Fragments of Earth Lore: Sketches & Addresses Geological and Geographical

The limits reached by the inland-ice during its greatest extension are becoming more and more clearly defined, although its southern margin will probably never be so accurately determined as that of the latest epoch of general glaciation. The reasons for this are obvious. When the inland-ice flowed south to the Harz and the hills of Saxony it formed no great terminal moraines. Doubtless many erratics and much rock-rubbish were showered upon the surface of the ice from the higher mountains of Scandinavia, but owing to the fanning-out of the ice on its southward march, such superficial débris was necessarily spread over a constantly-widening area. It may well be doubted, therefore, whether it ever reached the terminal front of the ice-sheet in sufficient bulk to form conspicuous moraines. It seems most probable that the terminal moraines of the great inland-ice would consist of low banks of boulder-clay and aqueous materials-the latter, perhaps, strongly predominating, and containing here and there larger and smaller angular erratics which had travelled on the surface of the ice. However that may be, it is certain that the whole region in question has been considerably modified by subsequent denudation, and to a large extent is now concealed under deposits belonging to later stages of the Pleistocene period. The extreme limits reached by the ice are determined rather by the occasional presence of rock-striæ and roches moutonnées, of boulder-clay and northern erratics, than by recognisable terminal moraines. The southern limits reached by the old inland-ice appear in this way to have been tolerably well ascertained over a considerable portion of central Europe. Some years ago I published a small sketch-map32 showing the extent of surface formerly covered by ice. On this map I did not venture to draw the southern margin of the ice-sheet in Belgium further south than Antwerp, where northern erratics were known to occur, but the more recent researches of Belgian geologists show that the ice probably flowed south for some little distance beyond Brussels.33 Here and there in other parts of the Continent the southern limits reached by the northern drift have also been more accurately determined, but, so far as I know, none of these later observations involves any serious modification of the sketch-map referred to.

I have now said enough, however, to show that the notion of a general ice-sheet having covered so large a part of Europe, which a few years ago was looked upon as a wild dream, has been amply justified by the labours of those who are so assiduously investigating the peripheral areas of the “great northern drift.” And perhaps I may be allowed to express my own belief that the drifts of middle and southern England, which exhibit the same complexity as the Lower Diluvium of the Continent, will eventually be generally acknowledged to have had a similar origin. I have often thought that whilst politically we are happy in having the sea all round us, geologically we should have gained perhaps by its greater distance. At all events we should have been less ready to invoke its assistance to explain every puzzling appearance presented by our glacial accumulations.

I now pass on to review some of the general results obtained by continental geologists as to the extent of area occupied by inland-ice during the last great extension of glacier-ice in Europe. It is well known that this latest ice-sheet did not overflow nearly so wide a region as that underneath which the lowest boulder-clay was accumulated. This is shown not only by the geographical distribution of the youngest boulder-clay, but by the direction of rock-striæ, the trend of erratics, and the position of well-marked terminal moraines. Gerard de Geer has given a summary34 of the general results obtained by himself and his fellow-workers in Sweden and Norway; and these have been supplemented by the labours of Berendt, E. Geinitz, Hauchecorne, Keilhack, Klockmann, Schröder, Wahnschaffe, and others in Germany, and by Sederholm in Finland.35 From them we learn that the end-moraines of the ice circle round the southern coasts of Norway, from whence they sweep south-east by east across the province of Gottland in Sweden, passing through the lower ends of Lakes Wener and Wetter, while similar moraines mark out for us the terminal front of the inland-ice in Finland – at least two parallel frontal moraines passing inland from Hango Head on the Gulf of Finland through the southern part of that province to the north of Lake Ladoga. Further north-east than this they have not been traced; but, from some observations by Helmersen, Sederholm thinks it probable that the terminal ice-front extended north-east by the north of Lake Onega to the eastern shores of the White Sea. Between Sweden and Finland lies the basin of the Baltic, which at the period in question was filled with ice, forming a great Baltic glacier which overflowed the Öland Islands, Gottland, and Öland, and which, fanning-out as it passed towards the south-west, invaded, on the south side, the Baltic provinces of Germany, while, on the north, it crossed the southern part of Scania in Sweden and the Danish islands to enter Jutland.

