Chapter XIV: The Geographical Development of Coast-Lines 393 (9)

I may now mention some of the more remarkable examples of intercrossings of erratics which have been recorded from the glacial accumulations of north Germany, etc. An examination of the glacial striæ, _roches moutonnées_, and boulder-clays of Saxony leads to the conviction, according to Credner, Penck, Torell, Helland, and others, that the whole of that region has been invaded by the great Scandinavian _mer de glace_ which flowed into Saxony from NNE. to SSW. Erratics from southern Sweden and Gothland occur in the boulder-clay, and the presence of these, taken in connection with the direction of the glaciation, leaves us no alternative but to agree with the conclusions arrived at by the Saxon geologists. But, apparently in direct contradiction of this conclusion, we have evidence to show that boulders of the same kinds of rock occur in Denmark and Holland, pointing to a former ice-flow from north-east to south-west and west. Thus boulders derived from Gothland occur at Gröningen in Holland, while fragments from the island of Öland are met with in Faxö; and erratics from the borders of the Gulf of Finland are encountered at Hamburg. Indeed, when geologists come to examine the erratics in north Germany and Poland generally, they find evidence of apparently two ice-flows--one of which went south-south-west, south, and south-east--spreading out, as it were, in a fan-shape towards the southern limits reached by the great "Northern Drift,"--while the other seems to have followed the course of the Baltic depression, overflowing the low-grounds of northern Prussia, Holland, etc., in a south-west and west direction. Now, it is quite evident that no one _mer de glace_ could have followed these various directions at one and the same time. The explanation of the apparent anomaly, however, is not far to seek. It is reasonable to infer that long before the _mer de glace_ had attained its maximum dimensions, when as yet it was confined to the basin of the Baltic and was only able to overflow the northern regions of Prussia, etc., its course would be determined by the contour of the pavement upon which it advanced. It would, therefore, be compelled to follow the Baltic depression, and for a long time it would carry erratics from Finland, the Baltic islands, and eastern Sweden in a south-west and west-south-west direction. And this would continue to be the direction even after a considerable portion of the low-grounds of Prussia, etc., had been overflowed. But when the ice-sheet was enabled to advance south into Saxony, Poland, and Lithuania, erratics from Finland, the Baltic islands, etc., would necessarily cease to travel towards the west, and hold on a south-south-east, south, and south-south-west course. Again, when the _mer de glace_ was on the decline, a time would return when the ice, as before, would be controlled in its flow by the Baltic depression, and this would give rise to a further distribution of erratics in a prevalent west-by-south direction.[T]

[T] For a fuller discussion of the distribution of erratics on the Continent, I may refer to Appendix, Note B, in _Prehistoric Europe_, where the reader will find references to the literature of this interesting subject. [Continental geologists now recognise a distinct stage of the Ice Age, during which their "Upper Diluvium" was deposited by a great glacier that occupied the basin of the Baltic. This "Great Baltic Glacier" appears to have been contemporaneous with the local ice-sheets and valley-glaciers of the Highlands and other mountain-tracts of our island. See Article X. 1892.]

No one of late years has been more assiduous in the collection of facts relating to the intercrossing of erratics in the drift-deposits of England than Mr. D. Mackintosh.[U] He has written many instructive and interesting descriptions of the phenomena in question, which he justly thinks are of prime importance from a theoretical point of view. In a recent paper[V] he presents us with the results of a systematic survey of the direction and limits of dispersion of the erratics of the west of England and east of Wales, which he evidently is of opinion afford strong support to the iceberg theory, while at the same time they are directly opposed to the theory of transport by land-ice. I have attentively considered all the arguments advanced by Mr. Mackintosh in favour of his views--the one upon which he apparently lays most stress being that of the intercrossings of erratics observed by him--and I shall now proceed to point out how the phenomena described by him are most satisfactorily explained by the land-ice theory. They seem to me, indeed, to lend additional support to that theory, in the same manner as the intercrossings of boulders observed in Scotland, northern Germany, etc., and sub-alpine regions of France. Mr. Mackintosh calls attention to the fact that erratics of the well-known Criffel granite are found scattered over a large part of the plain of Cumberland, from which they extend south along the coast to near the mouth of the estuary of the Duddon. They reappear on the coast in the neighbourhood of Blackpool and Liverpool, and again at intervals on the coasts of north Wales from Flint to Colwyn Bay, and thence to Penmaenmawr and the neighbourhood of Beaumaris. They are dispersed over the peninsula of Wirral and the Cheshire plain, etc., and they have been followed south-east as far as the neighbourhood of Cardington, near Church Stretton, Burton, Wolverhampton, Stafford, Hare Castle, Macclesfield, and Manchester. This great stream of boulders, therefore, spreads out to south-east, south, and south-west: the erratics, to quote Mr. Mackintosh, "have radiated from an area much smaller than their terminal breadth." The same is the case, I may remark in passing, with erratics in the boulder-clays of Scotland, Scandinavia, north Germany, etc., as also with those in the drift-deposits of the great Rhone glacier and other ancient glaciers both on the north and south side of the Alps. Now, the course followed by the Criffel erratics is crossed at an acute angle by the path pursued by many boulders of Eskdale granite, and various felspathic rocks derived from the Cumberland mountains. For example, Cumberland erratics of the kinds mentioned occur near St. Asaph and Moel-y-Tryfane and in Anglesey, and they have been followed over a wide district in Cheshire, etc., extending as far south as Church Stretton and Wolverhampton, and as far east as Rochdale. More than this, we find that numerous erratics of felstone, derived from the mountain of Great Arenig, in north Wales, have gone to north-east as far as Halkin Mountain, in Flintshire, Eryrys, near Llanarmon, and Chirk, from which last-named place they have been traced in a south-easterly direction to Birmingham, Bromsgrove, etc. A glance at the map of England will show that this south-easterly drift of erratics crosses at an acute angle the paths followed by the Criffel granite boulders and the erratics derived from Cumberland, so that we have now several intercrossings to account for. How can this be done by the land-ice theory?

