476 Correspondence — A. J. Jukes-Browne. 



derived from those of places or districts they are based on the Roraan 

 name if there was one, or on the earliest known form of the name. 



I am informed by Dr. H. C. March, F.S.A., that Charmouth is 

 generally believed to be the place called Carriim in the Anglo-Saxon 

 Chronicle, which records a battle fought there by King Egbright 

 against the Danes in a.d. 833, and this seems to be the earliest 

 mention of the place, which was never a port of any importance. All 

 the editors and commentators identify Garrum with Charmouth, and 

 it is this ancient form of the name which should be taken as the basis 

 of a stratigraphical term and not the uncouth modern name of 

 Charmouth. I think, therefore, that if our Erench colleagues continue 

 to use a name taken from this place they should substitute Carrumian 

 for Charmouthian, on the same principle that we write Callovian, 

 not Kellawaysian ; Bajocian, not Bayeuxian ; and Cenomanian, not 

 Lemansian. 



PS. — Since the above was written and printed Mr. Lang has 

 proposed the name ' Carixian ' for the lower part of the Charmouthian 

 or Pliensbachian stage, accepting Bonarelli's name of Domerian for 

 the upper part, and he derives this name from "the Carixa of 

 E.avennas", which is cited in Roberts' History of Lyme Regis as the 

 ancient name of Charmouth (see Geol. Mag., September, 1913, 

 pp. 401-12). 



On this proposal I have several criticisms to offer. In the first 

 place, Mr. Lang remarks that he has " already advocated the propriety 

 of emplo3'ing the term Charmouthian strictly with its original 

 connotation", and yet he suggests as a new name for a part of this 

 Charmouthian a term taken from what he accepts as the Latin 

 name of the same place. Surely if Carixa was the Roman name for 

 Charmouth it should be used as the basis for the name of the whole 

 Charmouthian stage. 



Secondly, the " Chorography of Ravennas" is not a very good 

 authority ; its author is really unknown and even the date of it is 

 somewhat uncertain. Moreover, as Mr. Lang himself points out, the 

 name Carixa is probably a latinization of the Celtic words car-isca, 

 meaning the River Char, not the place. As a matter of fact, it is very 

 doubtful whether there was any settlement at the mouth of the Char 

 until the time of the wars between the Saxons and Danes. 



Thirdly, we seem in danger of being saddled with too many of these 

 latinized names. They are very useful as names for stages, but 

 when it comes to introducing sub-stages with similar names I for one 

 protest. The division of a system into two or more series, of a series 

 into stages, and of a stage into any number of zones seems quite 

 sufficient for practical purposes. The addition of sub-stages merely 

 imposes an unnecessary burden upon the memory. 



In England the stages of the Lias have hitherto been called Lower, 

 Middle, and Upper. If it is thought more convenient to divide the 

 series into four or five stages, let us have geogi'aphical names for 

 them, but there is no good reason for burdening our nomenclature 

 with a double set of such names. j^ j Jukes-Browne. 



Torquay. 



September 8, 1913. 



