Walther Penck was a German, born in Austria, and he was the son the geographer, Albrecht Penck. During Walther's lifetime he spent time doing research in Argentina, Turkey, and Germany. He is known for his theories on uplift and erosion, which was contrasting to the beliefs of W. M. Davis.
Penck died of cancer at the age of 35. He was survived by his wife and two young sons. Penck's legacy leaves behind three major publications, "Wesen und Grundlagen der Morphologischen Analyse" (1920), "Die Piedmontlächen Des Sudlichen Schwarzwaldes" (1925), and "Die Morphologische Analyse" (1924). Respectively, these titles translate to, "Essence and Basis of Morphological Analyses", "The Piedmont Areas of the Southern Black Forest", and his book, "The Morphological Analysis". It was not until 1953 that his book was translated into English. There were challenges in interpretting his work as they were cryptic and confusing, and he used very "difficult and obscure languange". One translator described that it was often "difficult to tell whether he said yes or no." (1.)
Walther Penck was a very interesting geomorphologist because he challenged established theories and based his work of extensive observation in the field. In northwest Argentina, Penck worked on geological surveying and topography mapping. With experience in mountaineering, he spent 1912 to 1914 mapping and observering 4500 square miles in the Andes. It was in these studies of the Upper Cretaceous and Tertiary sediments, that he developed his ideas on the patterns of tectonic movement (1.). Although his work lacks formality and supported evidence, I think that it is just that which causes me to be intruiged by him. His work seemed to be driven by lived experience, fascination, and observation, which is an important factor in the evolution of thought. If all geomorphologist were to only build on and expand the beliefs of another, than ideas could be skewed by bias. Davis held an important part in geomorphology to make substantiated theories in which he compiled evidence and formed an explanation for all his beliefs. I feel that such logic like Davis's could cloud, constrain, and distract some scientist from viewing the world from an original perspective. So, despite Penck's possible lack of solid probability in his theories, his divergent thoughts surely has stood to inspire and instigate many scientists to think outside the box of logic, possibly to open their eyes to a whole different way of thinking. At the same time, such challenges to logic, only provides more questions to gather more support and theories to a certain school of thought.
George D. Hubbard
(2.)Davis viewed geomorphology as a part of geography and as a tool to interpret the past dynamic geology. Davis used observation to apply to theory formed through deduction, induction, and generalizations.
Davis's studies introduced an important idea of cycles, supported by a wide variety of evidence, varying in conditions such as climate and rock types.
Penck viewed geomorphology as a border science between geography and geology. He relied heavily on observation and interpretting processes based on the physical forms and structures that he saw.
While, Penck lacked a bit in conciseness and consistency in his studies, he made way for an important idea, that geomorphology was not always cyclically simple and uniform. He observed different geographies and geologies in form and focused less on hypothesizing what caused the formation of structures. Penck observed each individual form as it was without the prescribed bias of a set cycle.
O. D. Von Engeln
(3.)There are many texts deciphering the works and studies of Walther Penck as well as comparing and contrasting his work to William Morris Davis. Davis, himself, spent a great deal of time challenging the work of Penck. Although, Penck's life and career was short, his work was bold and extensive. He challenged the Davis's theory of uplift, claiming that it is only a certain case scenario. This brought Davis to work vehemently to refute this idea and support his beliefs. The distinct differences in Davis and Penck's views on geomorphology, cause their theories to be starkly contrasting and allow little room for the two to agree. However, with concise analyses of the two stances, important questions and answers have arrised.
There is an important distinction between the two sciencetists fundamental beliefs and approaches. Davis's goal in his studies was to observe a landform and identify the specific stage in the systematic evolution in the natural cycle of land. Comparitively, Penck held a less uniform belief in that landforms did not necessarily fit into a specific stage, but rather he believed landforms were unique reflections of the process of uplift and with observation, the nature of the forces causing the uplift could be observed. Davis believed that uplift occured at a rapid rate and decreased over time, whereas Penck felt that uplift initially occurred slowly, then accelerated, decelerated, and then quiescent. These divergences in opinion, among others lead the two Geomorphologists to come to very different hypotheses in theory.
Citations