[U] This enthusiastic geologist died in 1891.

[V] _Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc._, vol. xxxv. p. 425

The explanation seems to me obvious, for the phenomena are, after all, less striking than similar appearances which have been observed in Scotland, especially by my colleagues, Messrs. Peach and Horne, in Caithness and the Orkney and Shetland Islands; and they are certainly less intricate than the facts recorded by MM. Falsan and Chantre concerning the intercrossing, interosculation, and direct opposition of erratic paths in Savoy and Dauphiny. We have only to reflect that the great _mer de glace_--to which, as I believe, all the English phenomena are due--did not come into existence and attain its maximum dimensions in the twinkling of an eye, nor could it afterwards have disappeared in the same sudden manner. On the contrary, a period of local glaciation must have preceded the appearance of the great ice-sheet. At first, and for a long time, permanent snow would be confined to the higher elevations of the land, and glaciers would be limited to mountain-valleys; but as the temperature fell the snow-line would gradually descend, until at last, probably after a prolonged period, it reached what is now the sea-level. Thus the formation of _névé_ and glacier-ice would eventually take place over what are now our low-grounds, and other tracts also, which are now submerged. It is quite impossible that the vast sheets of ice which can be demonstrated to have covered Scotland, a large part of England, Ireland, Scandinavia, and north Germany, and even the limited area of the Faröe Islands, could possibly have been fed by the snow-fields of mountain-heights only. The precipitation and accumulation of snow, and the formation of _névé_ and glacier-ice, must have taken place over enormous regions in what are now the temperate latitudes of Europe.

It is obvious that the direction of ice-flow in the basin of the Irish Sea opposite the south of Scotland and the west of England, while preserving a general southerly trend, would vary at different periods. Before the _mer de glace_ in that basin had attained its climax there must have been a time when the ice, streaming outwards from the high-grounds of Cumberland, was enabled to push its way far westward out into the basin of the Irish Sea. At that time it was still able to hold its own against the pressure exerted by the Scottish ice. But as the general _mer de glace_ increased in thickness, the course of the Cumberland ice would be diverted ever further and further to the south-east, until, eventually, the Scottish ice came to hug the coast of Cumberland, and to overflow Lancashire in its progress towards the south-east. So gorged with ice did the basin of the Irish Sea become, that a portion of the Scottish ice was forced over the plain of Cumberland and up the valley of the Eden, where it coalesced with the ice coming north from the Shap district, and thereafter flowed in an easterly direction to join the great _mer de glace_ of the North Sea basin.

Thus the intercrossings of the Criffel and Cumberland erratics described by Mr. Mackintosh receive a ready explanation by the land-ice theory. Nor do the intercrossings of the Welsh erratics with those derived from Scotland and Cumberland offer any difficulty. The ice coming from the Welsh mountains would naturally be deflected towards south-east by the _mer de glace_ that streamed in that direction, and might quite well have carried its characteristic boulders as far as Birmingham before the general _mer de glace_ had attained its greatest dimensions. But when that period of maximum glaciation arrived, the Welsh boulders would be unable to travel so far towards the east, and the Scottish and Cumberland boulders would then cross the path formerly followed by the felstone erratics from Great Arenig.

Again, it is evident that when the _mer de glace_ was gradually decreasing similar oscillations of the ice-flow would take place, but in reverse order, and thus would give rise to a second series of intercrossings. Moreover, we must remember that the Glacial period was characterised by several great changes of climate. It was not one continuous and prolonged period of cold conditions, but consisted rather of a succession of arctic and genial climates; so that the same countries were overrun at different epochs by successive _mers de glace_, each of which would rework, denude, and redistribute to a large extent the morainic materials of its predecessor, and thus might well cause even greater complexity in the dispersion of erratics than has yet been recognised anywhere in these islands.

