The quintessential systematist: Henri Baulig

GEOHHNIOIOGY ELSEVIER

Geomorphology 11 (1994) 1-13

The quintessential systematist: Henri Baulig M. Derruau* Emeritus Professor, Ddpartement de G&~graphie, Universiti Blaise Pascal, Clermont Ferrand, France (Received 18 March 1993; revised 4 February 1994; accepted 28 February 1994)

Abstract

The French geomorphologist Henry Baulig (1877-1962) studied with W.M. Davis between 1905 and 1911. Following this master, he espoused the theory of the geomorphic cycle but also gave an eminent role to eustatism - - both Quaternary glacioeustatism and Pliocene diastrophic eustatism (i.e., the rise or fall of sea level caused by submarine tectonism). He believed that large parts of continents had remained stable since the start of the Pliocene, and that they retain undeformed remnants of ancient erosion levels. He opposed Walther Penck's Piedmonttreppen theory. He also attempted to reconstruct the polycyclic profiles of rivers and of peneplain surfaces, but his method of identifying ancient flattened surfaces by statistical and graphical means never gained wide acceptance. Among Baulig's regional works, a morphological study of the Massif Cenral and a two volume, much appreciated, geography of North America are noteworthy. He has also left us the French-English-German Vocabularyof Geomorphology, which is an extraordinary work of scholarship. Baulig was sceptical of quantification and process studies, preferring to rely on perceived morphology. Specific relief forms such as sugar-loaf shaped rocky domes and inselbergs did not much interest him, but he was aware, better than sometimes stated, of climatic geomorphology. Although his rigorous, analytical, and somewhat theoretical way of arguing isolated him from some geographers who were keen on new, adventurous ideas, his work remains an outstanding model.

1. Introduction

The French geomorphologist Henri Baulig (Fig. 1 ) was a student of W.M. Davis, as were C.A. Cotton and D.W. Johnson, with whom he maintained close and enduring friendships. It is not surprising, therefore, that he took an important part, mainly through written contributions, in the Journal of Geomorphology, both in its launching in 1938 and throughout its short life, which was interrupted by the onset of World War II, and which was not revived afterwards owing to the death of its editor, Douglas Johnson. *Correspondence to: 27 rue G6n6ral Delzons, 63000 Clermont Ferrand, France. 0169-555X/94/$07.00 © 1994 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved

SSDIO169-555X(94)O0011-F

Baulig is a link with the pioneers of geomorphology, which can be considered to have emerged as a distinct discipline after 1870, with the scientific exploration of the western parts of the USA. Outstanding amongst these pioneers were J.W. Powell (1934-1902) and G.K. Gilbert, whose Report on the Geology...of the Henry Mountains remained a bible for Baulig. The doctrine Baulig developed must be considered in that context. Many aspects of that doctrine and the philosophy inherent in it are embodied in the well known Essais de Ggomorphogie (Baulig, 1950a) a collection of earlier seminal papers revised by Baulig himself but published at the instigation of some of his students (Georges Chabot, Jean Dresch, Jean Despois, Lucien Gachon, Etienne Juillard, Marguerite Lefevre, Pierre Marthelot, Pierre Monbeig, Conrad Sittig).

2

M. Derruau/Geomorphology 11 (1994) 1-13

Fig. 1. Henri Baulig. This article is not concerned so much with Baulig's life and career, though these cannot be overlooked. For details, the reader is referred to an excellent well rounded biographical essay in Geographers (Juillard and Klein, 1980). Also, a more comprehensive bibliography than that given here is found in the work by Juillard and Klein (1980) augmented by Juillard (1962). In the present essay the author is concerned only with points which seem to be worth further developing, particularly the appreciation of Baulig's doctrine.

2. His career

Baulig was born in 1877 into modest circumstances, and with Alsatian Protestant ties on his mother's side. Some would relate Baulig's conscientiousness and striving after accuracy to this background for such qualities are frequent in religious minorities: the influence of his Quaker family on W.M. Davis comes to mind. Baulig was a brilliant student, first at school then at Paris University, where he completed his studies in history and geography with the help of scholarships. In

M. Derruau/ Geomorphology 11 (1994) 1-13

France, geography and history were then linked even more than they are today. His teacher P. Vidal-Lablache sent him to Harvard University to study under W.M. Davis. There he discovered American geomorphology and perfected his knowledge of English: he became fluent in three languages and always maintained that English, German and French were indispensable in geographical sciences, and he translated part of Suess' Das Antlitz der Erde (Suess, 1897-1915) into French. He spent seven years, from 1904 to 1911, in the United States, and W.M. Davis' teaching, as well as field studies, both in the West and on the Atlantic scarp, contributed indelibly to Baulig's geomorphological development. After his return to France, Baulig taught first at the Sorbonne ( 1911 - 1913), and then in Rennes. But it was at Strasbourg, after the interruption imposed by the 1914-1918 War, that he made his career. He returned there even after the War of 1939-1945 ( which he spent in Clermont-Ferrand, where the University of Strasbourg had taken refuge) and he remained in Strasbourg after his retirement in 1947. And what a retirement, with nearly half of his total list of papers published between 1948 and 1961 ! He died in Alsace in 1962. Alsace had a marked influence on him although he did not describe this region extensively (but see Baulig, 1922, for instance). His doctoral thesis was not concerned with Alsace but with the geomorphology of the Massif Central (Baulig, 1928a). This remains his magnum opus. He worked on it from 1911 to 1928, and defended his thesis at the age of 51. But Alsace retained a patriotic significance, already evident in 1914-1918 and renewed in 1939-1945, for Baulig. In the 'thirties, he directed the Centre of German Studies that was a university institute partly devoted to the teaching of geography and German civilization to military personnel.

