Vol. 51.] THE LOESS AND OTHER DEPOSITS OF SHANTUNG. 253 



Then ensued partial elevation, with the formation of the Marine 

 Sands and old Valley-gravels, and this probably continued till the 

 land assumed its present contours. 



The beds, so far as at present known, are as follows, numbered in 

 ascending order : — 



9. Modern Alluvium. 



8. Marine Sands: "I r, . 



7. Old Valley-gravels. ) Contemporaneous. 



6. Loess: 1 ~ . 



5. Basement-gravels. ] Contemporaneous in part. 



4. Basalt- flows of Kiangsu. 

 3. Yu-hwa-t'ai Gravels. 

 2. Daying Beds, volcanic. 

 1. Hang-chow Sandstones. 



IV. Conclusions. 



The conclusions at which we have arrived are the following : — 



1. Northern and Eastern Asia have never been glaciated in the 

 same sense that Europe has, hence the loess is in no way connected 

 with glacial action. 



2. The loess, where undisturbed, shows very plain evidence of 

 stratification. 



3. It is certainly not of geolian formation, but is as certainly an 

 aqueous deposit, and, from the enormous difficulties in accepting a 

 freshwater origin, we have been driven to ascribe to it a marine 

 origin. 



4. Its vast extent, probably over 1,000,000 square miles in China 

 alone, entitles it to rank among the great formations of the world. 



5. It has suffered enormous denudation and re-arrangement. 



6. It is succeeded by very extensive Marine Sands, and old 

 Valley-gravels. 



7. Zoological, ethnological, historical, and traditionary evidence 

 alike point to the former depression of Asia beneath the sea, and 

 the subsequent desiccation of the land consequent upon re-elevation. 



Discussion. 



Dr. W. F. Hume remarked that the difficulties in accepting the 

 theory are almost insuperable. The fact that Baron von Bicht- 

 hofen's theory had not been fully discussed was a serious feature in 

 the paper. The perfect preservation of land-shells and mammalia, 

 the irregular vertical distribution, and the absence of limestones and 

 marine shells alike disprove the view brought forward by the 

 Authors. 



Mr. Mark, thought that the Authors should have paid more 

 attention to the views of Baron von Richthofen, and the evidence of 

 Nehring, which had been summarized in the ' Geological Magazine,' 

 since the paper of one of the Authors published in the Society's 

 Journal in 1871. 



Q. J. G. S. No. 202. t 



