Scandinavia and Finland. 399 



Greenland, there are no transported boulders and no moraines where 

 tliere are no rocks projecting above the surface of the ice. These 

 are some only of the difficulties involved in the position as generally 

 argued. They are paramount difficulties. 



The burden of my argument, however, is not so much at this 

 stage to press home the impossibility of this ice-sheet, as to urge that 

 any explanation that is forthcoming seems inadequate to illuminate 

 the position unless we also grant, not merely a slow and secular rise 

 of the land, but that the whole contour and internal relations of the 

 different parts of Scandinavia have been greatly altered since so-called 

 Glacial times by differential movements. I had written this sentence, 

 when I was pleased to find my inference corroborated by the very high 

 authority of Lyell. After describing the dislocations of the chalky 

 beds of Denmark, to which he assigns a very late date, he goes on to 

 say : — " Hence we may be permitted to suspect that in some other 

 regions, where we have no such means at our command for testing 

 the exact date of certain movements, the time of their occurrence 

 may be far more modern than we usually suppose. In this way 

 some apparent anomalies in the position of erratic blocks, seen 

 occasionally at great heights above the parent rocks from which 

 they have been detached, might be explained, as well as the 

 irregular direction of certain glacial furrows like those described 

 by Professor Keilhau and Mr. Horbye on the mountains of the 

 Dovrefeld in lat. 62 N., where the striation and friction are said to 

 be independent of the present shape and slope of the mountain " 

 ('•' Ant. of Man," p. 394). Let us prosecute this view somewhat. 



That the upward movement of the Scandinavian peninsula, which 

 is conceded by everyone, was not equable and quite continuous, is 

 also generally admitted. It is proved among other things by the 

 terraces existing on the coast of Norway and Lapland, and which 

 mark intermittent periods of repose or of slower movement ; but this 

 intermittence will not explain the facts. The facts, in truth, require that 

 we should postulate that at one time there was a much greater and 

 more rapid inovement. The barnacles seen by Brongniart and Lyell 

 were found at one height only. If the rise had been more or less 

 intermittent even, we should have had several of these barnacle patches 

 at different heights, or a continuous series of them. It does not seem 

 possible to account for the isolation of the Swedish and other lakes 

 and their separation with their marine animals from the sea, except 

 by a rapid movement. The whole country intervening between the 

 great lakes and the sea is eloquent of violent breakages and ruptures, 

 notably those about Trolihiittan. This a priori probability is amply 

 supported by all the facts we can collect, and I would venture to 

 press them on the attention of those whose eyes have been closed to 

 all evidence of cataclysmic action by their allegiance to another god. 



If the position be just for which we have pi-essed in a previous 

 paper, that Eastern England and the bed of the North Sea as far east 

 as the Danish islands was bent into a series of enormous north-and- 

 south folds at the very time when the Drift was being distributed, 

 we can hardly doubt that the same movement extended to the 



