Talk:Purbeck Marble

untitled

I would like to see some changes to this entry but as they involve inter-related corrections of fact, I'd rather explain first what I think is needed. These are the main points:

(1) The terms "Purbeck Stone" and "Purbeck Limestone" include other materials besides Purbeck Marble.

(2) Purbeck Marble is a shelly limestone, not even "partly" metamorphic.

(3) Purbeck Marble, and other Purbeck limestones, were also worked in the Romano-British period.

(4) I think it worth saying that at the present time there is no ongoing quarrying of Purbeck Marble, though there are several quarries working other kinds of Purbeck Limestone. (This point is also relevant to the entry for "Isle of Purbeck".)

For some years I have been making a study of the Romano-British Purbeck stone industry, and can offer references to books, articles and websites, relevant to the geology and to the medieval and modern industries as well as to the Roman.

The current external links are good, but I'd suggest adding a reference to the Langton Matravers museum, which specialises in the Purbeck stone industry; I understand the Mineral and Mining museum is slanted much more towards the ball-clay industry.

Prestonjohn (talk) 22:11, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've made approximately the above changes and cancelled the "stub" status, Prestonjohn (talk) 22:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Winkles"

OK, Winklestone is a name for Sussex marble, but let's not confuse things by mentioning winkles under Purbeck marble. Unless someone can think of a better change I intend simply to delete the words "with generally larger Winkles of the same species", which don't make sense here because: (1) winkles are Littorina, not Viviparus (Yonge, The Sea Shore, etc.); (2) the gastropods in Sussex marble are Viviparus, not winkles in the strict sense; (3) the Purbeck Viviparus are not, to my knowledge, called winkles; (4) the gastropods in the two kinds of stone are of the same genus, not "the same species", the Sussex ones (V. fluviorum) being indeed "generally larger" than the Purbeck (V. cariniferus) (Lake, Young, Wood and Mortimore, 1987, Geology of the country around Lewes, Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prestonjohn (talk • contribs) 08:39, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect wrong?

Why does Purbeck stone redirect here? Shouldn't Purbeck stone redirect to Purbeck Group?--Ykraps (talk) 13:52, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not purbeck Marble

Apparently the bits at the end of this article are not specifically about the Marble, so why are they here?

"Purbeck stone has been used for restoration and new projects in ecclesiastical buildings throughout England, but especially in the south. For example it is used in the Exeter, Ely, Norwich, Chichester, Salisbury, Lincoln, Llandaff and Southwark Cathedrals and in Westminster Abbey.

The pterosaur ichnogenus Pteraichnus is found in the Purbeck Limestone.[7]"

IceDragon64 (talk) 00:30, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the bit about the ichnogenus as those are found elsewhere in the Purbeck Group. I'm not sure whether the other paragraph is using the term 'Purbeck Stone' loosely for 'Purbeck Marble' - I'll do some checking. Mikenorton (talk) 17:18, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the 'marble' has been used in all these buildings, but not recently as far as I can see, other than for restoration. Mikenorton (talk) 17:27, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Capital M?

The article uses capital P capital M: Purbeck Marble. Purbeck is a proper noun, of course, but is the M of marble normally capitalised in the name of the stone? Ngrams suggest not. Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 16:15, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]