Sedimentary Geology, 21 (1978) 1--26
1
© Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam -- Printed in The Netherlands
THE ORIGIN A N D DISTRIBUTION OF THE LOESS IN THE D A N U B E
BASIN A N D ASSOCIATED REGIONS OF EAST-CENTRAL EUROPE - A REVIEW
I.J. SMALLEY and J.A. LEACH
Glacial Soils Project, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Leeds, Leeds
(England)
Peter Fraenkel and Partners, London (England)
(Received November 9, 1976; revised and accepted September 12, 1977)
ABSTRACT
Smalley, I.J. and Leach, J.A., 1978. The origin and distribution of the loess in the
Danube basin and associated regions of East-Central Europe -- A review. Sediment.
Geol., 21: 1--26.
Within the Danube basin significant loess deposits are located:
(1) north of the Alps, near the western end of the basin,
(2) around Vienna and stretching away in a northeasterly direction through the Moravian
depression,
(3) on either side of the south-flowing Danube in Hungary and in northern Yugoslavia,
and
(4) on the Walachian plain between Romania and Bulgaria.
These deposits can be distinguished from the belt of glacial loess extending roughly
west--east from Paris/Brussels via KSin, Leipzig, Wroclaw to Krakow and beyond, and obviously related to the North European glaciations. Other sources of material must be
invoked to explain the presence of loess (and loess-like sediments) in the Danube basin.
Material comes from three major sources:
(1) the Alpine glaciers,
(2) North European glacial debris carried through the Moravian depression by meltwater,
and
(3) silt derived from flysch and related rocks in the Carpathian mountains.
There is no simple primary loess in the Danube basin in any significant amount; deposits of typical aeolian loess which do exist are often derived from Danube floodplains and
formed from material from several sources. This is particularly true of the deposits in the
lower Danube region (on the Walachian plain). Since the deposits in the Danube basin are
so diverse in type and origin particular care is needed in the use of loess terms and in
chronological and stratigraphic investigations. This is particularly so since several countries are involved and national usage tends to differ in many ways. A particular problem is
to distinguish (physically and terminologically) materials which have been derived from a
typical loess by some 'degradation' process and materials which have never been a true
loess but have assumed certain loessic characteristics by soil-forming processes. This
occurs particularly in the Pannonian basin where there is an abundance of weathered
material.
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this paper is twofold; first to consider the recent investigations on the loess which have been carried out in an area which can roughly
be described as East-Central Europe and to review significant advances and
developments, and secondly to discuss current theories relating to the origin
of loess material and the distribution of loess deposits in this loess-rich
region, and in particular in the Danube basin. The overall region considered
corresponds roughly with t h a t described as East-Central Europe by Osborne
(1967) and Maruszczak (].967). The countries involved are Bulgaria,
Romania, Hungary and Poland: we concentrate on these four countries, but
also consider investigations carried out in Czechoslovakia, Austria, the
German Democratic Republic and Yugoslavia.
The western sheet of the INQUA loess map should be published in 1978
and it is hoped that the data presented here will assist users of this great
addition to loess cartography. Some problems have been encountered in the
production of the map because of the difficulty of matching the mapped
deposits across national boundaries and hopefully we can illustrate some
national differences in approaches to loess and loess problems which affect
the development of an overall picture of the origin and distribution of the
East-Central European loess. The problem of loess definition will n o t be discussed, except to acknowledge that the simple Smalley and Vita-Finzi
(1968) definition is inadequate in these circumstances and to propose that
the definitions developed for use with the INQUA loess map should be used.
These lengthy definitions have been published elsewhere (see Fink, 1974)
and a condensed version is given in Table I. To provide a satisfactory survey
of the loess in East-Central Europe it is absolutely necessary to recognise the
need to distinguish between several distinct types of loess; there is no place
here for a simple division into loess and not-loess; the region demands a distinction between typical loess {exact nature to be discussed) and loesses
derived from this, sometimes by a considerable sequence of events; and even
possibly loess-like materials of unexpected and independent derivation.
If glacial action is a prime cause of loess formation in the way outlined
by Smalley (1966), it would be reasonable to expect a band of loess to parallel the limits of glaciation and thus spread as a broad stripe across northern
Europe. The more modest Alpine glaciers would produce loess deposits
around the Alps; and these could be the two main sources of loess material
in Europe. In this circumstance the deposits near the Alps are readily
explained and the belt across northern Europe via Brussels, KSln, Leipzig,
Wroclaw, Cracow etc., matches the glacial limits very conveniently. The
problems are: What happened to this material after initial deposition? Was it
moved from the glacial limits into the more distant regions of East-Central
Europe? What effect did the Danube and its tributary system have? Where
did the loess material end up? And, very significantly, was material produced
within the Danube basin independently of the glacial sources at the fringes?
TABLE I
Loess definitions used in the preparation of the INQUA loess map of Europe (Fink,
1974)
Name
Definition/description and synonyms
Loess
German synonyms: Loss, typiseher Loss ("typical" loess).
Characteristics: the definitely dominant fraction of the
sediment is within 60--20 pm (coarse silt, very fine sand),
unstratified; primarily calcareous, quite porous capillary
network, on the whole, dry material is yellow, buff, brownish yellow.
Sandy loess
German synonyms: Sandloss, Flottsand, lossiger Sand,
sandiger Loss. Characteristics: mixture of grains sized 60-20 pm and 500--200 pm (fine sand, medium sand), often
the distribution of particle sizes shows a major peak within
the silt range and a lesser peak within the medium sand
range, sometimes there is an equal distribution among silt,
(very) fine sand, and medium sand fractions; very often
they are unstratified or in thin beds, usually non-calcareous,
not so porous as loess, colour similar to loess.
Clay-loess, clayey loess,
argillaceous loess
German synonyms: Tonloss, toniger Loss, tonreicher Loss.
Characteristics: peak particle size of the sediment is within
the range from 60--20 /am with 25--30% of particles being
smaller than 2 m (clay size); unstratified, low porosity;
similar carbonate content and colour to loess.
Loess-like sediments
German synonyms: Lossderivate, lossartige Sedimente.
General characteristics: the term covers primarily aeolian
material which has been moved or redeposited in various
(secondary) processes (allochtonous loess-like sediments)
and/or modified in-situ (autochthonous loess-like sediments); relevant processes are:
"deluvial" (colluvial) processes and solifluction respectively
giving hill-washed loess, solifluction loess, solifluxion loess
(German terms: Solifluktions-loss, Fliesloss, Bergloss, Hangloss).
fluvial (proluvial) processes giving brickearth, brick earth
(German: Sehwemmloss, subaquatischer Loss).
modification caused by cryoturbation giving "cryoturbation loess" (German: Kryoturbationsloss).
eluvial and pedogenic processes giving loess loam (German:
Losslehm, Glayloss, Staublehm ("dust loam"), Decklehm
("covering loam")).
thorough, intense pedogenic modification and transformation (redeveloping) giving "semi-pedoliths" and "pedoliths"
(these terms are proposed by M. Pecsi for lithified soils
formed from redeposited soil and loess material).
Loess-like sediments may have originated from either loess, sandy loess, or clay-loess; in
any case their porosity is less than that of the original material; great variation of carbonate content, some may he essentially non-calcareous; colours may differ considerably in
particular cases.
THE REGION
The Danube basin provides a challenging setting for the study of loess
sedimentation. It is satisfactory in that the bounds can be neatly drawn and
the region defined simply and accurately; b u t in terms of the study of loess
sedimentation, it presents many difficulties, some of which were touched on
in the Introduction. Defining the region as the Danube basin involves an
admission that the River Danube plays a major role in the shaping of the system and an important part of this discussion concerns the interaction of the
Danube with associated loess deposits. This has been considered very briefly
before (Smalley, 1972) b u t many of the interesting aspects of the whole
Danube basin have never been thoroughly assessed. Much investigation has
been carried out on the loess in the various countries involved and the most
accessible reports of this work are contained in the volumes on loess produced for the 1965 (published 1968) and 1969 INQUA congresses. At the
Paris congress in 1969 a survey of European loess was undertaken and the
published volume (in French) gives a convenient review of European loess
from a stratigraphic viewpoint.
