No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 May 2009
I have to thank Dr. Callaway for the courtesy and good-humour with which he has received my criticisms on his paper in the December Number of the GEOLOGICAL MAGAZINE. Would that all controversial fencing were conducted with equally well-tipped foils.
My Roman soldiers,inparticular, have been received with a kindness that reminds me of the friendly meetings of the British and French officers in the Peninsular War during brief seasons of armistice. Indeed, one might almost go so far as to say that friendly intercourse with these Koman cohorts has imbued Dr. Callaway with a taste for military tactics, and has inspired him to perform a masterly change of front under cover of the active advance of a line of skirmishers.
1 In 1883 I remarked with reference to a Himalayan rock: “these facts appear to me to indicate that the rock was subjected to two different processes of contact metamorphism; one process—due to heat; …whilst the second process was probably the injection of matter from the granite rock, possibly in a gaseous or liquid condition, along lines that followed the original direction of lamination or cleaTage.” Records, G.S.I, vol. xvi. p. 137.Google Scholar