[CB] Naturwissenschaftliche Wochenschrift, Bd. vii. (1892), No. 4, p. 31. The plants were determined by Dr. Weber, Professor Wittmack, and Herr Warnstorf. [More recent investigations have considerably increased our knowledge of this flora. See Naturwissenschaftliche Wochenschrift, Bd. vii. (1892), Nr. 24, 25. Ausland, 1892, Nr. 20; Neues Jahrb. f. Min., etc., 1893, Bd. i., p. 95.]
The presence of the upper diluvium, however, proves that such genial conditions eventually passed away, and that an ice-sheet again invaded north Germany. But this later invasion was not on the same scale as that of the preceding one. The geographical distribution of the upper diluvium and the position of large terminal moraines put this quite beyond doubt. The boulder-clay in question spreads over the Baltic provinces of Germany, extending south as far as Berlin,[CC] and west into Schleswig-Holstein and Denmark. At the climax of this later cold epoch glaciers occupied all the fiords of Norway, but did not advance beyond the general coast-line. Norway at that time must have greatly resembled Greenland—the inland-ice covering the interior of the country, and sending seawards large glaciers that calved their icebergs at the mouths of the great fiords. In the extreme south, however, the glaciers did not quite reach the sea, but piled up large terminal moraines on the coast-lands, which may be followed thence into Sweden in an easterly direction by the lower end of Lake Wener and through Lake Wetter. A similar belt of moraines marks out the southern termination of the ice-sheet in Finland. Between Sweden and Finland lies the basin of the Baltic, which, at the epoch in question was filled with ice, forming a great Baltic glacier. This glacier overflowed the Öland Islands, Gottland, and Öland, fanning out as it passed towards the south-west and west, so as to invade on the south the Baltic provinces of Germany, while in the north it traversed the southern part of Scania, and overwhelmed the Danish islands as it spread into Jutland and Schleswig-Holstein. The course of this second ice-sheet is indicated by the direction of transport of erratics, etc., and by the trend of rock-striæ and roches moutonnées, as well as by the position of its terminal and lateral moraines.
[CC] Not quite so far south. There is no reason to believe that the ice-sheet of the so-called Great Baltic Glacier advanced beyond the Baltic ridge. The upper boulder-clay south of that ridge is the ground-moraine of an earlier glaciation—the equivalent of our upper boulder-clay. See note, [page 324]. Nov. 1, 1892.
Such, then, is the glacial succession which has been established by geologists in Scandinavia, north Germany, and Finland. The occurrence of two glacial epochs, separated by a long interval of temperate conditions, has been proved. The evidence, however, does not show that there may not have been more than two glacial epochs. There are certain phenomena, indeed, connected with the glacial accumulations of the regions in question which strongly suggest that the succession of changes was more complex than is generally understood. Several years ago Dr. A. G. Nathorst adduced evidence to show that a great Baltic glacier, similar to that underneath which the upper diluvium was amassed, existed before the advent of the vast mer de glace of the so-called “first glacial epoch,”[CD] and his observations have been confirmed and extended by H. Lundbohm.[CE] The facts set forth by them prove beyond doubt that this early Baltic glacier smoothed and glaciated the rocks in southern Sweden in a direction from south-east to north-west, and accumulated a bottom-moraine whose included erratics are equally cogent evidence as to the trend of glaciation. That old moraine is overlaid by the lower diluvium—i.e., the boulder-clay, etc., of the succeeding vast mer de glace that flowed south to the foot of the Harz—the transport of the stones in the superjacent clay indicating a movement from NNE. to SSW., or nearly at right angles to the trend of the earlier Baltic glacier. It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that we have here to do with the products of two distinct ice-epochs. But hitherto no interglacial deposits have been detected between the boulder-clays in question. It might, therefore, be held that the early Baltic glacier was separated by no long interval of time from the succeeding great mer de glace, but may have been merely a stage in the development of the latter. It is at all events conceivable that before the great mer de glace attained its maximum extension, it might have existed for a time as a large Baltic glacier. I would point out, however, that if no interglacial beds had been recognised between the lower and the upper diluvium, geologists would probably have considered that the last great Baltic glacier was simply the attenuated successor of the preceding continental mer de glace. But we know this was not so; the two were actually separated by a long epoch of genial temperate conditions.