The region could be defined in alternative geographical terms and these
are invoked because it is necessary, to look effectively at the loess within the
Danube basin, to consider loess near but outside the Danube basin, particularly in Poland. The arguments about the definition of Central Europe
can be complex, as discussed by Sinnhuber (1954), but the region which
could conveniently be called East-Central Europe provides an interesting
region for a review of loess research.
Osborne (1967) defined East-Central Europe as the countries of Poland,
Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia and Albania. With
the German Democratic Republic, these correspond with Pounds' (1969)
demarcation of Eastern Europe. If the two great European-based Quaternary
compendia (Charlesworth, 1957, Woldstedt, 1958) are consulted, they offer
very little information on loess in these countries, with some notable exceptions, for example the loess in Czechoslovakia gets a reasonable treatment by
Woldstedt who also discusses the famous loess section at Paks in Hungary.
But in general terms the Danube loess is n o t well appreciated.
Woldstedt and Charlesworth probably represent the view of the Quaternary geologists up to a b o u t the mid 1950's; since then loess investigations
have been initiated and developed in most of the East European countries.
This development has been a comparatively recent one but has achieved
some remarkable results. Two examples might illustrate the time factor.
Pecsi {1965) has written: "In the past the microstratigraphic and palaeopedolic study of the Hungarian loess profiles was restricted almost entirely
to the Paks profile." And Conea, discussing the loess profile investigation in
Romania, pointed out h o w studies have developed since Haase and Richter
(1957) examined the profile at Constanta. The Haase and Richter paper is
referred to by Woldstedt b u t the important work by Conea and other
115° . : ~
~25o
.!20°
\
\-~
{
)
POLAND
[
50°
~,
/
'h"
<,
CZECHO
~.~. ~f..,.
/ " ~ ~--,d.~ -SLOVAKIA
.J
AUSTRIA
9"
/
\
X
/
\
RUMANIA
~i :[\YUGOSLAVIA }Q£~
.IilI
[15°
III ::I.V:. II
i
120°
~25°
Fig. I. National boundaries in East-Central Europe.
Romanian workers follows the publication of Part 2 of 'Das Eiszeitalter' (in
1958).
Fig. 1 shows the national boundaries in East Europe and the main rivers
of concern to this paper. Fig. 2 shows the mean annual discharge of the
Danube and its tributaries. It is proposed that loessic material has been (and
is, to a m o d e s t extent) delivered into the main stream by the rivers Inn and
Tisza. The Tisza is the only north-bank tributary of any size and drains the
Great Hungarian Plain. The Inn, the second largest of the south-bank tributaries, carries Alpine materials and has probably contributed significantly to
-,
Km
2890
Isar185 . ~
2500-
Inn 809~
MauthQusen
Wien1920
~omva (March)
~'
105
Budapest 2330
~'El
UndergroL
recharge
Mohacs
2180~
T~lsze/820
Sava 1520
Moravo 190
2000-
Pan~.evo5380
Calafat
5620
Oltenita 5940
Sulina 6430 m/sec
Fig. 2. Mean annual discharge of the River Danube and its tributaries (after Laszloffy,
via Pecsi and Sarfalvi, 1964).
downstream deposits. The Sava drains the Yugoslavian highlands but probably cannot be considered as a very significant supplier of loessic sedimentary
material; it does not have links with a major glaciated region such as the
North Alpine foreland nor does it drain a silt-rich plain.
The Morava (March}, contributing a modest 105 m 3, below Vienna, flows
through the Moravian depression and currently can only transport an insignificant amount of material. At times of glacial melt large volumes of water
flowed through this depression and carried glacial debris which contributed
greatly to deposits in lower parts of the Danube valley.
POLAND
The loess in Poland is concentrated in the south of the country. A southern limit is formed by the Carpathian Mountains. The loess is obviously associated with, and the quartz particles formed by, the northern glaciers. The
aeolian theory of loess deposit formation has been widely accepted in
Poland, and in some cases has been stretched b e y o n d its limits. Maruszczak
(1967), for example, has suggested that the loess in the lower Danube valley,
on the Walachian plain, was blown into position by winds from the west.
The disposition of the loess deposits in southern Romania and northern
Bulgaria make~,, this a doubtful suggestion, or rather, suggests that fluvial
transportation was more significant. It has also been suggested (see, for
example, Pounds, 1969, p. 10) that loess material was carried by the wind
across the Carpathians and nearby mountains to be deposited in parts of the
plains of Bohemia and Moravia, in the Hungarian plain, and in Walachia and
Moldavia. This also seems unlikely; observations in various parts of the world
indicate that loess material is invariably transported a relatively short distance b y the wind, and the idea of a 300 km transportation across a mountainous region lacks support.
North European material has, however, been introduced into the Danube
basin from north of the Carpathians. Glacial melt water flowing through the
Moravian depression between the Bohemian Massif and the western end of
the Carpathians must have carried large amounts of glacial sand and silt into
the region n o w occupied by eastern Austria and the little Hungarian plain.
The loess in Poland is mostly primary loess (using the term primary in the
simple sense, as in Smalley, 1972) and n o t complicated by secondary deposition and other events. Or rather, there is sufficient primary loess in Poland
for this to be the subject of much loess investigation. The distribution factors affecting Polish loess have recently been described by Jersak (1970),
compositions and properties compared by Borowiec (1970), and the sedimentation process discussed b y Cegla (1972). At a recent symposium, edited
by Maruszczak (1972), the problem of classifying Polish loesses was considered.
Continuing the investigations of Tokarski et al. {1961), Manecki and
Dominik (1972) have carried out a detailed study of the loess deposits at
Zwierzyniec on the outskirts of Krakow. It seems reasonable to consider the
Zwierzyniec loess as fairly typical of the Polish loesses and it seems possible
that some of the conclusions of Manecki and Dominik may have nationwide
applicability. They concluded that:
(1) The Zwierzyniec loess is primary loess.
(2) Allogenic minerals that accumulated by aeolian processes are quartz,
feldspars, micas, transparent minerals of the heavy fraction and, from clay
minerals, mainly kaolinite and some illite.
(3) Autogenic minerals include carbonate minerals (mainly calcite) and some
clay minerals of the montmorillonite and illite groups.
(4) Due to a small amount of heavy minerals, the main mass of iron is
bonded in weakly crystallized goethite.
South of the Polish loess deposits lie the Carpathian Mountains, and associated with these mountains are considerable deposits of silt. There has been
some dispute a b o u t the origin of this silt and the discussion has considerable
bearing on the problem of the origin of loess material in the Danube basin.
A detailed study has been made by Cegla (1963) of the silts in the Podhale,
Sacz, Jaslo-Sanok and Zywiec basins. Cegia concluded that the silty sediments were derived from local flysch rocks by weathering. He suggested that
there is evidence that the macroscopic similarity of the upper portions of the
silts to the loess proper is largely due to subsequent soil processes.
The silts should be regarded as post-Aurignacian sediments, since the presence of this horizon has been proved in gravels underlying the silts. Thus it
appears that the formation of the silts may be linked with the Older Dryas
period. It is suggested that the argillaceous horizon between the upper and
lower silts corresponds to the Allerod period, while the upper parts of the
silts were formed during the Younger Dryas.
