STEJNEGER] ANIMALS AND PLANTS OF NORWAY 467 
specimen, and I may add that it is plainly visible in Lonnberg’s 
figure of the Irish hind (p. 12, fig. 6). 
It seems thus pretty clearly established that the name Cervus 
elaphus scoticus is only a synonym of Cervus atlanticus, and that 
my supposition of the Scotch and Norwegian deer being of the same 
extraction and different from the central European stock (Amer. 
Natural., XXXV, I9QOI, p. 110) has been amply verified. 
With this conclusion it would seem that Lonnberg’s subsequent 
criticism (pp. 15-17) of my theory, that the deer immigrated into 
western Norway over an ancient Scoto-Norwegian land bridge falls 
to the ground. At the same time his own centention, that it came 
from south Sweden with the “ //ex-flora” and has died out in the 
intermediate territory, becomes untenable. I agree perfectly with 
his proposition (p. 18) that “the red deer went the same way as 
the flora did,” but in the present essay I hope to show that the flora 
with which the red deer arrived in west Norway did not come via 
southern Sweden either. In his discussion of my theory Lonnberg 
complains (p. 15) that I did not specify explicitly the period during 
which the immigration into western Norway took place and surmises 
that I meant it to have occurred in preglacial time because of my 
view that some “ members of the older Oriental invasion,” as one 
of which I regard the ancestor of Cervus atlanticus, “ joined the 
preglacial Siberian immigration in France,’ but my statement 
(Amer. Natural., XXXv, 1901, p. 109) about this immigration taking 
“place early, probably before the first great glaciation reached its 
maximum ” clearly refers to its entering eastern Europe during the 
early stage when “ neither ice nor water had yet shut off the passage 
north of the Caspian Sea” and not to the time when its most west- 
erly projected members reached Norway. I deliberately refrained 
from.mentioning any specific time, because the Scandinavian geol- 
ogists had not reached an agreement as to whether there has been 
one glacial epoch or several, or in the latter case whether the last 
glaciation in western Norway extended as far as the former, and 
in the paper referred to there was no opportunity to enter into any 
lengthy discussion of these questions. Under those circumstances 
I was very careful to avoid the word mterglacial since in my opinion 
the invasion over a Scoto-Norwegian land bridge is a biologic occur- 
rence which need not be affected either by the acceptance or the 
rejection of an interglacial theory. 
After having stated “as an established geological fact that at 
the time of the first great glaciation the existence of any terrestrial 
