PALAEONTOLOGY SINCE CUV1EE. 75 



An extremely interesting question in palaeon- 

 tology, and one which is at present engaging the 

 attention of geologists, is, whether North Germany 

 was under water or encrusted with ice during 

 one division of the Diluvial. Nehring l has come 

 forward in support of the latter hypothesis. He 

 adduces weighty arguments against the drift theory, 

 i.e. against the generally accepted supposition that, 

 during one subdivision of the Diluvial, North Ger- 

 many was under water, and that the Scandinavian 

 blocks of granite scattered over the land were 

 deposited by icebergs from the north. His chief 

 argument against this theory is the utter want of 

 any remains of marine animals, the want of every 

 trace of shore fauna. Some few discoveries in 

 East and West Prussia, in Holstein and about 

 Hamburg, which have been examined by Berendt 

 and Jentzsch, ' prove only,' says Nehring, * that 

 certain limited portions of North Germany were, 

 during the ice period, covered by the sea perma- 

 nently, or perhaps only for a time.' For, he adds, 

 it was not sea but glaciers which covered the low- 

 lying plains of Germany, as far as the Hartz and 

 the other mountain ranges to the south. Where 



1 Nehring, Faunistische Beweise fur die ehemalige Verglet- 

 schemng von Norddeutschland,' Kosmos, vii. 1883. 



