It is evident, from the form of the meizoseismal area shown in Fig.
33, that a mere fringe of it lies upon land, and that the epicentre
must be situated some distance out at sea. Other facts may be
mentioned which point to the same conclusion. There were, for
instance, no purely vertical movements observed, even in the districts
where the damage done by the shock was greatest. Nor were any large
landslips to be seen in those areas; there were no lasting changes in
the underground water-system; and in general, as Professor Mercalli
remarks, all the superficial distortions of the ground which are so
characteristic of the epicentral area of a great earthquake were
conspicuous by their absence. There is evidence, again, of some
disturbance of the sea-bed in the death and flight of fishes from
great depths and in the seismic sea-waves recorded by the tide-gauges
at Genoa and Nice. These phenomena will be described in a later
section, but reference should be made here to an interesting
observation at Oneglia on the occurrence of some of the stronger
after-shocks. Persons on the coast, it is said, saw the sea curling
and moving, and immediately afterwards the shock was felt.
In determining the position of the epicentre, Professor Mercalli had
recourse as usual to observations on the direction of the shock,
especially those derived from the oscillation of lamps or other
suspended objects, the projection or fall of bodies free to move,
fractures, etc., in damaged houses, and the stopping of pendulum
clocks. Such observations were made at 120 places--72 in the western
Riviera and the Alpes Maritimes, and 48 at Piedmont, Lombardy, and
Tuscany.
At many of these places the movement was extremely complicated. In
nearly all parts of the area most strongly shaken, for instance, the
direction of the shock changed more than once; and it was therefore
necessary to select whenever possible the principal direction of the
shock at each place. In some towns, such as Oneglia, Mentone, Antibes,
Cuneo, etc., the shock had two dominant directions, and these appeared
to be sensibly at right angles to one another; an inclination which,
as Professor Mercalli suggests, may be due in part to the
approximation of the real directions to those of the principal walls
of the houses in which the observations were made.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account