Mr. Mackintosh refers to the occurrence of chalk-flints and Lias fossils associated with northern erratics in the drift-deposits of the west of England, the presence of which, he thinks, is fatal to the theory of transport by land-ice. Thus, he says, chalk-flints, etc., have been met with at Lillieshall (east of Wellington), at Strethill (near Ironbridge), at Seisdon (between Wolverhampton and Bridgenorth), at Wolverhampton, near Stafford, and near Bushbury. Chalk-flints have also been found as far west as Malvern and Hatfield Camp, south of Ledbury. All these erratics have crossed England from the east, according to Mr. Mackintosh and other observers. Not only so, but, as Mr. Mackintosh remarks, those found at Wolverhampton, Birmingham, etc., "must have _crossed the course_ of the northern boulders near its southerly termination." And since both northern and eastern erratics are found associated in the same drift-deposit, it seems to him "impossible to explain the intercrossing by land-ice or glaciers." Now, on the contrary, those eastern erratics are scattered over the very districts where I should have expected to find them. The observations of geologists in East Anglia have shown that that region has been invaded by the _mer de glace_ of the North Sea basin.[W] This remarkable glacial invasion is proved not only by the direction followed by stones of local derivation, and by boulders which have come south from Scotland and the northern counties, but by the occurrence in the boulder-clay at Carnelian Bay and Holderness of erratics of certain well-known Norwegian rocks, which have been recognised by Mr. Amund Helland. The occurrence of chalk-flints and fragments of Oolitic rocks in the neighbourhoods mentioned by Mr. Mackintosh thus only affords additional evidence in favour of the land-ice origin of the drift-deposits described by him. The _mer de glace_ that flowed down the east coast of England seems to have encroached more and more upon the land, until eventually it swept over the low-lying Midlands in a south-westerly direction, and coalesced with the _mer de glace_ that streamed inland from the basin of the Irish Sea, and the ice that flowed outwards from the high-grounds of Wales. The united ice-stream would thereafter continue on its south-westerly course down the Severn valley to the Bristol Channel. I have no doubt that Mr. Mackintosh will yet chronicle the occurrence of chalk-flints and other eastern erratics from localities much further to the south than Ledbury.

[W] See Mr. Skertchly's description of East Anglian deposits in _Great Ice Age_, 2nd edit., p. 358.

Again, considerable stress has been laid by Mr. Mackintosh upon the occurrence of chalk-flints in the drift-deposits of Blackpool, Dawpool, Parkgate, Halkin Mountain, Wrexham, the peninsula of Wirral, Runcorn, Delamere, Crewe, Leylands, Piethorne (near Rochdale), and other places. "All these flints," Mr. Mackintosh remarks, "belong to the basin of the Irish Sea, and have almost certainly crossed the general course of the northern boulders on their way from Ireland." Here, unfortunately, the Irish Sea intervenes to conceal the evidence that is needed to enable us to track the exact path followed by the erratics in question. I am not so certain as Mr. Mackintosh that the chalk-flints he refers to came from the north of Ireland. Chalk-flints occur pretty numerously in the drift-deposits in the maritime districts of north-eastern Scotland, which we have every reason to believe have been derived from an area of Cretaceous rocks covering the bottom of the adjacent sea; and for aught one can say to the contrary, patches of chalk-with-flints may occur in like manner in the bed of the Irish Sea. I cannot at present remember whether any boulders of the basalt-rocks, which are associated with the Chalk in the north of Ireland, have been recognised in the drifts of the west of England; but if the chalk-flints really came from Antrim, it is more than probable that they would be accompanied by fragments of the hard igneous rocks which overlie the Cretaceous strata of north Ireland. Chalk and chalk-flints occur in the boulder-clay of the Isle of Man, where they are associated, Mr. Horne tells us, with Criffel granite and fragments of a dark trap-rock.[X] Possibly these last are basalt-rocks from Antrim. It seems reasonable, therefore, to believe that erratics of Irish origin have found their way to the Isle of Man; and if this be so, it may be permissible to assume that the chalk-flints of Blackpool, etc. (and perhaps also some of the basalt-rocks), have come from the same quarter. Mr. Horne has no doubt that the Irish erratics were brought to the Isle of Man by land-ice. Referring to the conclusion arrived at by Mr. Close that the Irish _mer de glace_ "was probably not less than 3000 feet in depth," he remarks: "It is highly probable that this great mass of Irish ice succeeded, after a hard battle (_i.e._, with the Scottish ice-sheet), in reaching the Manx coast-line. It is not to be supposed that the normal momentum of the respective ice-sheets remained constant. The moving force must have varied with changing conditions. On the other hand, it is quite possible that there may have been an 'under-tow' of the ice from the north-east coast of Ireland, which would easily account for Antrim chalk and chalk-flints in the Manx till." I would go further, and state my conviction that before the united ice-sheets had attained their maximum development, it is almost certain that the ice flowing into the Irish Sea basin by the North Channel would for a long time exceed in mass the coalescent glaciers that descended from the Southern Uplands of Scotland, and would therefore be enabled to extend much further to the east than it could at a later date, when the general _mer de glace_ had reached its climax. It might thus have advanced as far as and even beyond the Isle of Man. This inference is based upon the simple fact that the area drained by the _mer de glace_ of the North Channel was very much greater than the area extending from the watershed of the Southern Uplands of Scotland to the Isle of Man. Erratics from the north of Ireland would thus travel down the bed of the North Channel, and eventually be distributed over a wide area up to and possibly even some distance beyond the Isle of Man. But as the Scottish and Cumbrian ice-flows gradually increased in importance, the _mer de glace_ coming from the North Channel would be forced further and further to the west, until the ice-flow issuing from the high-grounds of Kirkcudbright at last succeeded in reaching the middle of the Irish Sea basin. This gradual modification of the general ice-flow in that basin would of course give rise to a redistribution of the ground-moraine, and the Irish erratics would then travel onwards underneath the Scottish ice, and eventually reach the low-grounds of Lancashire and Cheshire, along with erratics from Criffel and the Cumbrian mountains. It is, therefore, quite unnecessary to suppose that the _mer de glace_ of the North Channel actually crossed the whole breadth of the basin of the Irish Sea to invade Lancashire, Cheshire, and north Wales. Had this been the case, chalk-flints, chalk, and many other kinds of rock derived from the north of Ireland, and even from Arran and Argyll, would have abounded in the drifts of the west of England. Erratics coming from Ireland could not possibly have travelled underneath Irish ice further east than the Isle of Man. There or thereabouts, as I have said, the _mer de glace_ of the North Channel would begin to encounter the ice streaming down from the uplands of Galloway and the mountains of Cumberland: and as the ice from these quarters increased in thickness, it would gradually override what had formerly been the bottom-moraine or till of the North Channel _mer de glace_. Thus Irish erratics would become commingled with erratics from Criffel, etc., and be carried forward in a southerly and south-easterly direction. The chalk-flints in the drifts of Lancashire, Cheshire, etc., are probably therefore _remaniés_--the relics of the bottom-moraine of the North Channel _mer de glace_ rearranged and redistributed. And this is why they and other Irish rocks are so comparatively rare in the glacial accumulations of the west of England.

