.R. 1962. The Department of Geology. University of Sheffield Gazette, 41, 17-25. MOORE, L.R. 1963. Microbiological colonization and attack on some Carboniferous miospores. Palaeontology, 6, 349-372. MOORE, L.R. & TRUEMAN, A.E. 1937. The Coal Measures of Bristol and Somerset. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, London, 93,195-240. MOORE, L.R. & TRUEMAN, A.E. 1939. The structure of the Bristol and Somerset Coalfields. Proceedings of the Geologists'Association, 50,46-67. NEVES, R. 1958. Upper Carboniferous Plant Spore Assemblages from the Gastrioceras subcrenatum Horizon, North Staffordshire. Geological Magazine, 95,1-18.

PALYNOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD NEVES, R. 1961. Namurian plant spores from the southern Pennines, England. Palaeontology, 4,247-279. NEVES, R. & DALE, B. 1963. A modified filtration system for palynological preparations. Nature, 198,775-776. NEVES, R., GUEINN, K.J., CLAYTON, G., IOANNIDES, N., NEVILLE, R.S.W. & KRUSZEWSKA, K. 1973. Palynological correlation within the Lower Carboniferous of Scotland and Northern England. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 69, 23-70. OWENS, B., NEVES, R., GUEINN, K.J., MISHELL, D.R.F., SABRY, H.S.M.Z. & WILLIAMS, I.E. 1977. Palynological division of the Namurian of northern England and Scotland. Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society, 41, 381-398. OWENS, B. & SARJEANT, W.A.S. 2000. Obituary: Charles Downie (1923-1999). The Palaeontological Association Newsletter, 43, 36-37. PIRRIE, D., DUANE, A.M. & RIDING, J.B. 1992. Special issue: Palynology of the James Ross Island area, Antarctic peninsula. Antarctic Science, 4(3), 257-368. RAISTRICK, A. 1934. Correlation of coal seams by microspore content, pt. 1. The seams of Northumberland. Transactions of the Institute of Mining Engineers, 88, 142-153. ROYER, D.L., WING, S.L., BEERLING, D.J., JOLLEY, D.W, KOCH, PL., HICKEY, L.J. & BERNER, R.A. 2000. Paleobotanical evidence for near present-day levels of atmospheric CO2 during part of the Tertiary. Science, 292,2310-2313. Sarjeant, W.A.S. 1984. Charles Downie and the early days

279

of palynological research at the University of Sheffield. Journal of Micropalaeontology, 3,1-6. SHEAR, W.A. 2000. Obituary: Jane Gray (1929-2000). Nature, 405, 34. SPINNER, E. 1965. Westphalian D megaspores from the Forest of Dean Coalfield, England. Palaeontology, 8, 82-106. SPINNER, E.G. 1986. Sheffield's worldwide palynologists. Journal of the University of Sheffield Geological Society, 8(4), 222-227. SULLIVAN, H.J. 1964. Miospores from the Drybrook Sandstone and associated measures in the Forest of Dean Basin, Gloucestershire. Palaeontology, 7, 351-392. TRAVERSE, A. 1988. Paleopalynology. Unwin Hyman, Boston, MA. WELLMAN, C.H. 2002. Morphology and wall ultrastructure in Devonian spores with bifurcate-tipped processes. International Journal of Plant Sciences, 163,451-474. WELLMAN, C.H. & GRAY, J. 2000. The microfossil record of early land plants. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, London, B355, 717-732. WELLMAN, C.H., EDWARDS, D. & AXE, L. 1998. Ultrastructure of laevigate hilate spores in sporangia and spore masses from the Upper Silurian and Lower Devonian of the Welsh Borderland. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, London, B353, 1983-2004. WETZELL, O. 1933. Die in organischer Substanz erhaltenen Mikrofossilien des baltischen Kriede-Feuersteins. PalaeontographicaA,17, 141-186; 78, 1-110.

This page intentionally left blank

The history of palaeobotany in Argentina during the 19th century E.G. OTTONE Departamento de Ciencias Geologicas, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Pabellon No. 2 Ciudad Universitaria, C1428EHA, Buenos Aires, Argentina. (e-mail: ottone @gl.fcen. uba.ar) Abstract: The first records of fossil plants in Argentina were related to the visits of the naturalistexplorers Azara, d'Orbigny, Darwin, de Moussy, Burmeister and Bonpland during the 19th century. The settlement of Burmeister in Buenos Aires in 1862 fostered the arrival of foreign, mostly German, scientists to work in, or closely related to, the School of Sciences in Cordoba. Among them were Stelzner, Brackebusch, Doering, Zuber, Ave-Lallemant, Hautal, Berg, Kurtz and Bodenbender. Fossil plants they collected were studied in part in Europe by Geinitz, Conwentz and Szajnocha, but also received opportune comments by Schenck, Nathorst, Zeiller and Ward. The first Argentine scientists who quoted the presence of fossil plants were Moreno, Lista, Fontana and Aguirre. The record of Tertiary plant remains from Tierra del Fuego by the Romanian explorer Popper and the Swedish Nordenskjold and Dusen completed the palaeobotanical studies in Argentina during the 19th century.

The discovery and exploration of the Argentine territory by the Spanish began in the early 16th century with the unfortunate trip of Juan Diaz de Solis (1471-1516), who was massacred with most of his crew by a group of unfriendly Indians on the shore of the de la Plata River in 1516. The foundation of the cities of Asuncion in 1537, Santiago del Estero in 1556, and Cordoba and Santa Fe in 1573, together with the refoundation of Buenos Aires in 1580, fostered the arrival of different Catholic religious orders to attend to the spiritual needs of the incipient congregations. As a result, priests and monks established the first schools in the country and also made the first observations on nature. Although a few general works on local natural history are known from the 16th and 17th centuries, this early knowledge was followed by an incipient development in the Argentine territory during the 18th century. The Jesuits priest Jose Sanchez Labrador (1717-1798) and Florian Paucke (also cited as Baucke, 1719-1780?) published remarkable books in this epoch that included both descriptions and illustrations of animals and plants (Furlong 1948). Jose Guevara (1719-1806), another clergyman, noted for the first time the presence of fossil bones in the country. However, his findings remained unpublished until 1882 (Furlong 1948). Thomas Falkner (1710-1784), an English Jesuit, also published the first sketchy description of a fossil from Argentina; a glyptodont recovered from the Carcarafia River (Falkner 1774). Manuel de Torres (1750-1819?, clergyman) discovered a megatherium in Lujan, c. 60 km west of the city of Buenos Aires (Ramirez-Rossi & Podgorny 2001) in 1785. This was the first fossil sent from Argentina to Europe and marked the beginning of a period when, due to the lack of secure repositories in the country,

collectors both philanthropically or for reward sent fossils (or just sold them) to European museums. The creation of the Museum of La Plata by Francisco Pascasio Moreno (1852-1919) in 1884, and the reorganization of the Museum of Buenos Aires and the School of Sciences in Cordoba by Hermann Burmeister (1807-1892) in the late 19th century, ended this period of removal (Podgorny 2000). Fossils recovered in the country, which included vegetal compressions, moulds and petrifications, gradually began to be retained on the shelves of Argentine institutions from that time on.

Naturalist-explorers and the discovery of fossil plants The natural sciences flourished during the 18th and 19th centuries. Naturalist-explorers, financed by European governments, were sent worldwide to obtain new scientific and geographical knowledge (Table 1). Scientists travelled either as a part of great expeditions or simply went independently on their voyages. The names of the naturalist-explorers given in Table 1, together with the expeditions of Charles Darwin (1809-1882) and Captain Robert Fitz Roy (1805-1865), or Alexandre von Humboldt (1769-1859) and Aime Bonpland (1773-1858), remained as some of the greatest personalities of the age. This was a period of unmatched travel and advancement of scientific knowledge.

Felix de Azara Azara (1746-1821) was a Spanish officer and naturalist who worked on the demarcation of the NE

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,281-294.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

282

E.G. OTTONE

Table 1. The names of some of the great explorers who participated in voyages financed by European governments during the 18th and early 19th centuries. Name

Nationality

Dates

Sir Joseph Banks James Cook Philibert Commerson Louis Antoine Comte de Bouganville Taddeus Haenke

British British French French

1743-1820 1728-1779 1727-1773 1729-1811

Czech: in the service of Spain Italian: in the service of Spain

1761-1816

Alessandro Malaspina

1754-1810

frontier of the Viceroyalty of the Rio de la Plata during 1781-1801. He made observations on natural history, and was the first author to refer to the presence of fossil plants in Argentina during the 19th century (Fig. la). He commented on his findings of petrified wood on the banks of the Parana and Uruguay rivers in his book Voyages dans VAmerique meridionale (Azara 1809). However, following a peculiar belief of country folk, who supposed that these rivers displayed the property of turning animal skeletons and logs into stone, he considered the petrifications to be mere curiosities of nature and did not recognize them to be fossil plants (Ottone 2001).

Alcide d'Orbigny d'Orbigny (1802-1857) was born in France. With the support of the Museum of Natural History of

Paris and of the Duke of Rivoli he travelled as naturalist-explorer to South America during the years 1826-1833. Following his arrival in Argentina in 1827 he visited Buenos Aires and several towns by the Parana River, as well as NE Patagonia. He left the country by ship for Chile in 1829. Following his return to France, he published the seven volumes and two atlases of his Voyage dans VAmerique meridionale in which he referred to the presence of petrified wood in the Tertiary strata that out cropped on the banks of the Parana River, near La Bajada and Cavallii Cuatia (now Parana and La Paz) (Fig. Ib), and also in equivalent horizons from Patagonia (d'Orbigny 1835, 18420, b). d'Orbigny was thus the first author to recognize the fossil character of the petrified logs from Parana River and to formally refer to the presence of fossil plants in Argentina (Ottone 2001).

Charles Darwin Darwin (1809-1882) was born in Shropshire, England. He circumnavigated the world between 1831 and 1836 as naturalist-explorer on the HMS Beagle commanded by Captain Robert Fitz Roy (1805-1865). Darwin arrived in Argentina in 1833 and visited La Bajada, on the Parana River, as well as several localities in Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego. After crossing the Cordillera de los Andes on two occasions, he left the country in 1835. On his return to England Darwin published his Journal of Researches in 1839, and, in 1846, the Geology of the Beagle. Darwin (18390, b, 1845, 1846) referred to the presence of fossil plants in three areas. He cited silicified dicotyledonous wood in the Tertiary of La

Fig. 1. Map of Argentina showing location of fossil plant sites, (a) Mouth of Negro River, Entre Rios province (Azara 1809). (b) Tertiary of Parana River near La Bajada and Cavallu Cuatia (now Parana and La Paz), Entre Rios province (d'Orbigny 1835, 18420, b; Darwin 1846). (c) Tertiary of Santa Cruz River, Santa Cruz province (Darwin 1846). (d) Triassic of Agua de la Zorra ('Darwin's Petrified Forest'), Mendoza province (Darwin 18390, b, 1845, 1846; Burmeister 1861; Doering 1882; Stelzner 1885; Ward 1889; Ave-Lallemant 1891). (e) Uruguay River between Colon and Concordia, Entre Rios province (de Moussy 1860). (f) Triassic of El Challao-Casa de Piedra-Cordon de las Lajas, Mendoza province (Burmeister 1861; Stelzner 1873, 1885; Geinitz 1876; Ave-Lallemant 1887; Ward 1889; Hautal 1892). (g) Triassic of Marayes, San Juan province (Burmeister 1861; Stelzner 1873, 1885; Geinitz 1876; Aguirre et al. 1883; Ward 1889). (h) Triassic of Cacheuta, Mendoza province (Burmeister 1861; Zuber 1887, 1888; Szajnocha 1888, 1889; Nathorst 1889; Ward 1889). (i) Chico River, Santa Cruz province (Musters 1871). (j) Hernandarias, Entre Rios province (Bonpland in Ottone 2002). (k) Curuzu Cuatia, Corrientes province (Bonpland in Ottone 2002). (1) Carboniferous of Famatina, La Rioja province (Stelzner 1872, 1885; Geinitz 1876; Ward 1889), (m) Permian of Bajo de Veliz, San Luis province (Brackebusch 1875; Bodenbender, 1894, 18960, b\ Kurtz 1895&, c, 1896; Zeiller 1896). (n) Tertiary of Negro River, Rio Negro province (Doering 1882; Conwentz 1884; Ward 1889). (o) Tertiary of Cerro Guido, Santa Cruz province (Hautal 1898). (p) Carboniferous of Retamito, San Juan province (Berg 18910, b; Szajnocha 1891; Kurtz 1891, 18950). (q) Carboniferous of Trapiche, San Juan province (Bodenbender 1894, 18960, b). (r) Carboniferous of Paganzo, La Rioja province (Bodenbender 1894,18960, b). (s) Permian of Sierra de los Llanos, La Rioja province (Bodenbender 1894, 18960, b). (t) Jurassic? of Cordillera Neuquina, Neuquen province (Bodenbender 1896c). (u) Tertiary of Shehuen or Chalia River, Santa Cruz province (Moreno 1879). (v) Tertiary of El Gualichu, Chubut province (Lista 18840, b). (w) Tertiary of Colhue Huapi and Musters Lakes, Chubut province (Fontana 18860, b). (x) Tertiary of Espiritu Santo Cape, Tierra del Fuego province (Popper 1887). (y) Tertiary of Sierra de Carmen Silva, Tierra del Fuego province (Nordenskjold 1898; Dusen 18990, b).

PALAEOBOTANY IN ARGENTINA

283

284

E.G. OTTONE

Bajada, on the Parana River (Fig. Ib), and equivalent strata on the banks of the Uruguay River; coniferous and dicotyledonous wood in the basaltic Tertiary cliff of the Santa Cruz River in Patagonia (Fig. Ic); and, finally, in situ coniferous silicified logs at Agua de la Zorra, near Uspallata, Mendoza province (Fig. Id). This last locality (nowadays known as 'Darwin's Petrified Forest') is an interesting Triassic outcrop that constitutes one of the most famous fossil deposits of the country. Fossil wood from Argentina was classified by the botanist Robert Brown (1773-1858) in England.