3. Baulig's doctrine Henri Baulig's geomorphological doctrine, beliefs and philosophy changed during his career. Although the acceptance of Davis' peneplain cycle, and the role of eustatism, remained with him for many years, new tendencies emerged after 1945 and it is significant that some self-criticism is evident in his Essais de G~omorphologie (Baulig, 1950a). Thus, referring to some of

3

his earlier papers he does not hesitate to write, "this is an error, the convex profile of the major stream bed does not necessarily imply infilling". (Baulig, 1950a, p. 59); or "All this must be revised". (Baulig, 1950a, p. 60). In the same way he ruthlessly revised his published texts. Baulig also criticized strongly, and with passion, the works of younger geomorphologists which appeared to him heretical or simply wrong: Walther Penck for the Piedmonttreppen concept (Baulig, 1939a), P. George on erosion surfaces of the lands of the lower Rh6ne (Baulig, 1934), L.C. King on the recession of slopes (Baulig, 1956b), P. Birot on all his methods (Baulig, 1957), and on the equilibrium profile of slopes (Baulig, 1950a, pp. 143-145), G. Denizot on the subject of Camargue (Baulig, 1950a, pp. 95-102) and also, according to Sittig (Sittig, 1936), G. Lafrenz, while A. Cailleux warranted a whole article (Baulig, 1950a, Baulig, 1951). Baulig defended himself against De Martonne, when the Pliocene diastrophism was attacked (Baulig, 1948a, pp. 101-109). On the other hand, Baulig strongly defends, point by point, certain aspects of the Davisian doctrine which he had adopted as his own. Thus, his doctrine evolved, but the fundamentals survived. What are the basic elements? 3.1. Reflections on the science of geography

Wrongly to refute a discovered truth may cause a loss of years in science. Baulig relied for his demonstration on the fate of "James Hutton and John Playfair Geomorphological Philosophy" (Baulig, 1950a, pp. 1-11) - - an example also cited in Chorley et al. (1964). Hutton and Playfair, the former in 1785 and 1795, the latter in 1803, had both recognized that rivers are largely responsible for the valleys in which they flow and that their action is continuous. This concept was not, however, accepted, in spite of being later backed by Scrope. Indeed, Werner's Neptunism, Diluvianism (Baulig, 1950a, p. 8), the role attributed by Lyell, after 1830, to the sculpture by the sea of the seafloor before its exposure, the tectonism of W. Hopkins and the theory of fault controlled valleys, all remained official citadels. Not until the eighteen fifties, with the work of Dana, Greenwood, Oldham, and later Powell and Gilbert, was the reality of fluvial erosion established. Even then, and despite the overwhelming evidence, Richthofen was reluctant to recognize the

4

M Derruau/Geomorphology 11 (1994)1-13

role of rivers in shaping the land surface. Baulig points out that the failure to recognise the importance of rivers caused morphology to stagnate for over half a century. Baulig's preoccupation with how science should be carried out also finds clear expression in his article on the evolution of our interpretation of the Great Basin, in the western United States (Baulig, 1948c). Composed of "basins and ranges", this relief was at first interpreted as a simple fold structure, then progressively recognized as more and more complex. Now, the interplay of tectonism, climate and erosion is acknowledged (Baulig, 1948c, p. 263). Baulig was also concerned with epistemiology, that is. with philosophical and methodological problems relating to the evolution and practice of science. But "is geography a science?" asked Baulig in the same year as he contributed his article on the Great Basin (Baulig, 1948d). For Baulig, geography was above all a method or a way of considering human as well as physical phenomena (Baulig 1948d, p. 9), a description of landscapes and the knowledge of environments of the earth. It is a linking of the factors that contribute to the geographical explanation of a country. The distinction between art or science, science or art, is meaningless, according to Baulig (Baulig, 1948d, pp. 1011~. Baulig realised that errors frequently arise from a misuse of terms. His interest in terminology arose from his battle with improper usage: "consequent", "subsequent", "obsequent", "youthful", "mature", '+old", terms which are discussed in two papers he published in the Journal of Geomorphology, and which, though notionally concerned with problems of nomenclature, in fact addressed major and fundamental aspects of the discipline (Baulig, 1938, 1939b). In the field of terminology, his masterly and unique contribution was the still quite astonishing Vocabulaire Franco-Anglo-Allemand de G~omorphologie ( Baulig, 1956a). It was published when the author was 79 years old. It is no exaggeration to state that no one else could have produced such a work: more than 500 paragraphs filled with classified terms, sharply defined and listed in an index which alone accounts for more than 70 pagest It remains indispensable to all geomorphologists; yet it is known to few of the younger generations.

3.2. Baulig, the disciple, but also the critic, of the Davisian doctrine Baulig was a student of Davis and he left a full account of the teaching of his master (Baulig, 1948b, 1950b). He supported Davis' use of the deductive method, as it is checked by field observations. He praised him for having understood many processes, and yet for not having waited till the processes were known in their minutest details before using them in landform explanation (Baulig, 1950a, p. 29). According to Baulig, the Harvard master's genius was in emphasizing the time factor, deducing that landforms have reached different stages in their morphological evolution, and realising that different phases of the geomorphic cycle are represented in different regions. Davis showed the way to all who followed by explaining the degree of development of landforms in a sequence of events leading towards planation (Davis, 1909 and 1954, pp. 249278 in the 1954 edition). Davis' cyclic concept was vigorously challenged, in particular because for some the cyclic theory appeared contrived and simplistic. He addressed this challenge with "Complications of the geographical cycle" (Davis, 1909 and 1954, pp. 279295 in the 1954 edition) and with several other papers in the Geographical Essays ( 1909 and 1954), particularly those on the arid cycle and on glacial erosion. Nevertheless, Baulig noted that there are several ambiguities in the Davisian scheme. Are rivers senile and powerless at the end of the cycle? What is a "mature" form? Does "maturity" indicate merely an equilibrium between external factors and internal forces, or does it imply that the initial landforms are no longer apparent (Baulig, 1939b) ? In the first sense, the valleys and crests of the Cevennes, in the southeast of the Massif Central, are "youthful" because they are irregular and subject to erosion, but in terms of the second, they are "mature" because the uplifted peneplain into which they are cut has disappeared. Another difference between the master and the pupil was that for Davis, a new uplift presages a new cycle and the older cycle is terminated, whereas for Baulig, the cycles follow one after the other as far as their initiation is concerned, but they develop simultaneously. The headwater section of a stream having reached an old age stage continues to develop, mainly by headward erosion, while the new cycle is in place downstream, and in equilibrium with the new baselevel.

