Although no question was asked with regard to the direction of the shock, no fewer than 469 observers made notes on this point. As a general rule, their determinations are extremely rough, few referring to more than the eight principal points of the compass. Moreover, in any one place, the directions assigned to the shock are very varied. For instance, in the city and suburbs of Birmingham, eight observers give the direction along a north and south line, eight east and west, eleven north-west and south-east, and five north-east and south-west, while there are five other intermediate estimates. But, when these directions are plotted on a map of the district, it is seen at once that they are either nearly parallel or perpendicular to the roads in which the observers were living; that is, the apparent direction of the shock was at right angles to one of the principal walls of the house. This, of course, is a result to be anticipated, for, whatever be the direction of the earthquake-motion, a house tends to oscillate in a plane perpendicular to one or other of its walls.
It is extraordinary to how great a distance the direction of the shock is perceptible. Records come from Brighton (137 miles from the epicentre), Maldon in Essex (144 miles), Harrogate (147 miles), Douglas in the Isle of Man (167 miles), Dublin (176 miles), and Baltinglass in Co. Wicklow (180 miles).
Nevertheless, whatever the distance may be, the sense of direction must be most perceptible in those houses whose principal walls are at right anglesto the true direction of the earthquake-motion, and we should therefore expect to find the observations of direction most frequently made in such houses, or in others which approximate to this situation. Thus, the average of all the observations within a fairly small area should give a result not very far from the true direction of the shock; and, the smaller the area and the farther from the epicentre, the more reliable should be the result. Now, in Birmingham the mean direction of the shock is E. 39° degrees N., which differs only by 2° degrees from the line joining the city to the epicentre; in London it is E. 21° degrees S., the difference being again 2° degrees. In other cases, the observations from different counties are grouped together, and the mean direction is taken to correspond to the centre of the county. Yet, even then, there is often a close agreement between the mean direction of the shock and the direction of the county-centre from the epicentre; the difference being not more than two or three degrees in the counties of Buckingham, Devon, Stafford, Warwick, and York. In other cases, where the deviation exceeds this amount, either the number of observations is small or the county is near the epicentre and so subtends a large angle.
Two results of some importance follow from this analysis: (1) that while, with a few isolated observations, the "method of directions" is almost sure to fail, with a large number of observations closely grouped, the position of the epicentre may be determined with a fair approach to accuracy; and (2) that, at any rate outside a radius of forty miles, the earth-waves travelled in approximately straight lines outwards from the epicentre.
Coseismal lines were defined by Mallet as long ago as 1849, but, owing to the difficulty of ascertaining the correct time, they have so far been of little service in the investigation of earthquakes. In the case of the Hereford earthquake, the distances traversed by the earth-waves are small; but, on the other hand, the time-records are numerous and frequently trustworthy to the nearest minute. Rejecting all estimates earlier than 5.32A.M., and later than 5.36, as well as a number at 5.35, there remain fairly good observations from 381 places, and exceptionally accurate ones from 33 places. The latter were obtained from signalmen and other careful observers who were in possession of Greenwich time, or who compared their watches shortly afterwards with well-regulated watches.
With evidence so abundant, a new method of drawing coseismal lines becomes possible. According to this method, each place of observation is indicated on the map by a mark corresponding to the particular minute recorded. If the records were quite correct, there would be a central area occupied by the marks corresponding to 5.32A.M., surrounded by a series of zones in which the times were respectively 5.33, 5.34, and 5.35. The curves separating these zones would be coseismal lines corresponding to the times 5.32½, 5.33½, and 5.34½.
Owing, however, to the inevitable inaccuracy of all the time-records, these different zones intrude on one another, and the coseismal lines have therefore to be drawn about half-way through theoverlapping regions, special weight being attributed to the apparently more accurate observations.
Coseismal lines of the Hereford earthquake.Fig.62.—Coseismal lines of the Hereford earthquake. (Davison.)ToList
Fig.62.—Coseismal lines of the Hereford earthquake. (Davison.)ToList
The coseismal lines obtained in this manner are represented by the continuous curves in Fig. 62. The isoseismals, which are added for the sake of comparison, are indicated by the dotted lines. It will be seen that the coseismal lines are elongated in the same direction as the isoseismals, but to a less extent, and this no doubt is due to the fact that the epoch selected by the majority of observers wasone not far from, and slightly preceding, that of the maximum intensity of the shock.