Victor Martin de Moussy De Moussy (1810-1869) was a French physician and geographer who settled in Argentina from 1841 to 1859. He was employed by the government of the Argentine Confederation (ruled in those years by President Justo Jose de Urquiza, 1801-1870) to promote the country as a suitable place for European investments and immigration. In Paris, he published the three volumes and one atlas of Description geographique et statistique de la Confederation Argentine. In the first volume of this book (de Moussy 1860) he cited the presence of silicified logs in the banks of the Uruguay River, near the town of Concordia (Fig. le).

Hermann Burmeister Burmeister (1807-1892) was born in Stralsund, Prussia. He visited Brazil and Argentina during the years 1857 and 1860 with the support of his friend, the German geologist and naturalist Alexander von Humboldt (1769-1859), who obtained a royal subsidy for him. Burmeister travelled from Mendoza to Uspallata, and discovered sphenophytes and frond fragments in the area of Casa de Piedra-Cordon de las Lajas (Fig. If). These fossils were Triassic, but Burmeister erroneously referred them to the Late Silurian. He also visited the petrified logs discovered several years before by Darwin at Agua de la Zorra (Fig. Id). On return to Germany he published his findings in Halle (Burmeister 1861). However, this same year, as a result of problems with his superiors, he resigned his post of Professor of Natural Sciences at the University of Halle and returned to Argentina where he was appointed General Director to the Museum of Buenos Aires in 1862. Burmeister later published the Description Physique de la Republique Argentine where he referred to several new findings of indeterminate fossil plants in Marayes (Fig. Ig), a fern-like rest in Cacheuta (Fig. Ih) (in strata now considered as Triassic in age) and, also, petrified wood on the banks of the Uruguay River (Burmeister 1876).

Georges Chaworth Musters Musters (1841-1879) was born in Naples. The son of an officer of the British Army, he joined the Royal Marines and was con decorated in the Crimean War, attaining the rank of Captain. He travelled northwards from Punta Arenas, on the Strait of Magellan, in April 1869. He visited the mouth of the Santa Cruz River and then followed the Chico River to the NW. When he arrived at the Cordillera de los Andes, he went on northwards, reaching the 42nd parallel (latitude 42°S). In Neuquen, he met Valentin Sayhueque, the 'Lord of the Land of Apples', the last great Indian Chief of Patagonia. Musters finally arrived in Carmen de Patagones, on the Atlantic coast, in May 1870. On his return to London, Musters published an account of his travel (Musters 1871), and there he referred to the presence of silicified wood in the sources of the Chico River, Santa Cruz province (Fig. li).

Aime Bonpland The work of Aime Bonpland (1773-1858) in Argentina also deserves to be mentioned. Bonpland was a French botanist and physician who accompanied Alexander von Humboldt (1769-1859) in his famous scientific travel across tropical America between 1799 and 1804. On his return to France, Bonpland was appointed an Academician and published several books including the botanical discoveries of their travels. In 1817, after the dissolution of the French Empire, he moved to Buenos Aires, and later lived in Sao Borja, Brazil and in Santa Ana, Argentina, on the coast of the Uruguay River, where he finished his days as a simple farmer. Even though Bonpland produced many documents on natural history during the years he stayed in Brazil and Argentina, most of them have remained unpublished. A recent study of Bonpland's palaeontological manuscripts (Ottone 2002) showed that he collected petrified plants in NE Argentina (Fig. Ij and k), the south of Brazil and in Uruguay. He sent part of his collections to the Museum of Natural History of Paris, where the fossils are still housed.

A Germanic School of Sciences In 1862, the year that Burmeister was appointed General Director to the Museum of Buenos Aires, Argentina was unified under the rule of General Bartolome Mitre (1821-1906). As a result, years of bitter confrontations between different local factions came to an end. The second President of this period, Domingo Faustino Sarmiento (1811-1888), supported by his Minister of Education (and future presi-

PALAEOBOTANY IN ARGENTINA

dent) Nicolas Avellaneda (1836-1885), undertook the promotion of education at all levels in the country. However, in April 1879 the Argentine Army, commanded by General Julio Argentine Roca (1843-1914), a future President of the country, began a series of military operations, known in Argentine history as the 'Campaign of the Desert'. This was intended to defeat the Tehuelche and the Mapuche Indians (who occupied most of Patagonia in those years) in order to definitively incorporate these territories into the modern economic exploitation system imposed from Buenos Aires onto the rest of the country. Priests and scientists also travelled with the army. In 1869 Burmeister was sent by the central government to reorganize the School of Mathematics, Physics and Natural Sciences of the University of Cordoba. Burmeister hired a group of German scientists for the School of Sciences. By this means, he successfully accomplished the reorganization of the School of Sciences in Cordoba with the incorporation of German professors to the university, but also promoted the appointment of his friends to the museums of Buenos Aires and La Plata. In December 1873 he founded the National Academy of Sciences, also in Cordoba. In 1874 the Academy began to publish the Boletin de la Academia Nacional de Ciencias and, a year later, the Adas de la Academia Nacional de Ciencias. Although these publications were mainly intended to disseminate the scientific work of the academicians, they also published the results of research by several of the German scientists who lived in the country. Burmeister worked out the rest of his days at the Museum of Natural Sciences in Buenos Aires and died in an accident in 1892. He had a great influence in the development of natural sciences in Argentina during the last three decades of the 19th century, and the scientists who worked in palaeobotany in this period were, in general, related to a certain extent to him or to one of his proteges.

Alfred Wilhelm Stelzner The geologist Stelzner (1840-1895) was one of the Germans invited by Burmeister to join the School of Sciences. Stelzner was appointed the first Professor of Mineralogy in 1871. Between 1872 and 1873 he travelled across Catamarca, La Rioja, San Juan and Mendoza provinces. He made interesting geological observations and also collected fossil plants in the Carboniferous of Famatina, La Rioja province (Fig. 11); in the Triassic of Marayes, San Juan province (Fig. Ig); and at Sierra de la Laja-El Challao and Agua de la Zorra, Mendoza province (Fig. Id and f), where he also referred to the 'Darwin's Petrified Forest' (Stelzner 1872,1873,1885). On his return to

285

Germany, Stelzner was appointed a member of The German Academy of Natural Sciences.

Ludwig Brackebusch Brackebusch (1849-1906), another German geologist, replaced Stelzner as Professor of Mineralogy at the School of Sciences in Cordoba in 1874. In the austral summer of 1875, he travelled through the provinces of Cordoba and San Luis. In the latter he mentioned for the first time the presence of Permian fossil plants in the Bajo de Veliz, San Luis province (Fig. 1m) (Brackebusch 1875). Brackebusch became the second Dean of the School of Sciences in Cordoba in 1880. He published a large-scale geological map of the Argentine Republic in 1891. In 1889, the German palaeontologist H. Schenck referred to the work of Professor Brackebusch in Argentina and also to the presence in the country of Thinnfeldia (now Dicroidium) odontopteroides, a characteristic fossil plant from the Upper Triassic of Gondwana (Schenck 1889), in a short communication to the German Geological Society in Berlin.

Hanns Bruno Geinitz Geinitz (1814-1900) was born in Altenburg, Thuringen. He was Professor of Geology and Mineralogy, and Director of the Museum of Mineralogy in Dresden. He was also one of the editors of the famous Neues Jahrbuch fur Mineralogie, Geologic und Palaeontologie, and a member of the German Academy of Natural Sciences from 1844. Although he never visited Argentina, his name is strongly associated with Argentine palaeobotany. Stelzner sent the fossil plants collected by him in Argentina to Geinitz, who described and illustrated the specimens and then published the work. This constituted the first publication to include descriptions and illustrations of Argentine plant fossils (Fig. Ig and 1) (Geinitz 1876). Classical species such as the Carboniferous Pteridosperm foliage Otopteris (now Nothorhacopteris) argentinica, or the Triassic Pteridophyte frond Hymenophyllites (now Cladophlebis) mendozaensis, were described by Geinitz for the first time.

Adolf Doering Doering (1848-1926), a naturalist and chemist, and future Professor of Chemistry at the School of Sciences in Cordoba, joined Roca's 1879 military expedition as a geologist and zoologist. The studies of the scientific commission were published in several volumes. In the geological section, Doering erroneously referred to 'Darwin's Petrified Forest'

286

E.G. OTTONE

as being from the Tertiary (Fig. Id). He also mentioned the presence of fossil logs in Tertiary strata cropping out near the confluence of the rivers Neuquen and Limay, and in the northern bank of the Negro River, northern Patagonia (Fig. In) (Doering 1882). He collected several samples of this wood and sent them to Europe for analysis.

Hugo Wilhelm Conwentz Conwentz (1855-1922) was born in Danzig (now Poland). He studied botany in Breslau (now Wroclaw, Poland) and was then Head of the Western Prussian Museum in Danzig from 1879 to 1909. He studied Doering's fossil logs and published his study in the Boletm de la Academia Nacional de Ciencias (Conwentz 1884). Conwentz described several gymnosperm and angiosperm wood species, and named one of them as Araucarioxylon doeringii, a species still in use (Fig. In).

Rudolf Zuber Zuber (1858-1920) was a Polish geologist who arrived in Argentina in 1886 to work in the oil industry in the Mendoza province. He also worked in Venezuela, Africa and India, and was a university professor and academician in his own country. He made the first geological map of the Cerro Cacheuta, a classical locality of the Argentine Triassic, and also recovered several fossil plants from these strata (Fig. Ih). Zuber published his findings both in a specialized engineering publication and in the Boletm de la Academia Nacional de Ciencias (Zuber 1887,1888).

first Professor of Palaeobotany at the Swedish Museum of Natural History. Nathorst (1889) proposed that the species zuberi described by Szajnocha in Cacheuta (Fig. Ih) should be placed in the genus Ptilozamites Nathorst rather than in Cardiopteris Schimper. It was later recognized that the species zuberi actually referred to the genus Zuberia Frenguelli (Frenguelli 1943,1944). The importance of Zuber's fossil plants was noticed not only in European academic circles, but also by the general public in Buenos Aires, where in its special edition of 1 January 1890 a journal published in the city informed them about Szajnocha's study of the fossils from Cacheuta (Anon. 1890).

Hermann (German in Spanish) Ave-Lallemant Ave-Lallemant (1835-1910) was born in Lubeck, Germany. His father, Robert, was a physician who lived for several years in Brazil. Ave-Lallemant studied mining engineering in Europe. By the end of the 1860s he visited Argentina, and then, influenced by Burmeister, he settled in the country where he worked as a land surveyor and as Professor in a secondary school in San Luis province, as well as searching for gold, coal and petroleum. He mentioned the presence of Triassic fossil plants in El Challao, Mendoza province (Fig. If) (AveLallemant 1887). In 1888 he made a geological study of the Sierra de Uspallata, Mendoza province, and made a geological map of the area. He referred to the presence of Triassic fossil fronds at Cerro Blanco and indicated the location of the 'Darwin's Petrified Forest' in his geological map (Fig. Id). He published this research in the Boletm de laAcademia de Ciencias in Cordoba (Ave-Lallemant 1891).

Ladislaus (Wfadystaw in Polish) Szajnocha Szajnocha (1857-1928) was born in Lwowie (now Poland). He was an Academician and Professor of Geology and Palaeontology at the University of Krakow. Szajnocha studied Zuber's fossils and published his work in Wien (Szajnocha 1888, 1889) in which he described and figured several species from Cacheuta (Fig. Ih), including the new Cardiopteris zuberi, a Corystosperm frond that is one of the most abundant and conspicuous species of the Argentine Triassic. Szajnocha compared the Argentine fossil plants with similar ones previously described from Tasmania, and from Ipswich and Tivoli, both in Queensland, Australia.

Alfred Gabriel Nathorst Nathorst (1850-1921) was a Swedish geologist, botanist and polar explorer. In 1884 he became the

Rudolf Hautal Hautal (1854-1928) was born in Hamburg, Germany. He studied theology and natural sciences in Strasbourg and in 1891 was appointed Manager of the Geological and Mineralogical Section of the Museum of La Plata by Francisco Pascasio Moreno, Director of this institution, with the recommendation of Burmeister. Hautal became Professor of Geology and Botany at the University of La Plata in 1898. He opted for Argentine citizenship in order to work with Moreno at the Argentine-Chilean Limits Commission. Hautal was a great mountaineer: making the first ascents of the Nevado de Famatina (6150 m) in La Rioja province, and the Volcan Lanin (3800 m) in Neuquen province. On his return to Germany, he was appointed Director of the Roemer Museum at Hildesheim, and acted as Vice Consul of the Argentine Republic. He was also a military geol-

PALAEOBOTANY IN ARGENTINA

ogist during World War I. Hautal (1892) described a Triassic frond fragment recovered by Moreno at El Challao, Mendoza province (Fig. If). He also discovered angiosperms in the Tertiary of Cerro Guido, Santa Cruz province (Fig. lo) (Hautal 1898) that would be studied later by Professor Kurtz (see below) in Cordoba (Kurtz 1902).

Carlos Berg Berg (1843-1902) was born in Russia. Invited by Burmeister, he arrived in Argentina in 1873 and worked at the Museum of Buenos Aires, where he became Director following Burmeister's death in 1892. Berg was also an Academician and Professor of Zoology at the University of Buenos Aires. Fernando Meister, a priest and director of the seminary in the city of San Juan, sent Berg several fossil plant samples from the Carboniferous of Retamito, San Juan province (Fig. Ip). Berg sent these on to Professor Szajnocha in Krakow. The material included sphenophyte and lycophyte remains that were subsequently figured (Berg 18910, b\ Szajnocha 1891).