[X] _Trans. Edin. Geol. Soc._, vol. ii., 1874.

Thus all the instances of intercrossings adduced by Mr. Mackintosh as favouring the iceberg theory, and condemning its rival, I would cite as proving exactly the opposite. So far from presenting any real difficulty to an upholder of the land-ice theory, they, in point of fact, as I have already remarked, lend that view additional support.

It is not my purpose to criticise all the arguments and reasons advanced by Mr. Mackintosh in favour of his special views, but I may be allowed a few remarks on the somewhat extraordinary character of the agents which, according to him, were mainly instrumental in producing the drift-phenomena of western England. Before doing so, however, I may point out that, in ascribing the transport of erratics in that region (and, by implication, the formation of the boulder-clays, etc., with which most of these erratics are associated) to floating-ice and sea-currents, Mr. Mackintosh has failed to furnish us with any "fossil evidence" to show that western England was under water at the time the boulder-clays and erratics were being accumulated. He speaks of cold and warm currents, but where do we find any traces of the marine organisms which must have abounded in those waters? Where are the raised sea-beaches which must have marked the retreat of the sea? Where do we encounter any organic relics that might help us to map out the zones of shallow and deep water? The sea-shells, etc., which occur in the boulder-clays are undeniably _remaniés_; they are erratics just as much as the rock-fragments with which they are associated. Similar assemblages of organic remains are met with in the till of Caithness, where shallow-water and deep-sea shells, and shells indicative of genial and again of cold conditions, are all confusedly distributed throughout one and the same deposit. The same or analogous facts are encountered in the _Blocklehm_ of some parts of Prussia, marine and freshwater shells occurring commingled in the boulder-clay. Nay, even in the _moraine profonde_ of the ancient Rhone glacier, broken and well-preserved shells of Miocene and Pliocene species appear enclosed in the tumultuous accumulation of clay, sand, and erratics. And precisely similar phenomena confront us in the glacial deposits of the neighbourhood of Lago Lugano. Mr. Mackintosh refers to the so-called "stratification" of the boulder-clay, as if that were a proof of accumulation in water. But a rude kind of bedding, generally marked by differences of colour, and sometimes by lines of stones, was the inevitable result of the sub-glacial formation of the boulder-clay. The "lines of bedding" are due to the shearing of the clay under great pressure, and may be studied in the boulder-clay of Switzerland and Italy, and in the till not only of the Lowlands but of the Highlands of Scotland. Occasionally the "lines" are so close that the clay sometimes presents the appearance of rude and often wavy and irregular lamination--a section of such a boulder-clay reminding one sometimes of that of a gnarled gneiss or crumpled schist. And these appearances may be noted in boulder-clays which occupy positions that preclude the possibility of their being marine--as in certain valleys of the Highlands, such as Strathbraan, and in the neighbourhood of Como, in Italy. This "lamination" is merely indicative of the intense pressure to which the till was subjected during its gradual accumulation under the ice. It is assuredly not the result of aqueous action. Aqueous lamination is due to sifting and winnowing--the coarser or heavier and finer or lighter particles being separated in obedience to their different specific gravity, and arranged in layers of more or less regularity according to circumstances. There is nothing of this kind of arrangement, however, in the so-called stratified boulder-clay. If the clay of an individual lamina be washed and carefully sifted, it will be found to be composed of grains of all shapes, sizes, and weights, down to the finest and most impalpable flour. It is impossible to believe that such a heterogeneous assemblage of grains could have been dropt into water without the particles being separated and sifted in their progress to the bottom. Of course, every one knows that patches and beds of laminated clay and sand of veritable aqueous origin occur now and again in boulder-clay. I suppose there is no boulder-clay without them. I have seen them in the till of Italy and Switzerland, where they show precisely the same features as the similar laminated clays in the till of our own islands. But these included patches and beds point merely to the action of sub-glacial waters, such as we know circulate under the glaciers of the Alps, of Norway, and of Greenland.

