[BC] Professor Brückner thinks the general lowering of temperature may not have exceeded 5-1/2° to 7° F. Verhandlungen der 73 Jahresversammlung der schweizerischen Naturforschenden Gesellschaft in Davos, 1890.
Let it be noted further that this lowering of the temperature—this displacement of climatic zones, was experienced over the whole continent—extending on the one hand south into Africa, and on the other east into Asia. But while the conditions in northern and central Europe were markedly glacial, further south only more or less isolated snow-capped mountains and local glaciers appeared—such, for example, as those of the Sierra Nevada, the Apennines, Corsica, the Atlas, the Lebanon, etc. In connection with these facts we may note also that the Azores were reached by floating ice; and I need only refer in a word to the evidence of cold wet conditions as furnished by the plant and animal remains of the Pleistocene tufas, alluvia, and peat of southern Europe. Again in north Africa and Syria we find, in desiccated regions, widespread fluviatile accumulations, which, in the opinion of a number of competent observers, are indicative of rainy conditions contemporaneous with the Glacial period of Europe.
When we compare the conditions of the Ice Age with those of the present we are struck with the fact that the former were only an exaggeration of the latter. The development of glaciation was in strict accordance with existing conditions. Thus in Pleistocene times North America was more extensively glaciated than northern Europe, just as to-day Greenland shows more snow and ice than Scandinavia. No traces of glaciation have been observed as yet in northern Asia or in northern Alaska, and to-day the only glaciers and ice-sheets that exist in northern regions are confined to the formerly glaciated areas. Again, in Pleistocene Europe glacial phenomena were more strongly developed in the west than in the east. Large glaciers, for example, existed in central France, and a considerable ice-flow poured into the basin of the Douro. But in the same latitudes of eastern Europe we meet with few or no traces of ice-action. Again, the Vosges appear to have been more severely glaciated than the mountains of middle Germany; and so likewise the old glaciers of the western Alps were on a much more extensive scale than those towards the east end of the chain. Similar contrasts may be noted at the present day. Thus we find glaciers in Norway under lat. 60°, while in the Ural Mountains in the same latitude there is none. The glaciers of the western Alps, again, are larger than those in the eastern part of the chain. The Caucasus region, it is true, has considerable glaciers, but then the mountains are higher.
Now turn for a moment to North America. The eastern area was covered by one immense ice-sheet, while in the mountainous region of the west gigantic glaciers existed. In our own day we see a similar contrast. In the north-east lies Greenland well-nigh drowned in ice, while the north-west region on the other hand, although considerably higher and occurring in the same latitude, holds only local glaciers. We may further note that at the present day very dry regions, even when these are relatively lofty and in high latitudes, such as the uplands of Siberia, contain no glaciers. And the same was the case in the Glacial period. These facts are sufficient to show that the conditions of glacial times bore an intimate relation to those that now obtain. Could the requisite increase of precipitation and lowering of temperature take place, we cannot doubt that ice-sheets and glaciers would reappear in precisely the same regions where they were formerly so extensively developed. No change in the relative elevation of the land would be required—increased precipitation accompanied by a general lowering of the snow-line for 3000 or 3500 feet would suffice to reintroduce the Ice Age.
From the foregoing considerations we may conclude:—(1) That the cold of the Glacial period was a general phenomenon, due to some widely-acting cause—a cause sufficient to influence contemporaneously the climate of Europe and North America; (2) that glaciation in our continent increased in intensity from east to west, and from south to north; (3) that where now we have the greatest rainfall, in glacial times the greatest snow-fall took place, and the snow tended most to accumulate; (4) that in the extreme south of Europe, and in north Africa and west Asia, increased rain precipitation accompanied lowering of temperature, from which it may be inferred that precipitation in glacial times was greater generally than it is now.
