Efficiency of Astronomical Causes in Producing Glaciation.—Having now collected a sufficient body of facts, let us endeavour to ascertain what would be the state to which the northern hemisphere would be reduced by a high degree of excentricity and a winter in aphelion. When the glacial epoch is supposed to have been at its maximum, about 210,000 years ago, the excentricity was more than three times as great as it is now, and, according to Dr. Croll's calculations, the mid-winter temperature of the northern hemisphere would have been lowered 36° F., while the winter half of the year would have been twenty-six days longer than the summer half. This would bring the January mean temperature of England and Scotland almost down to zero or about 30° F. of frost, a winter climate corresponding to that of Labrador, or the coast of Greenland on the Arctic circle. But we must remember that the summer would be very much hotter than it is now, and the problem to be solved is, whether, supposing the geography of the northern hemisphere to have been identical with what it is now, the snow that fell in winter would accumulate to such an extent that it would not be melted in summer, and so go on increasing year by year till it covered the whole of Scotland, Ireland, and Wales, and much of England. Dr. Croll and Dr. Geikie answer that it would. Sir Charles Lyell maintained that it would only do so if geographical conditions were then more favourable than they are now; while the late Mr. Belt has argued, that excentricity alone would not produce the effect unless aided by increased obliquity of the ecliptic, which, by extending the width of the polar regions, would increase the duration and severity of the winter to such an extent that snow and ice would be formed in the Arctic and Antarctic regions at the same time whether the winter were in perihelion or aphelion.[51 - I have somewhat modified this whole passage in the endeavour to represent more accurately the difference between the views of Dr. Croll and Sir Charles Lyell.]
The problem we have now to solve is a very difficult one, because we have no case at all parallel to it from which we can draw direct conclusions. It is, however, clear from the various considerations we have already adduced, that the increased cold of winter when the excentricity was great and the sun in aphelion during that season, would not of itself produce a glacial epoch unless the amount of vapour supplied for condensation was also exceptionally great. The greatest quantity of snow falls in the Arctic regions in summer and autumn, and with us the greatest quantity of rain falls in the autumnal months. It seems probable, then, that in all northern lands glaciation would commence when autumn occurred in aphelion. All the rain which falls on our mountains at that season would then fall as snow, and, being further increased by the snow of winter, would form accumulations which the summer might not be able to melt. As time went on, and the aphelion occurred in winter, the perennial snow on the mountains would have accumulated to such an extent as to chill the spring and summer vapours, so that they too would fall as snow, and thus increase the amount of deposition; but it is probable that this would never in our latitudes have been sufficient to produce glaciation, were it not for a series of climatal reactions which tend still further to increase the production of snow.
Action of Meteorological Causes in intensifying Glaciation.—The trade-winds owe their existence to the great difference between the temperature of the equator and the poles, which causes a constant flow of air towards the equator. The strength of this flow depends on the difference of temperature and the extent of the cooled and heated masses of air, and this effect is now greatest between the south pole and the equator, owing to the much greater accumulation of ice in the Antarctic regions. The consequence is, that the south-east trades are stronger than the north-east, the neutral zone or belt of calms between them not being on the equator but several degrees to the north of it. But just in proportion to the strength of the trade-winds is the strength of the anti-trades, that is, the upper return current which carries the warm moisture-laden air of the tropics towards the poles, descending in the temperate zone as west and south-west winds. These are now strongest in the southern hemisphere, and, passing everywhere over a wide ocean, they supply the moisture necessary to produce the enormous quantity of snow which falls in the Antarctic area. During the period we are now discussing, however, this state of things would have been partially reversed. The south polar area, having its winter in perihelion, would probably have had less ice, while the north-temperate and Arctic regions would have been largely ice-clad; and the north-east trades would therefore be stronger than they are now. The south-westerly anti-trades would also be stronger in the same proportion, and would bring with them a greatly increased quantity of moisture, which is the prime necessity to produce a condition of glaciation.