M. Derruau/ Geomorphology 11 (1994) 1-13

Above all, however, Baulig modified the geographical cycle by placing great importance on eustatic movements of sealevel (Baulig, 1935) which he attributed to glacioeustatism or to tectonic eustasy in the Pliocene (Baulig, 1927, 1928b, 1930). He regretted that American geomorphologists had been so slow to recognize the importance of the changing sealevel. Davis himself did not agree with glacioeustasy until 1933, at the end of his long life of 84 years, and of that generation of American geologists only Barrell (Barrell, 1917) followed European thinking in this regard. For Davis, in contrast to Baulig, cycles are interrupted only by earth movements and not by eustatic modifications of baselevel. Baulig, accepting as he did the geomorphic cycle, could not subscribe to the sequence of Piedmonttreppen proposed by Walther Penck in Die Morphologische Analyse (Penck, 1924; published posthumously, as the author died young, at the age of 35). Most geographers, in particular those present at the International Geographical Congress of 1938, in Amsterdam, agreed with Baulig. Penck explained the stepped platforms developed on the margins of Hercynian massifs in central Germany not by the differential uplift (faulting) of an old planation surface, but rather by a continuous accelerated updoming. In contrast Baulig urged that a discontinuity of forms cannot be explained by a continuous, even if accelerated, uplift. Having considered the geomorphic cycle, Baulig could not avoid dealing with the graded stream (Baulig, 1925) or slope profiles (Baulig, 1940a). The fluvial equilibrium profile shows an ever changing relationship between discharge, velocity and quantity and calibre of the load. The connection between the load and discharge varies at each tributary junction and it is not surprising that the junction leads to a break of gradient: similarly, the profile is not tangent but secant to baselevel. There is no reason, apart from climatic change, why fluvial erosion must, in time, give way to deposition. As for the profile of equilibrium of hillslopes, it can, according to Baulig, be explained in terms of different processes at work on different segments. Creep is responsible for summit convexity, diffuse runoff for concave lower slopes. The slope varies constantly in time and all points of the slope profile are interdependant, as in a catenary curve, where any weight added to any point modifies the position of all the others.

5

These developments are not mathematical. To Baulig, Nature seemed too complex to allow of quantification. His statements were always qualitative, even with stream flow. According to him, even the mathematical relationship between load and curvature of meanders cannot be determined (Baulig, 1950a). Baulig set great store by restored slope profiles as evidence of past cycles (Baulig, 1940a, 1928a). In his thesis on the Massif Central, four plates show the longitudinal profiles of the major streams and their tributaries, with the indication of the sections related to each cycle separated by convex connections. By projecting each of these sections downstream, by defining as accurately as possible the slope of each extension to its estimated baselevel, he recognized remnants of several epicycles (minor or interrupted cycles): 5 or 6, even 7 in the case of the basins of the Allier and Aveyron. He even sought to connnect cycles from one basin to the next and to suggest chronological links. Not content with restoring cyclic sections on the longitudinal profiles, Baulig also used reconstructions of transverse profiles. The best example is due to Conrad Sittig (whom Baulig guided very closely - - Sittig, 1936), concerning the Ahr River in the northwest of the Rheinische Schiefergebirge. In a deeply entrenched valley, the terraces or benches on the side slopes do not automatically indicate the former topography for they could have undergone degradation, so that, when the river eroded its former valley in a different position (central or lateral), several relics of former profiles would be arranged in tiers alternating in altitude in opposite sides of the valleys. On a much larger scale than that of a valley, Baulig devoted more than 100 pages to the problem of river terraces and a booklet entitled Eclaircissements et rdpliques, in the series of the International Geographical Union (Baulig, 1948a). In it, everything is described, discussed by his colleagues, and is then refuted. However, it was not only in the profiles of rivers and valleys that Baulig found evidence for former cycles of erosion. He searched for and found them, with or without genuine deposits, on surfaces of cuestas and ranges and especially on the broad expansed of ancient massifs. The Appalachians, the west European massifs and particularly the Massif Central of France, provided splendid opportunities for such studies.

6

M. Derruau/ Geomorphology11 (1994)1-13

3.3. Glacioeustasy and tectonic eustasy Henri Baulig became the champion of eustasy and his name is particularly linked with the notion of a changing sealevel (Baulig, 1935). Glacioeustasy, exemplified by the Crau and the Camargue (Baulig, 1927), plains of the lower Rh6ne, will be considered first. The Crau is the fluvioglacial outwash sheet of the Durance (of Wiirmian age according to Baulig, though it is possible that earlier glaciations also played a role in its development) in relation to a lower sealevel. The Camargue is the active delta of the Rh6ne, the baselevel tor which is apparently present sealevel. As the stony alluvium of the Crau passes beneath the fine alluvium ~f the Camargue, tectonic movements need not be invoked. Baulig reached similar conclusions about the Dalmatian coasts (Baulig, 1930). Baulig (e.g. Baulig, 1922) had for some time been influenced by the interI,retations of Lamothe and Deperet who recognized in the valleys of European rivers, terraces of glacial age ~trranged in tiers, with parallel profiles (they associated them with baselevels higher than the present!) but from 1927 onwards Baulig accepted the validity of glacioeustasy, with high levels of interglacial age. He ignored neither post-glacial isostatic readjustments in subarctic regions nor the effects of unloading due to the melting of ice-caps; which rise continues to the present day. But according to Baulig there is another type of eustasy, due to tectonic upheaval of the ocean basins, cssentially in the Pliocene, which caused sealevels to stand at 380, 280, 180 and 120 m above today's level. Evidence for this "diastrophic" eustasy is found in subaerially produced plains at these levels located ~dong ancient drainage lines. Baulig believed he could construct statistical plots of these palaeoplain remnants for example in the Paris Basin (Baulig, 1928b), in Brittany, on the Mediterranean borders of the Massif Central (Baulig, 1928a) and even in the Sahel of Algiers. The distribution of heights on the British Ordnance Survey, being non stochastic, prevented him from extending his research into the plains of England, but observations he made there were not, in Baulig's ,~pinion, inconsistent with the same conclusion. 3.4. Distrust of experimentation, process studies, quantification, calculus A few lines extracted from his article on the work of Davis (Baulig, 1948b, reprinted in Baulig, 1950a)

