An enthusiasm for loess: Leonard Horner in Bonn and Liu Tungsheng in Beijing

1 Introduction

Loess was first described and defined by Karl Caesar von Leonhard, in Heidelberg, in 1824 [1]. Loess is entry #89 in von Leonhard’s list of interesting and significant geo-materials. This entry, in volume 3 of von Leonhard’s great work, we see as the founding reference to loess, and the beginning of almost 200 years of loess research and scholarship. The fortuitous arrival of Charles Lyell in Heidelberg in 1832 meant that this potentially obscure material became known throughout the world. Lyell was engaged at the time in writing ‘The Principles of Geology’ the book which would keep him occupied for the rest of his life. It was one of the great early compendiums of geological knowledge and had huge influence in the developing science. Lyell placed a short exposition on loess in volume 3 and because of the world-wide distribution and relative fame of the book the loess became well known, and many people speculated about its nature and possible origins [2, 3, 4].

Loess investigation and loess scholarship progressed in many directions, in many disciplines, in many countries, in many languages, and with growing levels of scientific expertise and the development of many interesting scientific techniques. And, of course, many individuals were involved; an attempt has been made to examine the course of loess research via the involvement of 100 significant individuals [5]. Liu Tungsheng was involved in this interesting assembly, but he also featured in a more select group of loess scholars.

2 Twelve Loess People

For the 1999 LoessFest Conference an attempt was made to identify and discuss twelve individuals who had made really significant contributions to the advance of loess science [6]. It would be tempting to write.. had made the greatest contribution to loess science.. but this would have been an unreasonable and overly subjective statement. The twelve made major contributions, among these were probably the most significant advances and paradigm changers in loess scholarship.

The 1999 LoessFest was held to celebrate the 175th anniversary of the announcement of loess by von Leonhard, and he was the first of the select twelve. Lyell, the great disseminator, was logically next, and then: F.von Richthofen, V.A.Obruchev, John Hardcastle, P. Tutkovskii, L.S.Berg, R.J.Russell, R.Grahmann, J.Fink, Liu Tung sheng and George Kukla. It is fairly easy to encapsulate the achievements which led to inclusion on the list: Richthofen supported the idea of the aeolian deposition of loess material to form deposits, and set in train the aeolian paradigm; Hardcastle pointed out the glacial connection and was also the first to recognise loess as a ‘climate register’, he invented scientific palaeoclimatology; Tutkovskii related loess formation to glacial action; Berg produced a remarkable theory of loess formation via ‘loessification’ and stimulated an amazing amount of discussion; Russell, like Berg, favoured an in-situ mode of formation and provoked much loess study; Grahmann produced the first major loess map- of Europe; Fink organised the INQUA Loess Commission, he provided a framework for loess study and research; Liu Tungsheng pointed the way to precise loess stratigraphy and demonstrated the true nature of the Quaternary; and Kukla related the loess record to the deep ocean record and demonstrated the validity of the loess record in palaeoclimatology. Liu sits comfortably in this list of major contributors. It can be argued that his was perhaps the most impressive contribution, he transformed the study of loess from small scale sedimentology to a new vision of the whole of Quaternary. He provided a new framework for Quaternary studies by clearly establishing that the Quaternary was a time if multiple events, a time of many climatic cycles that shaped so much of our contemporary world.

We can make a case for Liu being a major loess scientist but we propose an additional virtue. We represent Liu as a major loess enthusiast; a very necessary and possibly under-valued role. Loess science advances within an ocean of loess interest, but the level of interest must be kept high. Enthusiasts are needed to promote and encourage the study of loess. We propose Liu as a great loess enthusiast, and as a setting for the whole idea of loess enthusiasm we identify Leonard Horner as the first loess enthusiast, a nineteenth century promoter of loess.

3 Leonard Horner (1785-1864) in Bonn

For a capsule biography of Horner (Figure 1) see Martin [7]. He was present in the important early years of the development of geology, and had a part to play in awakening interest in loess. He spent some time in Bonn and it was this time which was geologically important in several ways.