Thus a geographical accident ensures that the loess and the silt remain
distinguishable in southern Poland. The Scandinavian glaciers have produced
silt which has been incorporated in the loesses, whilst the weathering of the
flysch in the Carpathians has yielded silt which has n o t been incorporated
into the loess deposits. The anti-cyclonic weather system associated with the
ice sheets ensured that glacial silt was predominant in the loess; had a wind
been available from the south, presumably the Carpathian silt could have
contributed.
HUNGARY
Hungary is totally within the Danube basin and probably presents the most
challenging problems in terms of loess origin and distribution. Isolated from
the North European lowlands by the Carpathian mountains, Hungary was
apparently denied a supply of loess material from the north European glaciers, which provided such an abundance on the northern side of the
Carpathians. And yet loess is abundant in Hungary; the recently published
1 : 500,000 geomorphological map shows very clearly the widespread distribution of loess material and the wide variety of loess deposits.
Recent Hungarian loess investigation has been very much influenced by
Pecsi {1965, 1966, 1967, 1972). His views (based on his 1966 paper in Petermanns Mitt.) could be summarized as follows: Hungary is situated in the middle
of the Carpathian Basin, where loess profiles of considerable thickness are fairly
abundant. These profiles are of a fundamental importance for the genetic,
stratigraphic and chronological classification of European loesses and loesslike deposits. The many-sided fine-stratigraphic and lithological study of the
Hungarian loess outcrops has revealed the cyclic alternation of layers of
diverse origin -- aeolian, deluvial, alluvial, as well as autochthonous-eluvial.
The dating of the loess profiles depends in principle on the correct interpretation of the origin of the sedimentary record which in turn was governed b y
the palaeogeographic, palaeophysiographic situation. The majority of the tall
loess bluffs in Hungary are situated on slopes or valley flanks. It may be
stated in general that even within a given stadial phase several loess layers of
different origin, aeolian, solifluction type, etc., came to exist and in the same
interval the intervention of several phases of denudation may also be proved.
Furthermore, the number of fossil soil horizons is substantially larger than in
Western or Central Europe. Most of them consists of steppe-type soils, forest
softs being scarcer and being due mostly, if n o t exclusively, to interglacial
climates. The formation of these fossil soils did n o t cover the entire time
span of the corresponding warm-climate phase either. Most of the sedimentary record of the Hungarian loess profiles is Upper Pleistocene, with the
older, Riss, Mindel and Gunz loesses playing a fairly subordinate role.
Pecsi (1972) has suggested that the loess and loess-like sediments in
Hungary may be considered as existing in three geomorphologlcal positions:
(a) The largest and most continuous extension of loessy silt cover occurs in
the flood plains and large alluvial fans of the Great Hungarian Plain. The
loess horizons alternate with sandy or silty layers and floodplain hydromorphous soils.
(b) On the flood-free alluvial fans of the Great Hungarian Plain (i.e., where a
continuous subsidence t o o k place during the Pleistocene) the loessic formations are deposited together with both aeolian and fluviatile sand intercalating both horizontally and vertically. In boreholes sunk in the southern
part of the Danube-Tisza interfluve, the alternation of sand and loess strata
was recognized down to 200 m below ground level (Mihaltz, 1953).
(c) Loess types of lithologically varied compositions and origins occur on the
slopes of mountains and foothill surfaces and in the derasion valleys dissecting frequently the slopes of the ridges in the hilly regions. In these areas
the typical loess layers play a subordinate role in the loess sequences.
It is important to recognise that in Hungarian loess literature (for example
in the Pecsi papers already cited) the term loess is used in a very general
sense. The very complexity o f the Hungarian deposits encourages this sort of
usage. A loess profile may contain much material which is n o t loess by any
definition. The famous Paks brickyard profile was measured b y one of the
authors in 1974 and this profile, some 47 m in height, would appear to comprise only 15% of true, unstratified aeolian loess, whereas fossil soils account
for 20% of the thickness of the profile. Pecsi (1965), describing the Paks profile, identifies a wide variety of loess types, some aeolian loess types such as
sandy loess, and others which are deluvial-eluvial deposits or altered loesses,
such as slaggy loess and slope loess. These loess-like sediments account for
some 47% of the Paks exposures. Similarly, the Dun~fSldv~r profile (see
Pecsi, 1972) which can be seen as a 50 m high bluff by the Danube, has a
2 m thick stratum a b o u t 5 m from the t o p of the section which is c o m p o s e d
of almost pure sand (c 90% sand). This profile, extended downwards another
10
35 m by boring, covers the entire Pleistocene; the lower 10 m are in the
Pliocene Pannonian formation. The stratigraphic value of such a section is
presumably reduced by the variety of materials composing it and the variety
of conditions their presence reflects. When Soergel initiated the use of loess
stratigraphy as a chronological insight into Pleistocene events, it was on the
assumption that the style of events recorded in the profile did n o t vary too
widely. The profile at Mauer, for example, represents periods of loess deposition separated by periods of soil formation. A knowledge of deposition
mechanics and conditions and speed of weathering under climatic controls
allowed certain conclusions to be drawn. This sort of approach may be impossible with the Hungarian profiles because of the wide variety of processes
and materials involved (Leach, 1975).
The fortuitous separation of glacial silt and Carpathian weathering silt
which occurred north of the Carpathians does n o t happen to the south, and
this is an obvious complicating factor to the Hungarian loess scene. Another
is that there is no simple primary loess as such in Hungary. There is typical
loess, in the INQUA Loess Commission sense (see Table I); b u t there is no
simple primary loess in the sense that the Zwierzyniec loess is primary. The
deposits of typical aeolian loess which exist in Hungary could be called primary (nth cycle) loess (after Smalley, 1972) because the predominant mateis formed a long way away and is subject to several transportation and deposition events before becoming aeolian loess. The distinction is, however, in
this case, relatively minor b u t it should be recorded that the typical loess
beside the Danube in Hungary (and in Romania) is closer in type to (say) the
lower Mississippi valley loess than it is to the Zwierzyniec loess a few hundred km to the north.
Loess is essentially quartz silt and quartz silt for the Hungarian loess
appears to derive from three main sources:
(1) Glacial material carried into the western parts through the Moravian
depression by glacial floodwater.
(2) Weathering products of flysch-type rocks in the Carpathians (as
described by Cegla, 1963, for the Polish Carpathians) which is mostly delivered into the Tisza system.
(3) Glacial material from the Alpine region introduced into the Danube
basin at the western extremity and carried into Hungary by the Danube
itself.
Aeolian loess deposits beside the Danube are derived from adjacent floodplains. The aeolian transportation is over a short distance, and it is no surprise to find that the best-developed loess sections are very close to the
Danube. Much of the region east of the Danube, in the Tisza basin, is shown
as covered by Pleistocene and Holocene, loessy flood-plain silts. These might
be associated with loess by virtue of particle size and mineral composition
b u t they lack the structural properties which characterise a typical loess.
To understand the disposition of loess in Hungary it is necessary to consider the disposition of loess deposits in the entire Danube basin. Fig. 3
11
MAXIMUM OF GLACIAL ADVANCE
tl
/I
/
"Leipzigp/
N
- 50° N
• Krokow
Moravion
Got,
li / ~ ii
i .