But this is only one-half of the effect that would be produced, for the increased force of the trades sets up another action which still further helps on the accumulation of snow and ice. It is now generally admitted that we owe much of our mild climate and our comparative freedom from snow to the influence of the Gulf Stream, which also ameliorates the climate of Scandinavia and Spitzbergen, as shown by the remarkable northward curvature of the isothermal lines, so that Drontheim in N. Lat. 62° has the same mean temperature as Halifax (Nova Scotia) in N. Lat. 45°. The quantity of heat now brought into the North Atlantic by the Gulf Stream depends mainly on the superior strength of the south-east trades. When the north-east trades were the more powerful, the Gulf Stream would certainly be of much less magnitude and velocity; while it is possible, as Dr. Croll thinks, that a large portion of it might be diverted southward owing to the peculiar form of the east coast of South America, and so go to swell the Brazilian current and ameliorate the climate of the southern hemisphere.
That effects of this nature would follow from any increase of the Arctic, and decrease of the Antarctic ice, may be considered certain; and Dr. Croll has clearly shown that in this case cause and effect act and react on each other in a remarkable way. The increase of snow and ice in the northern hemisphere is the cause of an increased supply of moisture being brought by the more powerful anti-trades, and this greater supply of moisture leads to an extension of the ice, which reacts in still further increasing the supply of moisture. The same increase of snow and ice, by causing the north-east to be stronger than the south-east trade-winds, diminishes the force of the Gulf Stream, and this diminution lowers the temperature of the North Atlantic both in summer and winter, and thus helps on still further the formation and perpetuation of the icy mantle. It must also be remembered that these agencies are at the same time acting in a reverse way in the southern hemisphere, diminishing the supply of the moisture carried by the anti-trades, and increasing the temperature by means of more powerful southward ocean-currents;—and all this again reacts on the northern hemisphere, increasing yet further the supply of moisture by the more powerful south-westerly winds, while still further lowering the temperature by the southward diversion of the Gulf Stream.
Summary of Principal Causes of Glaciation.—I have now sufficiently answered the question, why the short hot summer would not melt the snow which accumulated during the long cold winter (produced by high excentricity and winter in aphelion), although the annual amount of heat received from the sun was exactly the same as it is now, and equal in the two hemispheres. It may be well, before going further, briefly to summarise the essential causes of this apparent paradox. These are—primarily, the fact that solar heat cannot be stored up owing to its being continually carried away by air and water, while cold can be so stored up owing to the comparative immobility of snow and ice; and, in the second place, because the two great heat-distributing agencies, the winds and the ocean-currents, are so affected by an increase of the snow and ice towards one pole and its diminution towards the other, as to help on the process when it has once begun, and by their action and reaction produce a maximum of effect which, without their aid, would be altogether unattainable.
But even this does not exhaust the causes at work, all tending in one direction. Snow and ice reflect heat to a much greater degree than do land or water. The heat, therefore, of the short summer would have far less effect than is due to its calculated amount in melting the snow, because so much of it would be lost by reflection. A portion of the reflected heat would no doubt warm the vapour in the atmosphere, but this heat would be carried off to other parts of the earth, while a considerable portion of the whole would be lost in space. It must also be remembered that an enormous quantity of heat is used up in melting snow and ice, without raising its temperature; each cubic foot of ice requiring as much heat to melt it as would raise nearly six cubic feet of water 30° F. It has, however, been argued that because when water is frozen it evolves just as much heat as it requires to melt it again, there is no loss of heat on the whole; and as this is adduced over and over again as a valid argument in every criticism of Dr. Croll's theory, it may be well to consider it a little more closely. In the act of freezing no doubt water gives up some of its heat to the surrounding air; but that air still remains below the freezing point or freezing would not take place. The heat liberated by freezing is, therefore, what may be termed low-grade heat—heat incapable of melting snow or ice; while the heat absorbed while ice or snow is melting is high-grade heat, such as is capable of melting snow and supporting vegetable growth. Moreover, the low-grade heat liberated in the formation of snow is usually liberated high up in the atmosphere, where it may be carried off by winds to more southern latitudes, while the heat absorbed in melting the surface of snow and ice is absorbed close to the earth and is thus prevented from warming the lower atmosphere, which is in contact with vegetation. The two phenomena, therefore, by no means counterbalance or counteract each other, as it is so constantly and superficially asserted that they do.
