[AR] Falsan: La Période glaciaire, p. 81.
All that we know of the löss and its fossils compels us to include this accumulation as a product of the Pleistocene period. It is not of post-glacial age—even much of what one may call the “remodified löss” being of late Glacial or Pleistocene age. I cannot attempt to give here a summary of what has been learned within recent years as to the fauna of the löss. The researches of Nehring and Liebe have familiarised us with the fact that, at some particular stage in the Pleistocene period, a fauna like that of the alpine steppe-lands of western Asia was indigenous to middle Europe, and the recent investigations by Woldrich have increased our knowledge of this fauna. At what horizon, then, does this steppe-fauna make its appearance? At Thiede Dr. Nehring discovered in so-called löss three successive horizons, each characterised by a special fauna. The lowest of these faunas was decidedly arctic in type; above that came a steppe-fauna, which last was succeeded by a fauna comprising such forms as mammoth, woolly rhinoceros, Bos, Cervus, horse, hyæna, and lion. Now, if we compare this last fauna with the forms which have been obtained from true post-glacial deposits—those deposits, namely, which overlie the younger boulder-clays and flood-accumulations of the latest glacial epoch, we find little in common. The lion, the mammoth, and the rhinoceros are conspicuous by their absence from the post-glacial beds of Europe. In place of them we meet with a more or less arctic fauna, and a high-alpine and arctic flora, which as we all know eventually gave place to the flora and fauna with which Neolithic man was contemporaneous. As this is the case throughout north-western and central Europe, we seem justified in assigning the Thiede beds to the Pleistocene period, and to that interglacial stage which preceded and gradually merged into the last glacial epoch. That the steppe-fauna indicates relatively drier conditions of climate than obtained when perennial snow and ice covered wide areas of the low-ground goes without saying, but I am unable to agree with those who maintain that it implies a dry-as-dust climate, like that of some of the steppe-regions of our own day. The remarkable commingling of arctic- and steppe-faunas discovered in the Böhmer-Wald[AS] by Woldrich shows, I think, that the jerboas, marmots, and hamster-rats were not incapable of living in the same regions contemporaneously with lemmings, arctic hares, Siberian social voles, etc. But when a cold epoch was passing away the steppe-forms probably gradually replaced their arctic congeners, as these migrated northwards during the continuous amelioration of the climate.
[AS] Woldrich: Sitzungsb. d. kais. Akad. d. W. math. nat. Cl., 1880, p. 7; 1881, p. 177; 1883, p. 978.
If the student of the Pleistocene faunas has certain advantages in the fact that he has to deal with forms many of which are still living, he labours at the same time under disadvantages which are unknown to his colleagues who are engaged in the study of the life of far older periods. The Pleistocene period was distinguished above all things by its great oscillations of climate—the successive changes being repeated and producing correlative migrations of floras and faunas. We know that arctic and temperate faunas and floras flourished during interglacial times, and a like succession of life-forms followed the final disappearance of glacial conditions. A study of the organic remains met with in any particular deposit will not necessarily, therefore, enable us to assign these to their proper horizon. The geographical position of the deposit, and its relation to Pleistocene accumulations elsewhere, must clearly be taken into account. Already, however, much has been done in this direction, and it is probable that ere long we shall be able to arrive at a fair knowledge of the various modifications which the Pleistocene floras and faunas experienced during that protracted period of climatic changes of which I have been speaking. We shall even possibly learn how often the arctic, steppe-, prairie-, and forest-faunas, as they have been defined by Woldrich, replaced each other. Even now some approximation to this better knowledge has been made. Dr. Pohlig,[AT] for example, has compared the remains of the Pleistocene faunas obtained at many different places in Europe, and has presented us with a classification which, although confessedly incomplete, yet serves to show the direction in which we must look for further advances in this department of inquiry.
[AT] Pohlig: Sitzungsb. d. niederrheinischen Gesellschaft zu Bonn, 1884; Zeitschr. d. deutsch. geolog. Ges., 1887, p. 798. For a very full account of the diluvial European and northern Asiatic mammalian faunas by Woldrich, see Mém. de l’Acad. des Sciences de St. Pétersbourg, viie sér., t. xxxv., 1887.