I
[I,[..''IL
TM
i
I
Mouo,a,os
I /"
It
ILD1
Carpathian
Mountains
Bohemian
!I'/
50°N --
~
'
[ D21
Transylvanian
en
L\_I
I_Dt3
I
~Cl~rest ~-,
Fig. 3. Loess regions. N = n o r t h e r n belt o f glacial loess; R = Rhine valley loess; D 1 - - 5 =
Danube basin deposits, viz., 1 = N o r t h Alpine; 2 = Moravian depression; 3 = P a n n o n i a n
basin (west o f D a n u b e ) ; 4 = P a n n o n i a n basin (Tisza region); 5 = Walachian plain ( R o m a nia and Bulgaria). Suggested transportation directions are indicated: small arrows--aeolian
transportation; large arrows--fluvial (D2, D4, D5) or glacial (N) transportation.
shows, very much in outline -- emphasised, we hope, by the rectangular areas
of demarcation -- definable loess areas in Europe (excluding the very eastern
fringe). A definable loess area is one which, by virtue of m o d e of formation
and geographical location, can be readily distinguished. Only a coarse distinction is attempted and seven areas are chosen; these include the major
loess regions: N, the northern loess band, directly related to the limits of the
northern glaciers; R, the Rhine valley loess; D1, the Alpine loess -- north o f
the Alps; D2, the material carried through the Moravian depression (loess
and other material); D3 and D4, possibly contentious deposits, mostly in
Hungary and to be discussed later; and D5, the lower Danube, Walachian
Plain, deposits.
The D3 and D4 deposits are located in the Pannonian basin, the most difficult region in the Danube basin, as far as the problem of explaining loess
origin and distribution is concerned. The loess deposits in Hungary have been
carefully and accurately mapped but for the preparation of a relatively large
scale regional study a map of European distribution is required. The INQUA
loess map of Europe is only now becoming available so Fig. 3 was prepared
from the map of Flint (1957, pl. 4) which gives a general picture of
12
03
RLL
{D2)
)
b~
4ohacs
Fig. 4. Selected loess regions in Hungary (after Pecsi 1964).
dy loess; R L L = redeposited loess loam (Pecsi terminology).
TL
=
typical loess;SL = san-
European loess distribution. This indicates two large Pannonian deposits, one
essentially west of the Danube, the other east of the Tisza; these are represented in Fig. 3 as D3 and D4.
Fig. 4 is based on a loess map of Hungary by Pecsi. The original shows a
complex distribution of many types of deposit -- many of which might not,
b y strict application of some definitions, be classified as loess at all. Pecsi
appears to call loess any sediment which has a significant amount of silt. He
has published a profile of the 'flood-plain loess' at Mohacs; this shows silt,
sandy-silt, and sandy-clay layers between the marshy flood-plain soils
repeated several times. "Due to soil-biological processes, the uppermost part
of the profile becomes a loess-like structure."
The deposits to the west of the Danube are placed in D3; they are considered to be formed from Alpine and northern material. The deposits to the
west, separated from the Danube by the Danube-Tisza interfluve, consist in
the main of material derived by weathering of tertiary sediments, in particular the Carpathian flysch. The critical loess-forming action (the critical initial action -- the formation of the loess silt} possibly occurred before the
Pleistocene began, which is unusual for a loess deposit, although it should be
remarked that some workers (e.g., Lugn 1969) believe in the recirculation of
old material.
13
The problem of loess 'genetics' in Hungary has been considered by Lang
(1970}. He claims that the main genetic loess types are:
(1) Aeolian loess occurring most often (typical loess).
(2) Aeolo-deluvial loess (deluvial c o n t e n t 50%).
(3} Deluvio-aeolian loess (mainly deluvial).
(4) Deluvial loess.
(5) Eluvial loess.
(6) Other transitional loess-like rock.
The sections near the Danube show the best loess exposures but some of
the material away from the river has been closely examined and reveals some
very interesting facts. Seppala (1971) has investigated the material at Mende
(see Fig. 4 for location). This particular brick pit is situated to the east of the
Danube, in fact it is roughly equidistant from the Tisza and the Danube. In
terms of drainage basins it is in the basin of the Tisza and is separated from
the widespread Holocene floodplain silts which fringe the Danube on its
eastern bank by widespread sand dune regions. Some simple questions might
be posed: How did the loess material arrive at Mende? Is it material from the
Danube floodplain, perhaps largely produced by northern glaciers? Is it
mostly silt from the Carpathians? Or is it from some other source and produced by some other mechanism.
Seppala (1971) quoted the statement by Flint (1957, p. 191) that the
"Chief source of loess was outwash in the valley of the Danube, derived from
the glaciers in the Alps and in the Carpathians", (repeated in Flint 1971, p.
263) and suggested that this presented a very simplified picture of the actual
case--a view with which we agree. We would propose that at least one other
major source of loess material should be considered for the parts of the
Danube basin to the east of the Moravian gate and that is glacial material
provided by northern glaciers and carried through the Moravian depression
by glacial meltwater. Examination of a loess map of Hungary (even a fairly
simple one: Pecsi, 1964} will reveal large deposits of "redeposited loess
l o a m " in the extreme western regions of the country.
Seppala c o m m e n t e d on the roundness of a significant n u m b e r of the
quartz particles in the Mende loess. He suggested that it cannot be inferred
from the roundness and surface texture of the material whether it was worn
during loess accumulation or due to earlier processes. The great dispersion of
roundness refers to grains of various kinds or origin. In that case earlier
aeolian and fluvial sediments as well as chemical and mechanical weathering
products must be considered. It should be noted that Cegla (1963) has suggested that the Carpathian silts in south Poland contain a significantly higher
proportion of rounded particles than the primary loess deposits in the band
to the north.
YUGOSLAVIA
The Danube flows through the low lands in the north of Yugoslavia,
where it is joined by the Tisza, and then on through the Iron Gates gorge to
14
become the boundary between Romania and Bulgaria as it flows through the
Walachian Plain. Markovic-Marjanovic (1968b, 1969) has distinguished three
regions in Yugoslavia with aeolian sediments.
(1) The great region of the Pannonian basin is covered by loess and windblown sand.
(2) The valleys of the great rivers show patches of aeolian deposits. Such
valleys with spots of loess are Velika Morava, with Zapadna and Juzna
Morava, Nisava, Vardar, and Bosna with Usora.
(3) Spots of loess are found on the Adriatic coast, near Susak and Zadar,
and also on the bank of Lake Skadar.
Of these (1) is of most interest in that it is directly associated with the
Danube and is well within the Danube basin. Pecsi (1972) has presented
some data on sections on the Danube between the Hungarian border and the
junction with the Tisza.
Aeolian sediments in Yugoslavia include:
(1) Loess, with a thickness of between 5 and 50 m, especially on the
Plateau of Titel, the northern slopes of Fruska Gore, and other parts of
Vojvodina. Loess with a thickness of under 5 m is found on most of the terraces in the Pannonian Basin.
(2) Wind-blown sand also covers wide areas in the Pannonian Basin; on the
Danube, before the Iron Gates and where the Danube and Tisza meet.
In the southern (Yugoslavian) part of the Pannonian basin the rivers
Drava, Sava and Tisza join the Danube. Each contributes sediment. The Tisza
brings Carpathian weathering debris from the Great Hungarian Plain, the
Danube brings glacial material and the Sava must be transporting some
loessic material since deposits have been reported in the vicinity of Zagreb
(Janekovic, 1968). The three rivers are, with the Inn (see Fig. 2), the major
tributaries of the Danube and must deliver a good selection of mixed sediment to the floodplains of north Yugoslavia. This material, from numerous
sources, was also transported through the Iron Gates by the Danube and
deposited on the lower Danube floodplains subsequently to become the
Romanian and Bulgarian loess.
Markovic-Marjanovic (1968a, p. 276) claims that the loess sections in the
Danube valley in Yugoslavia are important for the stratigraphy of the
Quaternary in southeast Europe. They show that Yugoslavia, though the
remotest of all European countries from the inland ice, has undergQne,
during the glacial epoch, all its influences and oscillations. The loesses are
more completely and more markedly developed in this way than in some
central European countries (she suggests the D D R and Poland).