Now, the average distance between the two inner coseismals is 32¾ miles, between the two outer ones (so far as drawn) 35-1/6miles, and between the first and third 67-1/6miles. The mean surface-velocity between the two inner coseismals is therefore 2,882 feet per second, and between the two outer ones 3,095 feet per second. There is thus an apparent increase in the velocity with the distance, but the accuracy of the coseismal lines is unequal to establishing this as a fact. The mean surface-velocity of 2,955 feet per second between the first and third coseismals is probably, however, the most accurate estimate of the surface-velocity yet made in a slight earthquake.
Nature of the Sound.—The sound which accompanied the shock was of the same character as that heard during all great earthquakes. It is often described in such terms as a deep booming noise, a dull heavy rumble, a grating roaring noise, or a deep groan or moan; more rarely as a rustling or a loud hissing rushing sound. As a rule, it began faintly, increased gradually in strength, and then as gradually died away; and this no doubt is the reason why it sometimes appeared as if an underground train or waggon were approaching quickly, rushing beneath the observer, and then receding in the opposite direction. Occasionally, the sound was very loud, being compared to the noise of many traction-engines heavily laden passing close at hand,or to a heavy crash or peal of thunder. But its chief characteristic was its extraordinary depth, as if it were almost too low to be heard. According to one observer, it was a low rumbling sound, much lower than the lowest thunder; and another compared it to the pedal notes of a great organ, only of a deeper pitch than can be taken in by the human ear, a noise morefeltthan heard. It will be seen presently how the sound, from its very depth, was inaudible to many persons.
A few observers described the sound in terms like those quoted above, but by far the larger number compared it to some more or less well-known type, and in many cases the resemblance was so close that the observer at first attributed it to the object of comparison. The descriptions, which present great varieties in detail, may be classified as follows: (1) One or several traction-engines passing, either alone or heavily laden, sometimes driven furiously past; a steam-roller passing over frozen ground or at a quicker pace than usual; heavy waggons driven over stone paving, on a hard or frosty road, in a covered way or narrow street, or over hollow ground or a bridge; express or heavy goods trains rushing through a tunnel or deep cutting, crossing a wooden bridge or iron viaduct, or a heavy train running on snow; the grating of a vessel over rocks, or the rolling of a lawn by an extremely heavy roller; (2) a loud clap or heavy peal of thunder, sometimes dull, muffled or subdued, but most often distant thunder; (3) a moaning, roaring, or rough, strong wind; the rising of the wind, a heavy wind pressing against the house; the howling of wind in a chimney, a chimney oroil-factory on fire; (4) the tipping of a load of coal, stones, or bricks, a wall or roof falling, or the crash of a chimney through the roof; (5) the fall of a heavy weight or tree, the banging of a door, only more muffled, and the blow of a wave on the sea-shore; (6) the explosion of a boiler or cartridge of dynamite, a distant colliery explosion, distant heavy rock-blasting and the boom of a distant cannon; (7) sounds of a miscellaneous character, such as the trampling of many men or animals, an immense covey of partridges on the wing, the roar of a waterfall, the passage of a party of skaters, and the rending and settling together of huge masses of rock.
The total number of comparisons made was 1,264. Of these, 45.4 per cent. refer to passing waggons, etc., 15.0 per cent. to thunder, 15.5 to wind, 3.9 to loads of stones falling, 2.7 to the fall of a heavy body, 7.2 to explosions, and 10.3 per cent. to miscellaneous sounds.
Generally, the sound adhered throughout to one of the types mentioned above, and, if it varied at all, varied only in intensity. At some places, however, the character of the sound was observed to change. For instance, one person described it as like the rumbling of a train going over a bridge, with a terrific crash, such as is heard in a thunderstorm at the instant when the shock was strongest, the rumbling dying away afterwards for some seconds.
Inaudibility of the Sound to some Observers.—The total number of observers who give a detailed account of the earthquake is 2,681, and, of these, 59 per cent. state that they heard the sound, 23 percent. give no information, while 18 per cent. distinctly say that they heard no sound; that is, roughly, out of every five observers, three heard the sound, one made no reference to it, and one failed to hear the sound.
In a few cases, no doubt, this failure was due to the distance of the observer, but this is far from being a complete explanation; for, in Herefordshire, six out of 179, and in Gloucestershire 17 out of 227, observers heard no sound. Nor is the peculiarity a local one, for at Clifton two out of five observers who were awake did not hear the sound, at Birmingham four out of 23, and in London, eight out of 18. Even in the same house, it would happen that one observer would hear a sound as of a heavily-laden traction-engine passing, while to another it was quite inaudible.