Fritz Kurtz Kurtz (1854-1920) was born in Berlin. He studied botany and obtained his Philosophischen Doctorwiirde at the University of Berlin in 1879. He then worked at the Berlin Botanical Garden and at the Mineralogical Museum of the University of Berlin where he studied Tertiary fossil plants. When Georg Hieronymus (1864-1921) retired as Professor of Botany at the School of Sciences in Cordoba in 1884, Kurtz was appointed to the position. Kurtz subsequently travelled all around the country on botanical expeditions and collected fossil plants. These were incorporated into the collections of the herbarium and palaeontology section of the School of Sciences, respectively. Although Kurtz published several papers on palaeobotany, much of his palaeobotanical work was only published after his death (Kurtz 1921). The recent republication of most of his articles, together with a careful revision of his palaeobotanical work (Archangelsky et al. 1996; Kurtz 1995), shows that Kurtz's work stands out from the rest of his contemporaries in the country. Five articles of Kurtz were published in the 1890s. Kurtz (1891) referred to the Carboniferous strata of Retamito in San Juan province (Fig. Ip) and described a new genus and a new species from these horizons: Botrychiopsis weissiana, a characteristic Pteridosperm from the Upper Carboniferous of Argentina (Kurtz 18950). He also described and drew several fossil plant remains recovered in 1883 by Francisco Pascasio

287

Moreno, Director of the Museum of La Plata from Bajo de Veliz (Kurtz 18956) (Fig. 1m). An abridged version of this work was published in India as an English translation by John Gillespie (Kurtz 1895c). Finally, an extract from a letter by Kurtz was published in England by W.T. Blanford (Kurtz 1896). When Kurtz died in the city of Cordoba 5 years after his retirement in 1915, he only had one student: Alberto Castellanos (1896-1968), who would become Professor of Botany at the universities of Buenos Aires, Tucuman and Rio de Janeiro, and teacher of palaeobotany to several of the most renowned Argentine palaeobotanists of the 20th century (Archangelsky 1970; Stipanicic 1971).

Wilhelm (Guillermo in Spanish) Bodenbender Bodenbender (1857-1941) was born near Frankfurtam-Main in the German Grand-duchy of Hesse. He studied geology at the School of Mines of Clausthal and at the University of Gottingen. Invited by Brackebusch in 1885, Bodenbender arrived in Argentina and, when Brackebusch left the country in 1892, Bodenbender replaced him as Professor of Geology and Mineralogy in Cordoba. He worked at the School of Sciences in Cordoba, in association with Professor Kurtz, and at the National Geological Survey in Buenos Aires. Bodenbender made important contributions to the geological knowledge of the Argentine territory, principally in the Precordillera and the Sierras Pampeanas. Bodenbender (1894, 18960, b) mentioned fossil plants in the Carboniferous of Trapiche, San Juan province (Fig. Iq), and Paganzo, La Rioja province (Fig. Ir), and in the Permian of Bajo de Veliz, San Luis province (Fig. 1m), and Sierra de los Llanos, La Rioja province (Fig. Is). He also mentioned abundant petrified wood in the Jurassic? of Cordillera Neuquina, Neuquen province (Fig. It) (Bodenbender 1896c).

Discussion European and American academic circles soon took notice of the reported finds of fossil plants by German geologists in Argentina. Rene Charles Zeiller (1847-1915), a French geologist and palaeobotanist, Professor at the National School of Mines referred to the find of fossil plants by Kurtz and Bodenbender (Fig. 1m) (Zeiller 1896). Frank Lester Ward (1841-1913), a North American geologist and palaeobotanist in the United States Geological Survey, also referred (Ward 1899) to the importance of fossil plant finds in Argentina by Darwin, Stelzner, Zuber and Doering, and to the work of Brown, Geinitz, Szajnocha, Nathorst and Conwentz (Fig. Id, f-h, 1 and n).

288

E.G. OTTONE

Argentine academics and explorers The first decades after the unification of the Argentine government by President Bartolome Mitre in 1862 were marked by two different military events: the 'War of the Triple Alliance' and the 'Campaign of the Desert'. The War of the Triple Alliance was a bloody conflict that confronted Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay with Paraguay. It finished in 1870 and resulted in the incorporation of the provinces of Formosa and Misiones to the Argentine Republic. The Campaign of the Desert was the last great war against the Indians, and it opened the extensive and mostly uninhabited land of Patagonia to modern economic exploitation. The Argentine rulers realized the strategic importance of sending expeditions with Argentine geographers and naturalists into these little-known territories. The expeditions of Francisco Pascasio Moreno, Ramon Lista and Luis Jorge Fontana (discussed below) constituted great steps forward. These scientists presented the information collected during their travels at different local scientific associations, such as the Scientific Society of Argentina (founded in 1872) or the Argentine Geographical Institute (founded in 1879) or the Geographical Society of Argentina (founded in 1881) that provided a forum for discussion and diffusion of this new geographical knowledge. They also published their results in books.

appointed Leader of the Argentine Representation in the Argentine-Chilean Limits Commission, where he demonstrated his geographical knowledge concerning the disputed areas. He was member of the Lower Chamber and, after his retirement from the Museum of La Plata, worked at the Ministry of Education. Moreno mentioned the presence of plant fossils in a general account of the Tertiary of Patagonia presented at the Scientific Society (Moreno 1878). In one of his books (Fig. lu) (Moreno 1879), he also specifically referred to the presence of Tertiary oysters and petrified woods on the banks of Shehuen or Chalia River, near Tar Lake, Santa Cruz province.

Ramon Lista Lista (1856-1898) was born in Buenos Aires. He studied both there and in Europe. In Buenos Aires Burmeister introduced him to the natural sciences. Lista made several expeditions to Patagonia, but also to the Chaco and Misiones provinces. He was Governor of Santa Cruz from 1887 until 1892, and was the author of books on geography, natural sciences, anthropology and linguistics. He died at the Pilcomayo River during one of his expeditions to Chaco. Lista referred to the presence of Tertiary fossil logs at El Gualichu, near Gastre, Chubut province (Fig. Iv) (Lista 1884a, b).

Luis Jorge Fontana Francisco Pascasio Moreno Moreno (1852-1919) was born in Buenos Aires and rapidly became a collector of fossils and natural artefacts (Burmeister dedicated a fossil to him, Dasypus morenoi, when he was 15 years old). Moreno travelled all around the country, but mostly in Patagonia. In his first southerly expedition (1873-1874) he visited Carmen de Patagones and the mouth of the Santa Cruz River. Secondly, in 1876, he visited the Nahuel Huapi Lake. In his third southward expedition (1876-1877) he followed the steps of Darwin and Fitz Roy visiting Chubut and attained the Cordillera de los Andes by the Santa Cruz River. During his fourth journey of exploration he became a prisoner of the Mapuche Indians of Sayhueque. After 19 days of captivity he escaped on 23 January 1880, using a makeshift raft of logs on the turbulent waters of the Limay River. In 1884 Moreno was appointed Director of the Museo de La Plata. He visited the Puna de Atacama in 1893 and the south of Mendoza province in 1894. In 1896 he undertook a new Patagonian expedition, travelling from Mendoza to Santa Cruz by the Cordillera de los Andes. This same year he was

Fontana (1846-1920) was also born in Buenos Aires. He joined the army in the War of the Triple Alliance, attaining the rank of Colonel before his retirement. He studied natural sciences with Burmeister and then worked at the Museum of Natural Sciences in Buenos Aires. He participated in expeditions to Chaco and Patagonia, and became the first Governor of Chubut in 1884. He finally settled in San Juan province, where he held different positions in the provincial administration. Fontana cited fossil logs in the proximities of Colhue Huapi and Musters Lakes, Chubut province (Fig. Iw) (Fontana 1886a,b).

Further workers In 1878 the Chair of Geology and Mineralogy at the University of Buenos Aires was held by the Argentine engineer Eduardo Aguirre (1857-1923). Aguirre, together with another Argentine, Miguel Puiggari (1827-1889), and the Scottish John Joseph Jolly Kyle (1838-1922), his colleagues and Professors of Chemistry at the university, presented

PALAEOBOTANY IN ARGENTINA

a communication to the Scientific Society on the Triassic coal of Mendoza River in which they cited the fossil plant findings of Stelzner in Marayes (Fig. 1g) (Aguirre et al/. 1883).

The quest for gold and a Swedish end at Tierra del Fuego Punta Arenas, founded in 1848, and Ushuaia, founded in 1884, at the place first occupied by the Anglican mission station of the Patagonian Missionary Society in 1869, were the only settlements in southernmost South America in the 1880s, when the discovery of placer gold deposits in Tierra del Fuego rushed people of different countries to the island.

Lulius (Julio in Spanish) Popper Popper (1857-1893) was born in Bucharest and studied engineering in Paris. After travelling for several years all around the world, he arrived in Argentina in 1884 attracted by the gold rush. He explored Tierra del Fuego, making important contributions to the geographical knowledge of the region, and exploited gold in El Paramo, north of San Sebastian Bay. Popper (1887) mentioned Tertiary fossil logs of Fagaceae on the cliff south of Espiritu Santo Cape, Tierra del Fuego, Argentina (Fig. Ix). This account of the history of palaeobotany in Argentina during the 19th century closes with the Swedish Expedition of 1895-1897 of Otto Nordenskjold (1869-1928) to the Magellan Strait. The expedition made geographical, geological, zoological and botanical observations. Per Karl Hjalmar Dusen (1855-1926), a Swedish botanist and explorer, originally a civil engineer, was responsible for the palaeobotanical studies. He described and figured a great number of fossil plants, mostly Fagaceae, recovered from the Sierra de Carmen Silva, Tierra del Fuego, Argentina (Fig. ly) and from southern Chile (Nordenskjold 1898; Dusen 1899
Conclusions The historical record of fossil plant finds in Argentina during the 19th century constituted a fourfold succession of events wherein European naturalist-explorers appear linked to German geologists, to the first Argentine scientists and to the first fossil plant collectors in Tierra del Fuego. Notwithstanding the evident delay shown by Argentine palaeobotany relative to this same spe-

289

ciality in Europe and North America, and taking into account that most early palaeobotanical research in the country was made by Europeans, steady progress was made in the study and comprehension of fossil plant assemblages in Argentina during the 19th century. Several fossil plant sites were discovered and species still in use, such as the Carboniferous Pteridosperm foliage Nothorhacopteris (Otopteris) argentinica (Geinitz) Archangelsky, the Triassic Pteridophyte front Cladophlebis (Hymenophyllites) mendozaensis (Geinitz) Frenguelli, the Tertiary fossil wood of Araucariaceae Araucarioxylon doeringii Conwentz and the Triassic Corystosperm frond Zuberia (Cardiopteris) zuberi (Szajnocha) Frenguelli, were described for the first time. During the 20th century, Argentine palaeobotany flourished under the guidance of Alberto Castellanos and his disciples. However, this is another story, already told in part (Archangelsky 1967, 1970; Menendez 1968; Stipanicic 1971; Archangelsky et al. 2000), but outside the scope of this paper. Thanks are due to R. Wilding for his invitation to present this contribution, to R. Howarth and Ch. Page for helpful reviews, to AJ. Bowden for suggestions on the final presentation of the paper, to A. Daurer of the Geologische Bundesanstalt for giving me a copy of the Szajnocha 1888 article and to M. Leibovich for linguistic advice. I am also grateful to CONICET and to UBA, which have enabled this research to be undertaken.

References AGUIRRE, E., PUIGGARI, M. & KYLE, J.J.J. 1883. Carbon fosil de Mendoza. Anales de la Sociedad Cientifica Argentina, 15,270-273. ANON. 1890. Las ciencias naturales en 1889. La Prensa, Ano, 6231, 20. ARCHANGELSKY, S. 1967. Palaeobotany and palynology in South America: a historical review. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 7, 249-266. ARCHANGELSKY, S. 1970. Evolucion de los estudios paleobotanicos en Argentina desde sus origenes hasta nuestros dias. Boletin de la Academia Nacional de Ciencias, Cordoba, 48,551-557. ARCHANGELSKY, S., ARRONDO, O.G. etal. 1996. Revision y actualization de la obra paleobotanica de Kurtz en la Republica Argentina. Actas de la Academia Nacional de Ciencias, Cordoba, 11, 83-259. ARCHANGELSKY S., LEZAMA, L. & ARCHANGELSKY, A. 2000. Bibliografia paleobotanica argentina. Museo Paleontologico Egidio Feruglio, Publication Especial MEF, 1. AVE-LALLEMANT, H. 1887. Estudio orografico en la Cordillera de Mendoza y Neuquen. Boletin del instituto Geogrdfico Argentine, 8,173-188. AVE-LALLEMANT, H. 1891. Estudios mineros en la provincia de Mendoza. La parte septentrional de la Sierra de Uspallata. Boletin de la Academia Nacional de Ciencias, Cordoba, 12,131-176.

