62 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



of earlier date than the glaciation of the districts in which they are 

 found. 



I propose to state briefly some of the general arguments that have 

 influenced my opinion, and then to deal with the special question of 

 the age of the deposits at Hoxne, which the advocates of the post- 

 glacial theory put forward as being undoubtedly in their favor. 



Let us first take into consideration the age of the beds containing 

 the remains of the mammoth, the woolly rhinoceros, and their com- 

 panions, with which the palaeolithic implements are so often found. 

 Wherever, in Europe, the relation of these beds to the bowlder-clay 

 can be clearly seen, they are of distinctly older age. Thus, in Russia, 

 Sir Roderick I. Murchison has recorded the discovery of the bones of 

 the mammoth and woolly rhinoceros, near Moscow, in reddish clay 

 covered with erratic blocks, on the plains thirteen miles distant from 

 the river. 1 And if we follow the northern drift southward from Mos- 

 cow, as I have done, we find it gradually changes from clay with bowl- 

 ders to the clay without bowlders that covers the southern plains. 

 Around the sea of Azov, cliffs of this glacial clay, one hundred feet 

 high, can be followed continuously for miles, and its junction below 

 with the older beds is sharply defined. It rests on a fresh-water de- 

 posit containing shells of species of Unto, Cyclas, and Paludina, and 

 at this horizon fragments of the tusks and bones of the mammoth are 

 abundant, and are always undoubtedly older than the glacial clay. 

 In a similar position the same remains have been found at Odessa and 

 other places in the south of Russia. 



Nor has the theory of the post-glacial age of the remains of the 

 mammoth remained unchallenged by eminent geologists in England. 

 Prof. Phillips 2 and Mr. Godwin Austen 3 long ago recorded their con- 

 viction that they belonged to an earlier period than the deposition of 

 the bowlder-clay, and that when they occur in newer beds they have 

 been derived from an older formation. The remains are so plentiful 

 in the caves of the north of England that it is certain that the mam- 

 moth and rhinoceros were abundant. Yet nowhere in the glaciated 

 parts of the country have the bones been found excepting where pre- 

 served from the action of the ice in caverns and fissures. 



Thus, in tracing the limits of the northern ice on the eastern side 

 of England, I have found that Durham and Northumberland were 

 probably completely overflowed by it, excepting the upper parts of 

 the Cheviots, as pointed out to me by Mr. Richard Howse. The ice 

 streamed through from the west, around the southern and northern 

 flanks of the Cheviots, down the valleys of the Tyne and the Tweed, 

 and when approaching the eastern coast was deflected to the south by 

 the great mass of ice that occupied and was flownng down the bed of 



1 " ftoolosry of Russia in Europe," p. 650. 



2 " Geology of Yorkshire," 1820, vol. i., pp. 18, 52. 



3 "British Association Reports," 1863, p.. 68. 