demonstrate his position on process studies and quantification, a position he held with only slight modification all his life. "Figures which directly and simply express facts have their use. The connections between separate values are abstract and do not correspond always with real values. As for calculus, when it becomes an instrument of research, when it pretends to achieve inaccesible conclusions by the simplest and most direct means, it invokes mistrust." (Baulig, 1950a, p. 25). The study of processes, more closely allied with physics than to mathematics, is treated not differently. "It is not certain that analysis of mechanisms leads directly to an understanding of the resulting forms" (Baulig, 1950a, p. 29). 3.5. Regional studies: Baulig the "quintessential" Baulig defined geography as the study of the relationship between characteristics of a region, and reflected deeply on the relationships of general and regional geography (Baulig, 1959a). He worked not only in regional geomorphology, for example in his seminal study of the Massif Central (Baulig, 1928a), but also produced regional geographies, both physical and human. Indeed, one of his most noteworthy works was and remains his Amdrique Septentrionale, two volumes of the G~ographie Universelle Armand Colin, (Baulig, 1935/36), for which he earned the Charles P. Daly Gold Medal for having written "the best regional geography of North America in any language" (Juillard and Klein, 1980). Henri Baulig was as much a geographer as a geomorphologist. He left us with some remarkable works of human geography such as La perche et le sillon (Baulig, 1949b), about agrarian methods and practices. His first article dealt with primitive traffic in North America (Baulig, 1908 - - see also Baulig, 1909, 1912, 1923, 1960a, 1960b). He was also a philosopher, insofar as methodology is a part of philosophy: he discussed cause and effect, chance and determinism (Baulig, 1948d, 1949a, 1959a, b). And his literary culture was evident when he wondered if Thomas Hardy had read Davis since he described an infilled valley in Wessex thus: "The river had stolen from the higher tracts and brought in particles to the vale all horizontal land, and now, exhausted, aged and attenuated, lay serpen-

M. Derruau / Geomorphology 1l (1994) 1-13

tining along through the midst of its former spoils" (Baulig, 1950a, p. 160).

4. Consensus and opposition - - j u s t or unjust

Baulig has to be credited with several noteworthy achievements: ( 1 ) The power and rigour of his reasoning gave great strength to his arguments. He did not jump to conclusions before examining all hypotheses compatible with the observed facts. (2) The refusal to accept any simplistic position, for instance that only tectonic activity can explain all high and low points. Many non-geomorphologists ignore the fact that a topographic high can replace an original depression or vice versa: inversion of folded or of volcanic relief is proof that erosion can wear down what tectonic or volcanic construction has elevated. He wrote: "The opinion of most geologists - - European ones at least - - would carry more weight if they were, not perhaps expert geomorphologists, but at least initiated in geomorphological methods and ideas. They should be interested more, in particular, in phases of continental erosion which for most of them are only breaks.., in sedimentary sequences" (Baulig, 1948a, p. 3). Soil settling does not necessarily result from tectonic subsidence, and sealevel did not necessarily rise if a marine sediment overlies an older subaerial or lagoonal one: the breaking of a shoreline barrier by storm waves or the enlargement of an inlet may cause a marine invasion without any subsidence or eustatic elevation. The Dunkirkian transgression, according to Baulig, is perhaps only a legend resulting from an error of judgement. (3) Large scale planations, in geologic history, are beyond doubt. At least 40 km of erosion of Precambrian and Primary mountain chains bear witness to one of them. In Great Britain, the Devonian Old Red Sandstone, unconformably overlying folded preCaledonian rocks, and the Permo-Triassic New Red Sandstone unconformably overlying preHercynian or folded Hercynian rocks, as for example in the Vosges Mountains, are classic examples. More generally, the exposure of originally buried magmas or metamorphic rocks, or of former mountain ranges, demonstrates the reality of erosion.

7

(4) Following Davis, Baulig suggested that phases of uplift are brief in comparison with phases of continental stability. This appeared to be confirmed by the brevity of folding episodes in mountain ranges: generally less than 10 million years. But is stability complete in the intervening phases? W. Penck did not accept this, and Baulig never denied a mobility like that of most of the Mediterranean world, but he preferred to carry out research in markedly stable areas. (5) Even if all of his conclusions are not acceptable, Baulig's rules for the extent of a former river profile or of a planation surface are useful (Baulig, 1940b, Baulig, 1948a). Most of his conclusions on the profile of equilibrium, which actually is broken at river junctions and - - with the exception of glacioeustatic rises - secant to the baselevel horizontal plane at the terminal point, are also acceptable. (6) Baulig's adherence to glacioeustasy, which provided essential explanations for the Crau and the Dalmatian coasts, showing that the Wtirmian profile cuts into that of the present rivers or those of the interglacial phases, can only be shared, even if a Wtirmian sheet incorporates elements of a former cold period. But the Pliocene diastrophic eustasy has not found wide acceptance. Objections to various aspects of Baulig's doctrine are numerous, though of unequal weight: ( 1) The first objection is that like Davis, Baulig was anthropomorphic when he spoke of youth, maturity, and old age or even senility of forms. It also conveys a sense of finalist prejudice. It suggests that Nature, like a conscious being, seeks to achieve an optimum. Baulig himself reflected on the terms used by Davis which lay themselves open to criticism as anthropomorphic and finalist. "Without doubt, we pass, we slip too easily from the idea of tendency to that of intention, from the idea of condition to that of objective. Anthropomorphism too often takes a simple form which we must, however, mistrust, for it passes as an explanation: the river seeks out structural weaknesses; it has intentions, preferences. In many cases it is possible to reduce this finality of intention to a downright mechanism. The river does not seek out a weakness, but when it finds one, it takes advantage of it such that it can hardly be diverted from it". "Thus purified, the notion of tendency appears indispensible to geomorphology. It is no less to the exact sciences". And he cited physicists such as Laplace or Max Planck having made good use of a

