982 PROFESSOR J. PRESTWICH OR THE EVIDENCES OF A SUBMERGENCE 
what way could their re-occupation of the emerged lands and uplifted sea-bed have 
been established, are matters for much consideration. In certain areas, where the 
waters rose above the highest summits of the land, entire faunas must have been 
destroyed, but where the higher summits were not submerged, room for the escape 
of large sections of both the fauna and flora existed, and local centres were left for 
their subsequent redistribution. Then, again, how far would a marine fauna be able 
to withstand the changes of level and pressure; or would its survival depend upon 
immigration from adjacent unsubmerged areas ? But these are questions for natu¬ 
ralists. No answer can be given at present, as the occasion for their discussion has 
not hitherto arisen. I have necessarily confined myself to the geological phenomena. 
Whatever phase of the Bubble-drift we may examine, we recognize in all of them 
physical and faunal conditions referable to the agency of one and the same cause. 
Whether we look at (1) the debris in one section of the Loess, (2) the Breccia on slopes, 
(3) the “ Head ” over the Raised Beaches, (4) the Basement gravels of many valleys, or 
(5) the Ossiferous fissures, we discern a complete absence of that wear which results 
from maintained river, sea, or ice action. Nor is there any indication of that 
transport of debris from a distance which attends river or tidal action. On the 
contrary, all the component materials are of local origin, derived from the adjacent 
slopes or hills, and they are cdl unworn. The evidence of the organic remains is to 
the same effect, in that they are those of a land fauna cdone, with an entire absence 
of marine and fluviatile remains. The bones found in the Bubble-drift are not only in 
the same unworn condition as the rock fragments, but they are free from all marks 
of gnawing. This is a proof that the animals had not, as in the caves, fallen a prey 
to Carnivora, but must have met their death in a way which was unusual—sucli as 
from drowning,—for had their bodies remained on a land surface after death, they 
would have been subject to being devoured by predaceous animals, or else the bones 
would have shown traces of weathering and wear. At the same time the sharply 
fractured state and dispersion of the bones show that they must have been subjected 
to considerable violence and displacement. These conditions, as well as the mode of 
distribution of the rul)ble from many independent centres, accord in all points with 
the results that would ensue from the submergence and re-elevation of a land surface 
from beneath deep waters after a temporary submergence. 
These conclusions, startling though they may appear,"^ have been forced upon me, 
not only by my own observations in the South of England, and parts of the 
Continent, but also by the independent evidence of other geologists, though their 
interj)retation of the facts may be different. Looked at in all its aspects, I see no 
alternative that equally well answers to all the conditions of the problem. Other 
'* Viewed by oui’ own standard the depth of submergence appears excessive, but in dealing with a 
body of the volume of the globe and with a surface length of 3000 miles or more, the deflection of the 
crust Avould apjDear really comparatively slight. 
