372 Br. W. T. Blanford — Age of the Himalayas. 



quakes are more frequent, their intensity, as a rule, is greater, and 

 much larger areas are disturbed. Different stages in the geological 

 history of a district are characterized by different kinds of earth- 

 quakes. The Alpine system is not yet old, fault-formation is still 

 in progress, and the fault-slips are long and frequently recurring. 

 In Great Britain, we meet with a later stage. Fault- formation in 

 our seismic area is more advanced, and slipping takes place so 

 slowly and over distances so short, that our earthquakes are rare 

 and the areas disturbed by them more or less circular in form. 



Every stage in the process, however, requires investigation, and 

 that of which our British earthquakes are witness is certainly 

 deserving of attentive study. Unattractive though it may be at 

 first sight, the epoch immediately preceding the death of a mountain- 

 chain, is at least as interesting to the geologist as the more vigorous 

 periods of origin and growth. 



Errata in the Maps. 



Edinburgh earthquake : For Costorphine, read Corstorphine. 



Georgie, ,, Gorgie. 



Curriehall, ,, Curriehill. 



Tongridge, ,, Longridge. 



Mihnrow, ,, Milnrow. 



Harwich, , , Horwich. 



Tarber, ,, Tarbert. 



Glachan, ,, Clachan. 



In the map of the T^ancashire earthquake, the outermost of the two smaller circles 

 should have been a dotted line. In the map of the E. Cornwall earthquake, the 

 spot between North Hill and Callington should be erased. 



Lancashire earthquake : 

 Kintyre earthquake : 



I 



VI. — The Age of the Himalayas. 



By W. T. Blanford, LL.D., F.R.S., etc. 



EEGRET that I cannot accept as unquestionable the evidence 

 brought forward by my friend Mr. Howorth in favour of the 

 recent elevation of other mountain ranges in Asia besides the 

 Himalayas. I dealt with the latter alone, because I have a slight 

 acquaintance with parts of them, and some knowledge of the 

 observers whose opinions are quoted. But I argue from the known 

 to the unknown, and if I find reason to reject the evidence on 

 which Mr. Howorth relies to prove the absence of extensive glacial 

 markings in the Himalayas, I am disposed to be sceptical as to that 

 on which he founds his argument in the case of other ranges. I 

 decline to be drawn into a discussion about the latter. 



I quite agree in the improbability of the Himalayan ice having 

 ever reached the Indo-Gangetic plain, but I think I have shown that 

 this is not the question at issue. I cannot, however, help remarking 

 that if I depended chiefly, as Tchihatcheff and Cotta appear to have 

 done in the case of the Altai, on the presence or absence of erratics, 

 I might come to a different conclusion, for there are unmistakable 

 "erratics" — huge blocks believed to have come from the higher 

 Himalayas — in the Northern Punjab. 



I hope I do no injustice to Mr. Ho worth's argument in placing 