Again, I would remark that Mr. Mackintosh has ignored all the evidence which has been brought forward from time to time to demonstrate the sub-glacial origin of boulder-clay, and to prove the utter insufficiency of floating-ice to account for the phenomena. And he adduces no new facts in support of the now discredited iceberg theory, unless it be his statement that _flat_ striated rock-surfaces (such as those near Birkenhead) have been caused by floating-ice--the dome-shaped _roches moutonnées_ being, on the other hand the work of land-ice. As a matter of personal observation, I can assure Mr. Mackintosh that _flat_ striated surfaces are by no means uncommonly associated in one and the same region with _roches moutonnées_. What are _roches moutonnées_ but the rounded relics of what were formerly rough uneven tors, projecting bosses, and prominent rocks? The general tendency of glacial action is to reduce the asperities of a land-surface; hence projecting points are rounded off, while flat surfaces are simply, as a rule, planed smoother. Mr. Mackintosh might traverse acres of such smoothed rock-surfaces in regions where the strata are comparatively horizontal--for example, in the case of the basaltic plateaux of the Faröes and of Iceland, which have certainly been glaciated by land-ice. Similar flat glaciated surfaces are met with again and again both in the Highlands and Lowlands of Scotland, occupying positions and associated with _roches moutonnées_ and till of such a character as to prove beyond any doubt that they no less certainly are the result of the action of land-ice. But it is needless to discuss the probability or possibility of glaciation of any kind being due to floating-ice. We know that glaciers can and do polish and striate rock-surfaces; no one, however, can say the same of icebergs: and until some one can prove to us that icebergs have performed this feat, or can furnish us with well-considered reasons for believing them to be capable of it, glacialists will continue sceptical.

But leaving these and other points which serve to show the weakness of the cause which Mr. Mackintosh supports with such keen enthusiasm, I may, in conclusion, draw attention to certain very remarkable theoretical views of his which seem to me to be not only self-contradictory, but opposed to well-known natural laws. Briefly stated, his general view is that the erratics of the west of England have been distributed by floating-ice during a period of submergence--the scattering of erratics and the accumulation of the associated glacial deposits having commenced at or about the time when the land began to sink, and continued until the submergence reached some 2000 feet below the present sea-level. In applying this hypothesis to explain the phenomena, Mr. Mackintosh makes rather free use of sea-currents and winds. For example, he holds that a current coming from Criffel carried with it boulder-laden ice which flowed south-west to the Isle of Man, south to north Wales, and south-east in the direction of Blackpool and Manchester, Liverpool and Wolverhampton, Dawpool and Church Stretton. Now, in the first place, it is very strange that there is not a vestige or trace of any such submergence, either in the neighbourhood of Criffel itself or in the region to the north of it. The whole of that region has been striated and rubbed by land-ice coming down from the watershed of the Galloway mountains, to the north of which the striæ, _roches moutonnées_, and tracks followed by erratics, indicate an ice-flow _towards_ the north-west, north, and north-east. It is, therefore, absolutely certain that at the time the granite erratics are supposed to have sailed away from Criffel on floating-ice, the whole of the Southern Uplands of Scotland were covered with a great ice-field extending from Wigtown to Berwickshire; so that, according to Mr. Mackintosh's hypothesis, we should be forced to believe that an ocean-current originated in Criffel itself! But waiving this and other insuperable objections which will occur to any geologist who is familiar with the glacial phenomena of the south of Scotland, and confining myself to the evidence supplied by the English drifts, I would remark that Mr. Mackintosh's hypothesis is not consistent with itself. A current flowing in the direction supposed could not possibly have permitted floating-ice to sail from Cumbria to the Isle of Man, to Moel-y-Tryfane and Colwyn Bay. Mr. Mackintosh admits this himself, but infers that the transport of the Cumbrian erratics may have taken place at a different time. But how could this be, seeing that the Criffel and Cumbrian erratics occur side by side in one and the same deposit? Again, the hypothesis of an ocean-current coming from Criffel is inconsistent with the presence of the Irish chalk-flints in the drifts of the west of England. Did these also come at a different time? And what about the dispersion of erratics from Great Arenig, which have gone north-east and north-north-east, almost exactly in the face of the supposed Criffel current? Here an ocean-current is obviously out of the question; and accordingly we are told that this dispersion of Welsh boulders was probably the result of wind. But why should this wind have propelled the floating-ice so far and no further in an easterly direction? Surely if floating-ice was swept outwards from Great Arenig as far as Eryrys, bergs must have been carried now and again much further to the east. And if they did not sail eastwards, what became of them? Did they all melt away immediately when they came into the ice-laden current that flowed towards the south-east?[Y] A still greater difficulty remains. The Criffel and Cumbrian erratics suddenly cease when they are followed to the south, great quantities of them being accumulated over a belt of country extending from beyond Wolverhampton to Bridgenorth. What was it that defined the southern limits of these northern boulders? It is clear that it could not have been high-ground, for the Severn valley, not to speak of low-lying regions further to the north-east, must have been submerged according to Mr. Mackintosh's hypothesis. There was therefore plenty of sea-room for the floating-ice to escape southwards. And yet, notwithstanding this, vast multitudes of bergs and floes, as soon as they arrived at certain points, suddenly melted away and dropt their burdens! In what region under the sun does anything like that happen at the present day? Mr. Mackintosh thinks that the more or less sharply-defined boundary-line reached by the erratics "could only have resulted from close proximity to a persistent current of water (or air?) sufficiently warm to melt the boulder-laden ice." He does not tell us, however, where this warm current of water or air came from, or in what direction it travelled. He forgets some of his own facts connected with the appearance of erratics of eastern derivation, and which, according to him, point to an ocean-current that flowed across from Lincolnshire into the very sea in which the Criffel granite and Cumbrian boulders were being dropt. The supposed warm ocean-current, then, if such it was rather than air, could hardly have come from the east. Neither is it at all likely that it could have come from the west, sheltered as the region of the Severn valley must have been by the ice-laden mountains of Wales. Again, the south is shut to us; for there are no erratics in the south of England from which to infer a submergence of that district. If it be true that all the northern erratics which are scattered over the low-grounds of England, Denmark, Holland, Germany, Poland, and Russia, owe their origin to boulder-laden ice carried by ocean-currents, no such warm water as Mr. Mackintosh desiderates could possibly have come from the east or south-east. We are left, then, to infer that the supposed warm current[Z] must have flowed up the Severn valley directly in the face of the Criffel current, underneath which it suddenly plunged at a high temperature, the line of junction between it and the cold water being sharply defined, and retaining its position unchanged for a long period of time! However absurd this conclusion may be, it is forced upon us if we admit the hypothesis at present under review. For we must remember that the floating-ice is supposed to have melted whenever it came into contact with the warm current. The erratics occur up to a certain boundary-line, where they are concentrated in enormous numbers, and south of which they do not appear. Here, then, large and small floes alike must have vanished at once! Certainly a very extraordinary case of dissolution.