Figure 1

Leonard Horner: print from a crayon drawing by Samuel Lawrence.

Horner only spent two years in Bonn, 1831-1833, but these were significant years; important years in the story of the development of loess research. Horner had six daughters and in 1832 Charles Lyell turned up in Bonn to marry the oldest, Mary. Charles married Mary and the couple progressed down the Rhine on honeymoon. They stopped in Heidelberg and met von Leonhard and Bronn, and looked at the loess [3, 4, 6]. Charles was in the process of preparing volume 3 of the Principles of Geology and after the Heidelberg revelations he made space for a short section on loess. Horner became involved in the new realizations of loess and he and Lyell made several excursions to see the loess of the locality. When the Horners returned to England Leonard presented a paper at the Geological Society in London, and set in train the enthusiasm for loess. The paper was eventually published in 1836. It contained a remarkable manifesto for loess research:

“To give a history of loess in the valley of the Rhine, by a careful examination of its composition, organic remains, its form of deposition and levels, and to trace it, if possible, to its source, would be a most interesting subject of inquiry, and should not fail to prove a valuable contribution to geological science” [8].

Horner was a great enthusiast for loess and consistent in his support of his famous son-in-law. He spent his career as Government inspector of industry, trying to ensure that the workers in the rapidly developing industries in England were properly treated and not exploited. He is one of the few people mentioned by name by Karl Marx in Das Kapital; Marx was an admirer of Horner and saw him as a champion of working people. He managed to maintain his interest in geology despite an amazing work load and was in fact president of the Geological Society of London in 1845 and 1860.

Figure 2 is his sketch of the geology near Bonn which was published in Principles of Geology; his mapping efforts were among the earliest in the volcanic region of the Eifel. Horner and Lyell together explored the crater of the Rodderberg and admired the loess and Horner maintained his interest in, and enthusiasm for, loess throughout his life.

Figure 2

The sketch map by Horner of a region near Bonn, used in volume 3 of Principles of Geology by Charles Lyell. One of the first geological maps of the Eifel region.

4 Liu Tungsheng (Figure 3, Figure 4)

Figure 3

Liu Tungsheng 2002; receives a John & Alice Tyler prize.

Figure 4

Liu Tungsheng at the New Zealand Soil Bureau in 1980. Also in the picture Ian Smalley (with tie) and Martin te Punga of the New Zealand Geological Survey.

Horner may have initiated interest in loess but one of the great progenitors in the 20th Century was Liu Tungsheng. He came to represent the amazing loess deposits of China, the default loess.

Loess in China, edited by Liu Tungsheng, was first published in 1985 by the China Ocean Press in Beijing; then a ‘2^nd edition’ was published in 1988, and this has become the default treatise on loess in China [9]. This 2^nd edition was elevated to the status of ‘Classic of Physical Geography’ and a substantial appreciation published [10]. Liu’s position as a scholar of the loess is well established.

We attempt a division of the Liu career; it is tempting to suggest a three part structure. Early activities were discussed in Liu [9] in 1988 and culminate in the visit to Poland in 1961 (for the INQUA meeting) and the revelation of the multi-event Quaternary. There was a significant publication in Acta Geological Sinica in 1962 [11], and the INQUA report [12] which helped to establish the importance of these stratigraphical observations, and then the Cultural Revolution happened and loess research experienced a hiatus.

The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution caused disturbance and disruption in Chinese life for about ten years, say from 1966 to 1976. So the revolution began just as the loess revelations were being published for the first time. Liu was sent to work, with many other scholars and scientists, into the north of China and loess research was interrupted. Stage two appears as ten years of loessic inactivity. Then, post 1976, steps were taken to quickly re-establish scientific activity, and to re-connect with scholars from the outside world. Several noteworthy events occur relatively quickly; official delegations start to arrive in China as various national academies send delegations to aid in the reconnection process. Two, perhaps three, of these delegations are of critical importance. The Australian Academy of Sciences sent a delegation in November 1975, and this group contained Dr. Jim Bowler of the Australian National University at Canberra. The visit to the Loess Plateauwas a life changing experience for Bowler and he was converted instantly into a loess enthusiast- and this had considerable influence on the trajectory of stage three of the Liu loess journey. Bowler was not just an outstanding scholar he was also a formidable organiser, and the timing was just right for a major initiative at the Birmingham INQUA Congress of 1977.