Having considered the climatic conditions that obtained at the climax of the Glacial period, I have next to recapitulate what is known as to the climatic changes of Pleistocene times. It is generally admitted that the glacial conditions of which I have been speaking were repeated twice, some say three times, during the Pleistocene period; while others maintain that even a larger number of glacial episodes may have occurred. Two glacial epochs, at all events, have been recognised generally both in Europe and North America. These were separated by an interglacial stage of more genial conditions, the evidence for which is steadily increasing. No one now calls in question the existence of interglacial deposits, but, as their occurrence is rather a stumbling-block in the way of certain recently resuscitated hypotheses, some attempt has been made to minimise their importance—to explain them away, in fact. It has been suggested, for example—(and the suggestion is by no means new)—that the deposits in question only show that there were local oscillations during the advance and retreat of the old ice-sheets and glaciers. This, however, is not the view of those who have observed and described interglacial beds—who know the nature of the organic remains which they have yielded, and the conditions under which the beds must have been accumulated. I need not refer to the interglacial deposits of our own country further than to remark that they certainly cannot be explained away in that summary fashion. The peat and freshwater beds that lie between the lower and upper tills in the neighbourhood of Edinburgh, for example, are of themselves sufficient to prove a marked and decided change of climate. No mere temporary retreat and re-advance of the ice-sheet will account for their occurrence. The lower till is unquestionably the bottom-moraine of an ice-sheet which, in that region, flowed towards the east. When the geographical position of the deposits in question is considered it becomes clear that an easterly flow of ice in Mid-Lothian proves beyond gainsaying that during the accumulation of the lower till all Scotland was drowned in ice. But when water once more flowed over the land-surface—when a temperate flora, composed of hazels and other plants, again appeared, it is obvious that the ice-sheet had already vanished from central Scotland. This is not the case of a mere temporary recession of the ice-front. It is impossible to believe that a temperate or even cold-temperate flora could have flourished in central Scotland at a period when thick glacier-ice mantled any portion of our Lowlands. Again, in the upper till we read the evidence of a recurrence of extreme glacial conditions—when central Scotland was once more overwhelmed by confluent ice-streams coming from the Highlands and the southern Uplands. Similar evidence of recurrent glacial conditions, I need hardly remind you, has been detected in other parts of the country. We are justified, then, in maintaining that our interglacial beds point to distinct oscillations of climate—oscillations which imply a long lapse of time. Continental observers are equally convinced that the interglacial epoch, of which so many interesting relics have been preserved over a wide region, was marked at its climax by a temperate climate and endured for a long period. The interglacial beds of northern and central Europe form everywhere marked horizons in the glacial series.
Geologists sometimes forget that in every region where glacial accumulations are well developed, good observers had recognised an upper and lower series of “drift-deposits” long before the idea of two separate glacial epochs had presented itself. Thus, in north Germany, so clearly is the Upper differentiated from the Lower Diluvium that the two series had been noted and mapped as separate accumulations for years before geologists had formulated the theory of successive ice-epochs.[BD] The division of the German Diluvium into an upper and a lower series is as firmly established as any other well-marked division in historical geology. The stratigraphical evidence has been much strengthened, however, by the discovery between upper and lower boulder-clays of true interglacial beds, containing lignite, peat, diatomaceous earth, and marine, brackish, and freshwater molluscs, fish, etc., and now and again bones of Pleistocene mammals.[BE] A similar strongly-marked division characterises the glacial accumulations of Sweden, as has been clearly shown by De Geer,[BF] who thinks that the older and younger epochs of glaciation were separated by a protracted period of interglacial conditions. In short, evidence of a break in the glacial succession has been traced at intervals across the whole width of the Continent, from the borders of the North Sea to central Russia. M. Krischtafowitsch has recently detected in the neighbourhood of Moscow[BG] certain fossiliferous interglacial beds, the flora and fauna of which indicate a warmer and moister climate than the present. The interglacial stage, he says, must have been of long duration, and separated in Russia as in western Europe two distinct epochs of glaciation.
[BD] Wahnschaffe: Forschungen zur deutschen Landes- und Volkskunde von Dr. A. Kirchhoff, Bd. vi., Heft 1.
[BE] For interglacial beds of north Germany see Helland: Zeitschr. d. deutsch. geol. Ges., xxxi., 879; Penck: Ibid., xxxi., 157; Länderkunde von Europa (Das deutsche Reich), 1887, 512; Dames: Samml. gemeinverständl. wissensch. Vorträge, von Virchow u. Holtzendorff: xx. Ser., 479 Heft; Schröder: Jahrb. d. k. geol. Landensanst. f. 1885, p. 219. For further references see Wahnschaffe, op. cit. I have not thought it worth while in this paper to refer to the interglacial deposits of our own islands. A general account of them will be found in my Great Ice Age, and Prehistoric Europe. The interglacial phenomena of the Continent seem to be less known here than they ought to be.