The Yugoslavian deposits will fallinto region D 4 in our scheme of disposition. They should perhaps be in a littlesub-region of their own since in terms
of origin they are distinctive. Loess material is delivered into the important
regions of northeast Yugoslavia by the river Tisza carrying Pannonian basin
weathering debris, by the Danube carrying Alpine glacial material from the
D1 region and northern glacial material from the D 2 region. The fact that
15
the deposits mirror so many of the features of the northern deposits demonstrates very clearly the extent of glacial control on the production of loess
material. The 'better' development of the loess is probably due to the long
transportation involved which allows effective particle sorting. The loess
deposits in the D D R (for example) are in some cases difficult to distinguish
areally from associated glacial materials (sandlSss, flugsand, etc.).
ROMANIA AND BULGARIA
After the Danube has flowed through the Iron Gates gorge it runs more or
less due east for a b o u t 300 km, forming the boundary between Romania and
Bulgaria. The Danube basin narrows dramatically as the m o u t h is approached
and on either side of the river considerable highlands exist; these encompass the Walachian plain on which considerable loess sedimentation has
occurred. The material for this loess is provided by the three main sources
which have already been enumerated; we propose that the bulk of the material is derived from the Pannonian basin weathering products with a considerable admixture of material from the northern glacial material. Considering
the distance involved, it seems unlikely that much Alpine material is
involved.
Loess deposits in Bulgaria have been thoroughly investigated by Bulgarian
workers, in particular by Minkov (1968, 1970). Many of the results of these
researches have been published in Bulgarian and this has somewhat reduced
their effectiveness in basinwide studies; however, sufficient data is available
in more accessible languages to enable the significant details of the Bulgarian
loess to be discerned (Fotakieva and Minkov, 1966, 1968). In Bulgaria,
Quaternary glacations covered the Rila (2926 m) and Prin (2915 m) mountains, which are situated in the southern part of the country. Traces of t w o
glaciations (Riss and Wurm) were found in this region. It is claimed that material originating from the accumulation activity of these glaciers do not overlap (or contribute to?) the loess deposits (Fotakieva and Minkov, 1968). The
loess in Bulgaria occupies an area of 9,800 km 2, distributed exclusively in the
section along the Danube. The thickness of the formation depends on the
distance from the river and the age of the geomorphological element it overlies. On the plateaux in immediate proximity to the river the thickness varies
within the range 50--60 m with some loess walls reaching 100 m. The thickness drops to 25--30 m a b o u t 10 km south of the Danube b u t in the southern peripheral parts it approaches 4--5 m. The studies carried o u t b y Minkov
and co-workers lead them to believe that the loess is emplaced b y aeolian
action and the material is derived from Danube floodplains.
In general, loess in Romania is a sediment of typical aeolian genesis, which
is attested by grain size, texture, carbonate content, colour and the existence
of fossil soils, as well as by the topographical position in which these sediments are found {Richter, 1968). The guidebook issued for the INQUA
Loess Commission excursions in 1972 gives a very convenient summary of
16
loess in Romania (Conea et al., 1972). Loess in Romania differs from loess
accumulated in more westerly and northerly situated countries by a higher
content of silt and clay. It is proposed (see Richter, 1968) that this conspicuous lowering of median grain size is probably a consequence of the position
of the country, because the area was not supplied with aeolian material from
neighbouring districts only b u t also from distant ones. Richter is not quite
clear on this point; he seems to imply that long-range aeolian transport may
be involved -- contributing small particles. We suggest that a more likely
explanation is that the reduction in median particle size is a consequence
of the long fluvial transportation and the final aeolian emplacement occurred
over the usual short distance.
It appears that the maximum effort in the field of loess research in
Romania has been expended in Dobrogea -- a region to the east of the northturning Danube, between the river and the Black Sea. A very detailed monographic study of the Quaternary of this region has been produced by Conea
(1970}. The Romanian Danube Plain has perhaps received less recent attention but a considerable amount of data has been amassed. Conea et al.
(1972} have proposed that in the eastern part of the country, aeolian materials have been brought by winds blowing from N and NE and in the western
part by W and SW winds. This fact, they suggest, is very true for the Danube
Plain where the more intense activity of the western wind is proved by the
presence of aeolian sands to be found only on the left bank of the rivers in
the western part of the Plain. However, the most considerable quantities of
dust have been carried by the N and NE winds, in the eastern part of the
Plain. This could be essentially northern material, perhaps formed by the
Dnepr lobe glaciers. Conea et al. (1972) suggest that in Dobrogea aeolian
materials may originate from the Black Sea beaches and from the weathering
products of local hard rocks.
AUSTRIA AND CZECHOSLOVAKIA
Part of the Czechoslovakian loess lies within the Danube basin but some significant loess deposits are outside the basin, away to the north, forming part of
the northern band of glacial loess. The deposits near Prague probably fall
into this category. However, the loess near Brno is certainly part of the D2
system. In the past few years considerable research has been carried o u t on
the loess in Czechoslovakia, in particular on the snail fauna (Lozek, 1965,
1968, 1969) and on correlations with deep-sea deposits (Kukla, 1970). A
volume was prepared for the 1969 INQUA Congress in Paris and this gives a
good survey (Demek and Kukla, 1969).
The loess at Prague, Brno and Krems (in Austria) was used by Kukla
(1970) in preparing his correlation with ocean-floor sediments. He claimed
that whereas the attention of almost all Quaternary stratigraphers is focussed
on deep-sea chronology, the results obtained in the classical loess regions of
Central Europe are poorly known. If his argument is accepted and the com-
17
plex loess sequences are used as he suggests in Quaternary chronology, it will
be necessary to establish conditions and mechanisms of deposition. As has
already been noted, with reference to the Hungarian loess, it is desirable
from a chronological view that the loess deposit be a fairly simple one, with
deposition occurring in a simple and predictable manner. This virtue is
possessed by deep-sea sediments, which makes them powerful stratigraphic
indicators. It is debatable whether the same uniformity of deposition style
is possessed by loess deposits.
If a loess deposit is to be used as a chronological indicator, the processes
of deposition of aeolian material and the interludes of soil formation should,
as far as possible, be uninterrupted by other events. Ideally the material
all the way up the profile should be uniform in size and as nearly uniform as
possible in mineralogy (of major constituents).
The famous deposits at Krems and Brno are in the D2 region; it is possible
that as a result they might show slightly different features to the Prague loess
which belongs to the N region.
The loess in Austria has been comprehensively surveyed by Fink (1968b,
1969b) and Fink and Piffl (1975). Fink has also given some useful summaries of loess research on a wider scale (Fink, 1968a, 1969a, 1972, 1974). In
Austria he distinguishes four palaeoclimatic regions: the 'dry' loess region,
with Chernozems as recent soils; the 'humid' loess region, with grey-brown
podsolic soils; the very humid 'dust-loam' (staublehm) region, with pseudogley soils as recent soils; and the very small region he calls the 'transitional
region'. Its sections, well known as Gottweig, Paudorf and Krems, are situated on the border of the dry and the humid loess regions. The humid loess
occurs in the region of the north of the Alps (D1 in our classification); the
dry/Chernozem loess occurs in NE Austria (the region of the Morava-Danube
junction, around Vienna, in region D2). The Staublehm is found in the SE
and stretches into the western parts of Hungary--but is probably still part of
region D2.
Some d o u b t was cast on stratigraphic terminology at the 1969 INQUA
meeting. The palaeosol which lies between the two sediment layers of the
Wurm glacial period was formerly called 'Paudorf'. New studies at the type
locality (south of Krems, lower Austria) have shown that the Paudorf soil is
of an older origin. It was suggested that the term 'Paudorf' no longer be used
in a stratigraphic sense; also the term 'Gottweiger Verlehmungszone', the
t y p e locality of which lies in a sunken road north of Gottweig, and where
recent field studies and the analysis of drill profiles indicate that a greater
age than Riss/Wurm is probable.