Again, a large number of observers who heard the sound expressly state that they were unconscious of any while the shock lasted. The noise at first resembled the approach of a steam-roller or traction-engine up the street, it became gradually louder, and then ceased more or less suddenly as the shock began; while, to others in the same places, the sound continued to grow in loudness until the strongest vibrations were felt.
Even when observers in the same place agreed in hearing the sound, it presented itself to them under different aspects. Thus, at Hereford, a crash or bomb-like explosion was noticed by some, but not by all, observers; at Ledbury, the sound according to one began like a rushing wind and culminated in a loud explosive report, another heard a noise like distant thunder, which ended when the shock began, while a third heard no sound at all. At places moredistant from the epicentre, the same diversity, both in character and intensity, is manifested. Thus, at Birmingham, the accounts refer on the one hand to the distant approach of a train and the rising of the wind, on the other to the reports of large cannons and to a noise as if tons ofdébrishad been hurled against the wall of the house; at Bangor, to muffled thunder, wind through trees, and a loud rumbling sound.
The first explanation of these apparent anomalies which presents itself is inattention on the part of the observers; but it is one that will not bear examination, though it may apply in some cases. The sound is too loud, at any rate near the epicentre, to escape notice, and it is generally heard before the shock begins to be felt. Moreover, as described in the last chapter, three out of every four earthquakes in Japan are unaccompanied by recorded sound, and the Japanese as a race cannot be accused of such constant inattention. The defect, it can hardly be doubted, is inherent to the observer, and not dependent on the conditions in which he is placed.
That the higher limit of audibility varies with different persons has long been known; and there can be no reason for doubting that there is a similar variability in the lower limit. Thus, to some observers, the sound remains inaudible throughout, however intently they may be listening. Again, it is found that, the deeper the sound, the greater must be the strength of the vibrations required to render them audible. As the vibrations which reach an observer increase in period, it may therefore happen that, sooner or later, the strength of some does not attain or exceed that limiting value, and, at that moment,the sound will cease to be heard. Moreover, for vibrations of a given period, this limiting value varies for different persons. Thus, to one observer, the sound may become inaudible, while another may continue to hear it. Lastly, the vibrations which affect an observer at any moment are of various strength and period. One may hear all perhaps, while a second may be able to hear some and not others. Thus, to one observer, the sound may be like a rising wind, to another like a heavy traction-engine passing; one may hear the crashes which accompanied the strongest part of the shock, while a second may be deaf to the same vibrations; to one the sound may become continually louder and cease abruptly, to another it may increase to a maximum and then die away.
Sound-Area.—While the sound was a very prominent feature of the earthquake in and near the epicentral area, records at a great distance are naturally difficult to obtain, and, on this account, the number of stations for determining the boundary of the sound-area is too small to allow of it being accurately drawn. As a rule, however, it must lie between the isoseismals 5 and 4, but it is less nearly circular than either of these lines. Its length, from north-west to south-east, is 320 miles, its breadth 284 miles, and the area contained by it about 70,000 square miles, or roughly two-thirds that of the disturbed area.
Isacoustic Lines.—The dotted lines in Fig. 60 represent isacoustic lines—that is, lines which pass through all places where the percentage of observers who recorded their perception of the sound is the same. For instance, if we take any point in the linemarked 80 and describe a small circle with that point as centre, then 80 per cent. of the observers within that circle would hear the earthquake-sound. The isacoustic lines thus show how the audibility of the sound varies throughout the sound area. To draw the curves with a close approach to accuracy, the unit of area should be small and of constant dimensions; but, in the present case, owing to the comparative paucity of the observations, a smaller unit than the county would give unreliable results.[65]At the centre of each county, the sound audibility may be regarded as proportional to the percentage of the total number of observers within the county who distinctly heard the sound. To draw the curve marked 50, the centre of every county in which the average percentage is less than 50 is joined to the centres of those adjoining counties in which it is above 50, and these lines are then divided in the proper ratio so as to give a point where the percentage would be exactly 50. A number of points at which the percentage is 50 is thus obtained, and the curve drawn through them is the required isacoustic line. The percentage of audibility varies from 87 in Herefordshire to 23 in Essex and the east of Ireland, but the only isacoustic lines which can be completely drawn are those that correspond to the percentages between 80 and 50 inclusive.
The peculiar form of the isacoustic lines will be evident at a glance. They bear little relation to the isoseismal lines. Their greatest extensions are not along the axes of those lines, but in two directions which are a little east of north-east and south ofsouth-west. They lie indeed along a hyberbolic line which, towards the south-west, agrees closely with the curvilinear axis of the hyperbolic band represented by the broken line in Fig. 60. Towards the north-east, the coincidence is not so close, but this is chiefly owing to the magnitude of the northern counties, which causes a deflection of the isacoustic lines towards the north.
