t yô I- KIDTJOF NANSEN. M.-N. Kl. 



'I1ic \crtical raii^c hclwcin tlic iippc iinost level ahf>vo ihe sca and 

 the lowest suhnicrj^-ed level <>\ llie api)areiit strandflat is thus coiisiflcrahly 

 f,^rcater on Px-ar Tslainl llian is L^-enerally ihc case along the Xorwegian 

 coast (with the exceiilnni of l''inniark perhaps). This may be due to the 

 fact that the rocks of the l^ear island region have so little power of 

 resistance that the vigorous shore erosion may have managed to plane 

 down fairlv hroail platforms rjuring relatively short periods. The planes 

 cut at tenii)()rar\ high or low levels at wliicli the shore-line may have 

 stood during vertical movements of the land crust or of the sea-level, may 

 therefore in this region appear as though they l)elonged to tlie strandfiat. 

 In Norway, however, a much longer time has generally ])C(tn required for 

 the development of broad shore benches. The Norwegian strandfiat was 

 therefore formed during long periods when the land crust stood at its 

 normal level of equilibrium (cf. p. 42), while the higher shore levels lasting 

 for shorter periods liave left few conspicuous marks only in the shape of 

 old raised beaclies and shore-lines. 



While there can hardly be any doubt that the outer flattest parts of 

 the plain of Bear Island have been levelled by shore erosion, it is very 

 difficult to decide how its inner part, higher than 50 metres and rising 

 to 100 or, according to Hoel, even to 150 metres above the sea, has been 

 formed. We have seen that Hoel does not consider it to be a plane of 

 marine abrasion because it is more uneven than the outer very level plain. 

 On the other hand there is as a rule a fairly well marked boundary between 

 this higher plain and the more steeply ascending mountain sides along its 

 southern margin, especially at Mount IVIisery. Although there may b2 

 some difference in tlie power of resistance of the rocks of the mountains 

 and of the plain, it is hardly sufficient to account for the differencs in 

 slope, and it seems to me to be possible that also the inner, higher part 

 of the plain may have been formed by shore erosion, but during a more 

 remote period than tlie lower flatter part, and by exposure to later erosion 

 it has become more uneven. On the other hand it is difficult to believe 

 that, during some comparatively recent' period, the land has been sub- 

 merged up to these higher levels for sufficiently long time to have an 

 extensive plain like this cut by shore erosion. 



This higher plain of Bear Island has a certain resemblance to the 

 plain across Hitteren in Norw-ay, previously described (p. 123), rising 

 gradually above 60 metres in the middle of the island (cf. map Fig. 107). 

 It has likewise a width of 13 kilometres. On Alsten Island at the foot 

 of the "Seven Sisters" there is a similar plain (about 8 kilometres across) 

 rising above 60 metres in the midflle of the island. It is probably cut in 

 mica-schist although to a great extent it is covered by quaternary marine 

 deposits and moraines. 



If it were not for the small areas of these islands one might be 

 tempted to assume that these plains have been gradually raised by iso- 