To the north of western Austria the Danube flows through West Germany
and there are deposits there which fall into region D1. This region has been
extensively studied by Brunnacker (1969). The Alpine ice spread to the
north almost to the present site of Munich (see Woldstedt 1958, p. 168).
There was some extension to the east, perhaps sufficiently for the Krems
loess to be of Alpine material, certainly n o t far enough for the Brno loess to
be Alpine.
18
GERMAN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC (DDR)
The loess in the DDR, like the loess in Poland, falls into the band associated with the northern glaciers. Unlike the Polish loess there is in no sense a
connection with the basin material and the deposits in the DDR are essentially peripheral to this study. However, they do fall into the East European
region as defined by Pounds (1969) and several interesting accounts of the
loess have been published lately. Supplement 274 to Petermanns Geographischen Mitteilungen contains some very complete studies on the loess of
the DDR (Richter et al., 1970). Neumeister (1971) has produced a comprehensive study of loess and related deposits in the vicinity of Leipzig and
Haase (1963) has reviewed the situation and problems of loess research in
Europe. This Haase paper is now somewhat superseded but provides a very
useful review of activity up to about 1962 and shows the emphasis which has
been given to loess stratigraphy.
DISCUSSION
Although considerable investigations have been carried out on the loess
deposits within the Danube basin there have not been m a n y attempts at synthesis. It is important to consider the loess in the Danube basin since,
although this has certain similarities to the northern belt of loess, it has certain added aspects which make it distinctive. One of the great problems in
loess investigation has been that the apparent similarities of widely separated
loess deposits have been overvalued and critical distinctions overlooked. This
trend has been exacerbated by the consideration of loess in separate national
packages w i t h o u t internationally accepted standards of definition and
description.
A thorough study of the conditions and distribution of loess in EastCentral Europe has been carried out by Maruszczak (1967). He has produced
a map of the distribution of loess in the region and published an interpretation based on the following assumptions:
(a) The loess was accumulated mainly by wind action, or was subject to
aeolian transport immediately before deposition by ocher agents (e.g., slope
processes).
(b) The loess cover of the discussed area was accumulated mainly during
the last glaciation ("younger loess").
(c) After the end of accumulation of the loess the distribution and shape
of the loess cover was not markedly changed by erosion.
Basing his argument on these assumptions, Maruszczak (1967) reached the
following conclusions:
(1) The loess covers are distributed in the discussed area, not uniformly in
the hypsometric range 0--500 m amsl (between sea-level and 500 m).
(2) Frequently in the same geological and morphological conditions thick
loess covers are found next to areas without any loess accumulation.
19
\30°
20 °
Warsaw
Leipzig
•
.50 °
I"'~
x
Prague
50 ° .
N
<rakow
BLS
BLT
nnsbruck
BASIN f ~ ' ~ .
BOUNDARY \
BLS
\
\
BLS
Belgrade
b k~
Bucharest
•
/
J
"40 °
".~:."
.~k
'.
.•x
....~
I
15o
\.
0
I
100
200km.20 o
:
. . ~
:i~= .
......:
.: •.-....
• ••
250
Fig. 5. Boundaries of the Danube basin. Budel ( 1 9 5 1 ) loess zones: B L T = loess tundra;
B L S = loess steppe.
Maruszczak does not discuss at any length the sources of loess material
but concentrates on the final stages of the formation of aeolian deposits. It
seems to us that the disposition of loess (and loess-like sediments) within the
Danube basin depends in a more fundamental manner on the different
sources of material and on modes of transportation other than aeolian. Figs.
3 and 5 represent an attempt to demarcate distinctive deposits within the
Danube valley region. This is probably an oversimplification and is based
essentially on the map of European loess distribution given by Flint (1957
pl. 4). In terms of detail the Flint map has n o w been superseded by the
20
INQUA loess map but in terms of simple dispersal of deposits it is probably
of sufficient accuracy for the present argument. The areas marked D1--D5
indicate deposition regions rather than particular loess deposits and are presented as obviously diagrammatic rectangles to emphasise their limited reality as actual zonal boundaries. However, we do suggest that it is meaningful
to look at the loess deposits in the Danube basin on a basis of these five
regions.
Fig. 3 shows the position of the regions relative to the position of the
northern loess belt (N) and the Rhine valley loess {R) and indicates some
very general transportation directions. Fig. 5 shows the regions relative to
the bounds of the Danube basin and important rivers in the system. Region
D1 includes the primary Alpine loess and represents a source of loess material for the basin system. Region D2 represents the material carried through
the Moravian depression by meltwater from northern glaciers. There are loess
deposits directly associated with this material b u t most of it went to deposits
downstream--in regions D3 and D5. The redeposited loess loam deposits in
western Hungary should be regarded as belonging to the D2 region. In D3
there is a significant amount of typical loess derived from floodplains; the
actual material is presumably mostly supplied by the D1 and D2 regions.
Region D4 includes the Hungarian Great Plains which, it is believed, receive
most of their silt materials by weathering of Carpathian rocks; D4, unlike
D3, is a source of loess material. Of course D3 may contribute material for
fluvial transportation by the Danube b u t it will be material received from an
initial upstream source.
The D5 deposits are composed of material from D1, D2 and D4 and it has
been stated that they tend to be relatively fine grain-size terms, probably
because of the long transportation involved. Maruszczak (1967) has discussed the formation of these loess deposits and appears to favour aeolian
transportation of material parallel to the river. The shape of the deposits and
the increasing fineness away from the river point to aeolian transportation
over a short distance perpendicular to the river. An attempt to summarise
the interrelations of the regions is shown in the network in Fig. 6.
Budel {1951), in a very influential paper, divided the regions of European
loess sedimentation into a steppe region and a tundra region (see also Budel,
1953). The distinction is approximately shown in Fig. 5: tundra essentially
to the north, steppe to the south. Maruszczak (1964) has c o m m e n t e d on the
distinction: "En 1951, J. Budel a distingu~ deux zones d'accumulation du
loess en Europe durant la derni~re glaciation: 1) la toundra {zone periglaciaire), et 2) la steppe et la steppe-foret {zone temper~e). Dans la partie
orientale de l'Europe centrale elles ~taient separ~es, selon cet auteur, par la
chaine des Carpathes. Les ~tudes les plus r~centes faites par des auteurs hongrois permettent cependant de suggerer que la ligne de partage courait plus
au sud. On peut estimer que le bassin du Danube central formait une vaste
zone de transition. Les conditions typiques du domaine periglaciaire regnaient sans aucun doute dans le bassin de la Vistule tandis que le Danube inferi-
21
N
Deposit of N. European|
glacial debris carried
through Moraviangate
Alpine primaryI
loess (DI) J
l
I L°e~s inAustriaI(D2)
N'E"
Weathering of
Carpathian
Flysch
I Flood plains~
(D3)
"1
I
I
|I aeoliantransport
I
I W. Bankdeposits"
(D3)
F-
Y
Great Plain
deposits (D4)
i
some ' t y p i c a l '
loess
(DI)
fluvial transport
by River Tisza
lower Danube(D5) l,
floodplain deposits
into
Black
Sea
aeolian t r a n s p o r t
Loess in Romania
I & Bulgaria (D5)
Fig. 6. I n t e r c o n n e c t i o n s o f t h e D a n u b e basin loess deposits: a n a p p r o x i m a t e n e t w o r k .
eur avait celles du climat temper~. I1 faut toutefois que les auteurs roumains
sont enclins ~ voir des traces de ph~nomenes periglaciaires meme dans cette
derni~re region. Sur la base d'observations personnelles, j'estime cependent
que les cryoturbations d~crites, en provenance des plaines riveraines du bas
Danube, presentent des traces de gel saisonnier et non de gel perpetuel".
