S. 8. Buckman — Rivev Development. 367 



in a footnote (p. 219), "The theories put forward by Mr. S. S. 

 Buckman in Proc. Cotteswolcl Nat. Field Club, vol. xiii (1900), 

 p. 175, following the lead of Professor W. M. Davis, appear to me 

 to transgress the limits of legitimate speculation." It seems rather 

 curious that in a paper like this there is no further reference to the 

 vp-ork done by Professor Davis, no attempt to consider his views, 

 only a dismissal of them, implied in the rejection of the views which 

 I have advanced in accordance with his teaching, which views, by 

 the way, I gave in more detail in Natural Science, April, 1899, 

 vol. xiv. 



However, we are bound to infer from the manner of Mr. Strahan's 

 condemnation that his own theories are within the limits of 

 legitimate speculation. Let us see how far they bear investigation. 



The author postulates an anticline of the Chalk, with a Caledonian 

 trend, more or less coinciding with the present escarpment in 

 direction. How far to the north-west of the present escarpment it 

 lay he does not indicate ; in this matter he is vague. Only he tells 

 us that " The rivers rising in the low-lying \^sic^ Oolite region flow 

 eastward against the general run of the country [_sic'] .... and 

 were initiated on an eastward slope of Chalk," etc. Therefore the 

 anticline must have been situated at least as far north-west as the 

 line of the present Oolite escarpment. Evidence he gives in a 

 footnote : " The existence of certain valleys breaching the [Chalk] 

 escarpment, but not now occupied by streams is explained by 

 Prof. Gregory on the supposition that they carried the drainage 

 from that part of the Chalk plain which has perished." Quite so ; 

 granted, so far as to say that the breaches were made b}'- rivers 

 flowing off high ground beyond the Chalk escarpment — how much 

 of it was Chalk is unimportant. But the same argument applies, 

 with greater force, to the Cotteswolds. The breaches of the Cottes- 

 wold escarpment are even moi'e noticeable than those of the Chalk, 

 and, as I pointed out before I had heard of Professor Davis or his 

 theories, these breaches must have been cut by eastward-flowing 

 rivers,* an idea which also had occurred to Dr. T. S. Ellis years 

 ago.^ These rivers must have drained a large area to collect the 

 necessary volume of stream ^ — that is to say, Mr. Strahan's anticline 

 would have to be placed well to the north-west of the present Oolite 

 escarpment. This is legitimate speculation ; because Mr. Strahan 

 can hardly complain if the same argument which is used in regard 

 to the breaches of the Chalk escarpment is applied to those of 

 the Oolites. But it is a reductio ad absurdiim for Mr. Strahan's 

 contention. The anticline which he wishes to place eastward of the 

 Severn in order to deflect that stream must, following his own line 



1 Q.J.G.S., vol. liii, p. 626. 



2 I have given au accoimt of all this iu my above-mentioued paper in Natural 

 Science. 



^ The meander ciu-ves of the Cotteswold valleys, pointed out to me by Professor 

 Davis, form the strongest evidence here, and I am afraid Mr. Strahan does not 

 appreciate its importance. But any theory of river development must account 

 for these meanders ; it cannot ignore such facts. They are illustrated in my two 

 papers above mentioned. . 