290

E.G. OTTONE

AZARA, E, DE. 1809. Voyages dans I'Amerique meridionale, depuis 1781 jusqu'en 1801; contenant la description geographique, politique et civile du Paraguay et de la riviere de La Plata; I'histoire de la decouverte et de la conquete do ces contrees; des details nombreux sur leur histoire naturelle, et sur les peuples sauvages qui les habitent; le recit des moyens employe spar les Jesuites pour assujetir et civiliser les indigenes, etc. Tome Premier. Dentu, Paris. BERG, C. 1891a. La Formation Carbonifera de la Republica Argentina. Anales de la Sociedad Cientifica Argentina, 31, 209-212. BERG, C. 18916. Nuevos datos sobre la Formation Carbonifera de la Republica Argentina. Anales de la Sociedad Cientifica Argentina, 32,68-71. BODENBENDER, W. 1894. Devono y Gondwana en la Republica Argentina. Las formaciones sedimentarias de la parte noroeste. Boletin de la Academia Nacional de Ciencias, Cordoba, 15,201-252. BODENBENDER, W. 18960. Sobre le edad de algunas formaciones carboniferas de la Republica Argentina. Revista del Museo de La Plata, 7, 131-148. BODENBENDER, W. 18966. Beobachtungen iiber Devonund Gondwana-Schichten der Argentinischen Republik. Zeitschrift der Deutschen geologischen Gesellschaft, 48,743-772. BODENBENDER, W. 1896c. Expedition al Neuquen de los doctores Kurtz y Bodenbender. Boletin del Instituto GeogrdficoArgentino, 10, 311-329. BRACKEBUSCH, L. 1875. Informe sobre un viaje geologico hecho en el verano del ano 1875, por las Sierras de Cordoba y de San Luis, por el catedratico de mineralogia y geologia. Boletin de la Academia Nacional de Ciencias Exactas, Cordoba, 2,167-216. BURMEISTER, H. 1861. Reise durch die La Plata-Staaten, mil besonderer Rucksicht auf die physische Beschaffenheit und den Culturzustand der Argentinischen Republik. Ausgefuhrt in den Jahren 1857, 1858, 1859 und 1860. Erster Band. H.W. Schmidt, Halle. BURMEISTER, H. 1876. Description physique de la Republique Argentine d'apres des observations personelles et etrangeres. Tome II. F. Savy, Paris. CONWENTZ, H. 1884. Sobre algunos arboles fosiles del Rio Negro. Boletin de la Academia Nacional de Ciencias, Cordoba, 1,435^56. DARWIN, C. 18390. Narrative of the Surveying Voyages of his Majesty's Ships Adventure and Beagle, Between the Years 1826 and 1836, Describing Their Examination of the Southern Shores of South America, and the Beagle's Circumnavigation of the Globe. In Three Volumes. Vol. III. Journal and Remarks. 1832-1836. Henry Colburn, London. DARWIN, C. 18396. Journal of Researches into the Geology and Natural history of the Various Countries Visited by HMS Beagle Under the Command of Captain FitzRoy, R.N., From 1832 to 1836. Henry Colburn, London. DARWIN, C. 1845. Journal of Researches into the Natural History and Geology of the Countries Visited During the Voyage of HMS Beagle Round the World, Under the Command of Capt. FitzRoy, R.N. Second Edition, Corrected, With Additions. John Murray, London. DARWIN, C. 1846. Geological Observations on South

America. Being the Third Part of the Geology of the Voyage of the Beagle, Under the Command of Capt. FitzRoy, R.N. During the Years 1832 to 1836. Smith, Elder & Co., London. DE MOUSSY, V.M. 1860. Description geographique et statistique de la Confederation Argentine. Tome Premier. Firmin Didot, Paris. DOERING, A. 1882. Informe oficialde la Comision Cientifica agregada al Estado Mayor General de la Expedition al Rio Negro (Patagonia) realizada en los meses de Abril, Mayo y Junio de 1879, bajo las ordenes del General D. Julio A. Roca. Tercera Parte. Geologia. Ostwald & Martinez, Buenos Aires, 299-530. D'ORBIGNY, A. 1835. Voyage dans I'Amerique meridionale (le Bresil, la Republique Orientale de V Uruguay, la Republique Argentine, laPatagonie, la Republique du Chili, la Republique de Bolivia, la Republique du Perou), execute pendant les annees 1826,1827,1828, 1829,1830,1831,1832 et 1833. Tome Premier. Partie Historique. P. Bertrand, Paris & V. Levrault, Strasbourg. D'ORBIGNY, A. 18420. Voyage dans I'Amerique meridionale (le Bresil, la Republique Orientale de V Uruguay, la Republique Argentine, LaPatagonie, la Republique du Chili, la Republique de Bolivia, la Republique du Perou), execute pendant les annees 1826, 1827, 1828, 1829, 1830, 1831, 1832 et 1833. Tome Troisieme. 3e Partie: Geologic. P. Bertrand, Paris & V. Levrault, Strasbourg. D'ORBIGNY, A. 18426. Voyage dans I'Amerique meridionale (le Bresil, la Republique Orientale de I'Uruguay, la Republique Argentine, LaPatagonie, la Republique du Chili, la Republique de Bolivia, La Republique du Perou), execute pendant les annees 1826, 1827, 1828, 1829, 1830, 1831, 1832 et 1833. Tome Troisieme. 4e Partie: Paleontologie. P. Bertrand, Paris & V. Levrault, Strasbourg. DUSEN, P. 18990. Uber die tertiare Flora der Magellanslander. I. In: NORDENSKJOLD, O. (ed.) Wissenschaftliche Ergebnisse der Schwedischen Expedition nach den Magellansldndern 1895-1897 unter leitung von Dr Otto Nordenskjold. Band I: Geologic, Geographie und Antropologie. PA. Norstedt & Soner, Stockholm, 87-108. DUSEN, P. 18996. Uber die tertiare Flora der Magellanslander. II. In: NORDENSKJOLD, O. (ed.) Wissenschaftliche Ergebnisse der Schwedischen Expedition nach den Magellansldndern 1895-1897 unter leitung von Dr Otto Nordenskjold. Band I: Geologic, Geographie und Antropologie. PA. Norstedt & Soner, Stockholm, 241-248. FALKNER, T. 1774. A Description of Patagonia and the Adjoining Parts of South America, Containing an Account of the Soil, Produce, Animals, Vales, Mountains, Rivers, Lakes & c. of Thofe Countries; The Religion, Government, Policy, Cuftoms, Drefs, Arms, and Language of the Indian Inhabitants; and Some Particulars Relating to Falkland's Islands. C. Pugh, Hereford & T. Lewis, London. FONTANA, L.J. 18860. Exploration en la Patagonia Austral. Boletin del instituto Geogrdfico Argentino, 7, 223-239,242-254,265-284. FONTANA, L.J. 18866. Viaje de exploracion en la Patagonia Austral. La Tribuna Nacional, Buenos Aires.

PALAEOBOTANY IN ARGENTINA FRENGUELLI, J. 1943. Resefia critica de los generos atribuidos a la * Serie de Thinnfeldia'. Revista del Museo de La Plata, Nueva Serie, Paleontologia, 2,225-342. FRENGUELLI, J. 1944. Las especies del genero 'Zuberia' en la Argentina. Anales del Museo de La Plata, Nueva Serie, Paleontologia: Section B; Paleobotdnica, 2, PteridofitasyPteridospermas, 1,1-30. FURLONG, G. 1948. Naturalistas argentinos durante la domination hispdnica. Huarpes, Buenos Aires. GEINITZ, H.B. 1876. Ueber Rhatische Pflanzen - und Thierreste in den argentinischen Provinzen La Rioja, San Juan und Mendoza. In: STELZNER, A. (ed.) Beitrage zur Geologie und Palaeontologie der Argentinischen Republik, 2. Paldontologischer Theil. Palaeonotographica, Supplementbande, 3,1-14. HAUTAL, R. 1892. Nota sobre un nuevo genero de Filiceos de la Formation Rhetica del Challao (provincia de Mendoza). Revista del Museo de La Plata, 4, 221-223. HAUTAL, R. 1898. Ueber patagonisches Tertiar etc. Zeitschrift der Deutschen geologischen Gesellschaft, 50,436-440. KURTZ, F. 1891. La formacion carbonifera de la Republica Argentina, por el Dr. Carlos Berg (en los Anales de la Sociedad Cientifica Argentina, tomo XXXI, pagina 209 y siguientes, 1891, y tiraje aparte). Revista Argentina de Historia Natural, 1, 193-196. KURTZ, F. 1895a. Contribuciones a la Palaeophytologia Argentina. I. Botrychiopsis. Un genero nuevo de las Cardiopterideas. Revista del Museo de La Plata, 6, 119-124. KURTZ, F. 1895&. Contribuciones a la Palaeophytologia Argentina. II. Sobre la existencia del Gondwana Inferior en la Republica Argentina (Plantas fosiles del Bajo de Velis, provincia de San Luis). Revista del Museo de La Plata, 6,126-139. KURTZ, F 1895c. On the existence of Lower Gondwanas in Argentina. Translated by John Gillespie. Records of the Geological Survey of India, 28,111-117. KURTZ, F. 1896. Recent discoveries of fossil plants in Argentina (Extract of a letter from Dr. F. Kurtz, National Academy of Sciences, Cordoba, Argentine Republic). Communicated by W.T. Blanford. The Geological Magazine, New Series, Decade IV, 3, 446^49. KURTZ, F. 1902. Contribuciones a la Palaeophytologia Argentina. III. Sobre la existencia de una DakotaFlora en la Patagonia austro-occidental (Cerro Guido, gobernacion de Santa Cruz). Informe preliminar. Revista del Museo de la Plata, 10,45-60. KURTZ, F. 1921. Atlas de plantas fosiles de la Republica Argentina. Actas de la Academia National de Ciencias, Cordoba,!, 129-153. KURTZ, F. 1996. Contribuciones a la Palaeophytologia Argentina (I, II, III, IV, V, VI y VII). Actas de la Academia National de Ciencias, Cordoba, 11,29-82. LISTA, R. 1884a. Exploracion Lista. Noticias Recientes. Revista de la Sociedad Geogrdfica Argentina, 2, 165-167. LISTA, R. 1884&. La ultima exploracion en la Patagonia. A.S.E. el senor Ministro de Guerra y Marina, General doctor don Benjamin Victorica. Buenos Aires, Agosto 12 de 1884. Revista de la Sociedad Geogrdfica Argentina, 2,269-215.

291

MENENDEZ, C.A. 1968. Bibliografia paleobotanica de America del Sur. Revista del Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales 'Bernardino Rivadavia', Paleontologia, 1,6,133-229. MUSTERS, G.C. 1871. At Home With the Patagonians. A Year's Wanderings Over Untrodden Ground From the Straits of Magellan to the Rio Negro. John Murray, London. MORENO, FP. 1878. Apuntes sobre las tierras patagonias. Anales de la Sociedad Cientifica Argentina, 5 (ano 1877), 189-205. MORENO, P.P. 1879. Viaje a la Patagonia Austral emprendido bajo los auspicious del Gobiemo National 1876-1877. Imprenta de la Nation, Buenos Aires. NATHORST, A.G. 1889. Ueber das Vorkommen der Gattung Ptilozamites in rhatischen Ablagerungen Argentiniens. Neues Jahrbuch fur Mineralogie, Geologie und Palaeontologie, (Jahrgang 1889), 202-203. NORDENSKJOLD, O. 1898. Uber die posttertiaren Ablagerungen der Magellanslander. Nebst einer kurzen Ubersicht ihrer tertiaren Gebilde. In: NORDENSKJOLD, O. (ed.) Wissenschaftliche Ergebnisse der Schwedischen Expedition nach den Magellansldndern 1895-1897 unter leitung von Dr Otto Nordenskjold. Band I: Geologie, Geographie undAntropologie. PA. Norstedt & Soner, Stockholm, 13-80. OTTONE, E.G. 2001. Los primeros hallazgos de plantas fosiles en Argentina. Asociacion Paleontologica Argentina, Publication Especial, 8,49-51. OTTONE, E.G. 2002. The French botanist Aime Bonpland and paleontology at Cuenca del Plata. Earth Sciences History, 21,150-165. PODGORNY, I. 2000. El argentino despertar de las faunas y de las gentes prehistoricas. Libros del Rojas, Buenos Aires. POPPER, L. 1887. Exploracion de la Tierra del Fuego. Boletin del Instituto Geogrdfico Argentino, 8, 74-93, 97-115. RAMIREZ-ROSSI, F. & PODGORNY, I. 2001. La metamorfosis del megaterio. CienciaHoy, 11,12-19. SCHENCK, A. 1889. Protokoll der Sitzung vom 13, August 1889. Herr A. Schenk, Berlin, bemerkte zu den Ausfiihrungen des Hem Prof. Brackebusch, dass das argentinische Rhaet, wie aus der fossilen Flora. Zeitschrift der Deutschen geologischen Gesellschaft, 41,585. STELZNER, A. 1872. Geologische Reise in der argentinischen Republik. Neues Jahrbuch fur Mineralogie, Geologie und Palaeontologie, (Jahrgang 1872), 630-636. STELZNER, A. 1873. Uber seine Reise durch die argentinischen Provinzen San Juan und Mendoza und die Cordillere zwischen dem 31. und 33.° s. Br. Neues Jahrbuch fur Mineralogie, Geologie und Palaeontologie, (Jahrgang 1873), 726-744. STELZNER, A. 1885. Beitrage zur Geologie der Argentinischen Republik und des Angrenzenden, zwischen dem 32. und 33.° S. gelegenen Theiles der chilenischen Cordillere. In: STELZNER, A. (ed.) Beitrage zur Geologie und Palaeontologie der Argentinischen Republik, 1. Geologischer Theil. Palaeontographica, Supplementbande, 3, XXIX, 1-329.

292

E.G. OTTONE

STIPANICIC, P.N. 1971. Resena historica sobre la paleobotanica en la Republica Argentina. Ameghiniana, 8, 169-175. SZAJNOCHA, L. 1888. Ueber die von Dr. Rudolf Zuber in Siid-Argentina und Patagonien gesammelten Fossilien. Verhandlungen der Kaiserlich-koeniglich geologischen Reichanstalt, (Jahrgang 1888), (6), 146-151. SZAJNOCHA, L. 1889. Uber fossile Pflanzereste aus Cacheuta in der Argentinischen Republik. Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Mathematisch-Natunvissenschaftliche Classe, 97 (Jahrgang 1888), 219-245. SZAJNOCHA, L. 1891. Uber einige carbone Pflanzereste aus der Argentinischen Republik. Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Classe, 100,203-213.