The upper boulder-clay of those regions is now recognised as the ground-moraine of this latest ice-sheet. In many places it is separated from the older boulder-clay by interglacial deposits – some of which are marine, while others are of freshwater and terrestrial origin. During interglacial times the sea that overflowed a considerable portion of north Germany was evidently continuous with the North Sea, as is shown not only by the geographical distribution of the interglacial marine deposits, but by their North Sea fauna. German geologists generally group all the interglacial deposits together, as if they belonged to one and the same interglacial epoch. This perhaps we must look upon as only a provisional arrangement. Certain it is that the freshwater and terrestrial beds which frequently occur on the same or a lower level, and at no great distance from the marine deposits, cannot in all cases be contemporaneous with the latter. Possibly, however, such discordances may be accounted for by oscillations in the level of the interglacial sea – land and water having alternately prevailed over the same area. Two boulder-clays, as we have seen, have been recognised over a wide region in the north of Germany. In some places, however, three or more such boulder-clays have been observed overlying one another throughout considerable areas, and these clays are described as being distinctly separate and distinguishable the one from the other.36 Whether they, with their intercalated aqueous deposits, indicate great oscillations of one and the same ice-sheet – now advancing, now retreating – or whether the stony clays may not be the ground-moraines of so many different ice-sheets, separated the one from the other by true interglacial conditions, future investigations must be left to decide.

The general conclusions arrived at by those who are at present investigating the glacial accumulations of northern Europe may be summarised as follows: —

1. Before the invasion of northern Germany by the inland-ice the low-grounds bordering on the Baltic were overflowed by a sea which contained a boreal and arctic fauna. These marine conditions are indicated by the presence under the lower boulder-clay of more or less well-bedded fossiliferous deposits. On the same horizon occur also beds of sand, containing freshwater shells, and now and again mammalian remains, some of which imply cold and others temperate climatic conditions. Obviously all these deposits may pertain to one and the same period, or more properly to different stages of the same period – some dating back to a time when the climate was still temperate, while others clearly indicate the prevalence of cold conditions, and are therefore probably somewhat younger.

2. The next geological horizon in ascending order is that which is marked by the Lower Diluvium – the glacial and fluvio-glacial detritus of the great ice-sheet which flowed south to the foot of the Harz Mountains. The boulder-clay on this horizon now and again contains marine, freshwater, and terrestrial organic remains – derived undoubtedly from the so-called pre-glacial beds already referred to. These latter, it would appear, were ploughed up and largely incorporated with the old ground-moraine.

3. The interglacial beds which next succeed contain remains of a well-marked temperate fauna and flora, which point to something more than a mere partial or local retreat of the inland-ice. The geographical distribution of the beds, and the presence in these of such forms as Elephas antiquus, Cervus elephas, C. megaceros, and a flora comparable to that now existing in northern Germany, justify geologists in concluding that the interglacial epoch was one of long duration, and characterised in Germany by climatic conditions apparently not less temperate than those that now obtain. One of the phases of that interglacial epoch, as we have seen, was the overflowing of the Baltic provinces by the waters of the North Sea.

4. To this well-marked interglacial epoch succeeded another epoch of arctic conditions, when the Scandinavian inland-ice once more invaded Germany, ploughing through the interglacial deposits, and working these up in its ground-moraine. So far as I can learn, the prevalent belief among geologists in north Germany is that there was only one interglacial epoch; but, as already stated, doubt has been expressed whether all the facts can be thus accounted for. There must always be great difficulty in the correlation of widely-separated interglacial deposits, and the time does not seem to me to have yet come when we can definitely assert that all those interglacial beds belong to one and the same geological horizon.