The Royal Society in Britain also sent a high-powered delegation, which contained Dr. Edward Derbyshire of Keele University. Derbyshire, like Bowler, was a notable physical geographer, and also like Bowler he was an amazingly efficient facilitator. The events that placed Bowler and Derbyshire on the loess plateau in the mid 1970s would have a major influence on the progress of loess research. Derbyshire went on to make strong links with workers in Lanzhou and this led to considerable studies on loess slope stability [13]. A third, less well known, delegation to China was the Canada Energy Delegation, led by Dr. H. Stafford. The Canadians contributed in an editorial fashion and made a considerable impact on the production of Loess in China.

All three delegations had an influence on the development of loess science in China and in the burgeoning of stage three of the Liu adventure. If stage one was the stage of fundamental science, and stage two was the time of oppression, then stage three shall be the stage of enthusiasm and fulfilment. As the cultural revolution ended Liu was quickly into action re-establishing loess activity. He visited Alaska and conversed with Troy Pewe [6] and in early 1980 he was in New Zealand, and visiting the Soil Bureau at Lower Hutt. He wrote the title for the newsletter Loess Letter. The cover page for Loess Letter 4 is shown in Figure 5, this was the issue which announced the Australian field meeting of the WPWG; the vision of Jim Bowler made manifest.

Figure 5

Loess Letter 4, for October 1980, showing the title written by Liu Tungsheng on his visit to the New Zealand Soil Bureau headquarters at Lower Hutt earlier in 1980. LL4 announced the first field meeting of the WPWG, held in Australia.

Bowler was pivotal because he made the major contribution to the setting up of the Western Pacific Working Group of the INQUA Loess Commission. This was a major effort towards re-incorporating China back into world science.

5 The Western Pacific Working Group

The Western Pacific Working Group of the INQUA Loess Commission started life at the 10^th INQUA Congress, held in Birmingham UK in 1977 [14, 15]. This was an important year for loess investigations and for Liu Tungsheng. The Loess Commission met in Birmingham and President Julius Fink announced that he was retiring. Marton Pecsi of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences in Budapest became the new president. He immediately announced some new directions for the Loess Commission; he proposed that the foundations laid by Fink, in Central Europe, and largely focussing on stratigraphy, would allow for some expansion of interests. He proposed that the Commission take a world view and consider loess deposits throughout the world, and that some studies are developed on practical problems with loess ground, most particularly in the regions of hydroconsolidation and subsidence. The most obvious, the most visible aspect of the enlargement of the scope of the Commission was the establishment of the Western Pacific Working Group, designed to encourage loess research in Australia, New Zealand and China and to generate cooperatives projects between the three countries. Liu was involved in the foundation of the WPWG along with the leading enthusiast Dr. Jim Bowler of the Australian National University in Canberra [15, 16].

The aims of the WPWG were to facilitate joint work between China, Australia and New Zealand – countries associated with the Western Pacific region. The topic was, of course, loess and wind-blown sediments, and the practical proposal was the holding of three field conferences, one in each country- for mutual benefit and instruction. The first international steering group meeting was held in Auckland in 1978 where it was decided that the first conference should be in Australia in 1980, and that to support the activities of the working group a newsletter should be published twice a year. The newsletter was Loess Letter and the New Zealand group took on publishing responsibility (see www.loessletter.msu.edu)

The 1980 Conference brought the Chinese loess scientists to Australia. Liu Tungsheng led the delegation, which consisted of An Zhisheng, Yuan Baoyin, Wu Zirong, ZhengHonghan and Wen Qizong. They explored part of southeast Australia and travelled from Canberra to Broken Hill-admiring the ‘Walls of China’ at Lake Mungo en route. The second WPWG meeting was in China, and the third in New Zealand. Each of the main parties in the WPWG had their local conference and field trip. The Chinese meeting was by far the largest and signalled to the world that Chinese loess research was back on track, was in fact burgeoning [16].