WARD, L. 1889. The geographical distribution of plants. Annual Report of the US Geological Survey, 8, 663-960. ZEILLER, R. 1896. Remarques sur la flore fossile de 1'Altai' a propos des dernieres decouvertes paleobotaniques de MM. les Drs Bodenbender et Kurtz dans la Republique Argentine. Bulletin de la Societe Geologique de France, Troisieme Serie, 24,466-487. ZUBER, R. 1887. Estudio geologico del Cerro Cacheuta y sus contornos (Republica Argentina- Provincia de Mendoza). Boletin de la Academia Nacional de Ciencias, Cordoba, 10,448^72. ZUBER, R. 1888. Estudio geologico del Cerro Cacheuta y sus contornos (Provincia de Mendoza, R.A.). El Ingeniero Civil, Ano 1,13,49-51.

The rise of Chinese palaeobotany, emphasizing the global context QI-GAO SUN Laboratory of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany, Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, No. 20 Nanxincun, Xiangshan, Beijing 100093, P.R. China. (e-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]) Abstract: The record of fossil plants in China can date back to the year 1086 during the Chinese Song Dynasty. The subject of palaeobotany was transplanted into China in the early 20th century. The rise of Chinese palaeobotany had direct connections with the world. V.K. Ting played a major role in the establishment of academic organizations and English journals for Chinese geological sciences, which also received support from foreign experts. A geological approach for palaeotanical studies was once popular in China because of practical use. H.C. Sze is usually called 'the founder of Chinese palaeobotany'. Sze was a disciple of W. Gothan and made a great contribution to the development of Chinese palaeobotany using a geological approach. Hu Hsen Hsu followed Asa Gray and thought that palaeobotany might be considered as a plant science subject. Hu's study on Metasequoia enhanced his reputation: the discovery of the living plants of Metasequoia is believed to be one of the most important discoveries in the 20th century. Hsu Jen majored in plant morphology and anatomy, and obtained palaeobotanical training in Birbal Sahni's laboratory in the 1940s. Hsu preferred to employ a biological approach to work on fossil plants.

It was as early as in 1086 that Shen Kuo (1029-1093), who was one of the great Chinese ancient scientists from the Song Dynasty, recorded the occurrence of fossil plants of so-called bamboo shoots in his voluminous works, Dream Pool Essays (Meng Xi Bi Tan). The fossil locality is situated atYan-shui-guan, 35km SE of Yen-chuan, Shaanxi Province, where its present climate is very dry and cool. The fossil plants that Shen Kuo considered to be bamboo shoots are actually assigned to the Neocalamites fossils. This fossil record is believed to be over 400 years older than that of Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) (Deng 1976; Li & Wang 1999; Li 2000). According to the ecological requirements and environment of bamboo shoots, Shen Kuo inferred that the climate in this fossil locality was warm and humid during the geological past, providing an example of the geological principle that the present might be a key to the past. Shen Kuo's clever idea, however, was thought of about 700 years before James Hutton (1726-1797) and Charles Lyell (1797-1875) (Sun & Yang 2000). However, we might speculate why such a brilliant Chinese civilization did not produce a scientific tradition. In fact, Chinese science and technology began to lag behind the occidental world from about the time of the Industrial Revolution. In the second half of the 19th century, the Chinese government of the Qing Dynasty was forced to initiate a series of open policies to foreign countries. From the early 1870s a large number of Chinese students were sent abroad to study modern science and technology, and most of them were eager to return to China in order to modernize their developing country after they finished their studies abroad. Although the 20th century saw a series of dramatic changes in recent Chinese history, modern science

and technology was transplanted into China bit by bit. The fact is that the development of modern science and technology in China during the 20th century had a very difficult passage, distorted both by international trends and by many different domestic factors. In the first half of the 20th century China was continually at war. A series of unexpected political changes occurred in China in the second half of the 20th century and Chinese scientists were isolated for quite a long time. This paper serves as a case study for the global perspective on the history of modern plant sciences in China. Thus, the aims of this paper are to focus on the early history of Chinese palaeobotany in the first half of the 20th century, to introduce those who played a significant part in the rise of Chinese palaeobotany, to emphasize some intrinsic academic connections with the academic world community and to provide some critical clues to understanding the current situation of palaeobotanical studies in China.

Initial development of palaeobotanical activities in China V.K. Ting (Ding Wen-Jiang, 1887-1936) was a famous leader of Chinese geological sciences. The initial development of Chinese palaeobotany benefits from the ambitious academic activities of Ting, who was a politically influential organizer. Ting left China for Japan to study at the age of 15. Two years later he transferred to Britain. He graduated from Glasgow University in Scotland in 1911 with two degrees, one in geology and the other in zoology. He

From: BOWDEN, A.J., BUREK, C.V. & WILDING, R. (eds) 2005. History of Palaeobotany: Selected Essays. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 241,293-298.0305-8719/057$ 15.00 © The Geological Society of London 2005.

294

Q.-G. SUN

returned home to China and founded the Geological Institute in Beijing in 1913 and the Geological Survey of China in 1916. Ting started some professional journals, such as Bulletin of the Geological Survey of China in 1919, Bulletin of the Geological Society of China in 1922 (Ting 19220, b) and Palaeontologia Sinica (Series A) in 1922. These journals welcomed palaeobotanical papers. It is very important to note that most of the papers that appeared in these journals were in English. It seems reasonable that these journals were regarded as international journals at that time. The establishment of a palaeobotanical organization and journals in China received enormous help from foreign colleagues, such as Swedish geologist Dr J.G. Andersson (1874-1960), and stimulated the rise of Chinese palaeobotany (Duan 1990; Li 2000). Ting was very active in international co-operation for the development of Chinese palaeobotany, inviting foreign experts to work in China. For example, in 1914 Ting invited Professor J.G. Andersson to China to serve as a mining advisor for the Chinese government. Dr Andersson worked in China for 12 years (Halle 1927; Duan 1990) and collected many fossils. A total of 1316 crates of specimens were transported to Sweden in 1923, among which were 474 crates of fossil plants. Professor T.G. Halle was invited to work in China in 1916-1917 and trained Chinese students such as T.H. Chow (Zhou Zan-Heng, 1893-1967) (Halle 1927; Duan 1990). In 1923 Chow published a paper on younger Mesozoic plants from Shantung (Chow 1923) and was considered to be the first Chinese expert to publish a palaeobotanical paper (Zhu 1994; Li 2000). In 1925 a group of American geologists and palaeontologists of the Third Asiatic Expedition were invited to China. American palaeobotanist R.W. Chaney and his colleagues gave talks about their research at the Beijing Geological Survey on 23 September 1925, which was organized by the Geological Society of China (Wang 2002). Meanwhile, Chinese students were chosen and sent abroad for study. Chow was sent to Sweden to study palaeobotany in 1924 (Duan 1990). After Chow returned to China he regrettably abandoned palaeobotanical studies, although he was engaged in a number of academic organizations (Li 2000). Sze Hsing-Chien (Si Xing-Jian, 1901-1964) was sent to Germany to study palaeobotany in 1928 (Zhang & Wang 1994).

Development of a geological approach on palaeobotany in China Palaeobotany is typically of an interdisciplinary nature. In many universities palaeobotany is interpreted as a geological subject and in others as a biological-geological subject (Darrah 1939). In the first

half of the 20th century, palaeobotany was mainly considered as a geological subject in China largely because palaeobotany was applicable to economic development and construction. Therefore the geological approach was normally taken in China until the 1980s.

Sze Hsing-Chien (SiXing-Jian, 1901-1964) Sze Hsing-Chien is usually called 'the founder of Chinese palaeobotany', and made a great contribution to the development of Chinese palaeobotany using the geological approach. Sze began his studies in Peking University in 1920. Later he became one of the students of Professor A.W. Grabau (1870-1946) and H.T. Lee (Li Si-Guang, 1889-1971). Professor Grabau, who was an American geologist and palaeontologist of the University of Columbia, was invited to China in 1920 and he worked in the Geology Department of Peking University and at the Geological Survey in Beijing for about 26 years. Lee studied palaeontology in Birmingham University in Britain and received his MSc degree in 1918. Influenced by these two professors, Sze became very interested in palaeontology and chose palaeobotany as his major. Sze graduated from the Geology Department of Peking University in 1926. In 1928 Sze went to Germany and studied palaeobotany at Berlin University with W Gothan (1879-1954), who played an important role in Sze's career. Sze achieved his PhD in Palaeobotany in 1931, the first Chinese palaeobotanist to do so (Zhang & Wang 1994). After finishing his doctorate thesis, Sze went to study at the Swedish Museum of Natural History, Stockholm, and worked with Professor T.G. Halle (Li 2000). In 1930 Sze, together with W. Gothan, attended the 5th International Botanical Congress held at Cambridge, UK, and he made friends with a number of botanists and palaeobotanists from all over the world (Li 2000). Sze was a prolific palaeobotanist in China. During the 1930s, Sze pioneered studies on fossil plants in China and published a series of important papers in German or English. Before he returned to China in 1933, Sze coauthored five papers with W. Gothan. From 1930 to 1939 Sze completed 21 papers as sole author. Although the research conditions in China at the time were very difficult, Sze made strenuous efforts to work on fossil plants and achieved brilliant results, indicating that the Chinese palaeobotanists were able to work independently on fossil plants. In the 1940s Sze published a total of 31 papers and taught young palaeobotanists, such as Li Xing-Xue (Lee Hsing-Hsueh, 1917-). Sze had a broad interest in fossil plants and his work involved many different research areas within palaeobotany. Therefore, Sze

HISTORY OF CHINESE PALAEOBOTANY

is regarded as the founder of palaeobotany in China (Zhang & Wang 1994; Li 2000,2001).

Botanists' efforts to promote the development of Chinese palaeobotany

295

on this Middle Miocene-aged Shanwang flora from Shandong and published an English monograph, which was undoubtedly the pioneering research on Tertiary floras in China (Sun et al 2000,2002).

Metasequoia story Hu Hsen-Hsu (1894-1968) During the 1940s Hu made a great contribution to Although few Chinese botanists worked on fossil the studies of recent and fossil Metasequoia (Hu plants in the first half of the 20th century, Hu Hsen- 1946; Hu & Cheng 1948). The publication of the Hsu (Hu Xian-Su, 1894-1968), who was a distin- living Metasequoia fossil was one of the greatest disguished plant taxonomist in China, had a strong coveries in the botanical and palaeobotanical cominterest in palaeobotany. Hu thought that palaeo- munity in the world and stimulated the development botany was an important subject within plant of Chinese palaeobotany in the last century. Miki science. Hu's ideas were closely related to his (1941) established the genus Metasequoia based on Berkeley and Harvard education background in the the Pliocene fossils from Japan and it was thought USA. He studied Chinese Tertiary plants and those that the genus was extinct. It was in October 1941 of the living fossil Metasequoia. Hu not only that Professor Gan Tuo first collected specimens advanced plant taxonomy, but also contributed to the from a tall tree (about 30 m high) under which there overall development of palaeobotanical studies in was a small temple called 'Shui-Sha-Miao' in Maotao-chi in Wan Hsien, Sichuan Province. Gan China (Shi & Yang 1998). Hu was sent to the University of California at noticed that this was a strange tree but it was very Berkley to study botany in 1912 and achieved his MSc difficult to identify at that time because it was not in degree in 1916. He then went to Harvard University to leaf. Three years later in 1944, Wang Zhan collected study plant taxonomy in 1922 and received his PhD specimens from the same tree at Mao-tao-chi and degree in 1925. Thus, Hu had a wide contact with the considered them to be those of Glyptostrobus penworld botanists and palaeobotanists of his time. Hu silis (Staunton) K. Koch (Shao et al 2000). In 1946 was greatly influenced by the scientific ideas of Asa Xue Ji-Ru also collected specimens of living Gray (1810-1888), father of American botany, who Metasequoia from Mao-tao-chi. Cheng Wan-Chun pointed out the significance of the phyto-geographi- studied Xue's specimens but didn't believe the tree cal relationship between eastern North America and to be Glyptostrobus, but rather a new genus of eastern Asia (Gray 1840, 1859, 1878; Boufford & conifer. Later Cheng posted some specimens of the Spongberg 1983). Hu developed a deep interest both strange tree to Hu Hsen-Hsu. On 9 May 1946 Hu wrote to Professor R.W. in recent plants and in fossil plants from China that might provide very important evidence for the Chaney and told him about the exciting discovery of Tertiary history of plants in the Northern Hemisphere. the living fossil plant Metasequoia. On 28 September Hu founded the Institute of Botany, Chinese 1946 R.W. Chaney talked about the discovery at the Academy of Sciences in Beijing, formerly the Fan annual meeting of Botanical Society of America. In Memorial Institute of Biology, in 1928 and the December 1946 Hu published a paper, entitled Botanical Society of China in 1933. He established 'Notes on a Palaeogene species of Metasequoia in several English journals in China for plant sciences China', and mentioned that he would discuss in and played a prominent role in the history of plant another paper a living species of Metasequoia. Hu sciences in China (including the subject of palaeob- thought that the plant was the fossil genus otany) during the 20th century. Hu made great Metasequoia established by S. Miki in 1941. At last, efforts to establish botanical organizations in China Hu and Cheng published their paper on Metasequoia that would provide the potential for further develop- glyptostroboidies Hu et Cheng in 1948. The living species of the genus Metasequoia was not extinct, ment of Chinese palaeobotany. In the 1930s Hu conducted successful collabora- but still survives on the Earth. So far, plants of the tive work with American palaeobotanist Professor living fossil Metasequoia have been introduced into R.W. Chaney with regard to Chinese Tertiary plants. many countries in the Northern Hemisphere. Just before the Chinese-Japanese War, R.W. Chaney was invited to China for the second time. He went on a field trip to a very famous fossil locality, Shanwang Development of the biological approach to locality in Linqu County, Shandong Province, in Chinese palaeobotany June 1937 and collected many specimens of fossil plants. Some specimens were transported to the USA Palaeobotany as a biological subject was not wideand kept at Berkley. Hu & Chaney (1940) co-worked spread in China during the last century, although the

296

Q.-G. SUN

development of a biological approach to Chinese palaeobotany did begin in the 1940s.