Effect of Clouds and Fog in cutting off the Sun's Heat.—Another very important cause of diminution of heat during summer in a glaciated country would be the intervention of clouds and fogs, which would reflect or absorb a large proportion of the sun-heat and prevent it reaching the surface of the earth; and such a cloudy atmosphere would be a necessary result of large areas of high land covered with snow and ice. That such a prevalence of fogs and cloud is an actual fact in all ice-clad countries has been shown by Dr. Croll most conclusively, and he has further shown that the existence of perpetual snow often depends upon it. South Georgia in the latitude of Yorkshire is almost, and Sandwich Land in the latitude of the north of Scotland, is entirely covered with perpetual snow; yet in their summer the sun is three million miles nearer the earth than it is in our summer, and the heat actually received from the sun must be sufficient to raise the temperature 20° F. higher than in the same latitudes in the northern hemisphere, were the conditions equal—instead of which their summer temperature is probably full 20° lower. The chief cause of this can only be that the heat of the sun does not reach the surface of the earth; and that this is the fact is testified by all Antarctic voyagers. Darwin notes the cloudy sky and constant moisture of the southern part of Chile, and in his remarks on the climate and productions of the Antarctic islands he says: "In the Southern Ocean the winter is not so excessively cold, but the summer is far less hot (than in the north), for the clouded sky seldom allows the sun to warm the ocean, itself a bad absorbent of heat; and hence the mean temperature of the year, which regulates the zone of perpetually congealed under-soil, is low." Sir James Ross, Lieutenant Wilkes, and other Antarctic voyagers speak of the snow-storms, the absence of sunshine, and the freezing temperature in the height of summer; and Dr. Croll shows that this is a constant phenomenon accompanying the presence of large masses of ice in every part of the world.[52 - For numerous details and illustrations see the paper—"On Ocean Currents in Relation to the Physical Theory of Secular Changes of Climate"—in the Philosophical Magazine, 1870.]
In reply to the objections of a recent critic Dr. Croll has given a new proof of this important fact by comparing the known amount of snow-fall with the equally well-known melting power of direct sun-heat in different latitudes. He says: "The annual precipitation on Greenland in the form of snow and rain, according to Dr. Rink, amounts to only twelve inches, and two inches of this he considers is never melted, but is carried away in the form of icebergs. The quantity of heat received at the equator from sunrise to sunset, if none were cut off by the atmosphere, would melt 3⅓ inches of ice, or 100 feet in a year. The quantity received between latitude 60° and 80°, which is that of Greenland, is, according to Meech, one-half that received at the equator. The heat received by Greenland from the sun, if none were cut off by the atmosphere, would therefore melt fifty feet of ice per annum, or fifty times the amount of snow which falls on that continent. What then cuts off the ninety-eight per cent of the sun's heat?" The only possible answer is, that it is the clouds and fog during a great part of the summer, and reflection from the surface of the snow and ice when these are absent.
South Temperate America as Illustrating the Influence of Astronomical Causes on Climate.—Those persons who still doubt the effect of winter in aphelion with a high degree of excentricity in producing glaciation, should consider how the condition of south temperate America at the present day is explicable if they reject this agency. The line of perpetual snow in the Southern Andes is so low as 6,000 feet in the same latitude as the Pyrenees; in the latitude of the Swiss Alps mountains only 6,200 feet high produce immense glaciers which descend to the sea-level; while in the latitude of Cumberland mountains only from 3,000 to 4,000 feet high have every valley filled with streams of ice descending to the sea-coast and giving off abundance of huge icebergs.[53 - See Darwin's Naturalist's Voyage Round the World, 2nd Edition, pp. 244-251.] Here we have exactly the condition of things to which England and Western Europe were subjected during the latter portion of the glacial epoch, when every valley in Wales, Cumberland, and Scotland had its glacier; and to what can this state of things be imputed if not to the fact that there is now a moderate amount of excentricity, and the winter of the southern hemisphere is in aphelion? The mere geographical position of the southern extremity of America does not seem especially favourable to the production of such a state of glaciation. The land narrows from the tropics southwards and terminates altogether in about the latitude of Edinburgh; the mountains are of moderate height; while during summer the sun is three millions of miles nearer, and the heat received from it is equivalent to a rise of 20° F. as compared with the same season in the northern hemisphere. The only important differences are: the open southern ocean, the longer and colder winter, and the general low temperature caused by the south polar ice. But the great accumulation of south polar ice is itself due to the great extent of high land within the Antarctic circle acted upon by the long cold winter and furnished with moisture by the surrounding wide ocean. These conditions of high land and open ocean we know did not prevail to so great an extent in the northern hemisphere during the glacial epoch, as they do in the southern hemisphere at the present time; but the other acting cause—the long cold winter—existed in a far higher degree, owing to the excentricity being about three times as much as it is now. It is, so far as we know or are justified in believing, the only efficient cause of glaciation which was undoubtedly much more powerful at that time; and we are therefore compelled to accept it as the most probable cause of the much greater glaciation which then prevailed.
