Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 May 2009
Previous to the year 1913 the English Kimmeridge Clay was divided into two zones only, which were believed tq be “intimately blended”. In 1913 Dr. H. Salfeld instituted a more detailed subdivision of eleven zones, the upper three of which constitute the Upper Kimmeridge Clay as since defined by Dr. F. L. Kitchin. Salfeld's sequence of zones was emended in 1922 by Messrs. Chatwin and Pringle, who showed that at Swindon the zone of Pectinatites pectinatus (Phill.) occurs below the Swindon Clay, and not above it, as Salfeld had supposed. In the early part of last year Mr. S. S. Buckman also presented a similar scheme of zones, and subdivided Salfeld's zone of P. pectinatus, which he placed in the Lower Portland, as in Salfeld's original scheme.
page 145 note 1 Woodward, H. B., “The Jurassic Bocks of Britain” vol. v, “The Middle and Upper Oolitic Rocks of England”: Mem. Geol. Surv., 1895, p. 152.Google Scholar
page 145 note 2 Salfeld, H., “Certain Upper Jurassic Strata of England”: Q.J.G.S., vol. lxix, 1913, p. 423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
page 145 note 3 Kitchin, F. L., “The Faunal Characters and Correlation of the Concealed Mesozoic Rocks in Kent” Summary of Progress Geol. Surv. for 1918, p. 43: Mem. Geol. Surv., 1919.Google Scholar
page 145 note 4 Chatwin, C. P. and Pringle, J., “The Zones of the Kimmeridge and Portland Rocks at Swindon” Summary of Progress Geol. Surv. for 1921, p. 162: Mem. Geol. Surv., 1922.Google Scholar
page 145 note 5 Buckman, S. S., Type Ammonites, vol. iv, 1923, pp. 29, 33.Google Scholar
page 146 note 1 Buckman, S. S., Type Ammonites, vol. iv, 1923, p. 33.Google Scholar
page 147 note 1 In Buckman, , Type Ammonites, vol. iv, 1922, p. 17.Google Scholar
page 147 note 2 Kitchin, F. L., op. cit., 1919, p. 43.Google Scholar
page 147 note 3 Hudleston, W. H., “Excursion to Swanage, Corfe Castle, Kimmeridge, etc.”: Proc. Geol. Assoc., vol. xiv, 1896, p. 322.Google Scholar
page 147 note 4 Information from Mr. J. Pringle.
page 147 note 5 Chatwin, C. P. and Pringle, J., op. cit., 1922, p. 166.Google Scholar
page 147 note 6 Buckman, S. S., Type Ammonites, vol. iv, pl. 381.Google Scholar
page 147 note 7 Buckman, S. S., Type Ammonites, vol. iv, 1923, p. 28.Google Scholar
page 147 note 8 Chatwin, C. P. and Pringle, J., op. cit., 1922, p. 166.Google Scholar
page 148 note 1 Hudleston, W. H., op. cit., 1896, p. 162.Google Scholar
page 148 note 2 Chatwin, C. P. and Pringle, J., op. cit., 1922, p. 162.Google Scholar
page 148 note 3 Buckman, S. S., Type Ammonites, vol. iv, 1923, p. 37.Google Scholar
page 149 note 1 Blake, J. F., “On the Correlation of the Upper Jurassic Rocks of England with those of the Continent” Part I, “The Paris Basin”: Q.J.G.S., vol. xxxvii, 1881, p. 584.Google Scholar
page 149 note 2 Blake, J. F., “On the Portland Rocks of England”: Q.J.G.S., vol. xxxvi, 1880, pp. 193, 195.Google Scholar
page 151 note 1 Lamplugh, G. W. and Kitchin, F. L., “On the Mesozoic Rocks in some of the Coal Explorations in Kent”: Mem. Geol. Surv., 1911, p. 204Google Scholar. See also Lamplugh, G. W., Kitchin, F. L., and Pringle, J., “The Concealed Mesozoic Kocks in Kent”: Mem. Geol. Surv., 1923, p. 227. This volume was issued after this paper was written.Google Scholar