It will be remembered that the hyperbolic band is the area within which the vibrations from the two foci were superposed. Now, the sound accompanied each part of the shock, and ceased entirely during the interval between them. Also, the stronger series of vibrations was accompanied by the louder sound; but, while the difference in strength was considerable between the two parts of the shock, it was very slight between the two sounds. There is therefore no marked distortion of the isoseismal lines when crossing the hyperbolic band, while the isacoustic lines are completely diverted from their normal course.
Thus, the study of the isacoustic lines strongly confirms the conclusions at which we have arrived above (p. 223)—namely, that there were two distinct foci arranged in a north-west and south-east line, and that the impulse at the former focus occurred a few seconds earlier than that at the latter.[66]
Variations in the Nature of the Sound throughout the Sound-area.—In one respect, the sound exhibited a marked uniformity all over the sound-area—namely, in its great depth; the word "heavy" being used in one out of every four accounts of the sound, whether close to the epicentre or near the boundary of the sound-area.
The type of comparison employed varies in different parts of the sound-area. As we recede from the origin, the sound becomes on the average less like thunder or explosions and more like wind. The references to passing waggons, etc., are so numerous that it is possible to draw curves, in the same way as isacoustic lines, which represent equal percentages of comparison to this type out of the total number of comparisons. The curves are somewhat incomplete, but it is noteworthy that those corresponding to the higher percentages cling to the extremities of the hyperbolic band, probably because the uninterrupted duration of the sound is greater there than elsewhere.
The effect of distance from the epicentre, however, is most noticeable in connection with changes in the character of the sound. It is only on the immediate neighbourhood of the origin that the explosive reports or crashes were heard in the midst of the rumbling sound. At a moderate distance, the sound before and after the shock became smoother, while the sound which accompanied the shock retained to a certain extent its rougher and more rumbling or grating character. Close to the boundary of the sound-area, the irregularities were still further smoothed away, and the only sound heard was like the low roll of distant thunder.
The explanation of these changes depends on thefact that, as we recede from the epicentre, the vibrations of every period tend to become inaudible. The limiting vibrations of the whole series will be the first to be lost, especially those of the longest period. Thus, near the epicentre, sound-vibrations of many different periods will be heard, and the sound will be more complex than it is elsewhere. The greater the distance, the narrower are the limits with regard to period between which the audible vibrations lie, until, near the boundary of the sound-area, the sound becomes an almost monotonous deep growl of nearly uniform intensity.
Time-relations of the Sound and Shock.—The principal epochs to be compared are the beginning, the epoch of maximum intensity, and the end. The beginning of the sound preceded that of the shock in 82 per cent. of the observations on this epoch, coincided with it in 12, and followed it in 6 per cent.; the epoch of maximum intensity preceded that of the shock in 21 per cent. of the records, coincided with it in 73, and followed it in 6 per cent.; while the end of the sound preceded that of the shock in 22½ per cent., coincided with it in 27½, and followed it in 50 per cent. Thus, as a general rule, the beginning of the sound preceded that of the shock, the sound was loudest when the shock was strongest, and the end of the sound followed that of the shock. In other words, the duration of the sound was in most cases greater than that of the shock.
Of the twelve undoubted minor earthquakes, nine occurred before, and three after, the principal shock, the times of the first eleven lying between limitsabout seven hours apart. With three exceptions, the records are insufficient to determine the positions of the epicentre with any approach to exactness.
The first occurred at about 11 or 11.30P.M.on December 16th. The boundary of the disturbed area, which coincides nearly with that of the fifth shock (E, Fig. 63), is 97 miles long from north-west to south-east, 83 miles wide, and contains about 6,300 square miles. The focus was apparently situated between the two foci of the principal earthquake and partly coincided with them.
Map of minor shocks of Hereford earthquake.Fig.63.—Map of minor shocks of Hereford earthquake. (Davison.)ToList
Fig.63.—Map of minor shocks of Hereford earthquake. (Davison.)ToList
Then came three slight shocks (at about 1A.M.on December 17th, 1.30 or 1.45A.M., and 2A.M.), aboutwhich little is known except that they probably originated somewhere near the Ross focus.