Geographical Changes, how far a Cause of Glaciation.—Messrs. Croll and Geikie have both objected to the views of Sir Charles Lyell as to the preponderating influence of the distribution of land and sea on climate; and they maintain that if the land were accumulated almost wholly in the equatorial regions, the temperature of the earth's surface as a whole would be lowered, not raised, as Sir Charles Lyell maintained. The reason given is, that the land being heated heats the air, which rises and thus gives off much of the heat to space, while the same area covered with water would retain more of the heat, and by means of currents carry it to other parts of the earth's surface. But although the mean temperature of the whole earth might be somewhat lowered by such a disposition of the land, there can be little doubt that it would render all extremes of temperature impossible, and that even during a period of high excentricity there would be no glacial epochs, and perhaps no such thing as ice anywhere produced. This would result from there being no land near the poles to retain snow, while the constant interchange of water by means of currents between the polar and tropical regions would most likely prevent ice from ever forming in the sea. On the other hand, were all the land accumulated in the polar and temperate regions there can be little doubt that a state of almost perpetual glaciation of much of the land would result, notwithstanding that the whole earth should theoretically be at a somewhat higher temperature. Two main causes would bring about this glaciation. A very large area of elevated land in high latitudes would act as a powerful condenser of the enormous quantity of vapour produced by the whole of the equatorial and much of the temperate regions being areas of evaporation, and thus a greater accumulation of snow and ice would take place around both poles than would be possible under any other conditions. In the second place there would be little or no check to this accumulation of ice, because, owing to the quantity of land around the polar areas, warm oceanic currents could not reach them, while the warm winds would necessarily bring so much moisture that they would help on instead of checking the process of ice-accumulation. If we suppose the continents to be of the same total area and to have the same extent and altitude of mountain ranges as the present ones, these mountains must necessarily offer an almost continuous barrier to the vapour-bearing winds from the south, and the result would probably be that three-fourths of the land would be in the ice-clad condition of Greenland, while a comparatively narrow belt of the more southern lowlands would alone afford habitable surfaces or produce any woody vegetation.
Notwithstanding, therefore, the criticism above referred to, I believe that Sir Charles Lyell was substantially right, and that the two ideal maps given in the Principles of Geology (11th ed. Vol. i. p. 270), if somewhat modified so as to allow a freer passage of currents in the tropics, do really exhibit a condition of the earth which, by geographical changes alone, would bring about a perpetual summer or an almost universal winter. But we have seen in our sixth chapter that there is the strongest cumulative evidence, almost amounting to demonstration, that for all known geological periods our continents and oceans have occupied the same general position they do now, and that no such radical changes in the distribution of sea and land as imagined by way of hypothesis by Sir Charles Lyell, have ever occurred. Such an hypothesis, however, is not without its use in our present inquiry, for if we obtain thereby a clear conception of the influence of such great changes on climate, we are the better able to appreciate the tendency of lesser changes such as have undoubtedly often occurred.
Land as a Barrier to Ocean Currents.—We have seen already the great importance of elevated land to serve as condensers and ice-accumulators; but there is another and hardly less important effect that may be produced by an extension of land in high latitudes, which is, to act as a barrier to the flow of ocean currents. In the region with which we are more immediately interested it is easy to see how a comparatively slight alteration of land and sea, such as has undoubtedly occurred, would produce an enormous effect on climate. Let us suppose, for instance, that the British Isles again became continental, and that this continental land extended across the Färoe Islands and Iceland to Greenland. The whole of the warm waters of the Atlantic, with the Gulf Stream, would then be shut out from Northern Europe, and the result would almost certainly be that snow would accumulate on the high mountains of Scandinavia till they became glaciated to as great an extent as Greenland, and the cold thus produced would react on our own country and cover the Grampians with perpetual snow, like mountains of the same height at even a lower latitude in South America.
