Chapter 2
liistoricalllad
It is difficult (and probably meaningless) to choose
the moment at which modern studies of fluvial sedimentology could be said to have begun. Probably the
monumental work of Fisk (1944, 1947) on the Mississippi river and delta was the most important single
advance. Several developments of fundamental importance took place in the late 1950s and early 1960s.
Flume and fieldwork on the origin of bedforms and
sedimentary structures culminated in a major structure classifi cation by Allen (1963a) and statements
on the fl ow-regime concepts of bedform origin
(Simons and Richardson 1961; Simons et al. 1965;
Harms and Fahnestock 1965). Facies models concepts began to appear in the late 1950s, and had a
major impact on geologists following the development of the fining-upward cyclothem model by
Allen (1963b, 1964) and Bernard et al. (1962). Modern research into stratigraphic traps for petroleum
essentially began at about the same time. The Shell
Development and Esso groups at Houston, USA>
in particular, devoted considerable energies to
researching the sedimentary products of modern
clastic and carbonate environments. They were interested in improving our knowledge of the geometry of porous bodies in the subsurface, and
developing techniques for diagnosing sedimentary
environments from such data as wireline logs. Nanz
(1954), a member of the Shell group, was probably
the first (at least, in the published record) to identify
fi ning-upward fl uvial deposits in the subsurface, but
they were not clearly understood as the products of
fluvial channel-fill and point-bar migration processes for several years, until the work of Bernard et
al. ( 1962), who were also members of the Shell group.
It js this history of the development of ideas that is
the subject of this chapter. Some of the areas of
interest to fluvial sedimentologists have been the
subject of other historical reviews. Some aspects of
fl uvial geomorphology which bear on fluvial sedimentology were summarized by Schumm (!972a).
Jopling (1975) discussed early research on lluvioglacial deposits. Middleton (1965, 1977) provided
brief histories of the work carried out on bedforms
and sedimentary structures. Pettijohn (1962) and
Potter and Pettijohn (1963, 1977) reviewed the subject of paleocurrent analysis. Allen (1965a) described
the state of knowledge of alluvial sedimentology as it
was in the mid-1960s, but this was not an historically
oriented paper. The main historical developments
up to the time of the first fluvial conference were
described by Miall (1978b), and later developments
were detailed by Miall (1987), and it is from these two
articles that this chapter is adapted. The intent of this
chapter is to outline research progress up to the
1980s. Modern developments are dealt with in the
detailed descriptive chapters later in this book.
2.2 Early Deveiopmeilts
in the Study of Fluvial Sedime01ts
2.2.1 From the Ancient Greeks to Playfair
Rivers and their deposits did IJ.Ot become subjects of
specialized study until the nineteenth century. However, many of the early naturalists and philosophers
made notes on this topic in the context of wideranging discussions on.the origins of the earth and
its physical features. The principles of uniformitarianism were not widely accepted until the time of
Lyell, but long before this it was realized that rivers
could transport and deposit large quantities of sediment, so that correct geological intepretations of
Recent alluvium were quickly arrived at. Application
of the same ideas to copsolidated and structurally
deformed deposits took a little longer. The following
is a brief review of some of the early writings on the
physical geology of rivers.
Plato1 in a passage from Critias described the
destruction of fertile lands by fluvial erosion and
transportation: '1 ••• the soil which has kept breaking
away from the high lands during these ages and these
liistoricalllad
It is difficult (and probably meaningless) to choose
the moment at which modern studies of fluvial sedimentology could be said to have begun. Probably the
monumental work of Fisk (1944, 1947) on the Mississippi river and delta was the most important single
advance. Several developments of fundamental importance took place in the late 1950s and early 1960s.
Flume and fieldwork on the origin of bedforms and
sedimentary structures culminated in a major structure classifi cation by Allen (1963a) and statements
on the fl ow-regime concepts of bedform origin
(Simons and Richardson 1961; Simons et al. 1965;
Harms and Fahnestock 1965). Facies models concepts began to appear in the late 1950s, and had a
major impact on geologists following the development of the fining-upward cyclothem model by
Allen (1963b, 1964) and Bernard et al. (1962). Modern research into stratigraphic traps for petroleum
essentially began at about the same time. The Shell
Development and Esso groups at Houston, USA>
in particular, devoted considerable energies to
researching the sedimentary products of modern
clastic and carbonate environments. They were interested in improving our knowledge of the geometry of porous bodies in the subsurface, and
developing techniques for diagnosing sedimentary
environments from such data as wireline logs. Nanz
(1954), a member of the Shell group, was probably
the first (at least, in the published record) to identify
fi ning-upward fl uvial deposits in the subsurface, but
they were not clearly understood as the products of
fluvial channel-fill and point-bar migration processes for several years, until the work of Bernard et
al. ( 1962), who were also members of the Shell group.
It js this history of the development of ideas that is
the subject of this chapter. Some of the areas of
interest to fluvial sedimentologists have been the
subject of other historical reviews. Some aspects of
fl uvial geomorphology which bear on fluvial sedimentology were summarized by Schumm (!972a).
Jopling (1975) discussed early research on lluvioglacial deposits. Middleton (1965, 1977) provided
brief histories of the work carried out on bedforms
and sedimentary structures. Pettijohn (1962) and
Potter and Pettijohn (1963, 1977) reviewed the subject of paleocurrent analysis. Allen (1965a) described
the state of knowledge of alluvial sedimentology as it
was in the mid-1960s, but this was not an historically
oriented paper. The main historical developments
up to the time of the first fluvial conference were
described by Miall (1978b), and later developments
were detailed by Miall (1987), and it is from these two
articles that this chapter is adapted. The intent of this
chapter is to outline research progress up to the
1980s. Modern developments are dealt with in the
detailed descriptive chapters later in this book.
2.2 Early Deveiopmeilts
in the Study of Fluvial Sedime01ts
2.2.1 From the Ancient Greeks to Playfair
Rivers and their deposits did IJ.Ot become subjects of
specialized study until the nineteenth century. However, many of the early naturalists and philosophers
made notes on this topic in the context of wideranging discussions on.the origins of the earth and
its physical features. The principles of uniformitarianism were not widely accepted until the time of
Lyell, but long before this it was realized that rivers
could transport and deposit large quantities of sediment, so that correct geological intepretations of
Recent alluvium were quickly arrived at. Application
of the same ideas to copsolidated and structurally
deformed deposits took a little longer. The following
is a brief review of some of the early writings on the
physical geology of rivers.
Plato1 in a passage from Critias described the
destruction of fertile lands by fluvial erosion and
transportation: '1 ••• the soil which has kept breaking
away from the high lands during these ages and these