Hsu Jen (Xu Ren, 1910-1992) Hsii was a Chinese palaeobotanist who preferred to use a biological approach to work on fossil plants. Hsii Jen's education and career was greatly influenced by C.Y. Chang (Zhang Jing-Yue, 1895-1975) and Birbal Sahni (1891-1949). The former was a pioneer of plant morphology and anatomy in China who studied botany in the USA and worked in Europe (Compiling Committee of Chang ChingYue's Works 1995). The latter was an Indian palaeobotanist, who studied palaeobotany in Britain and was the fifth Indian to be elected as a Fellow of the Royal Society in Britain (Sitholey 1950). Hsii entered Tsinghua University because he admired his uncle, Professor C.Y. Chang, who was a Tsinghua graduate (1916-1920). Chang went to the USA to study botany in 1920 and he began his study with C.J. Chamberlain in the Botany Department of Chicago University in 1922. Chang was very interested in palaeobotany, although he majored in botany. In 1924 he wrote an article about the latest discovery of coal-balls in the United States and introduced it to the Chinese scientific community (Chang 1924). Chang received his PhD degree in 1925 and afterwards returned to China to engage in plant morphology and anatomy (Compiling Committee of Chang Ching-Yue's Works 1995). However, Chang still worked on the anatomy of fossil wood (Chang 1929). At Chang's suggestion Hsii went to Tsinghua University to study botany in 1929. Hsii learnt about fossil plants and had instilled in him a deep interest in palaeobotany during his sophomore (second) year. After Hsii graduated from Tsinghua University in 1933, he joined Peking University and worked as an assistant with Professor C.Y. Chang. Under his uncle's guidance, he employed methods of plant morphology and anatomy to study fossil plants (Hsii 2000). Chang had hoped that Hsii would study palaeobotany with J. Walton in the University of Glasgow, but Hsii failed to visit Britain because of financial difficulty during World War II. In 1944 Chang recommended that Hsii go to Lucknow University in India to study palaeobotany with Birbal Sahni (Chen et al. 1994). In 1946 Hsii got his PhD degree from Lucknow University and returned to Peking University to teach palaeobotany. In 1948 Hsii was invited by Birbal Sahni to India a second time to participate in the foundation of Birbal Sahni's Institute of Palaeobotany. Here Hsii met Thomas Harris, in December 1949, when Harris came to the institute as adviser for 2 months (Sitholey 1953). In 1950 Hsii visited Sweden and attended the 7th International

Botanical Congress in Stockholm, where he met many palaeobotanists from all over the world. At the congress he gave two talks on 'Devonian spores from Yunnan, China' and 'New information on Homoxylon rajmahalense Sahni'. After his visit to Sweden, Hsii paid a short visit to Britain. At the end of 1950 H.T. Lee invited Hsii back to serve the 'New' China. In the summer of 1952 Hsii returned to China and maintained a biological approach to research of fossil plants. Hsu's efforts changed, to some degree, the face of Chinese palaeobotany in the second half of the 20th century.

Summary Many subjects of modern science and technology were transplanted into China in the late 19th century. Geological sciences including the subject of palaeobotany are needed to serve such industries as coal, gas and oil in China. Focusing on palaeobotany, the information from China is of great importance because it has a large territorial area and contains abundant recent and fossil plants in which foreign scientists are very interested. For example, the knowledge about recent and fossil plants from China is crucial to the understanding of the phytogeographical relationship between eastern North America and eastern Asia. Since the early 1870s many Chinese students have travelled abroad to study modern science and technology, thus establishing direct or indirect connections with the world's scientific community. However, two factors held Chinese scientific development back. First, China was continually at war during the first half of the 20th century, making scientific development difficult; and, secondly, the Chinese culture differs greatly from that of foreign countries. Therefore, it is often very difficult to locate modern science and technology theories in the cultural soils of China. In the early 20th century V.K. Ting, who was a graduate from the University of Glasgow in Scotland, made tireless efforts to establish academic organizations for the Chinese geological sciences. This was of great importance to the development of Chinese palaeobotany. The journals, such as Bulletin of the Geological Survey of China, Bulletin of the Geological Society of China and Palaeontologia Sinica (Series A), serve as important media for publishing palaeobotanical papers in English or German that are easily understood by foreign colleagues. Otherwise, Chinese scientists would find themselves isolated if their work was published only in Chinese (Hass 1988). The establishment of a palaeobotanical organization and journals in China received enormous help from foreign colleagues, such as Swedish geologist Professor J.G. Andersson, and greatly promoted the rise of Chinese palaeobotany. In the first

HISTORY OF CHINESE PALAEOBOTANY half of the 20th century palaeobotany was mainly considered a geological subject largely because palaeobotany was of practical use to the needs of economic construction in China. Therefore, a geological approach was popular. H.C. Sze often called 'the founder of Chinese palaeobotany', was a disciple of W. Gothan and made a great contribution to the development of Chinese palaeobotany using this geological approach. As a distinguished plant taxonomist in China, Hu Hsen-Hsu had a strong interest in palaeobotany. Hu was a Harvard graduate, who accepted Asa Gray's scientific ideas and conducted collaborative work with R. W. Chaney pertaining to the Chinese Tertiary plants. The discovery of the living plants of Metasequoia always proves to be an interesting topic in the world circles of botany and palaeobotany. The studies on Metasequoia enhanced the reputation of Hu, who thought that palaeobotany might be considered as a subject concerning mainly plant sciences. The development of a biological approach to Chinese palaeobotany began in the 1940s. As a botanist who majored in plant morphology and anatomy, Hsu Jen obtained his palaebotanical training in Birbal Sahni's laboratory in India in the 1940s, and preferred to employ a biological approach to work on fossil plants. After Hsu returned to China from India in 1952, Hsu" worked in Sze's laboratory in Nanjing for several years. In 1959 Hsii obtained support from Hu Hsen-Hsu and founded a palaeobotanical laboratory of his own at the Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, which changed the face of Chinese palaeobotany in the late 20th century. The author concludes that the history of Chinese palaeobotany in the first half of the 20th century had an important influence on the development of Chinese palaeobotany in the second half of the 20th century, which will be discussed in another paper. I would like to thank Feng-Lin Li, Zhu-Sheng Xu, Hu Shi, Jin-Jian Liu, Guo-Quan Wang, W. J. Hass, R. Wilding and I. Poole for their kind help in various aspects. J. Hilton, A.J. Bowden and anonymous referees are much acknowledged for their kind and appreciative assistance with improvement of manuscript. This work is partially supported by the grants from CAS Knowledge Innovative Programme and National Natural Science Foundation of China. This article contributes to the publication of Q.-G.SUN's study on history of Chinese plant sciences (No. HCPS-2003-01).

References The Chinese references are cited as their English titles were given in Chinese journals. Note that the words 'Peking'and 'Beijing', 'Shantung' and 'Shandong', etc refer to the same place, and that the names 'Ting, V.K.' and 'Ding W.J.', 'Sze

297

C.H.' and 'Si XJ.', etc, refer to the same person. The spellings were changed in the early 1970s. BOUFFORD, D.E. & SPONGBERG, S.A. 1983. Eastern Asian-North American phytogeographical relationships - A history from the time of Linnecus to the twentieth century. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden, 70,423^39. CHANG, C.Y. 1924. New discovery of American palaeobotany. Science (in China), 9, 809-810 (in Chinese). CHANG, C.Y. 1929. A new Xenoxylon from North China. Bulletin of Chinese Geological Society. 8(3):243-255. CHEN, Y, Li, C.S. & SUN, XJ. 1994. A brief biography of Jen Hsii. In: Compiling Group of A Dictionary of Scientist Biographies. Biography of Modern Chinese Scientists, Volume 6. Science Press, Beijing 396-402 (in Chinese). CHOW, T.H. 1923. A preliminary note on some younger Mesozoic plants from Shantung. Bulletin of the Geological Survey of China, 5(2), 81-141 (in Chinese and English). COMPILING COMMITTEE OF CHANG CHING-YUE'S WORKS. 1995. Chang Ching-Yue's Works. Peking University Press, Beijing (in Chinese and English). DARRAH, WC. 1939. Textbook of Paleobotany. D. Appleton-Century, New York. DENG, L.H. 1976. A review of the 'bamboo shoot' fossils at Yenzhou recorded in 'Dream Pool Essays' with notes on Shen Kuo's contribution to the development of paleontology. Acta Palaeontologica Sinica, 15(1): 1-6 (in Chinese with English Abstract). DUAN, S.Y. 1990. Ting V.J. and Chinese palaeobotany. In: WANG, H.Z. (ed.) The Early History of Geological Causes in China. Peking University Press, Beijing, 214-224 (in Chinese with English Abstract). GRAY, A. 1840. Dr. Siebold, Flora Japonica (review). American Journal of Science and Arts, 39,175-176. GRAY, A. 1859. Diagnostic characters of new species of phaenogamous plants, collected in Japan by Charles Wright, Botanist of the U.S. North Pacific Exploring Expedition. (Published by request of Captain John Rodgers, Commander of the Expedition.) With observations upon the relations of the Japanese flora to that of North America and of other parts of the Northern Temperate Zone. Memoir of American Academy of Arts and Science, II, 6, 377-452. (Reprinted, in part, in SARGENT, C. 1889. SARGENT S. (ed.) Scientific Papers of Asa Gray, Volume 2, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 142-173.) GRAY, A. 1878. Forest geography and archeology. American Journal of Science III, 16, 85-94,183-196. HAAS, W.J. 1988. Transplanting botany to China: The cross-cultural experience of Chen Huan-Yong. Arnoldia, 48(2), 9-25. HALLE, T.G. 1927. Palaeozoic plants from central Shansi. Palaeontologia Sinica (Series A), 2(1), 1-316. Hsu, J. 2000. Selected Works of Jen Hsu. Earthquake Publishing House, Beijing. Hu, H.H. 1946. Notes on a Paleogene species of Metasequoia in China. Bulletin of the Geological Society of China, 16,105-107. Hu, H.H. & CHANEY, R.W 1940. A Miocene Flora from Shantung Province, China. Carnegie Institution of Washington Publication, 507.

298

Q.-G. SUN

Hu, H.H. & CHENG, W.C. 1948. On the new family Metasequoiaceae and on Metasequoia glyptostroboides, a living species of the genus Metasequoia found in Szechuan and Hupeh, Bulletin of Fan Memorial Institute of Biology (New Series), 1(2), 153-163 (in English with Chinese Abstract). Li, X.X. 2001. Dearly cherish the memory of Professor Sze Hsing-Chien (1901-1964): founder of Chinese palaeobotany. Acta Palaeontologica Sinica, 40(4), 419^23 (in Chinese with English Abstract). Li, X.X. & WANG, J. 1999. Chinese palaeobotany. In: WANG, H.Z. (ed.) Fifty Years of Geological Sciences in China (1949-1999). Publishing House of China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, 37^4 (in Chinese). Li, X.X. 2000. General history and prospects of China's palaeobotany: a century review. Acta Palaeontologica Sinica, 39 (Suppl.), 1-13 (in English with Chinese Abstract). MIKI, S. 1941. On the change of flora in eastern Asia since Tertiary period (I): The clay or lignite beds flora in Japan with special reference to the Pinus trifolia beds in central Hondo. Japanese Journal of Botany, 11, 237-303. SHAO, G.E, Liu, Q.J. et al 2000. Zhan Wang (1911-2000). Taxon, 49,593-601. SHI, H. & YANG, F. 1998. In memory of Professor Dr. HsenHsu Hu. Plants, 2,36-37 (in Chinese). SITHOLEY, R.V. 1950. Paleobotany in India (VII) Professor Birbal Sahni, FRS. Journal of the Indian Botanical Society, 14, (1), 1-5. SITHOLEY, R.V. 1953. Palaeobotany in India (VIII) - Birbal Sahni Institute of Palaeobotany. The Palaeobotanist, 2,111-112.

SUN, Q.G. & YANG, J. 2000. Advances in studies on leaf physiognomy. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 17 (special issue for IOPC-VI), 102-108 (in Chinese with English Abstract). SUN, Q.G., COLLINSON, M.E. et al 2002. Quantitative reconstruction of palaeoclimate of the Middle Miocene aged Shanwang flora, eastern China. Palaeogeography, Palaeodimatology, Palaeoecology, 180,315-329. SUN, Q.G., Li, F.L. et al 2000. A bilingual bibliography of geological and palaeontological studies of Shanwang Formation, Shandong Province, China (1936-2000). Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 17 (special issue for IOPC-VI), 272-288 (in Chinese with English Abstract). TING, V.K. 1922a. Editorial: History of organization of the Geological Society of China. Bulletin of the Geological Society of China, 1, (1^4), 1-2. TING, V.K. 19226. The aims of the Geological Society of China. Bulletin of the Geological Society of China, 1, WANG, M.L. (ed.). 2002. Chronicle of Events of the 80th Anniversary of the Geological Society of China (1922-2002). Geological Publishing House, Beijing (in Chinese). ZHANG, S.Z. & WANG, Z.Q. 1994. A biography of Sze Hsing-Chien. In: Liu, D.S. (ed.) Brief Biographies of Chinese Experts of Science and Technology (Geological Volume No.l). Hebei Education Publishing House, Shijiazhuang, Hebei Provinve, 337-346 (in Chinese). ZHU, W.Q. 1994. History of Chinese palaeobotany. In: Botanical Society of China. History of Chinese Botany. Science Press, Beijing, 292-307 (in Chinese).