If a similar change were to occur on the opposite side of the Atlantic very different effects would be produced. Suppose, for instance, the east side of Greenland were to sink considerably, while on the west the sea bottom were to rise in Davis' Strait so as to unite Greenland with Baffin's Land, thus stopping altogether the cold Arctic current with its enormous stream of icebergs from the west coast of Greenland. Such a change might cause a great accumulation of ice in the higher polar latitudes, but it would certainly produce a wonderful ameliorating effect on the climate of the east coast of North America, and might raise the temperature of Labrador to that of Scotland. Now these two changes have almost certainly occurred, either together or separately, during the Tertiary period, and they must have had a considerable effect either in aiding or checking the action of the terrestrial and astronomical causes affecting climate which were then in operation.
It would be easy to suggest other probable changes which would produce a marked effect on climate; but we will only refer to the subsidence of the Isthmus of Panama, which has certainly happened more than once in Tertiary times. If this subsidence were considerable it would have allowed much of the accumulated warm water which initiates the Gulf Stream to pass into the Pacific; and if this occurred while astronomical causes were tending to bring about a cold period in the northern hemisphere, the resulting glaciation might be exceptionally severe. The effect of this change would however be neutralised if at the same epoch the Lesser and Greater Antilles formed a connected land.
Now, as such possible and even probable geographical changes are very numerous, they must have produced important effects; and though we may admit that the astronomical causes already explained were the most important in determining the last glacial epoch, we must also allow that geographical changes must often have had an equally important and perhaps even a preponderating influence on climate. We must also remember that changes of land and sea are almost always accompanied by elevation or depression of the pre-existing land: and whereas the former produces its chief effect by diverting the course of warm or cold oceanic currents, the latter is of not less importance in adding to or diminishing those areas of condensation and ice-accumulation which, as we have seen, are the most efficient agents in producing glaciation.
If then Sir Charles Lyell may have somewhat erred in attaching too exclusive an importance to geographical changes as bringing about mutations of climate, his critics have, I think, attached far too little importance to these changes. We know that they have always been in progress to a sufficient extent to produce important climatal effects; and we shall probably be nearest the truth if we consider, that great extremes of cold have only occurred when astronomical and geographical causes were acting in the same direction and thus produced a cumulative result, while, through the agency of warm oceanic currents, the latter alone have been the chief cause of mild climates in high latitudes, as we shall attempt to prove in our next chapter.[54 - The influence of geographical changes on climate is now held by many geologists who oppose what they consider the extravagant hypotheses of Dr. Croll. Thus, Prof. Dana imputes the glacial epoch chiefly, if not wholly, to elevation of the land caused by the lateral pressure due to shrinking of the earth's crust that has caused all other elevations and depressions. He says: "Now, that elevation of the land over the higher latitudes which brought on the glacial era is a natural result of the same agency, and a natural, and almost necessary, counterpart of the coral-island subsidence which must have been then in progress. The accumulating, folding, solidification, and crystallisation of rocks attending all the rock-making and mountain-making through the Palæozoic, Mesozoic, and Cenozoic eras, had greatly stiffened the crust in these parts; and hence in after times, the continental movements resulting from the lateral pressure necessarily appeared over the more northern portions of the continent, where the accumulations and other changes had been relatively small. To the subsidence which followed the elevation the weight of the ice-cap may have contributed in some small degree. But the great balancing movements of the crust of the continental and oceanic areas then going forward must have had a greatly preponderating effect in the oscillating agency of all time—lateral pressure within the crust." (American Journal of Science and Arts, 3rd Series, Vol. IX. p. 318.)"In the 2nd edition of his Manual of Geology, Professor Dana suggests elevation of Arctic lands sufficient to exclude the Gulf Stream, as a source of cold during glacial epochs. This, he thinks, would have made an epoch of cold at any era of the globe. A deep submergence of Behring's Strait, letting in the Pacific warm current to the polar area, would have produced a mild Arctic climate like that of the Miocene period. When the warm current was shut out from the polar area it would yet reach near to it, and bring with it that abundant moisture necessary for glaciation." (Manual of Geology, 2nd Edition, pp. 541-755, 756.)]