The fifth shock (E, Fig. 63) occurred at about 3A.M., and disturbed an area 104 miles in length, 79 miles in width, and about 6,400 square miles in area. Its boundary occupies approximately the position that would be taken by an isoseismal of intensity between 7 and 6 of the principal earthquake. We may therefore infer that this shock and the principal earthquake were caused by slips along the same fault and in about the same region of the fault. Also, as there is no evidence of discontinuity in the vibrations of the minor shock, it is probable that the focus was continuous, and occupied the space between the two foci of the principal earthquake, as well as part or the whole of both these foci.
The next four shocks occurred at about 3.30, 4, 5, and 5.20A.M., and were more closely associated with the Ross than with the Hereford focus, and then followed the principal earthquake at 5.32A.M.
A few minutes later, at 5.40 or 5.45A.M., a very slight shock was felt, the focus of which was possibly situated in the central region between the two foci. The next, at about 6.15A.M.(K, Fig. 63), disturbed an area 41 miles long, 27 miles broad, and containing about 870 square miles. Its focus must have coincided approximately with the Ross focus of the principal earthquake, and this was also the case probably with the last shock of all, which occurred on July 19th, 1897, at 3.49A.M.
The greater part of the epicentral district is covered by a sheet of Old Red Sandstone (Fig. 64), but, just to thenorth-east of the position laid down for the originating fault (indicated by the straight broken line), is the well-known Woolhope anticlinal, by which Silurian beds are brought to the surface. The anticlinal axis runs approximately north-west and south-east, and is thus roughly parallel to the earthquake-fault. Moreover, the thinning-out and occasional disappearance of some of the Silurian beds on the south-west side of the anticlinal (as compared with those on the north-east side) is suggestive of a north-west and south-east fault or rapid flexure at ornear the south-west junction of the Old Red Sandstone and the Silurian strata. If it be a fault, it must hade to the north-east, and would therefore satisfy two of the conditions determined by the seismic evidence. It would lie, however, about two miles too far to the north-east, being in fact to the north-east of the villages which suffered most from the earthquake.
Geology of meizoseismal area of Hereford earthquake.Fig.64.—Geology of meizoseismal area of Hereford earthquake. (Davison.)ToList
Fig.64.—Geology of meizoseismal area of Hereford earthquake. (Davison.)ToList
But only a few miles to the south-east of the Woolhope anticlinal, and almost in the same line with it, there is a second anticlinal, that of May Hill. This is a triangular area, and is known to be bounded on all three sides by faults. The fault on the north-east side has an average north-west and south-east direction, and, if it were continued through the Old Red Sandstone towards the north-west, but bending at first a few degrees more to the west, it would pass through a point about 1½ miles west of Hereford. It is worthy of notice that both this fault and another nearly parallel to it, about half-a-mile farther north-east, stop, according to the Geological Survey map, at the points where they enter the Old Red Sandstone. The latter is an area which has never been investigated with thoroughness by modern stratigraphical methods, and in which it is difficult to trace faults. It therefore appears not improbable that the earthquakes were due to slips along a continuation of this fault.
Whether this be the case or not, however, it is clear that the earthquake-fault must pass between the anticlinal areas of Woolhope and May Hill, the former being on the north-east, and the latter on the south-west, side of the fault. At the Hereford focus, the fault must hade to the north-east; and, at the Ross focus, it is probable, from the distribution of placeswhere damage occurred to buildings, that it hades to the south-west If this be the case, the fault must change in hade between the two foci.
How long a time had elapsed since the last sign of growth in the earthquake-fault took place, it is impossible to say; but it must be many years in length. During this interval, the stresses tending to produce movement along the fault-service had been gradually increasing, until they were sufficient to overcome the resistance opposed to them. It is worthy of notice that the earliest perceptible movements were slight. Their function seems to have been to prepare the way for the great slips by equalising the difference between stress and resistance over a large area of the fault-surface. We cannot trace with accuracy the transference of the seat of movement from one part of the fault-surface to another. The first slip seems to have taken place chiefly in the region between the two foci of the principal earthquake; possibly it overlapped both of them partly. The next three slips were apparently in the neighbourhood of the Ross focus, and were followed by a fifth in the same area as the first. Then came a series of small movements that we cannot locate further than by saying that they were more closely connected with the Ross focus than the other.
