The Glacial Period and the Earth-Movement Hypothesis.[AZ]
[AZ] This article contains the substance of two papers, one read before the Victoria Institute, in 1892; the other an address delivered to the Geological Society of Edinburgh, in 1891.
Perhaps no portion of the geological record has been more assiduously studied during the last quarter of a century than its closing chapters. We are now in possession of manifold data concerning the interpretation of which there seems to be general agreement. But while that is the case, there remain, nevertheless, certain facts or groups of facts which are variously accounted for. Nor have all the phenomena of the Pleistocene period received equal attention from those who have recently speculated and generalised on the subject of Pleistocene climate and geography. Yet, we may be sure, geologists are not likely to arrive at any safe conclusions as to the conditions that obtained in Pleistocene times, unless the evidence be candidly considered in all its bearings. No interpretation of that evidence which does not recognise every outstanding group of facts can be expected to endure. It may be possible to frame a plausible theory to account for some particular conspicuous phenomena, but should that theory leave unexplained a residuum of less conspicuous but nevertheless well-proved facts, then, however strongly it may be fortified, it must assuredly fall.
As already remarked, there are many phenomena in the interpretation of which geologists are generally agreed. It is, for example, no longer disputed that in Pleistocene times vast sheets of ice—continental mers de glace—covered broad areas in Europe and North America, and that extensive snow-fields and large local glaciers existed in many mountain-regions where snow-fields and glaciers are now unknown, or only meagrely developed. It is quite unnecessary, however, that I should give even the slightest sketch of the aspect presented by the glaciated tracts of our hemisphere at the climax of the Ice Age. The geographical distribution and extent of the old snow-fields, glaciers, and ice-sheets is matter now of common knowledge. It will be well, however, to understand clearly the nature of the conditions which obtained at the climax of glacial cold—at that stage, namely, when the Alpine glaciers reached their greatest development, and when so much of Europe was cased in snow and ice. This we shall best do by comparing the present with the past. Now in our day the limits of perennial snow are attained at heights that necessarily vary with the latitude. This is shown as follows:—
| Region. | N. Lat. | Height of Snow-Line. | |
| Iceland, | 65° | 3,070 | feet. |
| Norway, | 61° | 5,180-5,570 | " |
| N. Urals, | 59° 30' | 4,790 | " |
| Alps, | 46° | 8,884 or 9,000 | " |
| Caucasus, | 43° | 10,600-11,000 | " |
| Apennines, | 42° 30' | 9,520 | " |
| Etna, | 37° 30' | 9,530 | " |
| Sierra Nevada, | 37° | 11,187 | " |
Thus in traversing Europe from north to south the snow-line may be said to rise from 3000 feet to 11,000 feet in round numbers. It is possible from such data to draw across the map a series of isochional lines, or lines of equal perennial snow, and this has been done by my friend, Professor Penck of Vienna.[BA] It will be understood that each isochional line traverses those regions above which the line of névé is estimated to occur at the same height. Thus the isochional line of 1000 metres (3280 feet) runs from the north of Norway down to lat. 64° on the west coast, whence it must pass west to the south of Iceland. The line of 1500 metres (4920 ft.) is traced from the north end of the Urals in a westerly direction. It then follows the back-bone of the Scandinavian peninsula, passes over to Scotland, and thence strikes west along lat. 55°. For each of these lines good data are obtainable. The line of 2000 metres (6560 ft.) is, however, hypothetical. It is estimated to extend from the Ural Mountains, about the lat. of 57°, over the mountains of middle Germany and above the north of France. The line of 2500 metres (8200 ft.) passes from the southern termination of the Urals, in lat. 51°, to the east Carpathians, thence along the north face of the Alps, thereafter south-west across the Cevennes to the north-west end of the Pyrenees; and thence above the Cantabrian and the Portuguese Highlands to the coast in lat. 39°. The line of 3000 metres (9840 ft.) is estimated to occur above the Caspian Sea, near lat. 44°, and extends west through the north end of the Caucasus to the Balkans. Thence it is traced north-west to the Alps, south-west to the Pyrenees, which range it follows to the west, and thereafter sweeps south above the coast at Cadiz. The line of 3500 metres (11,480 ft.) runs from the Caucasus south-west across Asia Minor to the Lebanon Mountains; thence it follows the direction of the Mediterranean, and traverses Morocco above the north face of the Atlas range. Finally the line of 4000 metres (13,120 feet) is estimated to trend in the same general direction as the last-mentioned line, but, of course, further to the south. Although these isochional lines are to some extent conjectural, yet the data upon which they are based are sufficiently numerous and well-known to prevent any great error, and we may admit that the lines represent with tolerable accuracy the general position of the snow-line over our Continent. So greatly has our knowledge of the glaciation of Europe increased during recent years, that the height of the snow-line of the Glacial period has been determined by MM. Simony, Partsch, Penck, and Höfer. Their method is simple enough. They first ascertain the lowest parts of a glaciated region from which independent glaciers have flowed. This gives the maximum height of the old snow-line. Next they determine the lowest point reached by such glaciers. It is obvious that the snow-line would occur higher up than that, but at a lower level than the actual source of the glaciers; and thus the minimum height of the former snow-line is approximately ascertained. The lowest level from which independent glaciers formerly flowed, and the terminal point reached by the highest-lying glaciers having been duly ascertained, it is possible to determine with sufficient accuracy the mean height of the old snow-line. The required data are best obtained, as one might have expected, in the Pyrenees and amongst the mountains of middle and southern Europe. In those regions the snow-line would seem to have been some 3000 feet or so lower than now. From such data Professor Penck has constructed a map showing the isochional lines of the Glacial period. These lines are, I need hardly say, only approximations, but they are sufficiently near the truth to bring out the contrast between the Ice Age and the present. Thus the isochional of 1000 metres, which at present lies above northern Scandinavia, was pushed south to the latitude of southern France and north Italy; while the isochional of 2000 metres (now overlying the extreme north of France and north Germany) passed in glacial times over the northern part of the Mediterranean.[BB]
[BA] “Geographische Wirkungen der Eiszeit,” Verhandl. d. vierten deutschen Geographentages zu München, 1884.
[BB] It is interesting to note that while in the Tatra (north Carpathians) the snow-line was depressed in glacial times to the extent of 2700 feet only, in the Alps it descended some 4000 feet or more below its present level. With the snow-line of that great chain at such an elevation it is obvious that only a few of the higher points of the Apennines could rise into the region of névé. This is the reason why moraines are met with in only the higher valleys of that range.
Isochional lines are not isotherms. Their height and direction are determined not only by temperature, but by the amount and distribution of the snow-fall. Nevertheless, the position of the snow-line in Europe during the Ice Age enables us to form a rough estimate of the temperature. At present in middle Europe the temperature falls 1° F. for every 300 feet of ascent. Hence if we take the average depression of the snow-line in glacial times at 3000 feet, that would correspond approximately to a lowering of the temperature by 10°.[BC] This may not appear to be much, but, as Penck points out, were the mean annual temperature to be lowered to that extent it would bring the climate of northern Norway down to southern Germany, and the climate of Sweden to Austria and Moravia, while that of the Alps would be met with over the basin of the Mediterranean.