The division of tundra/steppe corresponds roughly to the division glacial
loess/more complex loess. It may be that attempts to differentiate loess on
climatic grounds could be confused by the sedimentological differences
involved in particular loess deposits. We feel strongly that when climatological or chronological considerations are of prime importance the N loess will
22
give more reliable results than any of the other deposits, with the D1 and D2
deposits almost as good.
In a discussion of loess in Europe it is impossible to avoid at least a passing
mention of the problem of definitions. The term '10ss' which has been so
widely adopted and used was initially, in c o m m o n usage, a textural term
denoting a soil with a loose crumbly texture. This turned out to have a very
distinctive size grading and to consist largely of quartz. The original material
was found in region R and the usage spread outwards from there. As the use
of the term has become less precise it has become more necessary to add
qualifying words and this was carried to extraordinary lengths by German
scientists (e.g., DecklSss, PlateaulSss, Flankenl~ss, BeckenlSss, HanglSss,
FlusswinkellSss, SchwemmlSss, SumpflSss, etc.). This proliferation of names
may have been in many ways desirable and productive of increased terminological precision, but practical problems seem to have prevented their widespread adoption and the INQUA Loess Commission terms (Table I)present
a much reduced list.
It should be noted that these INQUA definitions have been drawn up by
workers much influenced by Eastern European deposits and thus the 'special' loesses, such as predominate in the Danube basin, make an obvious
appearance. Typical loess, deposited by aeolian action, predominates in the
world-wide deposits known as loess. It may turn out that this is best defined
by some physical property such as porosity or shear strength or collapsibility. We still have some preference for a mechanism-linked definition but we
have to admit that although this may relate well to primary typical loess, so
much attention has been paid to other types of deposit that the 'purist'
approach seems unreasonable.
The complexity of deposits is at its greatest in Hungary due to a combination of various factors. Material is deposited in Hungary by the Danube;
weathered material gathers in the Pannonian basin and in the western tip of
the country there are residues of northern material, relics of the post-glacial
flood-flows through the Moravian depression. Thus a major endeavour of
Hungarian workers has been differentiating these deposits, plotting their
distribution and determining their origin. Pecsi (1965) has stated that "The
genetic classification of the continental deposits and soil constituting the
loess profiles of the Pleistocene, the establishing of their sequence of deposition and the determination of their probable conditions of origin is indispensible for any further and more comprehensive study into Pleistocene geology
or geochronology, whether it is of palaeontologic, palaeobotanic, archaeologic or palaeopedologic nature in its principal orientation". We subscribe to
this view and the data presented in this paper are designed to further this
aim. However, we feel that the most significant progress will be made by
studying a definable natural system, such as the Danube basin, which
although complex can be treated in terms of particle production and sediment movement. This necessity is now widely recognised and the publication
of the INQUA loess map of Europe will do much to encourage wide ranging
studies.
23
There appear to be three main sources of loess material (quartz silt -- the
predominant loess material) for the Danube Valley:
(1) The Alpine region (D1) where material is produced by glacial grinding.
(2) The Moravian gate region where material ground by the northern glaciers was carried into the basin (D2).
(3) The Pannonian basin where the breakdown of suitable tertiary rocks
(e.g., flysch) has yielded silt-sized material (D4).
There will be minor sources of material. It is believed that modest glaciers
existed in the Yugoslavian highlands; these could contribute some materials.
Some could be introduced at the very eastern end of the basin, which would
presumably be northern material possibly from the glaciers north of the
Black Sea.
The siting of the deposits, as Lang (1970) has apparently suggested,
depends in the main on the river Danube. Certainly the classic deposits at
Paks and Dun~fSldv~r are formed from material brought into Hungary by
the Danube and deposited on adjacent floodplains. It will be seen from Fig.
2 that, as a result of natural recharge in the region downstream of Budapest,
the flow at Mohacs is less than the flow at Budapest. This will have encouraged deposition of sediment and the formation of floodplains to provide
material for the last short aeolian transportation in region D3. In fact, in all
deposits, the aeolian stage is short; the widespread distribution of material
is achieved by fluvial means.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank Prof. Dr. Marton Pecsi, President of the INQUA Loess Commission, for his generous advice and assistance. It should be noted however that
our opinions still diverge on several points. We also thank the Royal Society,
the Science Research Council, the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and the
Karl-Marx-Universit~it, Leipzig for their support. This work was carried o u t
under the auspices of the Glacial Soils Project.
REFERENCES
Borowiec, J., 1970. Comparison of composition and properties of loesses occurring in
Poland. Ann. Univ. Mar. Curie-Sklod. (Lublin), 25(B): 51--81 (in Polish, Engl. suture.).
Brunnacker, K., 1969. La Baviere et le Wurtemberg Septentrional. In: La Stratigraphie
des Loess d'Europe. INQUA, 1969, pp. 39--51.
Budel, J., 1951. Die Klimazonen des Eiszeitalters. Eiszeit.u.Gegenwart, 1: 16--26.
Budel, J., 1953. Die 'Periglazial' - - morphologischen Wirkungen des Eiszeitalters auf der
ganzen Erde. Erdkunde, 7: 249--266. (Engl. trans. Int. Geol. Rev., 1 (1959) March:
1--16).
Cegla, J., 1963. On the origin of the Quaternary silts in the Carpathian Mountains. Ann.
Univ. Mar. Curie-Sklod. (Lublin), 18(B): 69--116 (in Polish, Engl. summ.).
Cegla, J., 1972. Loess sedimentation in Poland. Acta Univ. Wratislav. no. 168, 71 pp.
(in Polish, Engl. suture.).
24
Charlesworth, J.K., 1957. The Quaternary Era. Edward Arnold, London, 1700 pp.
Conea, A., 1970. Quaternary Deposits in Dobrogea. Editura Aeademiei, Bucurest, 234 pp.
(in Romanian, Engl. summ.).
Conea, A., Bailey, R. and Canarache, A., 1972. Guidebook to excursions of the INQUA
Loess Symposium in Romania. Geol. Inst., Bucharest, 54 pp. (Guidebooks to Excursions no. 10; in English).
Demek, J. and Kukla, J., 1969. Periglazialzone, Loss und Palaolithikum der Tschechoslowakei. Czechoslovak Acad. Sci., Geog. Inst. Brno., 157 pp.
Fink, J., 1968a. General Report: Progress of investigations of loess in Europe. Proc. 7th
INQUA Congr. 1 2 : 2 8 1 - - 2 8 4
Fink, J., 1968b. The loess in Austria. Proc. 7th INQUA Congr. 12: 285--288.
Fink, J., 1969a. Les Progres de l'Etude des Loess en Europe. In: La Stratigraphie des
Loess d'Europe. INQUA, 1969, pp. 3--12.
Fink, J., 1969b. Le Loess en Autriche, In: La Stratigraphie des Loess d'Europe. INQUA,
1969, pp. 17--21.
Fink, J., 1972. Presidential address of inauguration, INQUA Loess Commission Symposium Hungary 1971. Acta Geol. Acad. Sei. Hungar., 16: 313--315.
Fink, J., 1974. Quadrennial Report, INQUA Loess Commission Rundschreiben nr. 11
(Beilage 1), 7 pp.
Fink, J., and Piffl, L., 1975. The Danube from Krems to Vienna. In: R.P. Suggate and
M.M. Cresswell (Editors), Quaternary Studies. Royal Soc. New Zealand, Wellington
1975. pp. 127--132.
Flint, R.F., 1957. Glacial and Pleistocene Geology. Wiley, New York, N.Y., 557 pp.
Flint, R.F., 1971. Glacial and Quaternary Geology. Wiley, New York, N.Y., 892 pp.