I have dwelt upon the recent work of geologists in the peripheral areas of the drift-covered regions of northern Europe, because I think the results obtained are of great interest to glacialists in this country. And for the same reason I wish next to call attention to what has been done of late years in elucidating the glacial geology of the Alpine Lands of central Europe – and more particularly of the low-grounds that stretch out from the foot of the mountains. Any observations that tend to throw light upon the history of the complex drifts of our own peripheral areas cannot but be of service. It is quite impossible to do justice in this brief sketch to the labours of the many enthusiastic geologists who within recent years have increased our knowledge of the glaciation of the Alpine Lands. At present, however, I am not so much concerned with the proofs of general glaciation as with the evidence that goes to show how the Alpine ground-moraines have been formed, and with the facts which have led certain observers to conclude that the Alps have endured several distinct glaciations within Pleistocene times. Swiss geologists are agreed that the ground-moraines which clothe the bottoms of the great Alpine valleys, and extend outwards sometimes for many miles upon the low-grounds beyond, are of true glacial origin. Now these ground-moraines are closely similar to the boulder-clays of this country and northern Europe – like them, they are frequently tough and hard-pressed, but now and again somewhat looser, and less firmly coherent. Frequently also they contain lenticular beds, and more or less thick sheets of aqueous deposits – in some places the stony clays even exhibiting a kind of stratification – and ever and anon such water-assorted materials are commingled with stony clay in the most complex manner. These latter appearances are, however, upon the whole best developed upon the low-grounds that sweep out from the base of the Alps. The only question concerning the ground-moraines that has recently given rise to much discussion is the origin of the materials themselves. It is obvious that there are only three possible modes in which those materials could have been introduced to the ground-moraine: either they consist of superficial morainic débris which has found its way down to the bottom of the old glaciers by crevasses; or they may be made up of the rock-rubbish, shingle, gravel, etc., which doubtless strewed the valleys before these were occupied by ice; or, lastly, they may have been derived in chief measure from the underlying rocks themselves by the action of the ice that overflowed them. The investigations of Penck, Blaas, Böhm, and Brückner appear to me to have demonstrated that the ground-moraines are composed mostly of materials which have been detached from the underlying rocks by the erosive action of the glaciers themselves. Their observations show that the regions studied by them in great detail were almost completely buried under ice – so that the accumulation of superficial moraines was for the most part impossible; and they advance a number of facts which prove positively that the ground-moraines were formed and accumulated under ice. I cannot here recapitulate the evidence, but must content myself by a reference to the papers in which this is fully discussed.37 These geologists do not deny that some of the material may occasionally have come from above, nor do they doubt that pre-existing masses of rock-rubbish and alluvial accumulations may also have been incorporated with the ground-moraines; but the enormous extent of the latter, and the direction of transport and distribution of the erratics which they contain cannot be thus accounted for, while all the facts are readily explained by the action of the ice itself, which used its sub-glacial débris as tools with which to carry on the work of erosion.

Professor Heim and others have frequently asserted that glaciers have little or no eroding power, since at the lower ends of existing glaciers we find no evidence of such erosion being in operation. But the chief work of a glacier cannot be carried on at its lower end, where motion is reduced to a minimum, and where the ice is perforated by sub-glacial tunnels and arches, underneath which no glacial erosion can possibly take place; and yet it is upon observations made in just such places that the principal arguments against the erosive action of glaciers have been based. If all that we could ever know of glacial action were confined to what we can learn from peering into the grottoes at the terminal fronts of existing glaciers, we should indeed come to the conclusion that glaciers do not erode their rocky beds to any appreciable extent. But as we do not look for the strongest evidence of fluviatile erosion at the mouth of a river, but in its valley – and mountain-tracks, so if we wish to learn what glacier-ice can accomplish, we must study in detail some wide region from which the ice has completely disappeared. When this plan has been followed, it has happened that some of the strongest opponents of glacial erosion have been compelled by the force of the evidence to go over to the other camp. Dr. Blaas, for example, has been led by his observations on the glacial formations of the Inn valley to recant his former views, and to become a formidable advocate of the very theory which he formerly opposed. To his work and the memoirs by Penck, Brückner, and Böhm already cited, and especially to the admirable chapter on glacier-erosion by the last-named author, I would refer those who may be anxious to know the last word on this much-debated question.

