Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T08:03:24.815Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Gibeon shower of meteoritic irons in South-West Africa (With Plates I and II)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2018

L. J. Spencer
L. J. Spencer*
Affiliation:
British Museum
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The presence of much native iron in Great Namaqualand was heard of in 1836 by the traveller Sir James E. Alexander, but he himself did not see any of the masses, and the material he acquired consisted only of small fragments that had been detached by the natives for pointing their weapons. An approximate chemical analysis of this material, made by Sir John Herschel, proved it to be meteoritic. A fragment weighing 2 grams which Alexander presented to the Geological Society of London in 1838 was transferred to the British Museum collection of meteorites in 1911. This appears to be all of his material that has been preserved.

Various other vague reports and travellers' tales have mentioned the presence of large masses of iron beyond the old mission station of Bethany, between there and Beersheba, and on the east side of the Great Fish River. A critical summary of these accounts was given by Sir Lazarus Fletcher in this magazine.

Type
Research Article
Information
Mineralogical magazine and journal of the Mineralogical Society , Volume 26 , Issue 173 , June 1941 , pp. 19 - 35
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1941

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 19 note 1 Alexander, J. E., An expedition of discovery into the interior of Africa through the hitherto undescribed countries of the Great Namaquas, Boschmans, and Hill Damaras. London, 1838, vol. 1, p. 145, vol. 2, p. 272. Journ. Roy. Geogr. Soc., 1938, vol. 8, p. 24.Google Scholar

page 19 note 2 Herschel, J. F. W., Notice of a chemical examination of a specimen of native iron, from the east bank of the Great Fish River, in South Africa. Phil. Mag. London, 1939, ser. 3, vol. 14, pp. 32–34. {Reprinted from the appendix of Alexander's book.)Google Scholar

page 19 note 3 Fletcher, L., On various masses of meteoric iron reported to have been found in Great Namaqualand and the adjacent region. Min. Mag., 1904, vol. 14, pp. 28–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 20 note 1 Shepard, C. U., Notice of meteoric iron near Lion river, Great Namaqualand, South Africa. Amer. Journ. Sci., 1853, ser. 2, vol. 15, pp. 1–4, 1 fig.Google Scholar

page 20 note 2 Cohen, E., The meteoric iron from Bethany, Great Namaqualand. Ann. South African Museum, 1900, vol. 2, pp. 21–29, 4 pls. Das Meteoreisen von Bethanien, Gross-Namaland, West-Südafrika. Mitt. Naturwiss. Ver. Neu-Vorpommern und Rügen, Berlin, 1901, vol. 32 (for 1900), pp. 12–25, 3 pls.Google Scholar

page 20 note 3 Brezina, A. and Cohen, E., Ueber ein Meteoreisen von Mukerop, Bezirk Gibeon, Grossnamaland. Jahresh. Ver. Naturk. Württemberg, 1902, vol. 58, pp. 292–302, 1 pl.Google Scholar

page 20 note 4 Berwerth, F., Über das neue Meteoreisen von Mukerop. Anzeiger Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math.-naturwiss. Cl., 1902, vol. 39, pp. 46–49. Der Meteoreisenzwilling von Mukerop, Bezirk Gibeon, Deutsch-Südwest-Afrika. Sitzungsber. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math.-naturwiss. Cl., 1902, Abt. I, vol. 111, pp. 646–666, 1 pl., 2 text-figs.Google Scholar

page 20 note 5 Rhine, F., Ein Meteoreisen mit Oktaeder- und Würfelbau (Tessera-Oktaedrit). Neues Jahrb. Min., 1910, vol. 1, pp. 115–117, 2 pls.Google Scholar

page 22 note 1 Schrauf, W., Die grossen Eisenmeteoriten aus Deutsch-Südwestafrika. Ber. Scnckenberg. Naturfor. Gesell. Frankfurt am Main, 1912, vol. 43, pp. 214–221, 2 figs.Google Scholar

page 22 note 2 Range, P., Geologie des deutschen Namalandes. Beitr. Geol. Erforsch. Deut. Schutzgeb. Berlin, 1912, Heft 2, pp. 67–70. Meteoriten aus Deutsch-Südwestafrika. Mitt. Deut. Schutzgeb. Berlin, 1913,. vol. 26, pp. 341–343, 2 figs. (sketchmap).Google Scholar

page 22 note 3 Zsivny, V., Egy délnyugatafrikai meteorvasról. [A South-West African iron meteorite.] Pótfüzetek a Természettudományi Közlönyhöz, Budapest, 1932, vol. 64, pp. 84–87, 2 figs. [M.A. 5–155.]Google Scholar

