[72] It is interesting to observe that the Cretaceous flora of the United States (that of the Dakota group), indicates a somewhat cooler climate than that of the following Eocene period. Mr. De Rance (in the geological appendix to Capt. Sir G. Nares's Narrative of a Voyage to the Polar Sea) remarks as follows: "In the overlying American Eocenes occur types of plants occurring in the European Miocenes and still living, proving the truth of Professor Lesquereux's postulate, that the plant types appear in America a stage in advance of their advent in Europe. These plants point to a far higher mean temperature than those of the Dakota group, to a dense atmosphere of vapour, and a luxuriance of ferns and palms." This is very important as adding further proof to the view that the climates of former periods are not due to any general refrigeration, but to causes which were subject to change and alternation in former ages as now.

[73] Mr. S. B. J. Skertchley informs me that he has himself observed thick Tertiary deposits, consisting of clays and anhydrous gypsum, at Berenice on the borders of Egypt and Nubia, at a height of about 600 feet above the sea-level; but these may have been of fresh-water origin.

[74] By referring to our map of the Indian Ocean showing the submarine banks indicating ancient islands (Chap. XIX.), it will be evident that the south-east trade-winds—then exceptionally powerful—would cause a vast body of water to enter the deep Arabian Sea.

[75] In his recently published Lectures on Physical Geography, Professor Haughton calculates, that more than half the solar heat of the torrid zone is carried to the temperate zones by ocean currents. The Gulf Stream itself carries one-twelfth of the total amount, but it is probable that a very small fraction of this quantity of heat reaches the polar seas owing to the wide area over which the current spreads in the North Atlantic. The corresponding stream of the Indian Ocean in Miocene times would have been fully equal to the Gulf Stream in heating power, while, owing to its being so much more concentrated, a large proportion of its heat may have reached the polar area. But the Arctic Ocean occupies less than one-tenth of the area of the tropical seas; so that, whatever proportion of the heat of the tropical zone was conveyed to it, would, by being concentrated into one-tenth of the surface, produce an enormously increased effect. Taking this into consideration, we can hardly doubt that the opening of a sufficient passage from the Indian Ocean to the Arctic seas would produce the effects above indicated.

[76] For an account of the resemblances and differences of the mammalia of the two continents during the Tertiary epoch, see my Geographical Distribution of Animals, Vol. I. pp. 140-156.

[77] Professor Haughton has made an elaborate calculation of the difference between existing climates and those of Miocene times, for all the places where a Miocene flora has been discovered, by means of the actual range of corresponding species and genera of plants. Although this method is open to the objection that the ranges of plants and animals are not determined by temperature only, yet the results may be approximately correct, and are very interesting. The following table which summarizes these results is taken from his Lectures on Physical Geography (p. 344):—

Latitude. Present
Temperature. 		Miocene
Temperature. 		Difference.
1. Switzerland 47°.00 53°.6 F 69°.8 F 16°.2 F
2. Dantzig 54°.21 45°.7 ,, 62°.6 ,, 16°.9 ,,
3. Iceland 65°.30 35°.6 ,, 48°.2 ,, 12°.6 ,,
4. Mackenzie River 65°.00 19°.4 ,, 48°.2 ,, 28°.8 ,,
5. Disco (Greenland) 70°.00 19°.6 ,, 55°.6 ,, 36°.0 ,,
6. Spitzbergen 78°.00 16°.5 ,, 51°.8 ,, 35°.3 ,,
7. Grinnell Land 81°.44 1°.7 ,, 42°.3 ,, 44°.0 ,,

It is interesting to note that Iceland, which is now exposed to the full influence of the Gulf Stream, was only 12°.6 F. warmer in Miocene times, while Mackenzie River, now totally removed from its influence was 28° warmer. This, as well as, the greater increase of temperature as we go northward and the polar area becomes more limited, is quite in accordance with the view of the causes which brought about the Miocene climate which is here advocated.

[78] The objection has been made, that the long polar night would of itself be fatal to the existence of such a luxuriant vegetation as we know to have existed as far as 80° N. Lat., and that there must have been some alteration of the position of the pole, or diminution of the obliquity of the ecliptic, to permit such plants as magnolias and large-leaved maples to flourish. But there appears to be really no valid grounds for such an objection. Not only are numbers of Alpine and Arctic evergreens deeply buried in the snow for many months without injury, but a variety of tropical and sub-tropical plants are preserved in the hot-houses of St. Petersburg and other northern cities, which are closely matted during winter, and are thus exposed to as much darkness as the night of the Arctic regions. We have besides no proof that any of the Arctic trees or large shrubs were evergreens, and the darkness would certainly not be prejudical to deciduous plants. With a suitable temperature there is nothing to prevent a luxuriant vegetation up to the pole, and the long continued day is known to be highly favourable to the development of foliage, which in the same species is larger and better developed in Norway than in the south of England.

[79] Geological Magazine, 1873, p. 320.