[Y] Mr. Mackintosh says nothing about the "carry" or direction of the erratics in west and south Wales. Were the paths of these erratics delineated upon a map, we should find it necessary to suppose that the wind- or sea-current by which the floating-ice was propelled had flowed outwards in all directions from the dominant heights!

[Z] It must have likewise flowed in more or less direct opposition to the current which, in accordance with the iceberg hypothesis, transported boulders southwards from the high-grounds of south Wales!

If we dismiss the notion of a warm ocean-current for that of a warm wind, we do not improve our position a whit. Where did the warm wind come from? Not, certainly, from the ice-laden seas to the east. Are we to suppose, then, that it flowed in from the south or south-west? If so, we might well ask how it came to pass that in the immediate proximity of such a very warm wind as the hypothesis demands, great snow-fields and glaciers were allowed to exist in Wales? Passing that objection, we have still to ask how this wind succeeded in melting large and small masses of floating-ice with such rapidity that it prevented any of them ever trespassing south of a certain line? It is obvious that it must have been an exceedingly hot wind; and that, just as the hypothetical warm ocean-current must have suddenly dived under the cold water coming from the north, so the hot wind, after passing over the surface of the sea until it reached a certain more or less well-defined line, must have risen all at once and flowed vertically upwards into the cold regions above.

Thus, in seeking to escape from what he doubtless considers the erroneous and extravagant views of "land-glacialists," Mr. Mackintosh adopts a hypothesis which lands him in self-contradictions and a perfect "sea of troubles"--a kind of chaos, in fact. In attempting to explain the drifts of western England and east Wales he has ignored the conditions that must have obtained in contiguous regions--thus forgetting that "nothing in the world is single," and that one ought not to infer physical conditions for one limited area without stopping to inquire whether these are in consonance with what is known of adjacent districts, or in harmony with the existing phenomena of nature.

I have so strongly opposed Mr. Mackintosh's explanation of the sudden termination of the northern erratics in the neighbourhood of Wolverhampton and elsewhere, that perhaps I ought to offer an explanation of my own, that it may, in its turn, undergo examination. I labour under the disadvantage, however, of not having studied the drifts in and around Wolverhampton, etc., and the suggestion which I shall throw out must therefore be taken for what it is worth. It seems to me, then, that the concentration of boulders in the neighbourhood of Wolverhampton, and the limits reached by the northern erratics generally, mark out, in all probability, the line of junction between the _mer de glace_ coming from the basin of the Irish Sea and that flowing across the country from the vast _mer de glace_ that occupied the basin of the German Ocean. Along this line the southerly transport of the northern boulders would cease, and here they would therefore tend to become concentrated. But it is most likely that now and again they would get underneath the ice-flow that set down the Severn valley, and I should anticipate that they will yet be detected, along with erratics of eastern origin, as far south even as the Bristol Channel. If it be objected to this view that erratics from Great Arenig have been met with south of Wolverhampton, at Birmingham and Bromsgrove, I would reply that these erratics were probably carried south either before or after the general _mer de glace_ had attained its climax--at a period when the Welsh ice was able to creep out further to the east than it could when the invasion of the North Sea ice was at its height.

I cannot conclude this paper without expressing my admiration for the long-continued and successful labours of the well-known geologist whose views I have been controverting. Although I have entered my protest against his iceberg hypothesis, and have freely criticised his theoretical opinions, I most willingly admit that the practical results of his unwearied devotion to the study of those interesting phenomena with which he is so familiar have laid all his fellow-workers under a debt of gratitude.

VIII.

Recent Researches in the Glacial Geology of the Continent.[AA]

[AA] Presidential Address to the Geological Section of the British Association, Newcastle, 1889.