On the Theory of Inter-glacial Periods and their Probable Character.—The theory by which the glacial epoch is here explained is one which apparently necessitates repeated changes from glacial to warm periods, with all the consequences and modifications both of climate and physical geography which follow or accompany such changes. It is essentially a theory of alternation; and it is certainly remarkable in how many cases geologists have independently deduced some alternations of climate as probable. Such are the interglacial deposits indicating a mild climate, both in Europe and America; an early phase of very severe glaciation when the "till" was deposited, with later less extensive glaciation when moraines were left in the valleys; several successive periods of submergence and elevation, the later ones becoming less and less in amount, as indicated by the raised beaches slightly elevated above our present coast line; and lastly, the occurrence in the same deposits of animal remains indicating both a warm and a cold climate, and especially the existence of the hippopotamus in Yorkshire not long after the period of extreme glaciation.
But although the evidence of some alternations of climate seems indisputable, and no suggestion of any adequate cause for them other than the alternating phases of precession during high excentricity has been made, it by no means follows that these changes were always very great—that is to say, that the ice completely disappeared and a warm climate prevailed throughout the whole year. It is quite evident that during the height of the glacial epoch there was a combination of causes at work which led to a large portion of North-western Europe and Eastern America being buried in ice to a greater extent even than Greenland is now, since it certainly extended beyond the land and filled up all the shallow seas between our islands and Scandinavia. Among these causes we must reckon a diminution of the force of the Gulf Stream, or its being diverted from the north-western coasts of Europe; and what we have to consider is, whether the alteration from a long cold winter and short hot summer to a short mild winter and long cool summer would greatly affect the amount of ice if the ocean currents remained the same. The force of these currents is, it is true, by our hypothesis, modified by the increase or diminution of the ice in the two hemispheres alternately, and they then react upon climate; but they cannot be thus changed till after the ice-accumulation has been considerably affected by other causes. Their direction may, indeed, be greatly changed by slight alterations in the outline of the land, while they may be barred out altogether by other alterations of not very great amount; but such changes as these have no relation to the alteration of climates caused by the changing phases of precession.
Now, the existence at the present time of an ice-clad Greenland is an anomaly in the northern hemisphere, only to be explained by the fact that cold currents from the polar area flow down both sides of it. In Eastern Asia we have the lofty Stanivoi Mountains in the same latitude as the southern part of Greenland, which, though their summits are covered with perpetual snow, give rise to no ice-sheet, and, apparently, even to no important glaciers;—a fact undoubtedly connected with the warm Japan current flowing partially into the Sea of Okhotsk. So in North-west America we have the lofty coast range, culminating in Mt. St. Elias, nearly 15,000 feet high, and an extensive tract of high land to the north and north-west, with glaciers comparable in size with those of New Zealand, although situated in Lat. 60° instead of in Lat. 45°. Here, too, we have the main body of the Japan current turning east and south, and thus producing a mild climate, little inferior to that of Norway, warmed by the Gulf Stream. We thus have it made clear that could the two Arctic currents be diverted from Greenland, that country would become free from ice, and might even be completely forest-clad and inhabitable; while, if the Japan current were to be diverted from the coast of North America and a cold current come out of Behring's Strait, the entire northwestern extremity of America would even now become buried in ice.
Now it is the opinion of the best American geologists that during the height of the glacial epoch North-eastern America was considerably elevated.[55 - Dana's Manual of Geology, 2nd Edition, p. 540.] This elevation would bring the wide area of the banks of Newfoundland far above water, causing the American coast to stretch out in an immense curve to a point more than 600 miles east of Halifax; and this would certainly divert much of the greatly reduced Gulf Stream straight across to the coast of Spain. The consequence of such a state of things would probably be that the southward flowing Arctic currents would be much reduced in velocity; and the enormous quantity of icebergs continually produced by the ice-sheets of all the lands bordering the North Atlantic would hang about their shores and the adjacent seas, filling them with a dense ice-pack, equalling that of the Antarctic regions, and chilling the atmosphere so as to produce constant clouds and fog with almost perpetual snowstorms, even at midsummer, such as now prevail in the worst portions of the Southern Ocean.