8

M. Derruau/Geomorphology 11 (1994) 1-13

vocabulary which appears finalistic. The principle of least action, or of least work, is the best response to the objection. "Finalism" does not creep into proposals except by favour of an incomplete analysis or an improper use of language (Baulig, 1950a, pp. 39-42). (2) A similar reproach is that Baulig's geomorphology, like that of Davis, is deductive, and hence theoretical and remote from facts. It does not proceed inductively according to some, as any observational sciences ought. The doctrine of a priori ideas is at risk. "Who guarantees that this deduction corresponds to anything real?" questions Baulig (1950a, p. 17). Again, there is a response in the Essais, in the article on the geomorphology of Hutton and Play fair. Let Playfair speak: "In physical research, theory and observation must go at the same pace. Without doubt, it is possible to start observations without proposing theories, but some nascent theory will soon arise, prompting more observations". "The systematic spirit appears as the principle driver of inductive research" (Baulig, 1950a, p. 10). In defence of Davis (Baulig, 1948a, reprinted in Baulig, 1950a, p. 17), Baulig wrote: "It is said the cycle is schematic and arbitrary. Schematic, ~mswers Davis, as is every work which explains a truly complex situation; arbitrary, no, for the scheme supports reality as far as possible". In fact, the deductive method cannot be faulted if only a general outline of evolution of terrain is sought. It is only a thread towards lhe clue. But it is evidently powerless to explain the unexpected, or at least simply what Davis, Baulig and Cotton called "accidents". But are these accidents really insignificant?. (3) Does not an attachment to the theory lead to a compelling fundamentalism? Baulig (1934) said he did not know what are the classical methods, but that he knew that there exist correct methods - - comparing his truth with the truth and projecting his moral rigour into science. Is there not a risk of inhibition of research, and may not this lead to a certain sterility? Where is l he optimum point between total liberty and controlled publication? Considering the younger Penck's Piedmonttreppen concept, Pierre Birot reacted differently from Baulig, and foresaw that, despite its faults, the novel idea of Penck was a fountain of fruitfulness: "the ~ermentation of new ideas sustained by a most original work as Die Morphologische Analyse cannot be obliterated before long" (Birot, 1938).

(4) The importance given by Davis and Baulig to the ideas of the cycle, that is to a comprehensive development of forms, resulted in prejudice against the study of processes. This conviction seems to originate with a debatable idea. For Baulig, process is a simple element, and he says this clearly in a criticism of Ahlmann. According to Ahlmann (1939), our uncertainty on the importance of glacial erosion results from our ignorance of its physical conditions and the study of physical properties can only develop on proportion. According to Baulig, such measures "will provide nothing but a global result" and it cannot be split process by process. "Isn't it strange that erosion, transport and deposition have been observed, described, even calculated through the nineteenth century, and yet there has not developed a coherent science of landform development?" (Baulig, 1950a, pp. 28-29). The opposition between Baulig and all geomorphologists who, especially after 1945, plunged headlong into the study of process, comes from two opposed philosophical concepts. Baulig is a follower of Descartes. Processes, for him, are the elements that one lays hold of by analysis. But he does not consider the interactions between processes, "the morpho-climatic system of erosion", or at least he believes it is not susceptible of physical research. It is Hegelian, not Cartesian, to indulge in intermingling complexities. As he wrote in his paper Les conceptsfondamentaux de la g~omorphologie which arose from a conference delivered in 1949 and published in Essais de G~omorphologie (Baulig, 1950a, pp. 31-42), "the laws of geomorphology are complex, relative, rarely susceptible to numerical expression. Moreover, they do not relate to simple and well-defined phenomena, but to global manifestations (present author' s emphasis) the interior workings of which are certainly complex and poorly understood" (Baulig, 1950a, p. 35). The dilemma arises entirely from the terms "working" and "manifestation". He later wrote "Experiments can be helpful in simple cases, but they fail with complex phenomena, exactly where they are most needed... In practice, nature carries out experiments for us. We must be satisfied to grasp a phenomenon as a whole without trying to take it apart, to 'understand' it without pretending to 'explain' it" (Baulig, 1950a, p. 36). Cyclic geomorphology is a science of evidence and not of modes of operation.

M. Derruau / Geomorphology 11 (1994) 1-13

Yet, the same paper ends with the question: "Are the details of processes" (he should have said processes oversimplified by analysis) "on the one hand, and general forms on the other, located on two different levels of physical reality such that knowledge of the processes would not deliver the laws of the forms". The simple fact that we are faced with the problem indicates to geomorphology two legitimate avenues of research: on the one hand, to press forward, as far as possible, with the study of processes and their mechanical and quantitative interpretation, and on the other hand, to consider the landscape as a whole, in its global situation, seeking to sift out the general laws, qualitative laws, which in particular explain the convergence of forms of different origin (Baulig, 1950a, p. 42). Put in another way, Baulig as he aged (he wrote this at 72), without denying what one may call his "manifestationism", opens the door to a whole evolutionary development of geomorphology and makes legitimate such studies as those on running water by American and English geomorphologists. (5) The statistical method applied to research into fluvial models of landscape development, in relation with Pliocene sealevels higher than the present, has had little success. Besides, is it a true statistic? It is based on only a few heights. As he wrote in 1928 in Les hauts niveaux d'drosion eustatique dans le Bassin de Paris I Baulig, 1928b, pp. 295-296) "we had to fall back to the map at a scale of 1:800,000" and "The total number of heights is very small (p. 493) ", he explained further (Baulig, 1948a, pp. 14, 15). Fortunately, he was able to enlarge and improve his statistical inventory by examination of topographic-hydrographic maps; he also eliminated structural surfaces. As the exceptional frequencies of high points revealed, the levels 180200, 280-300, 380-400 (these are the same as in the Bas-Languedoc), the regular difference of 100 m between the levels is suspicious. The metric system not having been invented in the Pliocene (Johnson, in Baulig, 1948a, pp. 102-103), the strengthening of the hectometric contour lines may have contributed to the illusion. Baulig responded that the difference in levels of 100 m or so is not hard to believe: "they might have been interpreted as general recovery of equilibrium I Baulig's emphasis), periodically arising when tensions developed in the crust reached a certain roughly constant limit (again Baulig's emphasis)". And De Martonne, recognizing the possibility that large defor-

