Geological Observations on South AmericaDarwin, Charles
Science
Geological Observations on South America
Darwin, Charles
Beagle Expedition (1831-1836); Geology -- South America; Mollusks, Fossil -- South America; Paleontology
ceases, I think, to be surprising, that extensive recent conchiferous
deposits are entirely absent on the southern and western shores of
America.
Let us take the one remaining case, of the bed of the sea slowly
subsiding during a length of time, whilst sediment has gone on being
deposited. It is evident that strata might thus accumulate to any
thickness, each stratum being deposited in shallow water, and
consequently abounding with those shells which cannot live at great
depths: the pressure, also, I may observe, of each fresh bed would aid
in consolidating all the lower ones. Even on a rather steep coast,
though such must ever be unfavourable to widely extended deposits, the
formations would always tend to increase in breadth from the water
encroaching on the land. Hence we may admit that periods of slow
subsidence will commonly be most favourable to the accumulation of
CONCHIFEROUS deposits, of sufficient thickness, extension, and
hardness, to resist the average powers of denudation.
We have seen that at an ancient tertiary epoch, fossiliferous deposits
were extensively deposited on the coasts of South America; and it is a
very interesting fact, that there is evidence that these ancient
tertiary beds were deposited during a period of subsidence. Thus, at
Navidad, the strata are about eight hundred feet in thickness, and the
fossil shells are abundant both at the level of the sea and some way up
the cliffs; having sent a list of these fossils to Professor E. Forbes,
he thinks they must have lived in water between one and ten fathoms in
depth: hence the bottom of the sea on which these shells once lived
must have subsided at least 700 feet to allow of the superincumbent
matter being deposited. I must here remark, that, as all these and the
following fossil shells are extinct species, Professor Forbes
necessarily judges of the depths at which they lived only from their
generic character, and from the analogical distribution of shells in
the northern hemisphere; but there is no just cause from this to doubt
the general results. At Huafo the strata are about the same thickness,
namely, 800 feet, and Professor Forbes thinks the fossils found there
cannot have lived at a greater depth than fifty fathoms, or 300 feet.
These two points, namely, Navidad and Huafo, are 570 miles apart, but
nearly halfway between them lies Mocha, an island 1,200 feet in height,
apparently formed of tertiary strata up to its level summit, and with
many shells, including the same Turritella with that found at Huafo,
embedded close to the level of the sea. In Patagonia, shells are
numerous at Santa Cruz, at the foot of the 350 feet plain, which has
certainly been formed by the denudation of the 840 feet plain, and
therefore was originally covered by strata that number of feet in
thickness, and these shells, according to Professor Forbes, probably
lived at a depth of between seven and fifteen fathoms: at Port S.
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