Page:EB1911 - Volume 08.djvu/844

 and elsewhere on the continent of Europe they are more generally eaten.

 EARTH PILLAR, a pillar of soft rock, or earth, capped by some harder material that has protected it from denudation. The “bad lands” of western North America furnish numerous examples. Here “the formations are often beds of sandstone or shale alternating with unindurated beds of clay. A semi-arid climate where the precipitation is much concentrated seems to be most favourable to the development of this type of formation.” The country round the Dead Sea, where loose friable sandy clay is capped by harder rock, produces “bad-land” topography. The cap of hard rock gives way at the joints, and the water making its way downwards washes away the softer material directly under the cracks, which become wider, leaving isolated columns of clay capped with hard sandstone or limestone. These become smaller and fewer as denudation proceeds, the pillars standing a great height at times, until finally they all disappear.

 EARTHQUAKE. Although the terrible effects which often accompany earthquakes have in all ages forced themselves upon the attention of man, the exact investigation of seismic phenomena dates only from the middle of the 19th century. A new science has been thus established under the name of seismology (Gr. , an earthquake).

History.—Accounts of earthquakes are to be found scattered through the writings of many ancient authors, but they are, for the most part, of little value to the seismologist. There is a natural tendency to exaggeration in describing such phenomena, sometimes indeed to the extent of importing a supernatural element into the description. It is true that attempts were made by some ancient writers on natural philosophy to offer a rational explanation of earthquake phenomena, but the hypotheses which their explanations involved are, as a rule, too fanciful to be worth reproducing at the present day. It is therefore unnecessary to dwell upon the references to seismic phenomena which have come down to us in the writings of such historians and philosophers as Thucydides, Aristotle and Strabo, Seneca, Livy and Pliny. Nor is much to be gleaned from the pages of medieval and later writers on earthquakes, of whom the most notable are Fromondi (1527), Maggio (1571) and Travagini (1679). In England, the earliest work worthy of mention is Robert Hooke’s Discourse on Earthquakes, written in 1668, and read at a later date before the Royal Society. This discourse, though containing many passages of considerable merit, tended but little to a correct interpretation of the phenomena in question. Equally unsatisfactory were the attempts of Joseph Priestley and some other scientific writers of the 18th century to connect the cause of earthquakes with electrical phenomena. The great earthquake of Lisbon in 1755 led the Rev. John Michell, professor of mineralogy at Cambridge, to turn his attention to the subject; and in 1760 he published in the Philosophical Transactions a remarkable essay on the Cause and Phenomena of Earthquakes. A suggestion of much scientific interest was made by Thomas Young, when in his Lectures on Natural Philosophy, published in 1807, he remarked that an earthquake “is probably propagated through the earth nearly in the same manner as a noise is conveyed through the air.” The recognition of the fact that the seismologist has to deal with the investigation of wave-motion in solids lies at the very base of his science. In 1846 Robert Mallet communicated to the Royal Irish Academy his first paper “On the Dynamics of Earthquakes”; and in the following year W. Hopkins, of Cambridge, presented to the British Association a valuable report in which earthquake phenomena were discussed in some detail. Mallet’s labours were continued for many years chiefly in the form of Reports to the British Association, and culminated in his great work on the Neapolitan earthquake of 1857. An entirely new impetus, however, was given to the study of earthquakes by an energetic body of observers in Japan, who commenced their investigations about the year 1880, mainly through the influence of Prof. John Milne, then of Tokyo. Their work, carried on by means of new instruments of precision, and since taken up by observers in many parts of the world, has so extended our knowledge of earthquake-motion that seismology has now become practically a new department of physical science.

It is hardly too much to say, however, that the earliest systematic application of scientific principles to the study of the effects of an earthquake was made by Mallet in his investigation of the Neapolitan earthquake mentioned above. It is true, the great Calabrian earthquake of 1783 had been the subject of careful inquiry by the Royal Academy of Naples, as also by Deodat Dolomieu and some other scientific authorities; but in consequence of the misconception which at that time prevailed with regard to the nature of seismic activity, the results of the inquiry, though in many ways interesting, were of very limited scientific value. It was reserved for Mallet to undertake for the first time an extensive series of systematic observations in an area of great seismic disturbance, with the view of explaining the phenomena by the application of the laws of wave-motion.

The “Great Neapolitan Earthquake,” by which more than 12,300 lives were lost, was felt in greater or less degree over all Italy south of the parallel of 42°, and has been regarded as ranking third in order of severity among the recorded earthquakes of Europe. The principal shock occurred at about 10 on the 16th of December 1857; but, as is usually the case, it had been preceded by minor disturbances and was followed by numerous after-shocks which continued for many months. Early in 1858, aided by a grant from the Royal Society, Mallet visited the devastated districts, and spent more than two months in studying the effects of the catastrophe, especially examining, with the eye of an engineer, the cracks and ruins of the buildings. His voluminous report was published in 1862, and though his methods of research and his deductions have in many cases been superseded by the advance of knowledge, the report still remains a memorable work in the history of seismology.

Much of Mallet’s labour was directed to the determination of the position and magnitude of the subterranean source from which the vibratory impulses originated. This is known variously as the seismic centre, centrum, hypocentre, origin or focus. It is often convenient to regard this centre theoretically as a point, but practically it must be a locus or space of three dimensions, which in different cases varies much in size and shape, and may be of great magnitude. That part of the surface of the earth which is vertically above the centre is called the epicentre; or, if of considerable area, the epicentral or epifocal tract. A vertical line joining the epicentre and the focus was termed by Mallet the seismic vertical. He calculated that in the case of the Neapolitan earthquake the focal cavity was a curved lamelliform fissure, having a length of about 10 m. and a height of about 3 m., whilst its width was inconsiderable. The central point of this fissure, the theoretical seismic centre, he estimated to have been at a depth of about 6 m. from the surface. Dr C. Davison, in discussing Mallet’s data, was led to the conclusion that there were two distinct foci, possibly situated on a fault, or plane of dislocation, running in a north-west and south-east direction. Mallet located his epicentre near the village of Caggiano, not far from Polla, while the other seems to have been in the neighbourhood of Montemurro, about 25 m. to the south-east.

The intensity, or violence, of an earthquake is greatest in or near the epicentre, whence it decreases in all directions. A line drawn through points of equal intensity forms a curve round the epicentre known as an isoseist, an isoseismal or an isoseismic line. If the intensity declined equally in all directions the isoseismals would be circles, but as this is rarely if ever the case in nature they usually become ellipses and other closed curves. The tract which is most violently shaken was termed by Mallet the meizoseismic area, whilst the line of maximum destruction is known as the meizoseismic line. That isoseismal along which the decline of energy is most rapid was called by K. von Seebach a pleistoseist.

In order to determine the position of the seismic centre, Mallet made much use of the cracks in damaged buildings, especially