298 J. H. Blake — Age of the Kessingland Rool-bed. 
II. — On the Age of the Mammalian Kootlet-bed at Kessing- 
LAND. 1 
By J. H. Blake, F.G.S., Assoc. Inst. C.E. ; 
Of H. M. Geological Survey of England and 'Wales. 
I N two papers, by Messrs. S. V. Wood, jun., and F. W. Harmer, 
recently read before tbe Geological Society, — alluded to by Mr. 
Belt, in tbe Geological Magazine for April last, — tbis Bootlet-bed 
at Kessingland bas been referred to, and described as an interglacial 
shallow valley deposit ; of an age posterior to the Contorted Drift 
or Lower Boulder-clay, lying in a trougb excavated out of the 
Chillesford Clay. To make their description more intelligible, the 
authors (Messrs. Wood and Harmer) subjoin a sketch-map — in their 
combined paper “ Observations on the Later Tertiary Geology of 
East Anglia,” read November 8th, 1876 — and indicate by a broken 
line the connexion of this trough with the existing (!) valley Systems 
of the rivers Waveney and Yare — which are here mainly cut out 
of the Chalky Boulder-clay and Middle Glacial Sands — thus ap- 
parently assuming that, before the Middle Glacial Sands and Chalky 
Boulder-clay were deposited, there were valley Systems occupying 
much the same positions in this immediate locality as there are now, 
with the addition of the supposed continuation of the interglacial 
valley of the Waveney in a south- easterly direction to Pakefield and 
Kessingland. To strengthen their argument, they likewise give an 
hypothetical section ; representing, what they believe to be the true, 
tliougli concealed, structure of this Waveney valley. They conclude 
this portion of their paper by stating, “ If these views (as pro- 
pounded by them) are right, there seems reason for suspecting that 
this Kessingland-bed, containing Mammalian remains and rootlets 
(which is directly overlain by the Middle Glacial), may belong to 
tbe period of interglacial valley excavation we liave been discussing ” 
— that is, posterior to the Contorted Drift or Lower Boulder-clay. 
I will now refer to Mr. Harmer’s paper “ On the Kessingland 
CI iff- section,” etc., read November 8th, 1876. After criticizing, 
generally, Mr. Gunn’s paper “ On the Presence of the Forest-bed 
Series at Kessingland and Pakefield,” etc., read November 17th, 
1875; and expounding bis own views as to the sequence of the beds, 
etc. ; Mr. Harmer states, “ While, however, the posteriority of these 
Mammaliferous and fresh-water deposits (Bootlet-bed, etc.) to the 
Crag (Chillesford Clay) seems thus apparent, 2 their age relatively to 
the beds newer than the Crag is obscure, since there is nothing to 
sliow whether they preceded the Lower Glacial beds, which are absent 
from the Kessingland section, or succeeded them — a point of con- 
1 This paper is published by permission of the Director-General of the Geological 
Survey. 
2 The section of the Kessingland Cliff given (in the Quart. Journ. Geol. Society, 
vol. xxxiii. p. 137) to show this — besides being inaccurate, together with the 
description of it, in some important particulars — is very deceptive in appearance, 
owing to the distorted scale to which it is drawn (the vertical scale being about 13 
times that of the horizoutal), and also on account of the interval between Covehithe 
and Kessingland (a distance of about miles) being abridged. 
