The Highland Boundary Fault : Reverse or Wrench Fault?
DETAILED work which I have done in the Loch Lomond area suggests a definite answer to the above problem which is of some importance since it concerns one of the major geological features of the British Isles. The direction in which the principal stress acted in the production of the fault can be approximately determined from the pattern of structures in the Lower Old Red Sandstone conglomerates, and this supports the contention put forward in stratigraphical accounts (summarized by J. G. C. Anderson1) that the Highland Boundary Fault is a reverse fault of Caledonian age and not a Proto-Armorican wrench fault as envisaged by E. M. Anderson2.
XVIII.—The Geology of the Highland Border: Stonehaven to Arran
(a) Scope of Paper.—The distinction between Highlands and Lowlands is a most striking feature of the topography of Scotland and has for long played an important part in the political, economic and social life of the country. Although the dividing line between the two regions, in a purely geographical sense, is ill-defined in some districts, on the whole it coincides fairly closely with a powerful geological dislocation which can be traced across Scotland from Stonehaven to Arran (fig. 1), a distance of 160 miles. This dislocation has for long been termed the Highland Boundary Fault. On detailed study it is found to be only one of several faults making up a complex fracture-zone, one of the most important in the British Isles, within which movements on a considerable scale have taken place from Ordovician to Carboniferous times.
Italian Influence on the Development of Calvinist Scholasticism
THIS ARTICLE TRIES to show that the rise of Calvinist scholasticism, which was the most important development in Calvinist theology during the second half of the sixteenth century, stemmed largely from several converging Italian influences, particularly from the writings of Peter Martyr Vermigli and Jerome Zanchi. Here Calvinist theology refers not only to the personal thought of John Calvin but also to the teachings of the founders of the Reformed or Calvinist tradition as it spread out from Geneva and Switzerland to France, Germany, England, Scotland, Poland, and the Low Countries. In this context Calvin emerges as the brightest star in a galaxy of Reformed theologians which includes Heinrich Bullinger, Pierre Viret, Theodore Beza and Wolfgang Musculus as well as Martyr, Zanchi and others. These theologians were often more influential than Calvin himself at a given place or time or on a given point of doctrine. Bullinger, Martyr, and Martin Bucer were all more important for spreading Calvinist ideas to Edwardian England than was John Calvin. Early Elizabethan Protestantism looked more to Zurich than to Geneva, as did early Polish Calvinism. German Calvinism owed more to Heidelberg than to Geneva.' These leaders developed their theologies sometimes in mutual dependence, sometimes with surprising independence. By no means was their relation to Calvin simply that of disciple to master, for each gave a personal nuance to his style of Calvinism. Thus the sixteenth century Jesuit Cornelius Schulting states on the opening page of his five volume polemic against Calvin and Peter Martyr that Martyr was clearer and far more learned than Calvin.2 Recently John Bray has pointed out that research in seventeenth century Calvinism leads "to the conclusion that the impact of Calvin upon the Calvinistic movement has been greatly over-rated. It may well be that some of