9

mations of the ocean floor have raised the water level of the seas, estimated that a simple probability calculation "excludes the possibility of sealevel higher than 100 m " (Baulig, 1948a, p. 109). Besides, and Baulig anticipated the objection, the Pliocene seas invading the continents to a depth of 380 m or even more would have inevitably left deposits that have not been found. Baulig said in some seas like the English Channel itself, the currents prevent the deposition of sediments. But, when one observes the mass of Plaisancian clays of 3.6 to 3.2 Ma deposited by the rising of the water level of the Mediterranean after the opening of the Straits of Gibraltar, it is surprising not to find anything comparable on the transgressive sea floors invoked by Baulig. Towards the end of his life, according to Juillard (1962), he "did not believe so strongly" in his planetary hypothesis. But is the debate closed? In our time, when the reality of the waxing and waning of the oceans is accepted, diastrophic eustasy can once again be considered. (6) Did Baulig ignore climatic geomorphology as some have considered? In fact, he perfectly assimilated the works of the pioneers of American geomorphology in the semiarid environment of the Western United States. He knew about alluvial fans of arid countries and about duricrusts (Baulig, 1950a, pp. 78-79), pediments, rock floors, rock planes, bajadas or bahadas (Baulig, 1950a, p. 80 with a serious bibliographic footnote extending to p. 84) ; he knew of McGee and his article on sheet flood erosion (McGee, 1897), Davis's "geographical cycle in an arid climate" (Davis, 1909 and 1954, pp. 296-322 in the 1954 edition) and the granitic domes of the Mohave desert. Certainly his conclusions sought to relate morphoclimatic problems to the laws common to all fluvial geomorphology, rather than emphasise their separateness (pedimentation, he insists, is not limited to arid regions and is produced anywhere where streams are loaded to their limit: see Baulig, 1950a, p. 86), but he is well aware of the facts and problems. And yet, and this comes from his pen: "The study of rock floors, of pediments in semiarid regions, has revealed a process capable or rapid development in relation to planation surfaces which are very flat from their origin and susceptible of extending almost indefinitely" (Baulig, 1950a, p. 160). He also presaged the conclusions reached by Millot after 30 years of research (Millot, 1990): the scheme of glacis development in resistant rocks consists of three proc-

10

M. Derruau / Geomorphology II (1994) 1-13

esses: a geochemical weathering which is guided by the structure of the rocks but alters their nature, a soil development with pedological disturbances, a diffuse stream action moving the loosened material and generating planation. Also, in 1950, he dealt at length with "fluvial profiles of humid tropical regions" (Baulig, 1950a). He realised (Baulig, 1950a, p. 111 ) that loess largely dates from the ice advances. In 1950 (Baulig, 1950a, p. 110) he anticipated that the glaciations of the two hemispheres were simultaneous, something that was not confirmed by radiometric dating until about 1970. Without dwelling on glacial morphology, about which he wrote often and with accuracy, it should be recalled that once the idea of periglacial action was broadcast in the nineteen fifties and sixties, he made it his own in his last papers, but he restricted the role of frost creep ~tction. He believed that creep, precisely defined, only takes place in a humid temperate area, but not in arid climates nor in periglacial climates, where solifluxion becomes dominant, nor in humid tropical countries Baulig, 1950a, p. 140). All in all, he considered the products of the non-temperate climates as "accidents", just as did Davis and Cotton, because the development of the cycle interested him more than its perturbations. I t could be said that he focussed his research too much ~n "normal" geomorphology, but not that he ignored what takes place outside its domain. He travelled little ~md never saw Latin America, Africa south of the Sahara, South and Southeast Asia nor Australia. It is perhaps because he was not familiar with inselberg landscapes that he sought to reduce them to laws of the ~'normal" geographic cycle. In all his earlier work, he ~egarded inselbergs, as did Davis, as monadnocks. He minimised the contributions of Bornhardt, Passarge and L.C. King. It is only in the second half of his scientific lifetime that he was struck by the extraordinary sheer slopes of inselbergs and the roundness of ~ugar-loaves. In his Vocabulaire Franco-AngloAllemand de Gdomorphologie (Baulig, 1956a), "'inselberg" is treated separately (para 172-173, after the term backwearing was introduced in para 171) under the title "the arid and semiarid cycle" and is compared with the West Indian "morne", a tropical hill, whilst monadnock, in para 161, features in "the cycle of relief". (7) The relatively stable Plio-Quaternary areas, that Baulig believed to be widespread and where he sought

traces of his high erosion levels, appear to be more limited than he thought. "Terrestrial tides" have been recognized. Periodically precise resurveying shows successive perceptible variations, but are they continuous deformations or oscillatory movements, or alternate local episodes of settling and swelling? Are faults opened by earthquakes elements of a continuous evolution or do they merely register a period of oscillation? More realistic are the observations of neotectonism in many parts of the world and especially in the countries around the Mediterranean. Measurements of rifting and collision of plates, movements which continued for million of years and which must have had epeirogenetic or orogenic consequences are also real. Glacio-isostasy in which Baulig believed - - indicates the plasticity of the crust subject to loading and unloading. But Baulig, observing the long response time to the unloading by melting of the Quaternary icesheets, thought that there were thresholds of resistance such that a movement could not begin until this threshold is reached. It is necessary, therefore, on the one hand, not to deny all stability, and on the other, to admit that the areas subject to neotectonics are widespread. The opposition by Baulig to the instability inherent in the theory of Piedmonttreppen, might be considered harsh, for a synthesis of the Davisian and the Penckian conceptions has been constructed by Klein (1959). This, Klein thought, was all the more workable since the stabilities defined by the Davisian cycle are mobile (thus, the gradient of a graded river is continuously modified). It must be admitted that streams can adapt to slow and minor tectonic movements, and they regrade their valleys accordingly. The whole basin regrades without the forms being integrated in a polycyclic development with steps and terraces. On the contrary, the non-cyclic scheme is replaced by a cyclic one if violent tectonic displacement leads to strong dissection. (8) Gaps in Baulig's geomorphology are due to his lack of interest in "accidents", for features and landscapes which originate irregularly during the development of the cycle are abnormal, maverick, in terms of the regular scheme and unwelcome on that account. Unfortunately for Baulig and those of like mind, in some areas these accidental forms dominate the landscape. Baulig did not dwell on the problems of differential erosion in crystalline terrains, the sugar-loaves, the -