The evidence of interglacial conditions within the Alpine lands continues to increase. These are represented by alluvial deposits of silt, sand, gravel, conglomerate, breccia, and lignites. Penck, Böhm, and Brückner find evidence of two interglacial epochs, and maintain that there have been three distinct and separate epochs of glaciation in the Alps. No mere temporary retreat and re-advance of the glaciers, according to them, will account for the various phenomena presented by the interglacial deposits and associated morainic accumulations. During interglacial times the glaciers disappeared from the lower valleys of the Alps – the climate was temperate, and probably the snow-fields and glaciers approximated in extent to those of the present day. All the evidence conspires to show that an interglacial epoch was of prolonged duration. Dr. Brückner has observed that the moraines of the last glacial epoch rest here and there upon löss, and he confirms Penck’s observations in south Bavaria that this remarkable formation never overlies the morainic accumulations of the latest glacial epoch. According to Penck and Brückner, therefore, the löss is of interglacial age. There can be little doubt, however, that löss does not belong to any one particular horizon. Wahnschaffe38 and others have shown that throughout wide areas in north Germany it is the equivalent in age of the Upper Diluvium, while Schumacher39 points out that in the Rhine valley it occurs on two separate and distinct horizons. Professor Andreæ has likewise shown40 that there is an upper and lower löss in Alsace – each characterised by its own special fauna.

There is still considerable difference of opinion as to the mode of formation of this remarkable accumulation. By many it is considered to be an aqueous deposit; others, following Richthofen, are of opinion that it is a wind-blown accumulation; while some incline to the belief that it is partly the one and partly the other. Nor do the upholders of these various hypotheses agree amongst themselves as to the precise manner in which water or wind has worked to produce the observed results. Thus, amongst the supporters of the aqueous origin of the löss, we find this attributed to the action of heavy rains washing over and rearranging the material of the boulder-clays.41 Many, again, have held it probable that löss is simply the finest loam distributed over the low-grounds by the flood-waters that escaped from the northern inland-ice and the mers de glace of the Alpine lands of central Europe. Another suggestion is that much of the material of the löss may have been derived from the denudation of the boulder-clays by flood-water, during the closing stages of the last cold period. It is pointed out that in some regions, at least, the löss is underlaid by a layer of erratics, which are believed to be the residue of the denuded boulder-clay. We are reminded by Klockmann42 and Wahnschaffe43 that the inland-ice must have acted as a great dam, and that wide areas in Germany, etc., would be flooded, partly by water derived from the melting inland-ice, and partly by waters flowing north from the hilly tracts of middle Germany. In the great basins thus formed there would be a commingling of fine silt material derived from north and south, which would necessarily come to form a deposit having much the same character throughout.