Index Numbers in italic refer to figures, numbers in bold refer to tables acetate peel technique 219, 243, 251 Alethopteris decurrens 70, 71,121 Alethopteris lonchitica Sternberg 43, 44 Alps, Venetian, work of Baron Achille de Zigno 87-88, 91 Andersson, J.G. (1874-1960) 294, 296 angiosperms work of Marie Stopes 130-131 see also dicotyledons Annularia 9 Antarctica, discovery of Glossopteris 129, 156 Aptian, permineralized wood 130-131 Araucarioxylon arizonicum 98 Arber, Edward Alexander Newell (1870-1918) 149, 209 Argentina 281-289, 283 Argentine scientists 288-289 Cordoba University 285 early naturalist-explorers 281-284 Germanic School of Sciences 284-287 gold rush 289 Arizona Territory, fossil forests 96-98, 100-101 Artisia 47 Ashmolean Museum 7, 8 Asteria 8 Asterophyllites equisetiformis 42,43,154 Asteroxylon 233, 242, 252 Astroites 8 Auinger, E.Antonin (c.1800-1821) 45, 45, 47, 52 Ave-Lallemant, Hermann (German) (1835-1910) 286 Azara, Felix de (1746-1821) 281-282 Bacon, Francis (1561-1626) 5 Balfour, Isaac Bayley (1853-1922) 197, 198,198, 199, 204, 234 Balfour, John Hutton (1808-84) 197, 206, 207 balsam transfer method 219, 243, 251 Bamgwanathia 218, 243 Batten, David 248, 252 Beckett, James 246, 248, 251 Bennettitales 30, 90, 91, 232, 233 Berg, Carlos (1843-1902) 287 Berghes, D. 45,49 Bible, literalism 76—77, see also Deluge, Biblical Binney, Edward 230-231, 232, 234 Black Isle see Eathie Blackburn, Kathleen 166 Blastolepis otozamitis 91, 92 Bodenbender, Wilhelm (Guillermo) (1857-1941) 287 Bolton, Herbert 249 Bonpland, Aime (1773-1858) 284 Both, Franz Jan (born 1792) 45, 48, 49, 52 Boullemier, F. 55, 56, 57 Bower, Frederick Orpen (1855-1948) 198-201, 200, 203, 205-206, 209, 209, 214-215, 217-218, 218, 234 Brachyphyllum 73 Brackebusch, Ludwig (1849-1906) 285

British Antarctic Survey, collaboration with Sheffield Palynology School 265, 266 British Association for the Advancement of Science meetings 1870 Liverpool 114 1887 Manchester 234, 236 1889 Newcastle upon Tyne 155 1904 Cambridge 209 work of Arthur Raistrick 164 British Museum (Natural History) collections, Williamson 150, 251 Brongniart, Adolphe (1801-76) 32, 42, 53, 55, 59, 114, 116 Histoire des vegetaux fossites 53-59 Brookes, Richard (c.1750) 10, 11 Natural History 7, 8, 11 Brora, Sutherland, fossil collection of Hugh Miller 69, 73-74 Buckland, Dean William (1784-1856) 20, 49 Buckland, Mary see Morland, Mary Burdiehouse, limestone 70 Burmeister, Hermann (1807-92) 284, 285 Butterworth, John 140, 142 Buxus balearica 29 Calamites 51, 57, 113, 114,115, 119, 124, 140,154, 18: 215 Calamites nodosa Sternberg 47 Calder, Mary 230, 240, 245-246 calotype 78 Canada, geological conservation 95-96, 105-106 Capieux, Johann Stephan (1748-1813) 42-43 Carboniferous fossil flora 31,32 Joggins fossil forest, Nova Scotia 95-96, 97, 105-106 palynology 260, 261, 263 Scotland, work of Hugh Miller 66, 70, 71 work of D.H.Scott 156 work of Emily Dix 181-189,191,192 work of James Lomax 137, 138 work of John Lindley 31 work of Marie Stopes 131, 132, 241 work of Robert Kidston 149 work of William Crawford Williamson 140, 232 Cardiocarpon 37, 156 Carruthers, William 114, 119 Cash, William (1834-1914) 140-141 Cenozoic, fossil flora 31 Chang, C.Y. (1895-1975) 296 Charlton, Alan 247 China 20th century 293-297 Song dynasty 293 Chow, T.H.(1893-1967) 294 Cladophlebis denticulata 72, 73 cladoxyl 69, 70 clays, post glacial 75

300

Coal Measures fossil flora 30, 112-114 palynology 166-167,168-170, 170-173, 772, 260 University of Manchester Museum collection 251 work of Emily Dix 181-189 work of Henry Steinhauer 18, 19 work of H.H.Higgins 112-126 work of John Lindley 31 work of Lesley Rowsell Moore 260 work of W.C.Williamson 232, 234 coal-balls 147, 241 work of Marie Stopes 128, 132 work of W.C.Williamson 139, 140, 232 Colson, Barbara 250-251 conservation, geological 95 Canada 95-96, 105-106 Great Britain 98, 101-105 USA 96-98, 100-101 Conwentz, Hugo Wilhelm (1855-1922) 286 Cookson, Isabel 218, 240, 242, 243, 250 collaboration with W.H.Lang 218, 243 Corda, August Karl Joseph (1809-1849) 45, 49, 57, 52 Cordaites9, 183 Cordoba University, Argentina 285 Courtin, F. 55, 56 Creation, date of 8 Cretaceous angiosperms, work of Marie Stopes 130-131 Lower, fossil flora 31 see also Wealden Croft, William Noble 244-245 Cromarty, work of Hugh Miller 63-69, 71-72 cryptogamia 85, 91, 116, 197, 205 Culm Measures, Devon 30 Cusack, Helen see Drury cuticle preparation work of Achille de Zigno 88 work of Joan Watson 247, 251 work of John Lindley 33,35 Cycadaceae 91, 128,239 Cycadopteris brauniana Zigno 89 Cyclopteris 33, 119 Darwin, Charles (1809-82) 95, 156, 282, 284 Davies, David 183, 186, 215 Dawson, Sir John William (1820-99) 95-96, 153, 154 De la Beche, Sir Henry Thomas (1796-1855) 29-30 De Zigno, Baron Achille (1813-92) 85-94, 86 early life 85-86 Flora fossilis formations oolithicae 87, 88, 89, 90, 91-92 fossil collection 87, 92 publications 87 research 86-88 Venetian Alps 87-88 taxonomy 88, 91-92 Decaisne, Joseph (1807-1882) 55, 56 Deluge, Biblical 8, 9-10, 77, 111 Derby, Earl of see Stanley, Edward Smith, 13th Earl of Derby Deutschlands Flora 44^5 development, progressive 32, see also evolution

INDEX Devonian work of Hugh Miller 65-67, 68-69 work of Sir William Dawson 153,154 Dick, Robert 64, 68, 70 Dickson, Alexander 799 dicotyledons work of John Lindley 31-32, 33, 34 Ding Wen-Jiang see Ting, V.K. Dix, Emily (1904-72) 181-193,182,189, 216, 238 Bedford College 184-190 Coal Measures of South Wales 182-183, 797 criticism of Kidston's classification 192, 216 early life 181 Macrofloral Bio stratigraphy of the South Wales Coalfield 186-187, 792 Macrofloras of the Millstone Grit and Lower Coal Measures 185-186 mental illness 190 Staffordian Series 183-184 Stephanian macrofloras 188-190 Doering, Adolf (1848-1926) 285 Downie, Charles 260-262, 263 Drury, Helen Cusack 246, 248, 249, 251-252 Dusen, Per Karl Hjalmar (1855-1926) 289 Eathie, Black Isle, fossil collecting of Hugh Miller 65-66, 68-69, 71-72, 74 Edinburgh and its Neighbourhood 67 Eigg, Isle of, fossil collection of Hugh Miller 74-75 Enlightenment, Age of 6-7 Eocene, fossil flora, work of John Lindley 29, 35 evolution Darwinism 156 John Lindley 31-32 Farey, John (1766-1826) 17, 20 'Fern Ledges'fossils 131 ferns fossil 17, 21-22,32,33,91,20 work of Frederick Price Marrat 116 work of Henry Hugh Higgins 113, 114, 720-123 fish, Devonian, work of Hugh Miller 65-66 Fisher, Helen 246, 248 / ... Flood, Noah's see Deluge, Biblical Flora der Vorwelt 44-52, 45, 59 Flora fossilis formationis oolithicae 87, 88, 89, 90, 91-92 Fontana, Luis Jorge (1846-1920) 288 Footprints of the Creator 76, 78 forests fossil 95 Arizona Territory, USA 96-98, 100-101,102,103, 104 conservation 98, 100-107 Darwin's Petrified Forest, Argentina 284, 285 Fossil Grove, Glasgow 98, 99,100, 101, 103, 105, 208 Joggins, Nova Scotia 95, 96, 97, 105-106 Wadsley, Sheffield 98, 101, 103, 105, 705 'formed stones' 7, 8 Fossil Flora of Great Britain 29-32, 34, 35-38 Fossil Grove, Victoria Park, Glasgow 98, 99,100, 101, 103, 105, 208

INDEX fossils collections Ashmolean Museum 7 Buckland, William 49 de Zigno, Baron Achille, University of Padua 87, 92 Dix, Emily 190, 193 Hancock Museum, Newcastle 31 Higgins, H. H., Ravenhead collection 112-114 Hutton, William 30 Kidston, Robert Geological Survey 216-217 Hunterian Museum, Glasgow 150, 217, 220-221 Lomax, James 139 Manchester University Museum 150, 249-250, 251 Miller, Hugh, National Museums of Scotland 67-75, 72, 79, 80-84 Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris 53 Scarborough Museum 31 Sheffield Palynology School 268 Steinhauer, Henry, 18, 19-20, 24 Sternberg, Kaspar Maria von, Narodniho Muzea 44, 45 Walton, John, Botany Department, University of Glasgow 219 early theories 8, 10, 41 'formed stones' 7, 8 'tongue stones' 8 preparation work of George Bryant 261 work of James Lomax 139, 142-143,144 work of Joan Watson 251 work of John Walton 219, 243, 251 work of William Nicol 197 preservation in situ 95-107 Franks, John 250 Fujii, Professor Kuyiro 129, 130, 239, 240 Fulneck, Yorkshire, work of Henry Steinhauer 14-15 fusain 133 Geinitz, Hanns Bruno (1814-1900) 285 Geological Conservation Review 103 Geological Society of London 16, 17 Geological Survey, collection of Robert Kidston 216-217 Glasgow, Fossil Grove 98, 99,100, 101, 103, 104, 105, 208 Glasgow University Botany Department 197-223, 203, 204, 227 Bower Building fire 221-223, 227, 223, 225 Kidston Collection 150, 219-221 Walton Figured Slide Collection 219 glossopetrae 8 Glossopteris 129-130, 149, 156-158, 759 Goldsmith, Oliver (1728-74) 77 Gondwanaland91, 129, 156-157 Grandori, Luigia 88, 92 grasses 32 Great Britain, geological conservation 98, 101-105 Gwynne-Vaughan, David Thomas (1871-1915) 201-202, 204, 205-206, 209 at Birkbeck College 212 at Queen's University Belfast 212-213 collaboration with Robert Kidston 209-210, 270, 277, 214 ill health 213

301

Hall, Nicola see Harrison Hahnia 113,115 Hancock Museum, Newcastle 31 Harrison, Nicola 248 Hartley, Richard 252 Hartog, Marcus, work with W.C.Williamson 236 Hautal, Rudolf (1854-1928) 286-287 Hayes, Peta 246, 248 Helmsdale, Sutherland, fossil collecting of Hugh Miller 72,73 Herbarium Diluvianum 111 Hick, Thomas (1840-96) 142, 236, 238 Hickling, Henry George Albert 241, 249 Hicklingia24l,242 Higgins, Reverend Henry Hugh (1814-93) 772,124 Ravenhead collection 112-126 Histoire des vegetauxfossiles 53-59 Hofmeister, Wilhelm Friedrich Benedict (1824-77) 197, 205 Hohe, Christian (1798-1869) 45, 52 Holden, Henry Smith 241 Hooke, Robert (1635-1703) inventions 5-6 Micrographia 6 Hornea 233, 242, 252 Hsu Jen (1910-1992) 296, 297 Hu Hsen-Hsu (1894-1968) 295, 297 Hu Xian-Su see Hu Hsen-Hsu Hunterian Museum, Glasgow collection of Emily Dix 190, 193 collection of Robert Kidston 217, 220-221 Hutton, William The Fossil Flora of Great Britain 29-33, 35, 116 illustration 30, 41-60 calotype 78 copper plate etching 42 lithography 53, 55, 59 photographic 78, 210 Isoetes33, 311 Jackson, Wilfred 238, 249 Joggins, Nova Scotia, fossil forest 95, 96, 97, 105-106 Jolley, David 265, 266, 267 Journal des Savants 6 Jurassic Gristhorpe Bay fossil cuticles 33 fossil flora 30 Scotland work of Hugh Miller 65, 70-71, 74 work of Marie Stopes 129 Stonesfield Flora 49, 52 Venetian Alps, work of Baron Achille de Zigno 87-88 Kidston, Robert (1852-1924) 141, 149, 206-210, 276 classification 183-184 collaboration with D.T.Gwynne-Vaughan 209-210, 270,277,213,214 collaboration with James Lomax 149 collaboration with WH.Lang 214-215, 242 Fossil Grove, Glasgow 208 Fossil Plants of the Carboniferous of Great Britain 149 influence of W.C.Williamson 234-235

