Climatic geomorphology
9
and accompanied by wonderful illustrations that improved his papers (Higgins, 1975;
King, 1976a,b) and constituted an excellent tool for the teaching of geomorphology.
His best quality was the capacity for assembling most of the previous, and unconnected,
knowledge of geomorphology. Some authors of the 20th century considered him to be the
father of geomorphology (Tricart, 1965).
The major contribution of Davis was the geographical cycle, also known variously as
the erosion cycle, the normal cycle, the humid cycle and so forth (Higgins, 1975), and
it was considered to be one of the first paradigms in geomorphology (Hart, 1986). It was
the first theory on landscape development with a general agreement from the scientific
community (Thorn, 1988a,b). He published his basic model in the paper The Rivers and
Valleys of Pennsylvania, but the definitive version was published with the title The
Geographical Cycle 10 years later.
According to the ideas of Davis, a sector of a planated land surface may undergo rapid
uplift leading to a subsequent period of valley incision under conditions of tectonic
stability. The initial landscape underwent sequential stages of different relief features
denoted as youth, maturity and old age. The final result was the elaboration of apeneplain
with some isolated residual relief (Fig. 1.1) that could correspond to the initial planated
land surface of a new cycle with renewed uplift. In the explanation of the cycle, Davis
analysed the development of hillslopes and fluvial valleys, as well as the probable
interruptions of the ideal cycle, in which erosion was reactivated in relation to a new or
different base level.
Criticism of this model mainly came from the fact that the model only represented
landscape development for humid temperate regions, considered to be the "normal
climate" by Davis. He considered glacial and arid landscapes as "accidents" to the
geographical cycle. Consequently he developed "arid" (Davis, 1905) and "glacial" (Davis,
1906) versions of the cycle, the latter divided into pre-glacial, optimum and post-glacial
stages (Fig. 3.21). In spite of numerous criticisms, some of them addressed in his papers,
the concept of the Davisian cycle of erosion had a general acceptance. Higgins (1975)
pointed out 12 reasons for this general acceptance, with simple arguments such as
simplicity, applicability, rationality and so forth.
On the other hand, the work of Davis also included different fields of geomorphology,
such as glacial, coastal, arid and volcanic landscapes. His relationships with European
scientists were important, especially those maintained with his German colleagues (Alfred
and Walter Penck), where he carried out long and successive visits.
The concept of landscape cyclicity gained a wide acceptance among the different
authors of that period, and was applied to a wide variety of other geomorphologic
environments, as was the development of specific cycles for karst (Fig. 1.2), littoral,
glacial, savannah and periglacial landscape cycles of erosion (Higgins, 1975; Hart, 1986).
The ideas of Davis were well received among many German and Anglo-American
scientists, but received little acceptance in the former USSR or countries of eastern and
northem Europe, where his work went virtually unnoticed. He had enthusiastic supporters
among French investigators, including Lapparent, Baulig and Martonne. The latter
published the Trait~ de G~ographie Physique in three volumes, in 1925-1927. This work
exerted a great deal of influence on many French specialists. As mentioned previously,
Martonne was also the first author who had introduced the term "climatic geomorphology"
in 1913, (Stoddart, 1969a; Beckinsale and Chorley, 1991).
9
and accompanied by wonderful illustrations that improved his papers (Higgins, 1975;
King, 1976a,b) and constituted an excellent tool for the teaching of geomorphology.
His best quality was the capacity for assembling most of the previous, and unconnected,
knowledge of geomorphology. Some authors of the 20th century considered him to be the
father of geomorphology (Tricart, 1965).
The major contribution of Davis was the geographical cycle, also known variously as
the erosion cycle, the normal cycle, the humid cycle and so forth (Higgins, 1975), and
it was considered to be one of the first paradigms in geomorphology (Hart, 1986). It was
the first theory on landscape development with a general agreement from the scientific
community (Thorn, 1988a,b). He published his basic model in the paper The Rivers and
Valleys of Pennsylvania, but the definitive version was published with the title The
Geographical Cycle 10 years later.
According to the ideas of Davis, a sector of a planated land surface may undergo rapid
uplift leading to a subsequent period of valley incision under conditions of tectonic
stability. The initial landscape underwent sequential stages of different relief features
denoted as youth, maturity and old age. The final result was the elaboration of apeneplain
with some isolated residual relief (Fig. 1.1) that could correspond to the initial planated
land surface of a new cycle with renewed uplift. In the explanation of the cycle, Davis
analysed the development of hillslopes and fluvial valleys, as well as the probable
interruptions of the ideal cycle, in which erosion was reactivated in relation to a new or
different base level.
Criticism of this model mainly came from the fact that the model only represented
landscape development for humid temperate regions, considered to be the "normal
climate" by Davis. He considered glacial and arid landscapes as "accidents" to the
geographical cycle. Consequently he developed "arid" (Davis, 1905) and "glacial" (Davis,
1906) versions of the cycle, the latter divided into pre-glacial, optimum and post-glacial
stages (Fig. 3.21). In spite of numerous criticisms, some of them addressed in his papers,
the concept of the Davisian cycle of erosion had a general acceptance. Higgins (1975)
pointed out 12 reasons for this general acceptance, with simple arguments such as
simplicity, applicability, rationality and so forth.
On the other hand, the work of Davis also included different fields of geomorphology,
such as glacial, coastal, arid and volcanic landscapes. His relationships with European
scientists were important, especially those maintained with his German colleagues (Alfred
and Walter Penck), where he carried out long and successive visits.
The concept of landscape cyclicity gained a wide acceptance among the different
authors of that period, and was applied to a wide variety of other geomorphologic
environments, as was the development of specific cycles for karst (Fig. 1.2), littoral,
glacial, savannah and periglacial landscape cycles of erosion (Higgins, 1975; Hart, 1986).
The ideas of Davis were well received among many German and Anglo-American
scientists, but received little acceptance in the former USSR or countries of eastern and
northem Europe, where his work went virtually unnoticed. He had enthusiastic supporters
among French investigators, including Lapparent, Baulig and Martonne. The latter
published the Trait~ de G~ographie Physique in three volumes, in 1925-1927. This work
exerted a great deal of influence on many French specialists. As mentioned previously,
Martonne was also the first author who had introduced the term "climatic geomorphology"
in 1913, (Stoddart, 1969a; Beckinsale and Chorley, 1991).