During the last twenty years the evidence of interglacial conditions both in Europe and America has so increased that geologists generally no longer doubt that the Pleistocene period was characterised by great changes of climate. The occurrence at many different localities on the Continent of beds of lignite and freshwater alluvia, containing remains of Pleistocene mammalia, intercalated between separate and distinct boulder-clays has left us no other alternative. The interglacial beds of the Alpine Lands of central Europe are paralleled by similar deposits in Britain, Scandinavia, Germany, and France. But opinions differ as to the number of glacial and interglacial epochs—many holding that we have evidence of only two cold stages and one general interglacial stage. This, as I have said, is the view entertained by most geologists who are at work on the glacial accumulations of Scandinavia and north Germany. On the other hand, Dr. Penck and others, from a study of drifts of the German Alpine Lands, believe that they have met with evidence of three distinct epochs of glaciation, and two epochs of interglacial conditions. In France, while some observers are of opinion that there have been only two epochs of general glaciation, others, as, for example, M. Tardy, find what they consider to be evidence of several such epochs. Others again, as M. Falsan, do not believe in the existence of any interglacial stages, although they readily admit that there were great advances and retreats of the ice during the Glacial period. M. Falsan, in short, believes in oscillations, but is of opinion that these were not so extensive as others have maintained. It is, therefore, simply a question of degree, and whether we speak of oscillations or of epochs, we must needs admit the fact that throughout all the glaciated tracts of Europe, fossiliferous deposits occur intercalated among glacial accumulations. The successive advance and retreat of the ice, therefore, was not a local phenomenon, but characterised all the glaciated areas. And the evidence shows that the oscillations referred to were on a gigantic scale.
The relation borne to the glacial accumulations by the old river alluvia which contain relics of palæolithic man early attracted attention. From the fact that these alluvia in some places overlie glacial deposits, the general opinion (still held by some) was that palæolithic man must needs be of post-glacial age. But since we have learned that all boulder-clay does not belong to one and the same geological horizon—that, in short, there have been at least two, and probably more, epochs of glaciation—it is obvious that the mere occurrence of glacial deposits underneath palæolithic gravels does not prove these latter to be post-glacial. All that we are entitled in such a case to say is simply that the implement-bearing beds are younger than the glacial accumulations upon which they rest. Their horizon must be determined by first ascertaining the relative position in the glacial series of the underlying deposits. Now, it is a remarkable fact that the boulder-clays which underlie such old alluvia belong, without exception, to the earlier stages of the Glacial period. This has been proved again and again, not only for this country but for Europe generally. I am sorry to reflect that some twenty years have now elapsed since I was led to suspect that the palæolithic deposits were not of post-glacial but of glacial and interglacial age. In 1871-72 I published a series of papers in the Geological Magazine in which were set forth the views I had come to form upon this interesting question. In these papers it was maintained that the alluvia and cave-deposits could not be of post-glacial age, but must be assigned to pre-glacial and interglacial times, and in chief measure to the latter. Evidence was led to show that the latest great development of glacier-ice in Europe took place after the southern pachyderms and palæolithic man had vacated England—that during this last stage of the Glacial period man lived contemporaneously with a northern and alpine fauna in such regions as southern France—and lastly, that palæolithic man and the southern mammalia never revisited north-western Europe after extreme glacial conditions had disappeared. These conclusions were arrived at after a somewhat detailed examination of all the evidence then available—the remarkable distribution of the palæolithic and ossiferous alluvia having, as I have said, particularly impressed me. I coloured a map to show at once the areas covered by the glacial and fluvio-glacial deposits of the last glacial epoch, and the regions in which the implement-bearing and ossiferous alluvia had been met with, when it became apparent that the latter never occurred at the surface within the regions occupied by the former. If ossiferous alluvia did here and there appear within the recently glaciated areas it was always either in caves, or as infra- or interglacial deposits. Since the date of these researches our knowledge of the geographical distribution of Pleistocene deposits has greatly increased, and implements and other relics of palæolithic man have been recorded from many new localities throughout Europe. But none of this fresh evidence contradicts the conclusions I had previously arrived at; on the contrary, it has greatly strengthened my general argument.
Professor Penck was, I think, the first on the Continent to adopt the views referred to. He was among the earliest to recognise the evidence of interglacial conditions in the drift-covered regions of northern Germany, and it was the reflections which those remarkable interglacial beds were so well calculated to suggest that led him into the same path as myself. Dr. Penck has published a map[AU] showing the areas covered by the earlier and later glacial deposits in northern Europe and the Alpine Lands, and indicating at the same time the various localities where palæolithic finds have occurred, and in not a single case do any of the latter appear within the areas covered by the accumulations of the last glacial epoch.
[AU] Archiv für Anthropologie, Bd. xv. Heft 3, 1884.
A glance at the papers which have been published in Germany within the last few years will show how greatly students of the Pleistocene ossiferous beds have been influenced by what is now known of the interglacial deposits and their organic remains. Professors Rothpletz[AV] and Andreæ,[AW] Dr. Pohlig[AX] and others, do not now hesitate to correlate with those beds the old ossiferous and implement-bearing alluvia which lie altogether outside of glaciated regions.