-

M. Derruau / Geomorphology 11 (1994) 1-13

depth of the weathering front in equatorial regions and the forms resulting from the evacuation of weathering products. In his view, they are not the major problems of geomorphology. But he knew that new problems would present themselves to geomorphologists. "Davis considered landscapes at a medium scale: they can also be studied on a planetary scale, such as in climatic geomorphology, or a detailed scale, such as in processes" (Baulig, ] 950a, p. 24). "Great leaps forward in geomorphology will come from the allied sciences and techniques. Soil science, extended to encompass the science of superticial formations, will furnish stronger and firmer principles for the interpretation of surfaces of erosion. Topography, and even submarine geology, will one day be known with infinite precision, thanks to powerful techniques. Geophysics will perhaps reach general conclusions on the composition of continental segments and of ocean basins" (Baulig, 1950a, p. 25). About the laboratory he was silent: he did not suspect that it can teach us about the porosity, and, hence, weatherability of crystalline rocks, the action of ice in soils, and of running water. On the other hand, some time after the end of Baulig's career, new observations and techniques came to confirm some of his conclusions. For example, in Mediterranean lands, the Messinian regression (at the end of the Miocene) and the Zanclean transgression which followed, are now well known and the whole work of Birot in the Mediterranean world, with his pupils, has probed the wide range of neotectonism. And everywhere radiometric dating has furnished the best benchmarks with which to measure morphogenesis. Baulig's Central Massif has been revisited (CERAMAC, 1992). All the breaks of slope of its rivers cannot be connected with cyclic episodes. Various studies have scanned it region by region, with mixed success. The most mobilistic, that of A. Le Griel ( 1991 ) has prompted much discussion. Since Baulig's book (Baulig, 1928a), low basins, due to differential erosion, have been noted. The Rhodanian Piedmont, an intermediate step between the Massif and the Rh6neSa6ne plains is not, as the master believed, a tectonic block but a pediplain of Miocene age. The creed of a Plio-Quaternary stability must be abandoned in many places because K-Ar dates from lava flows have shown that flows which are found today at different heights overflowed at the same level into the same valley. One

11

can hold a semi-stable or a semi-mobilist position. Some districts have remained stable since the end of the Miocene: the Rhodanian Piedmont (but not the adjacent areas to the north and the south), a large part of Mediterranean margin, where Paul Ambert (1984) has demonstrated that the southern edge of the Grands Causses represents escarpments of different lithologies, as Baulig himself believed, even though the region was not perfectly unmoved. It seems that Plio-Quaternary faults are rare in the whole Massif, but that flexures are numerous, leading to "regradations".

5. Conclusion

Henri Baulig's work in the Massif Central, as is true of other workers and other areas, is not authoritative or final, but what he wrote stimulated future workers. Most of the reproaches made of him are explained by the discovery of methods and techniques later than his time. To harbour resentment against him is like blaming Pasteur and Lister for not having used penicillin. His influence on French geomorphology remains limited for he did not have many disciples. But some regard him as a master of ideas of the highest order, and do not hesitate, should the occasion arise, to share his opinions, and be inspired by his example (e.g. Klein, 1977). But why did he attract so few pupils? After the age of 36, Baulig did not teach in Paris, in a France where centralisation reigned. In appearance he was not a leader of men; he was the opposite of his Grenoble contemporary, Raoul Blanchard. His cold, somewhat shy manner meant he discouraged many young colleagues. Also, the attraction of novelty, the illusion of creating rather than applying a doctrine, led many investigators elsewhere. Baulig's doctrine is so coherent that it is readily seen as rigid and complete, as leaving no room for initiative in its successors. More fruitful, even if it includes some debatable statements and some fruitless essays, is the work of a Pierre Birot (1909-1984), not because it rejects Baulig, but because it made Baulig's work complete by exploring all the fresh problems that present themselves. Henri Baulig remains the focal point: innovations cannot be defined except by reference to him.

12

M. Derruau / Geomorphology 11 (1994) 1-13

Acknowledgements T h e a u t h o r t h a n k s P r o f e s s o r A n n i e R e f f a y w h o subj c c t e d the early ( F r e n c h ) draft o f the p a p e r to critical r e v i e w a n d m a d e v a l u a b l e s u g g e s t i o n s , a n d Drs E.M. C a m p b e l l a n d C.R. T w i d a l e , D e p a r t m e n t o f G e o l o g y a n d G e o p h y s i c s , U n i v e r s i t y o f A d e l a i d e , for a s s i s t a n c e with the t r a n s l a t i o n o f this article into E n g l i s h , and for d i s c u s s i o n o f s e v e r a l points.

References Ahlmann, H.W., 1939. 15th International Congress, Physical Geography Section, Report. J. Geomorphol., 2:61-69. Ambert, P., 1984. P6diments villafranchiens et n6otectonique du pi6mont central du Languedoc. In: Montagnes et Pi6monts, hommage h Franqois Taillefer Toulouse. Revue G6ographique des Pyr6n6es et du Sud-Ouest, Travaux I, pp. 383-395. Barrell, J., 1917. Rhythms and the measurement of geological time. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 28:745 ff., esp. 762, 772-773. Baulig, H., 1908. Sur la distribution des moyens de transport et de circulation chez les indig~nes de 1' Amerique du Nord. Ann. G6ogr., 17: 433-456. Baulig, H., 1909. Les ressources naturelles du Nord et du NordOuest canadien. Ann. G6ogr., 18:451-462. Baulig, H., 1912. Le d6veloppement g6ographique des chemins de fer aux Etats-Unis et au Canada. France-Am6rique, revue mensuelle, Paris, pp. 151-165,209-214. Baulig, H., 1922. Questions de morphologie vosgienne et rh6nane. Ann. G6ogr., 31: 132-154, 385-401. Baulig, H., 1923. La population de 1' Alsace et de la Lorraine en 1921. Ann. G6ogr., 32: 12-25. Baulig, H., 1925. La notion de profil d'6quilibre: histoire et critique. Congr~s International de G6ographie. Le Caire llI, pp. 51--63. Baulig, H., 1927. La Crau et la glaciation wiirmienne. Ann. G6ogr., 36: 499-508. Baulig, H., 1928a. Le Plateau Central de la France et sa Bordure M6diterran6enne, Etude Morphologique. A. Colin, Paris, 591 pp. Baulig, H., 1928b. Les hauts niveaux d'6rosion eustatique dans le Bassin de Paris. Ann. G6ogr., 37: 289-305,385-406. Baulig, H., 1929. Sur le sens des mots "serre", "serra", "sierra". Ann. G6ogr., 38: 171-173. Baulig, H., 1930. Le littoral dalmate. Ann. G6ogr., 39: 305-310. Baulig, H., 1934. Sur les surfaces d'aplanissement du Bas-Rh6ne. Ann. G6ogr., 43: 636-640. Baulig, H., 1935/36, Am6rique Septentrionale, Collection G6ographie Universelle, 2 vols. A. Colin, Paris, 680 pp. Baulig, H., 1935. The changing sea-level. Inst. Br. Geogr. Publ., 3: 46 pp. Baulig, H., 1938. Questions de terminologie. I. Cons&tuent, subs6quent, obs6quent. J. Geomorphol., 1: 224-229. Baulig, H., 1939a. Sur les "gradins de piedmont". J. Geomorphol., 2:281-304 (English summary pp. 298-304).