In consequence of the preliminary slips within and near the Ross focus, the effective stress in that portion of the fault was diminished; and this may be the reason why the first great slip took place at the Hereford focus. The immediate result of such a movement would naturally be an increase of stress in and beyond the terminal regions, and the next slip might have been expected in an area partlyoverlapping the Hereford focus, and either to the north-west or south-east of it. Instead of this, for a distance of two miles in the latter direction, there was not the least perceptible movement during the principal earthquake, and the second great slip occurred in the region beyond occupied by the Ross focus. This second slip, moreover, occurred within two or three seconds after the other; that is, before the earth-waves had time to travel from the Hereford to the Ross focus. In other words, the slip at the Ross focus was not a consequence of the slip at the Hereford focus; but both were due to a single generative effort.
Now, a section drawn parallel to the earthquake-fault and on the north-east side of it, would show an anticline near the Hereford focus and a corresponding syncline near the Ross focus, with an undisplaced portion in the intermediate region; while a parallel section on the other side of the fault would show a syncline near the Hereford focus, an anticline near the Ross focus, and again an undisplaced portion in the intermediate region. If further movements tending to accentuate such a structure were to occur (that is, if the anticlinals were to be made more anticlinal and the synclines more synclinal), there would therefore be two slips, one in each focus; while, along the fault-surface between, there would be practically no displacement. At any rate, the earlier stresses in that region may have been fully relieved by two slight preliminary slips (those causing the first and fifth minor earthquakes), and those resulting from the great displacements by the first after-slip which followed in about ten minutes.
Half-an-hour later, another slip took place at theRoss focus, and by this the equilibrium of the rock-masses was almost completely restored; for we have no certain evidence of any further movements until seven months have elapsed (July 19th, 1897), when there was a final slip in the same region of the fault.
Between the north-east end of Loch Ness and the Moray Firth at Inverness, there lies a tract of land not more than seven miles in length, which is notable as one of those most frequently shaken by earthquakes in the British Islands. In the intensity of its shocks it is inferior to the south-east of Essex and the centre of Herefordshire, and, in mere number, to the celebrated village of Comrie in Perthshire. But, in the interest of its seismic phenomena, in the light which they cast on the development of the earth's crust, the neighbourhood of Inverness has no equal in Great Britain, and not many superiors in any part of the world.
For this importance from a seismological point of view, the district is indebted to the great fault which traverses Scotland along the line of the Caledonian Canal, and to the fact that this fault, although it dates from Old Red Sandstone times, has not yet finished growing. As results of its formation, we have the almost straight cliff along the south-east coast of Rossshire, and the long chain of lakes, beginning with Loch Dochfour and Loch Ness, and ending with Loch Oich, Loch Lochy, and Loch Linnhe. As evidences of its persistent though intermittent growth, we have the slight tremors and earth-soundsoccasionally observed at and near Fort William, and the much stronger shocks felt in the neighbourhood of Inverness.
During the nineteenth century there were three strong earthquake shocks in this district. The first and most severe occurred on August 13th, 1816, and was felt over the greater part of Scotland; the second on February 2nd, 1888; and the third and weakest on November 15th, 1890. This last shock was followed by several slighter ones, the series ending with a rather smart shock on December 14th. Between this date and the summer of 1901 no earthquakes seem to have been felt at or anywhere near Inverness.
The date of the first shock of 1901 is not quite certain. One is said to have been felt at Aldourie (see Fig. 66) some time in June, and a second at Dochgarroch in July. These may have been succeeded by others too slight to attract much notice, but the first to be generally observed occurred on September 16th at 6.4P.M.A weak tremor, accompanied by a faint sound, was perceived over a nearly circular area about 12 miles in diameter, and with its centre about 1½ miles south of Dochgarroch. On the next day, at 11P.M., a quivering lasting two seconds was felt at Inverness, and a weak tremor, accompanied by sound, at Dochgarroch at 1.15A.M.on September 18th. Nine minutes later, at 1.24A.M., occurred the principal earthquake, the shock of which would be called a strong one, even in Italy and Japan.
In Inverness, the damage to buildings, though seldom serious, was by no means inconsiderable. One brick building used as a smithy was destroyed, several chimneys or parts of them fell, and many chimney-cans were displaced or overthrown. At Dochgarroch and other places within the meizoseismal area, walls were cracked, chimneys thrown down, and lintels loosened.
But, for this country, an unusual effect of the earthquake was a long crack made in the north bank of the Caledonian Canal near Dochgarroch Lochs. It occurred in the middle of the towing-path, and could be traced at intervals for a distance of 200 yards to the east of the Lochs, and 400 yards to the west, being often a mere thread, and in no place more than half-an-inch wide. Soon after its formation, however, the fissure was obliterated by heavy showers of rain.
