JjT. W. Monckton — Marine and Suhaerial Erosion. 409 



Statland. The well-known headland there rises sheer from the sea, 

 but he remarks the steep slope does not go far down under water. 

 The fishery charts show that the 50 fathom line is from 2 to 

 3 miles from the land, and in that distance there are sunken 

 rocks rising to, or nearly to, the surface, that is to say, they belong 

 to the coast plain now under water. 



In the north of Norway Dr. Reusch notes that the coast plain 

 is duplicated. He more especially refers to the tract around 

 Torghatteii, the celebrated island, the mountain upon which has 

 a hole through it. There we see two coast plains, the upper with 

 a level of about 300 feet and the lower forming the usual flat 

 stretch a little above the sea. We should get a similar result in 

 Gower if further elevation were to take place now, for the present 

 sea-shore would form a second raised platform, and the sea would 

 then begin to cut another slice off the rocks at its new level. 



It is not easy, in most cases, to prove by any definite evidence 

 whether a tract of surface is the result of marine erosion or has been 

 produced by subaerial denudation. The platform upon which the 

 Gower raised beach lies is clearly the work of the sea, and I think 

 Dr. Reusch has established the coast plain of Norway as being the 

 work of the sea too, though it has no doubt been somewhat 

 modified by subaerial denudation, and more especially by ice-action 

 since its elevation. On the other hand, it has been found possible 

 to prove that the wide flat plateaux of South and East Berkshire 

 and the neighbouring parts of Surrey and Hampshire are the work 

 of subaerial eroding agents. They are largely covered by sheets of 

 gravel, which has been proved by its peculiarities of composition 

 to be gravel of diff'erent rivers (Q.J.G.S., 1892, vol. xlviii, p. 29). 

 In fact, these flat Berkshire and Surrey plateaux were the bottoms 

 of valleys at the time of the deposition of the gravel which caps 

 them, and the gravel being harder than the sides of the valleys has 

 better resisted the agents of denudation. 



That it is possible to produce definite evidence in this case is, 

 however, due to conditions which do not hold in all places. Thus 

 the valleys of the country around London are, to a large extent, 

 newer than the Drifts which lie at high levels around them, and to 

 a large extent the Drifts have either survived or are newer than the 

 Ice Age. In many parts of England the surface of the solid geology 

 is hidden by great accumulations of Glacial Drift, and in mountainous 

 regions, such as North Scotland and Norway, the rock surface has 

 been swept clear of all soft deposits by ice, and we have only the 

 beds of gravel, sand, clay, etc., which have been left by, or have 

 accumulated since, the retreat of the last glacier or ice-sheet. 



The district at the head of the Hardanger Fjord, in Norway, has 

 especial attraction for me. It is, for one thing, not yet free from 

 ice, and a snowfield, the Hardanger Jokl, covers a considerable tract. 

 In the second place, the main surface features seem to be the result 

 of subaerial denudation. Dr. Hans Reusch has quite recently dealt 

 with this question in the Year Book of the Norwegian Geological 

 Survey for 1900 (Kristiania, 1901), and I am much interested to 