Baulig, H., 1939b. Questions de terminologie. II. Jeune, mur, vieux. J. Geomorphol., 2: 121-132. Baulig, H., 1940a. Le profil d'equilibre des versants. Ann. G6ogr., 49: 81-97. Baulig, H., 1940b. Reconstruction of stream profiles. J. Geomorphol., 3: 3-12. Baulig, H., 1948a, Le probl6me des terrasses. Union G6ographique Internationale. Sixi~me Rapport de la Commission pour l'l~tude des terrasses. 109 pp. Additional booklet, same reference: Eclaircissements et r6pliques. 16 pp. Baulig, H., 1948b. L'oeuvre de William Morris Davis. L'Information G6ographique, 12: 101-108. Baulig, H., 1948c. Les chalnons du Grand Bassin, 6volution d'un probl6me g6omorphologique. Ann. G6ogr., 57: 258-263. Baulig, H., 1948d. La g6ographie est-elle une science? Ann. G6ografiska, 57:1-11. Baulig, H., 1949a. Causalit6 et finalit6 en g6omorphologie. Geogr. Ann. (Series A), 31: 321-324. Baulig, H., 1949b. La perche et le sillon: mots et choses. M61anges de Philologie romane.., offerts h Ernest Hoepffner. Publications de la Facult6 des Lettres de 1'Universit6 de Stra~sbourg.Fascicule 113. Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 590 pp: 139-149. Now issued by Presses Universitaires de Strasbourg, 9 Place de I'Universit6, Strasbourg, France. Baulig, H., 1950a. Essais de G6omorphologie. Publications de la Facult6 des Lettres de l'Universit6 de Strasbourg. Fascicule 114. Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 162 pp. Now issued by Presses Universitaires de Stra~sbourg, 9 Place de l'Universit6, Strasbourg, France. Baulig, H., 1950b. W.M. Davis: master of method. Assoc. Am. Geogr. Ann., 40: 188-195. Baulig, H., 1951. G6omorphologie davisienne. L'lnformation G6ographique, 15: 93-100. Baulig, H., 1956a. Vocabulaire Franco--Anglo-Allemand de G6omorphologie. Publications de la Facult6 des Lettres de l'Universit6 de Strasbourg. Fascicule 130. Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 230 pp. Now issued by the Presses Universitaires de Strasbourg, 9 Place de 1'Universit6, Strasbourg, France. Baulig, H., 1956b. P6n6plaines et pEdiplaines. Bull. Soc. Beige l~tud. G6ogr., 25:25-58 (translated by C.A. Cotton in Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 69:913-930 for 1957). Baulig, H., 1957. Les m6thodes de la g6omorphologie, d'apr~s M. Pierre Birot. Ann. G6ogr., 66: 95-124, 221-236. Baulig, H., 1959a. G6ographie g6n6rale et g6ographie r6gionale. M61anges g6ographiques canadiens offerts h R. Blanchard. Cah. G6ogr. Qu6., 3(6): 47-52. Baulig, H., 1959b. Contingence et n6cessit6 en g6ographie humaine. Annales: Economies, Societ6s, Civilisations 14 : 320-324. Baulig, H., 1960a. La g6ographie du fer et de l'acier. Etude alsatiques, 15: 779-788. Baulig, H., 1960b. Un contact mortel: l'extinction des lndiens de Basse-Californie. Etudes alsatiques, 15: 993-996. Birot, P.. 1938. R6flexions sur les Piedmonttreppen. Comptes Rendus Congr~s International G6ographique, Amsterdam 1I. Brill, Leiden, pp. 114--124. CERAMAC, 1992. Rythmes morphog6niques en domaine volcanis& Acres du colloque A.G.F., sous la direction de Y. Lageat et de J.

M. Derruau / Geomorphology 11 (1994) 1-13 C1. Thouret. Universit6 Blaise Pascal, Clermont-Ferrand, 272 pp. ( Baulig's Central Massif of France revisited). Chorley, R.J., Dunn, A.J., Beckinsale, R.P., 1964. The History of the Study of Landforms or the Development of Geomorphology. I. Geomorphology before Davis. Methuen and Wiley, London, 678 pP. Davis, W.M., 1909 and 1954. Geographical Essays. D.W. Johnson, (Editor), Gimm, Boston. 1909. Identically reproduced in 1954, but in a different order D.W. Johnson, (Editor), Dover Publications, New York, 777 pp. Juillard, E. and Klein, CI., 1980. Henri Baulig. In: T.W. Freeman and Ph. Pinchemel (Editors), Geographers: Bibliographical Studies, 4. Mansell, London, pp. 7-17. J uillard, E., 1962. Henri Baulig. Ann. Gfogr., 71:561-566 (obituary). Klein, C1., 1959. Surfaces de regradation et surfaces d'aggradation. Ann. G6ogr., 68:292-317.

13

Klein, CI., 1977. La leqon de Henri Baulig, Rev. G6ogr. de I'Est, Nancy, 17: 191-201. Le Griel, A., 1991. L'6volution g6omorphologique du Massif Central Franqais, essai sur la gen6se d'un relief. Th~se d'Etat, Lettres, Universit6 de Lyon, publi6e h Saint-Etienne, 3 volumes, 660 pp. McGee, W.J., 1897. Sheetflood erosion. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 8: 87112. Millot, G., 1990, Fa9onnement des p6diments rocheux, in Gen~se et 6volution des piedmonts. M6diterran6e, Revue d'Aix-en-Provence, hors s6rie, pp. 1-2. Penck, W., 1924. Die morphologische Analyse: Ein Kapital der physikalischen Geologie. Geographische Abhandlungungen, 2 Reihe Heft 2, Stuttgart, 283 pp. Sittig, C., 1936. Le probl~me des "terrasses fluviales ~'. Ann. G6ogr., 45: 136--149. S uess, E., 1897-1915. Das Antlitz der Erde ( The Face of the Earth). Translated into French as La Face de la Terre by E. de Margerie (Editor). 5 volumes, A. Colin, Paris. 3440 pp. Baulig's contributions in Vol. 3, 1911, pp. 595-662 and 927-956.