THE President of this section must often have some difficulty in selecting a subject for his address. It is no longer possible to give an interesting and instructive summary of the work done by the devotees of our science during even one year. So numerous have the students of geological science become--so fertile are the fields they cultivate--so abundant the harvests they reap, that one in my present position may well despair of being able to take stock of the numerous additions to our knowledge which have accumulated within the last twelve months. Neither is there any burning question which at this time your President need feel called upon to discuss. True, there are controversies that are likely to remain unsettled for years to come--there are still not a few matters upon which we must agree to differ--we do not yet see eye to eye in all things geological. But experience has shown that as years advance truth is gradually evolved, and old controversies die out, and so doubtless it will continue to be. The day when controversies shall cease, however, is yet, I hope, far in the future; for should that dull and unhappy time ever arrive, it is quite certain that mineralogists, petrologists, palæontologists, and geologists shall have died out of the world. Following the example of many of my predecessors, I shall confine my remarks to certain questions in which I have been specially interested; and in doing so I shall endeavour to steer clear, as far as I can, of controversial matters. My purpose, then, is to give an outline of some of the results obtained during the last few years by Continental workers in the domain of glacial geology.

Those who are not geologists will probably smile when they hear one declare that wielders of the hammer are extremely conservative--that they are slow to accept novel views, and very tenacious of opinions which have once found favour in their eyes. Nevertheless, such is the case, and well for us that it is so. However captivating, however imposing, however strongly supported by evidence a new view may appear to be, we do well to criticise, to sift the evidence, and to call for more facts and experiments, if such are possible, until the proofs become so strong as to approach as near a demonstration as geologists can in most cases expect such proofs to go. The history of our science, and indeed of most sciences, affords abundant illustration of what I say. How many long years were the views of sub-aërial erosion, as taught by Hutton and Playfair, canvassed and controverted before they became accepted! And even after their general soundness had been established, how often have we heard nominal disciples of these fathers of physical geology refuse to go so far as to admit that the river-valleys of our islands have been excavated by epigene agents! If, as a rule, it takes some time for a novel view to gain acceptance, it is equally true that views which have long been held are only with difficulty discarded. Between the new and the old there is a constant struggle for existence, and if the latter should happen to survive, it is only in a modified form. I have often thought that a history of the evolution of geological theories would make a very entertaining and instructive work. We should learn from it, amongst other things, that the advance of our science has not always been continuous--now and again, indeed, it has almost seemed as if the movement had been retrograde. Knowledge has not come in like an overwhelming flood--as a broad majestic river--but rather like a gently-flowing tide, now advancing, now retiring, but ever, upon the whole, steadily gaining ground. The history I speak of would also teach us that many of the general views and hypotheses which have been from time to time abandoned as unworkable, are hardly deserving of the reproach and ridicule which we in these latter days may be inclined to cast upon them. As the Scots proverb says: "It is easy to be wise behindhand." It could be readily shown that not a few discarded notions and opinions have frequently worked for good, and have rather stimulated than checked inquiry. Such reflections should be encouraging to every investigator, whether he be a defender of the old or an advocate of the new. Time tries all, and each worker may claim a share in the final establishment of the truth.

Perhaps there is no department of geological inquiry that has given rise to more controversy than that which I have selected for the subject of this address. Hardly a single step in advance has been taken without vehement opposition. But the din of contending sides is not so loud now--the dust of the conflict has to some extent cleared away, and the positions which have been lost or maintained, as the case may be, can be readily discerned. The glacialist who can look back over the last twenty-five years of wordy conflict has every reason to be jubilant and hopeful. Many of those who formerly opposed him have come over to his side. It is true he has not had everything his own way. Some extreme views have been abandoned in the struggle; that of a great Polar ice-sheet, for example, as conceived of by Agassiz. I am not aware, however, that many serious students of glacial geology ever adopted that view. But it was quite an excusable hypothesis, and has been abundantly suggestive. Had Agassiz lived to see the detailed work of these later days, he would doubtless have modified his notion and come to accept the view of large continental glaciers which has taken its place.

The results obtained by geologists who have been studying the peripheral areas of the drift-covered regions of our Continent, are such as to satisfy us that the drifts of those regions are not iceberg-droppings, as we used to suppose, but true morainic matter and fluvio-glacial detritus. Geologists have not jumped to this conclusion--they have only accepted it after laborious investigation of the evidence. Since Dr. Otto Torell, in 1875, first stated his belief that the Diluvium of north Germany was of glacial origin a great literature on the subject has sprung up, a perusal of which will show that with our German friends glacial geology has passed through much the same succession of controversial phases as with us. At first icebergs are appealed to as explaining everything--next we meet with sundry ingenious attempts at a compromise between floating-ice and a continuous ice-sheet. As observations multiply, however, the element of floating-ice is gradually eliminated, and all the phenomena are explained by means of land-ice and "Schmelz-wasser" alone. It is a remarkable fact that the iceberg hypothesis has always been most strenuously upheld by geologists whose labours have been largely confined to the peripheral areas of drift-covered countries. In the upland and mountainous tracts, on the other hand, that hypothesis has never been able to survive a moderate amount of accurate observation. Even in Switzerland--the land of glaciers--geologists at one time were of opinion that the boulder-clays of the low-grounds had a different origin from those which occur in the mountain-valleys. Thus, it was supposed that at the close of the Pleistocene period the Alps were surrounded by great lakes or by gulfs of some inland sea, into which the glaciers of the high valleys flowed and calved their icebergs--these latter scattering erratics and earthy débris over the drowned areas. Sartorius von Waltershausen[AB] set forth this view in an elaborate and well-illustrated paper. Unfortunately for his hypothesis no trace of the supposed great lakes or the inland sea has ever been detected: on the contrary, the character of the morainic accumulations, and the symmetrical grouping and radiation of the erratics and perched blocks over the foot-hills and low-grounds, show that these last have been invaded and overflowed by the glaciers themselves. Even the most strenuous upholders of the efficacy of icebergs as originators of some boulder-clays, admit that the boulder-clay or till, of what we may call the inner or central region of a glaciated tract is the product of land-ice. Under this category comes the boulder-clay of Norway, Sweden, and Finland, and of the Alpine Lands of central Europe, not to speak of the hilly parts of our own islands.

