1916.] conclusion. 405 



There still remains one point, which earlier in the paper 

 I promised to speak of. That is the strange connection 

 between the raised beaches and the Neolithic monuments. 



That the beaches have been covered by. many of the 

 deposits of intermediate times I am quite convinced, still they 

 were not on the beaches during Neolithic times for the graves 

 and dolmens are placed on them. On the 50 feet beach we 

 have found cists at Hougue Noirmont. On the same beach 

 the De Hus dolmen is placed. On the 25 feet beach is the 

 LTslet dolmen, the two adjoining graves, just discovered, and 

 possibly the tw T o smaller dolmens on the Common. Thus we 

 have the earliest and the latest periods brought together. The 

 only way of accounting for the fact is, that the beaches had 

 been completely denuded of their superimposed deposits and 

 were visible to the dolmen builders who recognised their value 

 as offering safe foundations for their massive erections. 



There is one more point bearing on this period. If I 

 read the peat evidence right I think that after the forests had 

 ended their growth — a very long time, to be estimated in 

 hundreds of years — must have elapsed during which our coasts 

 were practically awash as regards the sea level, for the whole 

 of the moss and marsh-plant peat show that there existed a 

 state of insufficient drainage. This was probably due to the 

 sea resting, or slightly rising for a long time, during the period 

 and it should be noticed that this rest was at one of the 

 "points of stability." 



CONCLUSION. 



It will be seen that the geological events of the Pleisto- 

 cene Period consists of a number of elevations and 

 submergences, and that with these changes there have been 

 changes of climate which have rendered the island alternately 

 habitable and uninhabitable. 



It may be well to review the supposed causes of these 

 changes. The question arises first, whether the land or the 

 sea rises and falls. I have all through this paper spoken of 

 changes as having been due to alterations in the level of the 

 sea. On the other hand Dr. R. R. Marett writes of the 

 changes of the island of Jersey as changes of land elevation. 

 Of course, we both mean the relative changes of level, but the 

 question is, does the land rise and fall or does the sea do so .?. 

 I think that before venturing an opinion I should give a 

 quotation or two to show how the question is answered by the 

 writers who have attacked the problem. 



