460 Nitihin on the Quaternary Deposits of Russia 



that is to say, with the subdivision into the palaeolithic and 



neolithic epochs I think that this subdivision will stand, 



even though, along with the remains of the mammoth, there 

 should be found some polished stones as the first indications of 

 a more perfect industry." .... 



" As to the time of the disappearance of the mammoth . . . 

 it is certain that wherever the glacial deposits are developed in 

 their entirety, the remains of the mammoth are not found above 

 the morainic deposits of the so-called second glaciation ; or at 

 least they are very rare. The time of the greatest development 

 of the mammoth and rhinoceros in Europe corresponds to the 

 period called interglacial, and to the second glaciation of 

 northern Europe. In northern and central Russia, which ex- 

 hibits everywhere but a single moraine, the remains of the 

 mammoth and rhinoceros are found principally in loessiform 

 deposits, in old lake and river deposits covering the moraine, 

 or the products of its alteration. These facts prove that the. 

 morainic deposits of Russia belong to the first glaciation, and 

 that by analogy with the west our loess, and the ancient allu- 

 viums where the remains of the mammoth and rhinoceros are 

 found, are sediments corresponding to the interglacial epoch, 

 and the second glaciation." 



" There are two questions whose solution is important for 

 the subject of which I am treating : first, that of two glaciations 

 in middle Europe, and then, that of the so-called interglacial 

 deposits of Germany, England and Scandinavia. You know, 

 gentlemen, that the idea of two epochs of glaciation (and even 

 of several, according to some investigations) has been suggested 

 by the discovery, upon the great expanse of the countries 

 mentioned, of two morainic deposits, separated by heavy, strat- 

 ified beds, in which are occasionally found numerous traces of 

 the Pleistocene fauna and flora. At the same time, the parti- 

 sans of this theory affirm that the second glaciation was less 

 powerful than the first, and that it could not cover all the 

 region occupied by the primary and principal glaciation. You 

 know also, gentlemen, that this theory, adopted by the larger 

 number of those who have studied the Quaternary deposits, is 

 far from being irrefutable. I will remark in the first place, 

 that the supposition of three and even four distinct glaciations 

 instead of two, indicates the possibility of diverse explanations, 

 and diverse opinions upon the genesis of these interglacial 

 deposits. For several countries, there has recently been 

 demonstrated the weakness of the proofs which have been used 

 in affirming the existence of several Glacial epochs, separated 

 by periods whose climatic conditions have been entirely dif- 

 ferent. Contemporary geological literature furnishes us with 

 some examples which demonstrate that there has been an error, 