[AB] "Untersuchungen über die Klimate der Gegenwart und der Vorwelt," etc.--_Natuurkundige Verhandelingen v. d. Holland. Maatsch. d. Wetensch. te Haarlem_, 1865.

When we come to study the drifts of the peripheral areas, it is not difficult to see why these should be considered to have had a different origin. They present certain features which, although not absent from the glacial deposits of the inner region, are not nearly so characteristic of such upland tracts. I refer especially to the frequent interstratification of boulder-clays with well-bedded deposits of clay, sand, and gravel; and to the fact that these boulder-clays are often less compressed than those of the inner region, and have even occasionally a silt-like character. Such appearances do seem at first to be readily explained on the assumption that the deposits have been accumulated in water opposite the margin of a continental glacier or ice-sheet--and this was the view which several able investigators in Germany were for some time inclined to adopt.

But when the phenomena came to be studied in greater detail, and over a wider area, this preliminary hypothesis did not prove satisfactory. It was discovered, for example, that "giants' kettles"[AC] were more or less commonly distributed under the glacial deposits, and such "kettles" could only have originated at the bottom of a glacier. Again, it was found that pre-glacial accumulations were plentifully developed in certain places below the drift, and were often involved with the latter in a remarkable way. The "brown-coal formation" in like manner was violently disturbed and displaced, to such a degree that frequently the boulder-clay is found to underlie it. Similar phenomena were encountered in regions where the drift overlies the Chalk--the latter presenting the appearance of having been smashed and shattered--the fragments having often been dragged some distance, so as to form a kind of friction-breccia underlying the drift, while large masses are often included in the clay itself. All the facts pointed to the conclusion that these disturbances were due to tangential thrusting or crushing, and were not the result of vertical displacements, such as are produced by normal faulting, for the disturbances in question die out from above downwards. Evidence of similar thrusting or crushing is seen in the remarkable faults and contortions that so often characterise the clays and sands that occur in the boulder-clay itself. The only agent that could produce the appearances, now briefly referred to, is land-ice, and we must therefore agree with German geologists that glacier-ice has overflowed all the drift-covered regions of the peripheral area. No evidence of marine action in the formation of the stony clays is forthcoming--not a trace of any sea-beach has been detected. And yet, if these clays had been laid down in the sea during the retreat of the ice-sheet from Germany, surely such evidence as I have indicated ought to be met with. To the best of my knowledge the only particular facts which have been appealed to, as proofs of marine action, are the appearance of bedded deposits in the boulder-clays, and the occasional occurrence in the clays themselves of a sea-shell. But other organic remains are also met with now and again in similar positions, such as mammalian bones and freshwater shells. All these, however, have been shown to be derivative in their origin--they are just as much erratics as the stones and boulders with which they are associated. The only phenomena, therefore, that the glacialist has to account for are the bedded deposits which occur so frequently in the boulder-clays of the peripheral regions, and the occasional silty and uncompressed character of the clays themselves.

[AC] These appear to have been first detected by Professor Berendt and Professor E. Geinitz.

The intercalated beds are, after all, not hard to explain. If we consider for a moment the geographical distribution of the boulder-clays, and their associated aqueous deposits, we shall find a clue to their origin. Speaking in general terms, the stony clays thicken out as they are followed from the mountainous and high-lying tracts to the low-grounds. Thus they are of inconsiderable thickness in Norway, the higher parts of Sweden, and in Finland, just as we find is the case in Scotland, northern England, Wales, and the hilly parts of Ireland. Traced south from the uplands of Scandinavia and Finland, they gradually thicken out as the low-grounds are approached. Thus in southern Sweden they reach a thickness of 43 metres or thereabout, and of 80 metres in the northern parts of Prussia, while over the wide low-lying regions to the south they attain a much greater thickness--reaching in Holstein, Mecklenburg, Pomerania, and west Prussia, a depth of 120 to 140 metres, and still greater depths in Hanover, Mark Brandenburg, and Saxony. In those regions, however, a considerable portion of the diluvium consists, as we shall see presently, of water-formed beds.

The geographical distribution of the aqueous deposits, which are associated with the stony clays, is somewhat similar. They are very sparingly developed in districts where the boulder-clays are thin. Thus they are either wanting, or only occur sporadically in thin irregular beds, in the high-grounds of northern Europe generally. Further south, however, they gradually acquire more importance, until in the peripheral regions of the drift-covered tracts they come to equal and eventually to surpass the boulder-clays in prominence. These latter, in fact, at last cease to appear, and the whole bulk of the diluvium, along the southern margin of the drift area, appears to consist of aqueous accumulations alone.