The map (Fig. 65) shows the area over which the earthquake was perceptible. The isoseismal lines are drawn partly continuous and partly dotted—continuous where some confidence can be placed in their accuracy, and dotted where their course must be regarded as doubtful, owing to the rarity or absence of observations.
The innermost isoseismal (shown on a larger scale in Fig. 66) corresponds to the intensity 8 of the Rossi-Forel scale, and includes the places where the shock was strong enough to cause slight structural damage to buildings. It is elliptical in form, 12 miles long,7 miles broad, and 67 square mile in area, with its centre at a point about 1½ mile east-north-east of Dochgarroch, and its longer axis running N. 33° E. and S. 33° W.
Isoseismal lines of the Inverness earthquake.Fig.65.—Isoseismal lines of the Inverness earthquake. (Davison.)ToList
Fig.65.—Isoseismal lines of the Inverness earthquake. (Davison.)ToList
The remaining isoseismals are less accurately drawn, owing to the scarcity of observations made in the west of Scotland. Except towards the west, however, the course laid down for the isoseismal 7may be trusted. Its length is 53½ miles, width 35 miles, and area 1,500 square miles. Its longer axis is almost exactly parallel to that of the preceding isoseismal, but the distance between the two curves is 9 miles on the north-west, and 14 miles on the south-east, side. The isoseismal 6 is 105 miles long, 87 miles wide, and contains 7,300 square miles; and the isoseismal 5, 157 miles long, 143 miles wide, and about 17,000 square miles in area.
The isoseismal 4 may be regarded as the boundary of the disturbed area of the earthquake, for, so far as known, the shock was not noticed at any point outside it. Towards the north, it was felt at Wick, Castletown, and other intermediate places; towards the west at Tobermory in the island of Mull; and, towards the south, at Skelmorlie (in Ayrshire), Paisley, Belsyde (near Linlithgow), Gullane (near North Berwick), and Dunbar. Along the east coast of Scotland, between Wick and Dunbar, there are few places of any size where the shock was not felt. The disturbed area of the earthquake is thus 215 miles long from north-east to south-west, 198 miles wide, and contains about 33,000 square miles.
Position of the Originating Fault.—The only isoseismals which are drawn accurately enough to determine the earthquake-fault are the two inner ones, those marked 8 and 7; but these are sufficient for the purpose. It is clear, from the direction of their longer axes, that the average direction of the fault must be N. 33 degrees E. and S. 33 degrees W. Again, the isoseismals are farther apart towards the south-east than towards the north-west, implying that the fault hades to the south-east. Lastly, as the intensity of the shock is greater on the side towards which thefault hades, it follows that the fault-line must lie a short distance (about a mile or so) on the north-west side of the centre of the isoseismal 8.
Now, the great fault alluded to above occupies almost exactly the position indicated by the seismic evidence. Its mean direction from Tarbat Ness to Loch Linnhe is N. 35° E. and S. 35° W., it hades to the south-east, and the fault-line passes through a point about three-quarters of a mile to the north-west of the centre of the isoseismal 8 (Fig. 66). There can be little doubt, therefore, that the earthquake was caused by a slip of this fault; and the evidence of the after-shocks, as will be seen, offers additional support to this conclusion.
The region in which the slip took place may be determined roughly from the position and form of the innermost isoseismal. Its centre must have been close to the point marked A in Fig. 66, which corresponds to a point about 1½ mile east-north-east of Dochgarroch. In a horizontal direction, its length must have been at least five or six miles; otherwise, the isoseismal 8 would have been less elongated. It must therefore have reached from about half-a-mile north-east of Loch Ness to about half-a-mile south-west of Inverness. Its width, measured along the dip of the fault-surface is unknown; but the small distance between the centre of the isoseismal and the fault-line shows that the principal movement took place at a depth which was probably under, rather than over, one mile.
We come now to the evidence afforded by the nature of the shock, in which there was but little variation throughout the disturbed area. AtInverness, a gentle movement was first felt, followed by an extraordinary quivering, which increased in force for two or three seconds, and then decreased for two or three seconds; just as the quivering was about to cease, there was a distinct lurch or heave, after which the vibration was much more severe than before and lasted several seconds longer than the first part of the shock. Dalarossie lies about fourteen miles south-east of Inverness, and here the first indication was a loud sound, as of an express train, coming from the east, rushing close to, and then under, the house; this lasted for a few seconds, and towards the end of it the house vibrated. Then succeeded an interval of quietness for about a second, followed by a terrific burst or crash, not unlike the crash of a loud thunder peal, of about two seconds' duration, during which the house distinctly heaved up once and then sank back. After another brief interval of quietness, there was a low rumble, like the sound of a dying peal of thunder.