Fotakieva, E. and Minkov, M., 1966. Der Loss in Bulgarian. Eiszeit. u. Gegenwart, 17:
87--96
Fotakieva, E. and Minkov, M., 1968. The loess of Bulgaria. Proc. 7th INQUA Congr., 12:
297--301.
Haase, G., 1963. Stand und Probleme der Lossforschung in Europa. Geogr. Bet. H., 27:
97--129.
Haase, G. and Richter, H., 1957. Fossile Boden im Loss an der Schwarzmeerkuste bei
Constanta. Petermanns Geogr. Mitt., 101: 161--173.
INQUA, 1968. Proc. 7th Congress, v. 12. C.B. Schultz and J.C. Frye (Editors), Loess and
Related Eolian Deposits of the World. Univ. Nebraska Press, Lincoln, 369 pp. (7th
Congr. Boulder 1965).
INQUA, 1969. La Stratigraphie des Loess d'Europe. Supplement au Bulletin de l'Association Fran~aise pour l'Etude du Quaternaire.
Janekovic, D., 1968. The loess of Croatia. Proc. 7th INQUA Congr., 12: 303--304.
Jersak, J., 1970. Les directions des vents predominants accumulant les loess au cours du
dernier dtage froid. Acta Geog. Lodz., 2 4 : 2 2 5 - - 2 3 8 (in Polish, French summ.).
Kukla, J., 1970. Correlations between loesses and deep-sea sediments. Geol. Foren.
Forhdl., 92: 148--180.
Lang, S., 1970. Questions of loess genetics in Hungary. Foldrajzi Kozlemenyek, 18: 313-324 (in Hungarian).
Leach, J.A., 1975. The Engineering Geology of the Loess Deposits of Hungary and
Poland: A Comparative Study. PhD. Thesis, University of Leeds, 224 pp.
Lozek, V., 1965. Das Problem der Lossbildung und die Lossmollusken. Eiszeit. u. Gegenwart, 16: 61--75.
Lozek, V., 1968. The Loess environment in Central Europe. Proc. 7th INQUA Congr.,
12: 67--80.
Losek, V., 1969. Le loess et les formations assimildes: correlation entre l'Europe Centrale
et la France par la faune de Mollusques. In: Etudes sur le Quaternaire dans le Monde v.
2 . 8 t h INQUA Congr. Paris, pp. 597--606.
25
Lugn, A.L., 1969. The geomorphology of loess in North America: its sources and distribution. In: Etudes sur le Quaternaire dans le Monde, 1. 8th INQUA Congr. Paris, pp.
77--84,
Manecki, A. and Dominik, J., 1972. Remarks on the mineral composition and genesis of
loess. Bull. Acad. Pol. Sci. ser. sci. de la terre, 20: 241--247.
Markovic-Marjanovic, J., 1968a. Loess sections in the Danube Valley, Yugoslavia and
their importance for the Quaternary stratigraphy of southeastern Europe. Proc. 7th
INQUA Congr., 12: 261--278.
Markovic-Marjanovic, J., 1 9 6 8 b . The loess in Serbia (and adjacent areas). Proc. 7th
INQUA Congr., 12: 337--338.
Markovic-Marjanovic, J., 1969. Les profils de loess du bassin Pannonique: Region classique du loess de Yougoslavie. In: La Stratigraphie des Loess d'Europe. INQUA, 1969
pp. 165--170.
Maruszczak, H., 1964. Conditions d'accumulation du loess dans la partie orientale de
l'Europe centrale. Geog. Polonica, 2: 39--47.
Maruszczak, H., 1967. Wind directions during the accumulation of the younger loess in
East-Central Europe. Rocznik Pol. Tow. Geol., 37: 177--188.
Maruszczak, H., 1972. National Symposium on Lithology and Stratigraphy of Loesses
in Poland, Proc., Lublin 25--30 Sept. 1972, H. Maruszczak, (Editor). Wydawnictwa
Geologiczne, Warsaw. 214 pp.
Mihaltz, I., 1953. La division des sediments quaternaires de l'Alfold. Act~. Geol. Acad.
Sci. Hungar., 2: 109--121.
Minkov, M., 1968. The Loess in North Bulgaria. Bulgarian Acad. Sci. Sofia, 198 pp. (in
Bulgarian).
Minkov, M., 1970. Uber die Lossstratigraphie in Nodbulgarien. Arbeit. der INQUA Losskommission, Bulgarien 1970, pp. 3--51.
Neumeister, H., 1971. Jungpleistozane Decksedimente und Bodenentwicklung in der
Umgebung yon Leipzig. Zpravy Geog. Ustav. CSAV, Brno, 8: 23--72.
Osborne, R.H., 1967. East-Central Europe. Chatto and Windus, London, 384 pp.
Pecsi, M., 1964. Ten Years of Physicogeographic Research in Hungary. Akademiai Kiado,
Budapest, 132 pp.
Pecsi, M., 1965. Genetic classification of the deposits constituting the loess profiles of
Hungary. Acta Geol. Acad. Sci. Hungar., 9: 65--84.
Pecsi, M., 1966. Losse und lossartige Sedimente im Karpatenbecken und ihre lithostratigraphische Gliederung. Petermanns Geogr. Mitt. 110, 176--189, 241--252.
Pecsi, M., 1967. Horizontal and vertical distribution of the loess in Hungary. Studia
Geomorph. Carpatho-Balcanica, 1: 13--20.
Pecsi, M., 1972. Scientific and practical significance of loess research. Acta. Geol. Acad.
Sci. Hungar., 16: 317--328.
Pecsi, M. and Pevzner, 1974. Palaeomagnetic measurements of the loess sequences at Paks
and Douafoldvar. Foldrajzi Kozlemenyek, 22, no. 3, pp. 215--224.
Pecsi, M. and Sarfalvi, B., 1964. The Geography of Hungary. Akad. Kiado, Budapest, 299
PP.
Pounds, N.J.G., 1969. Eastern Europe. Longman, London, 912 pp.
Richter, H., 1968. Loess in Roumania. Proc. 7th INQUA Congr., 12: 329--332.
Richter, H., Haase, G., Lieberoth, I., Ruske, E. and Ruske, R., 1970. Periglazial-LossPalaolithikum im Jungpleistozan der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik. (Petermanns Geogr. Mitt. Erganzungsheft Nr. 274) VEB Hermann Haack, Gotha. 422 pp.
Seppala, M., 1971. Stratigraphy and material of the loess layers at Mende, Hungary. Bull.
Geol. Soc. Finland, 43: 109--123.
Sinnhuber, K.A., 1954. Central Europe-Mitteleuropa-Europe Centrale: An analysis of a
geographical term. Trans. Inst. Brit. Geogr., 20: 15--39.
Smalley, I.J., 1966. The properties of glacial loess and the formation of loess deposits.
J. Sediment. Petrol., 36: 669---676.
26
Smalley, I.J., 1972. The interaction of great rivers and large deposits of primary loess.
Trans. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 34: 534--542.
Smalley, I.J. and Vita-Finzi, C., 1968. The formation of fine particles in sandy deserts
and the nature of 'desert' loess. J. Sediment. Petrol., 38: 766--774.
Stoilov, K.G., 1974. Composition, texture and state of sediments of the loess formation
on the Right Bank of the Lower Danube River. Bulg. Akad. Nauk. Geol. Inst. Izv.
Ser. Inzu. Geol. Khidrogeol., 23: 75--131.
Tokarski, J., Parachoniak, W., Kowalski, W., Manecki, A. and Oszacka, B., 1961. Remarks
on the loess. Rocznik Pol. Tow. Geol., 31: 247--272.
Woldstedt, P., 1958. Das Eiszeitalter: Grundlinien einer Geologie des Quartars. Enke,
Stuttgart. Bd. 2., 438 pp.