[CD] “Beskrifning. till geol. Kartbl. Trolleholm”: Sveriges Geologiska Undersökning, Ser. Aa., Nr. 87.
[CE] “Om de äldre baltiska isströmmen i södra Sverige”: Geolog. Förening. i Stockholm Förhandl., Bd. x., p. 157.
There are certain other facts that may lead us to doubt whether in the glacial phenomena of the Baltic coast-lands we have not the evidence of more than two glacial epochs. Three, and even four, boulder-clays have been observed in east and west Prussia. They are separated, the one from the other, by extensive aqueous deposits, which are sometimes fossiliferous. Moreover, the boulder-clays in question have been followed continuously over considerable areas. It is quite possible, of course, that all those boulder-clays may be the product of one epoch, laid down during more or less considerable oscillations of an ice-sheet. In this view of the case the intercalated aqueous deposits would indicate temporary retreats, while the boulder-clays would represent successive re-advances of one and the same mer de glace. On the other hand, it is equally possible, if not more probable, that the boulder-clays and intercalated beds are evidence of so many separate glacial and interglacial epochs. We cannot yet say which is the true explanation of the facts. But these being as they are, we may doubt if German glacialists are justified in so confidently maintaining that their lower and upper diluvial accumulations are the products of the “first” and “second” glacial epochs. Indeed, as I shall show presently, the upper diluvium of north Germany and Finland cannot represent the second glacial epoch of other parts of Europe.
For a long time it has been supposed that the glacial deposits of the central regions of Russia were accumulated during the advance and retreat of one and the same ice-sheet. In 1888, however, Professor Pavlow brought forward evidence to show that the province of Nijnii Novgorod had been twice invaded by a general mer de glace. During the first epoch of glaciation the ice-sheet overflowed the whole province, while only the northern half of the same region was covered by the mer de glace of the second invasion. Again, Professor Armachevsky has pointed out that in the province of Tchernigow two types of glacial deposits appear, so unlike in character and so differently distributed that they can hardly be the products of one and the same ice-sheet. But until recently no interglacial deposits had been detected, and the observations just referred to failed, therefore, to make much impression. The missing link in the material evidence has now happily been supplied by M. Krischtafowitsch.[CF] At Troïzkoje, in the neighbourhood of Moscow, occur certain lacustrine formations which have been long known to Russian geologists. These have been variously assigned to Tertiary, lower glacial, post-glacial, and pre-glacial horizons. They are now proved, however, to be of interglacial age, for they rest upon and are covered by glacial accumulations. Amongst their organic remains are oak (Quercus pedunculata), alder (Alnus glutinosa, A. incana), white birch, hazel, Norway maple (Acer platanoides), Scots fir, willow, water-lilies (Nuphar, Nymphæa), mammoth, pike, perch, Anadonta, wing-cases of beetles, etc. The character of the plants shows that the climate of central Russia was milder and more humid than it is to-day.
[CF] Bull. de la Soc. Impér. des Naturalistes de Moskau, No. 4, 1890.
It is obvious that the upper and lower glacial deposits of central Russia cannot be the equivalents of the upper and lower diluvium of the Baltic coast-lands. The upper diluvium of those regions is the bottom-moraine of the so-called great Baltic glacier. At the time that glacier invaded north Germany, Finland was likewise covered with an ice-sheet, which flowed towards the south-east, but did not advance quite so far as the northern shores of Lake Ladoga. A double line of terminal moraines, traced from Hango Head on the Gulf of Finland, north-east to beyond Joensuu, puts this beyond doubt.[CG] The morainic deposits that overlie the interglacial beds of central Russia cannot, therefore, belong to the epoch of the great Baltic glacier. They are necessarily older. In short, it is obvious that the upper and lower glacial accumulations near Moscow must be on the horizon of the lower diluvium of north Germany. And if this be so, then it is clear that the latter cannot be entirely the product of one and the same mer de glace. When the several boulder-clays described by Schröder and others as occurring in the Baltic provinces of Germany are reinvestigated, they may prove to be the bottom-moraines of as many distinct and separate glacial epochs.