6 Commentary

Three INQUA Congresses should be considered; each relates to the Liu Tungsheng story. In 1961 INQUA met in Poland; it had been a difficult task arranging for an INQUA Congress in Poland but at last in 1961 it was there [14]. At the Polish conference there was a ‘loess workshop’ organised by Julius Fink of the University of Vienna. Eleven papers, eventually published in 1964 in vol.4 of the Proceedings. Fink invited Liu to attend, and he did, and presented one of the key papers in the history of loess research [12], (see Figure 6). It was at this 6^th Congress that Fink established the precursor of the Loess Commission, the Sub-Commission for Loess Stratigraphy. It was a sub-commission of the Stratigraphy Commission (it became a full Commission in 1969 at the Paris Congress). Liu was present at the birth of that great exercise in loess enthusiasm- the INQUA Loess Commission, which ran until 2003, peaking in 1999 with the Heidelberg-Bonn Loess-Fest [15].

Figure 6

The first real loess stratigraphy, this figure, reproduced from Loess Letter 38 shows the beginning of precision in loess stratigraphy and the announcement of the multi-event Quaternary. The figure originally appeared in Liu & Chang 1964. Caption details: 1: Malan loess, 2: Upper Lishih loess, 3: Lower Lishih loess, 4: Wucheng loess, 5: buried soils = palaeosols, 6: Lower Pliocene conglomerate, 7: Palaeozoic sandstones.

The second INQUA Congress of great significance was the 10^th Congress, held in Birmingham UK in 1977. Here Fink handed the Loess Commission over to Marton Pecsi and the scope was enlarged, and the WPWG was established and the study of Chinese loess was reborn. Liu was an important part of the WPWG, in fact it was the relationship between Liu and Jim Bowler which provided the driving dynamic for the whole operation. So, post 1977, the study of loess was officially a worldwide operation. Which was superbly displayed at the 13^th Congress in Beijing in 1991. A magnificent event, presided over by Liu and featuring over 200 papers on loess; a nice contrast to the eleven in 1961. Loess arrived at the centre of the Quaternary world and Liu’s work in establishing the multi-event nature of the Quaternary reached a sort of culmination. Loess enthusiasm peaked.

The 13^th INQUA Congress (Figure 7) demonstrated all the virtues of a very successful scientific congress. Here was the exact combination of science and enthusiasm. Liu, in 1991, presided over a remarkable event. Within the INQUA collective the Loess Commission was also flourishing, and becoming much more international, as Marton Pecsi desired. An Zhisheng of the Chinese Academy of Sciences became president in Beijing, and Ian Smalley of Leicester University became secretary and the Commission set out for its own particular grand climax at the Heidelberg-Bonn LoessFest of 1999 [17]. The next task in the world of loess scholarship is to improve the relationship between the ‘western/European’ tradition/history and the Chinese history. A major step forward has been made [18] and progress should be maintained. There has also been some progress in the recognition of Horner as a significant player in the loess drama [19] and that is to be welcomed.

Figure 7

Beijing (13^th) INQUA Congress logo; one of the more satisfying INQUA logos (see Smalley 2011 for other INQUA logos).

7 Conclusions

We propose that enthusiasm be included in the complex of factors that are involved in loess study and scholarship. We also propose that Leonard Horner might be recognised as the progenitor of loess enthusiasm. Circumstances meant that he was quite a minor geologist but he was in place, in space and time, to promote the beginnings of interest in loess. Liu Tungsheng was a great loess enthusiast of the 20^th Century; here we recognise two major enthusiasts: Julius Fink and Liu. Fink in Europe, Liu in China; both careers were disturbed by war and civic unrest. Fink had a relatively short life (1918-1981) but Liu was long lived (1917-2008) and survived to see loess interest spreading world-wide, and to experience the apotheosis of the 13^th INQUA Congress in Beijing, close to the loess.