But when such was the state of the North Atlantic (and, however caused, such must have been its state during the height of the glacial epoch), can we suppose that the mere change from the distant sun in winter and near sun in summer, to the reverse, could bring about any important alteration—the physical and geographical causes of glaciation remaining unchanged? For, certainly, the less powerful sun of summer, even though lasting somewhat longer, could not do more than the much more powerful sun did during the phase of summer in perihelion, while during the less severe winters the sun would have far less power than when it was equally near and at a very much greater altitude in summer. It seems to me, therefore, quite certain that whenever extreme glaciation has been brought about by high excentricity combined with favourable geographical and physical causes (and without this combination it is doubtful whether extreme glaciation would ever occur), then the ice-sheet will not be removed during the alternate phases of precession, so long as these geographical and physical causes remain unaltered. It is true that the warm and cold oceanic currents, which are the most important agents in increasing or diminishing glaciation, depend for their strength and efficiency upon the comparative extents of the northern and southern ice-sheets; but these ice-sheets cannot, I believe, increase or diminish to any important extent unless some geographical or physical change first occurs.[56 - Dr. Croll says that I here assume an impossible state of things. He maintains "that the change from the distant sun in winter, and near sun in summer to the near sun in winter and distant sun in summer, aided by the change in the physical causes which this would necessarily bring about, would certainly be sufficient to cause the snow and ice to disappear." (Climate and Cosmology, p. 106.) But I demur to his "necessarily." It is not the direct effect of the nearer sun in winter that is supposed to melt the snow and ice, but the "physical causes," such as absence of fogs and increase of warm equatorial currents. But the near sun in winter acting on an ice-clad surface would only increase the fogs and snow, while the currents could only change if a large portion of the ice were first melted, in which case they would no doubt be modified so as to cause a further melting of the ice. Dr. Croll says: "The warm and equable conditions of climate which would then prevail, and the enormous quantity of intertropical water carried into the Southern Ocean, would soon produce a melting of the ice." (Loc. cit. p. 111.) This seems to me to be assuming the very point at issue. He has himself shown that the presence of large quantities of ice prevents "a warm and equable climate" however great may be the sun-heat; the ice therefore would not be melted, and there would be no increased flow of intertropical water to the Southern Ocean. The ocean currents are mainly due to the difference of temperature of the polar and equatorial areas combined with the peculiar form and position of the continents, and some one or more of these factors must be altered before the ocean currents towards the north pole can be increased. The only factor available is the Antarctic ice, and if this were largely increased, the northward-flowing currents might be so increased as to melt some of the Arctic ice. But the very same argument applies to both poles. Without some geographical change the Antarctic ice could not materially diminish during its winter in perihelion, nor increase to any important extent during the opposite phase. We therefore seem to have no available agency by which to get rid of the ice over a glaciated hemisphere, so long as the geographical conditions remained unchanged and the excentricity continued high.]
If this argument is valid, then it would follow that, so long as excentricity was high, whatever condition of climate was brought about by it in combination with geographical causes, would persist through several phases of precession; but this would not necessarily be the case when the excentricity itself changed, and became more moderate. It would then depend upon the proportionate effect of climatal and geographical causes in producing glaciation as to what change would be produced by the changing phases of precession; and we can best examine this question by considering the probable effect of the change in precession during the next period of 10,500 years, with the present moderate degree of excentricity.
Probable Effect of Winter in Aphelion on the Climate of Britain.—Let us then suppose the winters of the northern hemisphere to become longer and much colder, the summers being proportionately shorter and hotter, without any other change whatever. The long cold winter would certainly bring down the snow-line considerably, covering large areas of high land with snow during the winter months, and causing all glaciers and ice-fields to become larger. This would chill the superincumbent atmosphere to such an extent that the warm sun and winds of spring and early summer would bring clouds and fog, so that the sun-heat would be cut off and much vapour be condensed as snow. The greater sun-heat of summer would no doubt considerably reduce the snow and ice; but it is, I think, quite certain that the extra accumulation would not be all melted, and that therefore the snow-line would be permanently lowered. This would be a necessary result, because the greater part of the increased cold of winter would be stored up in snow and ice, while the increased heat of summer could not be in any way stored up, but would be largely prevented from producing any effect, by reflection from the surface of the snow and by the intervention of clouds and fog which would carry much of the heat they received to other regions. It follows that 10,000 years hence, when our winter will occur in aphelion (instead of, as now, in perihelion), there will be produced a colder climate, independently of any change of land and sea, of heights of mountains, or in the force of oceanic currents.
