RECENT ADVANCES IN SCIENCE 571 



there are sentences in Mr. Moir's article which might, I think, be 

 unintentionally misleading to uninformed readers. He speaks 

 of " making a beginning " with this correlation. But a "begin- 

 ning was made " years ago, as we have seen. Mr. Moir, how- 

 ever, gives a detailed and most interesting scheme. He adopts 

 the view that the Chalky Boulder Clay is Riss. The other beds 

 then fall into line. A hill-wash near Ipswich represents the 

 Wiirm, and contains Solutrean implements. The Middle Glacial 

 Gravel represents the Mindel-Riss Interglacial Period. The 

 Cromer Till is Riss. The Cromer Forest Bed is Giinz-Mindel. 

 He does not make it clear where he places the Giinz itself, as 

 he cannot mean (what one phrase seems to imply) that the 

 Giinz preceded the Coralline Crag. Except, therefore, for the 

 doubt about the Giinz, Mr. Moir suggested, earlier and in much 

 greater detail, the same scheme as that which I said appeared 

 to be indicated by Prof. Marr's work, when I was reviewing the 

 latter in the last number of this journal. The Giinz is very 

 possibly represented by Marr's cold period of the Chillesford 

 Beds. It cannot have anything to do with the Coraliine Crag. 



Now, it will be seen that the Moir scheme is not funda- 

 mentally new, since it turns on the dating of the Chalky Boulder 

 Clay as Riss, which is not a new suggestion. On the other hand, 

 so far as I know, Mr. Burkitt is the first to suggest that it is 

 Wiirm. We have, therefore, these two schemes from which to 

 choose. Both Mr. Burkitt and Mr. Moir accept the conclusion 

 that the Older Palaeolithic is earlier than the Chalky Boulder 

 Clay. The dispute, therefore, has a highly important bearing on 

 that other correlation problem — of the Palaeolithic Ages with the 

 Glacial Periods — to which I have referred. Now, Mr. Burkitt 

 believes that the French time-table (the Older Palaeolithic 

 post-Riss and the Aurignacian post- Wiirm) is well founded. 

 But, if the Moir scheme is correct, it goes ill with the French 

 time-table in this country, and, doubtless, abroad also. 



I am exceeding my space, but there are two suggestions of 

 a general character which I would make. The Achen Recession 

 was much less warm than the real interglacial periods, the snow- 

 line being at least 700 metres below its present level. Hence, 

 in these northern latitudes, it may well be impossible to 

 distinguish Biihl from Wiirm. If there is a cold phase missing 

 as a separate entity in Britain, it is likely to be Biihl. And a 

 second point. On the Continent, Wiirm was much less severe 

 than Mindel or Riss. It was probably also less severe in Britain. 

 But the Chalky Boulder Clay is close to the extreme southern 

 limit of any glaciation in England. Hence the Chalky Boulder 

 Clay would appear to be more likely to be Riss (or even Mindel) 

 than Wiirm. These considerations appear to favour the Moir 

 correlation. 