From what I have myself seen of the löss in various parts of Germany, and from all that I have gathered from reading and in conversation with those who have worked over löss-covered regions, I incline to the opinion that löss is for the most part of aqueous origin. In many cases this can be demonstrated, as by the occurrence of bedding and the intercalation of layers of stones, sand, gravel, etc., in the deposit; again, by the not infrequent appearance of freshwater shells; but, perhaps, chiefly by the remarkable uniformity of character which the löss itself displays. It seems to me reasonable also to believe that the flood-waters of glacial times must needs have been highly charged with finely-divided sediment, and that such sediment would be spread over wide regions in the low-grounds – in the slackwaters of the great rivers and in the innumerable temporary lakes which occupied, or partly occupied, many of the valleys and depressions of the land. There are different kinds of löss or löss-like deposits, however, and all need not have been formed in the same way. Probably some may have been derived, as Wahnschaffe has suggested, from denudation of boulder-clay. Possibly also, some löss may owe its origin to the action of rain on the stony clays, producing what we in this country would call “rain-wash.” There are other accumulations, however, which no aqueous theory will satisfactorily explain. Under this category comes much of the so-called Berglöss, with its abundant land-shells, and its generally unstratified character. It seems likely that such löss is simply the result of sub-aërial action, and owes its origin to rain, frost, and wind acting upon the superficial formations, and rearranging their finer-grained constituents. And it is quite possible that the upper portion of much of the löss of the lower-grounds may have been re-worked in the same way. But I confess I cannot yet find in the facts adduced by German geologists any evidence of a dry-as-dust epoch having obtained in Europe during any stage of the Pleistocene period. The geographical position of our Continent seems to me to forbid the possibility of such climatic conditions, while all the positive evidence we have points to humidity rather than dryness as the prevalent feature of Pleistocene climates. It is obvious, however, that after the flood-waters had disappeared from the low-grounds of the Continent, sub-aërial action would come into play over the wide regions covered by the glacial and fluvio-glacial deposits. Thus, in the course of time, these deposits would become modified, – just as similar accumulations in these islands have been top-dressed, as it were, and to some extent even rearranged. I am strengthened in these views by the conclusions arrived at by M. Falsan – the eminent French glacialist. Covering the plateaux of the Dombes, and widely spread throughout the valleys of the Rhone, the Ain, the Isère, etc., in France there is a deposit of löss, he says, which has been derived from the washing of the ancient moraines. At the foot of the Alps, where black schists are largely developed, the löss is dark grey, but west of the secondary chain the same deposit is yellowish, and composed almost entirely of silicious materials, with only a very little carbonate of lime. This limon or löss, however, is very generally modified towards the top by the chemical action of rain – the yellow löss acquiring a red colour. Sometimes it is crowded with calcareous concretions, but at other times it has been deprived of its calcareous element and converted into a kind of pulverulent silica or quartz. This, the true löss, is distinguished from another lehm, which Falsan recognises as the product of atmospheric action – formed, in fact, in situ, from the disintegration and decomposition of the subjacent rocks. Even this lehm has been modified by running water – dispersed or accumulated locally, as the case may be.44

All that we know of the löss and its fossils compels us to include this accumulation as a product of the Pleistocene period. It is not of post-glacial age – even much of what one may call the “remodified löss” being of late Glacial or Pleistocene age. I cannot attempt to give here a summary of what has been learned within recent years as to the fauna of the löss. The researches of Nehring and Liebe have familiarised us with the fact that, at some particular stage in the Pleistocene period, a fauna like that of the alpine steppe-lands of western Asia was indigenous to middle Europe, and the recent investigations by Woldrich have increased our knowledge of this fauna. At what horizon, then, does this steppe-fauna make its appearance? At Thiede Dr. Nehring discovered in so-called löss three successive horizons, each characterised by a special fauna. The lowest of these faunas was decidedly arctic in type; above that came a steppe-fauna, which last was succeeded by a fauna comprising such forms as mammoth, woolly rhinoceros, Bos, Cervus, horse, hyæna, and lion. Now, if we compare this last fauna with the forms which have been obtained from true post-glacial deposits – those deposits, namely, which overlie the younger boulder-clays and flood-accumulations of the latest glacial epoch, we find little in common. The lion, the mammoth, and the rhinoceros are conspicuous by their absence from the post-glacial beds of Europe. In place of them we meet with a more or less arctic fauna, and a high-alpine and arctic flora, which as we all know eventually gave place to the flora and fauna with which Neolithic man was contemporaneous. As this is the case throughout north-western and central Europe, we seem justified in assigning the Thiede beds to the Pleistocene period, and to that interglacial stage which preceded and gradually merged into the last glacial epoch. That the steppe-fauna indicates relatively drier conditions of climate than obtained when perennial snow and ice covered wide areas of the low-ground goes without saying, but I am unable to agree with those who maintain that it implies a dry-as-dust climate, like that of some of the steppe-regions of our own day. The remarkable commingling of arctic- and steppe-faunas discovered in the Böhmer-Wald45 by Woldrich shows, I think, that the jerboas, marmots, and hamster-rats were not incapable of living in the same regions contemporaneously with lemmings, arctic hares, Siberian social voles, etc. But when a cold epoch was passing away the steppe-forms probably gradually replaced their arctic congeners, as these migrated northwards during the continuous amelioration of the climate.