page 22 note 4 Spencer, L. J., Meteoric irons from South Test Africa. Nat. Hist. Mag. British Museum, 1930, vol. 2, pp. 240–246, 5 figs. [M.A. 4–422.] This popular article was rewritten by Mary Proctor in Everyman's Astronomy, London, 1939, chap. XIII, pp. 189 197, 2 pls. [M.A. 8–55.]Google Scholar

page 26 note 1 Rogers, A. W., Geitsi Gubib, an old volcano. Trans. Roy. Soc. South Africa, 1915, vol. 5, pp. 247–258, with sketch-map and section.CrossRefGoogle Scholar du Toit, A. L., The geology of South Africa, 1939, p. 392.Google Scholar

page 26 note 2 Helberger, H., Kann der Diamant kosmogenetischen Ursprungs sein ? Zeits. Prakt. Geol., 1934, vol. 42, pp. 124–125. [M.A. 6–8.]Google Scholar

page 27 note 1 F. Rinne, 1910, loc. cit. In this case, as the section plane was parallel to a cube face, there are actually only four directions of the lines: one set at right angles for the octahedron and another set also at right angles for the cube, the two sets being at 45° to one another.

page 27 note 1 Farrington, O. C., Meteorites. Chicago, 1915, p. 95.Google Scholar

page 28 note 1 73° = 36°+37°, 77° = 36°+41°, 103° = 37°+66°, 107° = 41°+66°, 114° = 180°–66°, 139° = 180°–41°, 143° = 180°–37°, 144° = 180°–36°

page 28 note 2 Brezina, A., Meteoreisenstudien II. Über die Orientirung der Schnittflächen an Eisenmeteoriten mittelst der Widmannstätdten'schen Figuren. Denkschr. Math.- naturwiss. Cl. Akad. Wiss: Wien, 1881, vol. 44, pp. 121–158, 5 pls., 11 text-figs.Google Scholar

Belaiew, N. T., The inner structure of the crystal grain as revealed by meteorites and Widmanstätten figures. Journ. Inst. Metals, London, 1923, vol. 29, pp. 379–403, 1 pl., 18 text-figs. Crystallisation of metals. London, 1923, pp. 72–78. [M.A. 2–87, 5483.]Google Scholar

Leonhardt, J., Die morphologischen und strukturellen Verhältnisse der Meteoreisen im Zusammenhang mit ihrem Entwicklungsgang. Fortschr. Min. Krist. Petr., 1927, vol 12, pp. 52–55; Neues Jahrb. Min., Abt. A, 1928, vol. 58, pp. 153–212, 2 pls., 9 text-figs. (pp. 179–201 : Orientierungsmethoden und ihre Anwendung zur Untersuchung geometrischer und kristallographischer Zusammenhänge). [M.A. 3–533, 4–122.]Google Scholar

page 28 note 3 Himmelbauer, A., Orientierung von Schnittflätchen an Meteoreisen. Min. Pert. Mitt. (Tschermak), 1909, vol. 28, pp. 153–166, 8 figs.Google Scholar

page 28 note 4 Hutchinson, A., Min. Mag., 1908, vol. 15, p. 100, pls. IV, IVa.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 29 note 1 The photographic plate was inclined at about 5° to the surface of the section, but this makes no appreciable difference in the angles.

page 31 note 1 Linck, G., Ueber das Krystallgefüge des Meteoreisens. Ann. Naturhist. Hofmus. Wien, 1893, vol. 8, pp. 113–117, 1 fig.Google Scholar

page 31 note 2 Spencer, L. J., Min. Mag., 1930, vol. 22, p. 276 Google Scholar; 1931, vol. 22, p. 493; 1932, vol. 23, p. 39; 1933, vol. 23, pp. 331, 388; 1935, vol. 24, p. 15.

page 32 note 1 Tschermak, G., Lehrbuch der Mineralogie. 4th edit., Wien, 1894, p. 585.Google Scholar

page 33 note 1 Spencer, L. J., Murnpeowie (South Australia), a granular type of meteoric iron. Min. Mag., 1935, vol. 24, pp. 13–20, 3 pls., 1 text-fig.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 34 note 1 Spencer, L. J., Hoba (South-West Africa), the largest known meteorite. Min. Mag., 1932, vol. 23, pp. 1–18, 1 pl., 5 text-figs.CrossRefGoogle Scholar