H. H. Howorth—A Great Post-Glacial Flood. 417 
implements are found, although in the latter case they are often 
rolled. It seems clear to me that man could not possibly have lived 
at the time when these great floods swept across the country, but 
must have been a prior occupant, whose discarded relics were swept 
up with the other surface matter to form the sandy deposits” (The 
Great Ice Age, pp. 840-1). So far, I agree most completely with 
Mr. Skertchly’s graphic presentation of the position. I naturally 
also agree with Mr. Geikie’s acceptance of this position. Mr. Geikie 
speaks of the paleeolithic and ossiferous gravels of Southern England 
as ‘yielding unmistakeable proof of having been finally subjected to 
disturbance and reconstruction, a disturbance and reconstruction 
_. which were certainly completed before the advent of Neolithic man 
in Britain. Thus we meet with gravels of the age in question 
scattered over the whole length and breadth of some districts rest- 
ing alike on valley bottom, hill side, and hill top—in fact, wrapping 
the country in a more or less continuous mantle. No river action 
will account for these appearances. The gravels, no doubt, lie 
thickest in the valleys, but they sweep up the hill sides, and over the 
hill tops, into totally different drainage areas.” He then goes on to 
say how he had examined the country round Brandon with Mr. 
Skertchly and continues, “After we had gone over a considerable 
area, and noted the wide distribution of the gravels and their 
anomalous positions, it became evident that, as my friend said, if the 
yravels owed their distribution to river-action, then the river which 
scattered them must have been broad enough to cover the whole 
country like a wide sea. Then, again, no mere river-action will 
account for the coarse and tumultuous aspect so often presented by 
the paleolithic gravels. One frequently sees sand, clay, grit, well- 
rounded stones, angular blocks and sharp-edged débris, all huddled 
together in the direst confusion—the larger stones often standing on 
end, and not lying in the position they must have assumed under 
ordinary river-action.” He concludes by saying that he might have 
entered into further details for the purpose of showing that the 
ancient ossiferous river-gravels of Southern England have been sub- 
jected to some powerful disturbing force since the time of their 
formation. ‘The explanation of this he remits to Mr. Skertchly, and 
we have already quoted it (id. pp. 505-6). 
Again, in another place, after postulating ‘great floods as having 
resulted from the melting of his ice-cap, Mr. Geikie goes on to say, 
“To this period must be attributed those tumultuous deposits with 
occasional paleeolithic implements and mammalian remains which 
are scattered over hill and valley alike in the east midland districts 
especially. No mere river-action can possibly account for the 
appearance presented by these confused accumulations, or for the 
anomalous positions in which they so often occur. They clearly 
indicate the flow of immense bodies of water.” He then goes on to 
deduce this water from his ice-sheet, and concludes that the result 
would be ‘to inundate wide regions with torrential waters. Thus, 
not only would new accumulations of clay, silt, sand, gravel, and 
shingle be formed, but the ancient gravels of the last interglacial 
DECADE 1II.—VOL. X.—NO. IX. 27 
