concealed coalfield in. Oxfordshire 181 
The boring ended in Coal Measures. These are described as 
alternations of red and grey sediments, dark shales alternating 
with red marls, and pale or red or green sandstones. Only one 
seam of coal was proved, the thickness of which was not stated. 
It was however probably quite thin. 
There is only one other boring at present, which may throw 
any light on the results obtained at Burford. Between 1901—4 
a boring was put down near Batsford, or more correctly at Lower 
Lemington in Gloucestershire. The full details of these cores were 
first published in 1913*. Here 1021 ft. of Jurassic and Triassic 
cover were penetrated, the 0.D. being 380 ft. The Coal Measures 
were struck at 641 ft. 0.D., and the boring passed into Silurian 
rocks at 1546 ft. from the surface (1166 ft. o.D.). The Coal 
Measures were thus only 5244 ft. thick. 
The measures are described as sandstones and conglomerates, 
with grey and red shales and red marls. No coals were proved, 
but coal veins occur in the arenaceous beds. These measures 
have been termed Upper Coal Measures, and one bed of sand- 
stone is described as “resembling Pennant.” In addition to 
specimens of Anthracomya and Ostracoda, a small flora was 
obtained from the measures, which will be further discussed here. 
It is by no means certain that the measures penetrated at 
Burford and Batsford belong to the same coalfield, though I am 
inclined,.on the whole, to make this assumption. The distance 
between the two borings is about 15 miles, along an almost due 
North and South line, and, so far as this matter is concerned, there 
is nothing against the view that the measures proved in the two 
borings belong to the same field, seeing that the major axes of 
the neighbouring fields all trend more or less North and South. 
There is also a very strong lithological similarity between the 
rocks proved at each boring. They appear to consist of red-grey 
sediments, the presence of red clays or marls being, as we shall 
see, remarkable. 
The field proved at Burford may be conveniently distinguished 
as the Oxfordshire Coalfield. No other concealed field is of 
course known at present from this county, whereas several distinct 
eoalfields occur in Gloucestershire. It is also probable that 1it 
may eventually be found to transgress into Gloucestershire, 
Warwickshire and Worcestershire. In the neighbourhood of 
Batsford, which is actually in Gloucestershire, county boundaries 
become very intricate, no less than four shires being involved. 
As is well known the application of county names to coalfields is 
frequently misleading and unwise, since the fields often overflow 
into neighbouring counties. For this reason it may eventually be 
* Strahan, A., Batsford (or Lower Lemington) boring, near Moreton-in-Marsh, 
Summ. Progr. Geol. Surv. for 1912, p. 90, 1913. 
