Page:The Ancient Stone Implements (1897).djvu/718

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
696
ANTIQUITY OF THE RIVER-DRIFT.
[CHAP. XXV.

intervened between the line of cliffs and the sea. On the occasion of one of my visits to Bournemouth, some of these stumps were fortunately visible, and were pointed out to me by Mr. Way at a spot but a few yards to the west of the pier, and between high and low water-mark. They appear to be of no very remote antiquity, geologically speaking, and to be connected rather with the present valley of the Bourne than with the valley of the old river Solent, as the trees, some of which were fully a hundred years old, grew on the surface of a thick bed of hard peat. Under any circumstances, however, the presence of such remains at the foot of the cliff does not tend to diminish our estimate of the antiquity of the freshwater beds containing the works of man, which we find occupying their summit.

In passing the deposits containing flint implements in different parts of this country under review, enough has, I think, now been said to show that in position, in character, and in the nature of their organic contents, they are perfectly in accordance with what might have been expected from river-action under certain circumstances. The case might indeed have been made much stronger had deposits in other places, in all respects similar, except that the presence of flint implements has not as yet been observed in them, been brought into account; and it must not be forgotten that this might, with perfect propriety, have been done, as there can be no possible doubt that a certain series of gravels, sands, and clays, containing organic remains and flint implements in extremely variable quantity, all belong to one geological period, and owe their existence to similar causes.

But though on no other hypothesis than that of river-action can the phenomena be accounted for, yet, as has already been seen, it is necessary, in order that river-action should have produced such effects, that the streams, during some portion of the year at all events, should have been more torrential in character than they are at the present day. If, however, we see satisfactory grounds for attributing these beds containing land and freshwater shells and remains of terrestrial animals, to rivers formerly flowing at much higher levels than at present, which have since excavated their valleys—and it seems impossible to do otherwise—then we must also accept as a fact that the climatal conditions were such as would enable the rivers to perform the work. It is, as Sir Joseph Prestwich[1] has shown, quite out of the question

  1. Phil Trans., 1864, p. 266.