It will be noticed, in this account, that the two parts of the shock were no longer consecutive. There was a short interval of rest between them, the intermediate vibrations observed at Inverness being too weak to be felt at Dalarossie. Still farther away, the extinction became more marked. At Aberdeen, for instance, the shock consisted of two parts, the first a tremble, followed, after an interval of a few seconds, by a swinging movement of longer duration than the tremble.
In all parts of the disturbed area, the shock maintained the same character of division into two parts, the second of which was of greater duration and intensity than the first and consisted of vibrationsof longer period. A phenomenon of such wide occurrence was clearly not due to local influences. It must have been caused by two separate initial impulses, the stronger succeeding the other after an interval of a few seconds and taking place in nearly the same region of the fault.[67]
Outside the isoseismal 5, there are but few records of the earthquake-sound; but it was heard faintly at Skelmorlie (in Ayrshire), Belsyde (near Linlithgow), and Gullane (near North Berwick). Towards the north, it was not observed beyond Wick and Wathen (in Caithness). The boundary of the sound-area cannot be laid down with any approach to accuracy, but it must have included a district containing about 27,000 square miles.
Throughout the whole disturbed area, 84 per cent. of the observers heard the sound. The percentage varies in different counties, from 93 in Inverness-shire to 77 in the counties of Perth and Aberdeen; but the records in the more distant regions are too few to allow of the construction of isacoustic lines.
In its character, the sound resembled that usually heard with strong earthquakes, 39 per cent. of the observers having compared it to passing waggons, traction-engines, etc., 25 per cent. to thunder, 14 to wind, 8 to loads of stones falling, 3 to the fall of heavy bodies, 4 to explosions or the firing of heavyguns, and 7 per cent. to miscellaneous sounds. The intensity of the sound gradually diminished outwards from the epicentre, and most rapidly near the isoseismal 7, which abounds approximately the area in which the sound was very loud from that in which it was distinctly fainter, and also includes nearly all the places at which loud explosive crashes were heard with the strongest vibrations.
In the time-relations of the sound and shock, the Inverness earthquake resembles the Hereford earthquake of 1896. The beginning of the sound preceded that of the shock in 72 per cent. of the records, coincided with it in 20, and followed it in 8 per cent.; the epoch of maximum intensity of the sound preceded that of the shock in 20 per cent. of the records, coincided with it in 73, and followed it in 7 per cent.; while the end of the sound preceded that of the shock in 15 per cent. of the records, coincided with it in 34, and followed it in 52 per cent.
Somewhat similar proportions hold over the greater part of the disturbed area, the percentages being nearly the same in the counties of Inverness, Ross, Nairn, Elgin, Banff, and the most distant counties. But in Aberdeenshire an exception occurs, the three epochs of sound and shock in most cases coinciding with one another. The majority of the observations in this county come from the southern part, and the line joining this district to the epicentre is nearly perpendicular to the line of the earthquake-fault. This result has an important bearing on the origin of the sound-vibrations. For, if the general precedence of the sound with respect to the shock were due to its superior velocity, the percentage of records in which the beginning of the sound preceded that ofthe shock would vary only with the distance, and not with the direction from the origin. Indeed, with increasing distance from the origin, this percentage should continually approach 100; while that in which the end of the sound followed that of the shock should diminish to zero. There is, however, no trace of either tendency, the sound being heard after the shock at places close to the boundary of the sound-area. On the other hand, it the sound-vibrations were to start simultaneously, or nearly so, from all parts of the focus, but especially from its marginal regions, then, in the greater part of the disturbed area, the sound would be heard both before and after the shock; for the lateral margins of the focus would be the portions nearest to, and farther from, most observers; while, at places near the line through the epicentre at right angles to the earthquake-fault, the three principal epochs of the sound and shock should approximately coincide.
The inference that the sound-vibrations heard before and after the shock come from the margins of the focus is also supported by the observations on the relative duration of the sound and shock. If we take only those records which are free from doubt, in 78 per cent. of the total number, the duration of the sound was greater than that of the shock; while, in Aberdeenshire, according to 93 per cent. of the observers, the durations of sound and shock were equal.
We may imagine, then, that the slip within the seismic focus would be greatest in a central region, and that it would die outwards in all directions towards the edges. The friction arising from the slipping in the central region would produce chieflythe comparatively large oscillations that formed the perceptible shock; the evanescent creep within the marginal regions would produce the small and rapid vibrations that were sensible only as sound.