302

INDEX

Kidston, Robert (1852-1924) continued library destroyed by fire 222-223 thin slide collection 150, 216-217, 220-221 use of photographic plates 210 work on Ravenhead collection 124-125 Kurtz, Fritz (1854-1920) 287 Lagenstoma 149, 241 Lancashire plant fossils 111 popular interest in fossil plants 230 Lancashire and Yorkshire Palaeobotanical Society 142 Lang, William Henry (1874-1960) 201-202, 205-206, 209, 210, 212-213, 217, 277, 220, 237, 238, 249 collaboration with Isabel Cookson 218, 243 collaboration with Robert Kidston 214-215, 242 Professor of Cryptogamic Botany, Manchester University 241-242, 244-245 Laurus dulcis 29 Laveineopteris tenuifolia 43 Lebour, G.A. 36 Leigh, Charles 111 Lepidocarpon 156 Lepidodendron 113,115, 116, 141,154, 156, 249, 251 Lepidodendron aculeatum Sternberg 45, 46, 52 Lepidodendron elegans 157 Lepidodendron obovatum Sternberg 45, 46, 52 Lepidodendron selaginoides Sternberg 47 Lepidophloios 70, 238, 243 Lepidostrobus 70, 156 Lesquereux, Leo (1806-89) 119 Lhwyd, Edward (1660-1709) 6, 8-10 Archaeologia Britannica 9 Lythophylacii Britannici ichnographia 9 limestone Burdiehouse 70 grey, work of Baron Achille de Zigno 87-88 magnesian, fossil flora 31 Lindley, John (1799-1865) 29-38, 36, 37 evolution 31-32 fossil cuticles 33, 35 posthumous reputation 36-38 taphonomy 32-33, 34, 114, 116 The Fossil Flora of Great Britain 29-32, 34, 35-38 tires of palaeobotany 35-36 Lindleycladus 38 Lista, Ramon (1856-98) 288 Lister, Joseph Jackson (1786-1869), achromatic compound lens 197 Lister, Martin 6 Lithodendron Wash 97-98, 101 lithography 53, 55, 59 Liverpool Museum 112, 114, 116,124 Lloyd-Bostock, Katherine 246, 248 Lomax, James (1857-1934) 137-151, 757 early interest in fossils 138-139 employment as collier 138 geological section maker 139, 142-143, 238 Lomax Palaeobotanical Company 137, 138, 143-151, 238 Long, Albert George 244-245 lycophyte stumps 95, 98, 99,100, 101, see also stigmaria Lydon, Susannah 246, 248, 249, 252

Lyell, Sir Charles (1797-1875) 95-96 Lyginopteris hoeninghausii (Brongniart) Gothan 58, 59 maceral 133 maceration, acid 33, 35, 88 Macrofloral Bio stratigraphy of the South Wales Coalfield 186-187 Macrofloras of the Millstone Grit and Lower Coal Measures 185-186 Malapeux, Charles Louis 55, 56 Manchester Museum 249-250 Manchester University, Botany Department 129, 229-252, 230, 239 Manton, Irene 237, 244, 245, 251 Mariopteris 70, 125 Marrat, Frederick Price 777, 724 work on the Ravenhead collection 116-119,120, 122 Martin, William (1767-1810), Petrificata Derbiensis 16 Maxted, Barbara see Colson Metasequoia 295, 297 Meunier, Jean-Baptiste (1786-1858) 55, 56, 58 Micrographia 6 microscopy 153, 197, 231 Robert Hooke 6 SEM techniques 247, 251 Miller, Hugh (1802-56) 63-84, 64 Carboniferous 70, 77 Cruise of the Betsey 67, 74, 76 Devonian 65-69 early life 63-64 in Edinburgh 66, 67 Edinburgh and its Neighbourhood 67 Footprints of the Creator 76, 78 natural theology 76-77 Old Red Sandstone, The 67 popular appeal 75-76, 78-79 post-glacial clays 75 Scottish Jurassic 65, 70-74 Scottish Tertiary 74-75 Sketchbook of Popular Geology 66, 75-76 Testimony of the rocks, The 70, 76, 77-78 Witness, The 66, 67 millstone grit, work of Emily Dix 183, 185 Mineral Botany project 16-18, 22 Mineral Conchology 16-17 Miocene, fossil leaves, work of John Lindley 29 Mollhausen, Baldwin 97-98 Moore, Lesley Rowsell 259-263, 260 Moravian Church, emphasis on natural history 14-15 Moreno, Francisco Pascasio (1852-1919) 288 Morland, Mary (1797-1857) 45, 49 Moussy, Victor Martin de (1810-69) 284 Murchison, Sir Roderick Impey (1792-71) 29, 30 Murray, Dr Peter 33 Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris 53 Musters, Georges Chaworth (1841-79) 284 Narodnmo Muzea, Prague 44, 45 Nathorst, Alfred Gabriel (1850-1921) 149, 286 National Museum of Wales, collection of Emily Dix 190, 193 National Museums of Scotland 67-68, 79, 80-84

INDEX Natural History of Lancashire, Cheshire and the Peak in Derbyshire 111 Nephropteris, work of Frederick Price Marrat 117, 119 Neuralethopteris 186 Neuropteris 9, 50, 70, 111, 119, 186,191 Neves, Roger 261, 262, 263 Nicholson, M.A. 45, 52 Nicol, William (1768-1851), geological section maker 197 nomenclature binomial work of E.F. von Schlotheim 42 work of Henry Steinhauer 21, 24-25 Odontopteris 119, 189 Oeningen, Switzerland, Miocene flora 29 oil industry, palynology 262-263, 266 Old Red Sandstone, The 67 Oliver, Francis Wall (1864-1952) 149, 150, 234 Oliver, Professor Daniel 148, 154 Oolitic, fossil flora 18, 33, 88 Orbigny, Alcide d' (1802-57) 282 Ordovician, microfossil, work of Charles Downie 261 Organisation of the Fossil Plants of the Coal Measures 140 Orthoceras steinhaueri 19 Osmundaceae, work of Kidston and Gwynne-Vaughan 209,270,277,213 Otozomites9l,92 Oudart, PL. 55, 56 Owens College 140, 142, 229, 232, 238, see also Manchester University Oxford University, Museum of Natural History 7 Padua University, collection of Baron Achille de Zigno 87,92 palynology coal seam, work of Arthur Raistrick 164, 166-170, 168,169, 170-173, 770, 777, 772 University of Sheffield 259-269 collections 268 Patagonia 284, 285, 288 peel technique, cellulose acetate 219, 243, 251 Permian, magnesian limestone, fossil flora 31 Petrified Forest National Park 96, 100, 101, 104 Phyllites juglandiformis Sternberg 48 Phyllites lobatus Sternberg 48 Phyllotheca 91 Phytolites 87 Phytolithus verrucosus 19, 22, 24 'Pinnites' eiggensis 74, 75 Pityostrobus macrocephalus 31 Plot, Robert (1640-96) 6, 7-8 Podocarpus lindleyana 37 Podocarpus macrophylla 29, 37 Polyporites bowmanni 31 Popper, Lulius (Julio) (1857-93) 289 preservation, differential 32-33, 34 Preyssler, Johann Daniel (1768-1839) 45, 45, 46, 52 Psilophyton 68, 69,154, 215 Pycnophyllum\l3,115 Raistrick, Arthur (1896-1991) 161-177, 765 adult education 164, 173, 174-175

303

Armstrong College, Newcastle 165-167, 170-171, 173-174 early life 161-163 Leeds University 163-164 pacifism 162-163, 165, 174 work in palynology 164-174, 175-177 Ravenhead, Lancashire collection of Henry Hugh Higgins 112-126, 775, 778, 720-123 work of Robert Kidston 124-125 Ray, John 6 Reformation, English 5 Rhynia 214-215, 233, 242, 252 Riocreux, Alfred 54, 55, 56 Rossert, J. 45, 52 Sachs, Julius von 198, 207 Sahni, Birbal (1891-1949) 296 Salo, Denis de, Journal des Savants 6 sandstone new red, fossil flora 31, 32 old red fossil fish 65-66, 67, 68-69 Hicklingia 241,242 Saxifraga 44, 45 Scarborough Museum 31 Scheuchzer, Johannes Jacobus 111 Schlotheim, Ernst Friedrich von (1764-1832) 42-43, 44, 59 Schmelda, Ignac Jurgend (1797-1839) 45, 49, 50, 52 Scott, Dukinfield Henry (1854-1934) 143, 147-148, 153-156,755,201,205,235 Scott, Robert Falcon 'of the Antarctic' 129, 240 sections, thin see fossils, preparation Sedgwick Museum, collection of Emily Dix 190, 193 Selenites 8 Seward, Sir Albert Charles (1863-1941) 129, 130, 156-159,158, 235 Sheffield University palynology 259-269 Centre for Palynological Studies 264-266, 268 North Sea oil and gas industry 262-263, 266 Sheffield, Wadsley Fossil Forest 98, 101, 103, 105, 705 ShenKuo (1029-93) 293 Si Xing-Jian see Sze Hsing-Chien Sigillariall5, 116 Sigillaria elegans 209, 251 Simon, F. 45, 52 Sincock, Caroline 248 Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) 102-105 Sketchbook of Popular Geology 66, 75-76 Smith, William (1769-1839) 16 stratigraphic methods 17, 19, 20, 21, 24 Solenites murrayana 33, 35 Sowerby, James (1757-1822) English Botany 19 Mineral Botany project 16-18, 19 Mineral Conchology 16-17 Sowerby, James de Carle (1787-1871) 30, 45, 49 Spencer, James (1834-98) 141-142 Sphenophyllum cuneifolium (Sternberg) Zeiller 48 Sphenophyllum schlotheimii 43 Sphenophyllum tenerrimum 70 Sphenopteridium crassum 70

304

INDEX

Sphenopteris work of Achille de Zigno 91 work of Emily Dix 186 work of Frederick Price Marrat 117,118,120,122 work of Robert Kidson 125 Sphenopteris affinis 70, 71 Spinner, Ted 262, 263, 264, 265 Sportophyte, The 131-132, 132, 240 Stagonolepis robertsoni 78 Stanley, Edward Smith, 13th Earl of Derby (1775-1851) 116 Steinhauer, Rev. Henry (1782-1818) 13-25, 21 in America 20-24 in Bath 18-19 binomial nomenclature 21, 24-25 early interest in science 15 fossil collection 18, 19-20, 24 geology of Labrador coast 17 Mineral Botany project with James Sowerby 16-18, 22 Moravian education 14-15 in northern England 16 posthumous reputation 24 Steinhaueria 24 Stelzner, Alfred William (1840-95) 285 Steno, Nicolaus (1638-96) 8 Stenopteris williamsonis (Brongniart) Harris 31 Sternberg, Kaspar Maria von (1761-1838) 24, 43-52, 59 Flora der Vorwelt 44-52, 45, 46, 47, 48, 50, 51, 59 Saxifraga 44, 45 Stigmariaficoides Brongniart 24, 234, 235, 251 Stonesfield Flora 49, 52 Stopes, Marie Carmichael (1880-1958) 127-133,128, 240 Ancient Plants 129, 240 Carboniferous coal-balls 132, 241 plant fossils 131 Cretaceous, angiosperms 130-131 early life 127-128 in Manchester 129, 230, 239-241, 250 in Munich 128-129 Journal from Japan 130 relationship with Kuyiro Fujii 129, 130, 239, 240 Sportophyte, The 131-132, 240 stratigraphy, fossils as level indicators 69 Sturm, Jacob (1771-1848), Deutschlands Flora 44-45 Sutcliffe, William Henry (1856-1913) 146-147 Szajnocha, Ladislaus (Wladyslaw) (1857-1928) 286 Sze Hsing-Chien (1901-64) 294, 297

Tertiary China 295 Scotland, work of Hugh Miller 74-75 Testimony of the rocks, The 70, 76,11-IS Thompson, Lucy 248 Thuja articulata 29 Ting, V.K. (1887-1936) 293-294, 296 'tongue stones' 8 Tradescant, John, the Younger (1608-62) 'Ark' 7 Triassic, Agentina 287 Trueman, Arthur Elijah 181-183, 186 United States of America, geological conservation 96-98, 100-101 Vines, Professor S.H. (1849-1934) 202, 203, 234 Walton, John (1895-1971) 219-223, 222, 238, 243 Ward, Harry Marshall 234, 236 Watson, David Meredith Scares 132, 241, 249 Watson, Joan 230, 240, 246-248, 246 Wealden flora 247-248, 252 Wealden, work of Joan Watson 247-248, 252 Weiss, Frederick Ernst (1865-1953) 148, 237-239,237, 242, 243-244 Wellman, Charles 266 Widdringtonia graminea (Sternberg) Knoblauch 48 Wigglesworth, Grace 238, 242-243, 249-250, 251 Williamson, William Crawford (1816-95) 30, 31, 35, 114, 155-156, 206, 229,231, 233, 234, 252 early medical career 231-232 fossil plant classification 116 illustrations 252 inspiration to young palaeobotanists 234-235 in Manchester 230-237 Organisation of the Fossil Plants of the Coal Measures 140, 232 Reminiscences of a Yorkshire Naturalist 116, 230-232, 234-236 work on coal balls 232 work with D.H.Scott 148, 155-156 work with James Lomax 139-141 Williamsonia otozamitis (Zigno) 90, 92 Williamsonia scotica 71-72 Witness, The 66, 67 wood, fossil work of Hugh Miller 71-72, 74, 75, 76-77 see also forests, fossil Woodward, Dr John 9 Xu Ren see Hsu Jen

Taeniopteris vittata 30, 33 taphonomy, work of John Lindley 32-33 • taxonomy work of Baron Achille de Zigno 88, 91-92 work of Frederick Price Marrat 116 techniques palaeobotanical 33, 35, 88, 219, 243, 251 palynological 261

Zamia gigas 232, 233, 252 Zehner, Joseph 45, 52 Zetter, C. 45, 49 Zhang Jing-Yue see Chang, C.Y. Zhou Zan-Heng see Chow, T.H. Zigno, Baron Achille de see de Zigno Zuber, Rudolf (1858-1920) 286