But if this is true, then the reverse change, bringing the sun back into exactly the same position with regard to us as it is in now (all geographical and physical conditions remaining unchanged), would certainly bring back again our present milder climate. The change either way would not probably be very great, but it might be sufficient to bring the snow-line down to 3,000 feet in Scotland, so that all the higher mountains would have their tops covered with perpetual snow. This perpetual snow, down to a fixed line, would be kept up by the needful supply of snow falling during autumn, winter, and spring, and this would, as we have seen, depend mainly on the increased length and greatly increased cold of the winter. As both the duration and the cold of winter decreased the amount of snow would certainly decrease, and of this lesser quantity of snow a larger proportion would be melted by the longer, though somewhat cooler summer. This would follow because the total amount of sun-heat received during the summer would be the same as before, while it would act on a less quantity of snow; there would thus be a smaller surface to reflect the heat, and a smaller condensing area to produce fogs, while the diminished intensity of the sun would produce a less dense canopy of clouds, which have been shown to be of prime importance in checking the melting of snow by the sun. We have considered this case, for simplicity of reasoning, on the supposition that all geographical and physical causes remained unchanged. But if an alteration of the climate of the whole north temperate and Arctic zones occurred, as here indicated, this would certainly affect both the winds and currents, in the manner already explained (see p. 142 (#x6_x_6_i24)), so as to react upon climate and increase the differences produced by phases of precession. How far that effect would be again increased by corresponding but opposite changes in the southern hemisphere it is impossible to say. It may be that existing geographical and physical conditions are there such potent agents in producing a state of glaciation that no change in the phases of precession would materially affect it. Still, as the climate of the whole southern hemisphere is dominated by the great mass of ice within the Antarctic circle, it seems probable that if the winter were shorter and the summer longer the quantity of ice would slightly diminish; and this would again react on the northern climate as already fully explained.
The Essential Principle of Climatal Change Restated.—The preceding discussion has been somewhat lengthy, owing to the varied nature of the facts and arguments adduced, and the extreme complexity of the subject. But if, as I venture to urge, the principle here laid down is a sound one, it will be of the greatest assistance in clearing away some of the many difficulties that beset the whole question of geological climates. This principle is, briefly, that the great features of climate are determined by a combination of causes, of which geographical conditions and the degree of excentricity of the earth's orbit are by far the most important; that, when these combine to produce a severe glacial epoch, the changing phases of precession every 10,500 years have very little, if any, effect on the character of the climate, as mild or glacial, though it may modify the seasons; but when the excentricity becomes moderate and the resulting glaciation less severe, then the changing phases of precession bring about a considerable alteration, and even a partial reversal of the glacial conditions.
The reason of this may perhaps be made clearer by considering the stability of either extreme glacial conditions or the entire absence of perpetual ice and snow, and the comparative instability of an intermediate state of climate. When a country is largely covered with ice, we may look upon it as possessing the accumulated or stored-up cold of a long series of preceding winters; and however much heat is poured upon it, its temperature cannot be raised above the freezing point till that store of cold is got rid of—that is, till the ice is all melted. But the ice itself, when extensive, tends to its own preservation, even under the influence of heat; for the chilled atmosphere becomes filled with fog, and this keeps off the sun-heat, and then snow falls even during summer, and the stored-up cold does not diminish during the year. When, however, only a small portion of the surface is covered with ice, the exposed earth becomes heated by the hot sun, this warms the air, and the warm air melts the adjacent ice. It follows, that towards the equatorial limits of a glaciated country alternations of climate may occur during a period of high excentricity, while nearer the pole, where the surface is almost completely ice-clad, no amelioration may take place. The same argument will, to some extent apply, inversely, with mild Arctic climates; but this is a subject which will be discussed in the next chapter.
This view of the character of the last glacial epoch appears to correspond very closely with the facts adduced by geologists. The inter-glacial deposits never exhibit any indication of a climate whose warmth corresponded to the severity of the preceding cold, but rather of a partial amelioration of that cold; while it is only the very latest of them, which we may suppose to have occurred when the excentricity was considerably diminished, that exhibit any indications of a climate at all warmer than that which now prevails.[57 - In the Geological Magazine, April, 1880, Mr. Searles V. Wood adduces what he considers to be the "conclusive objection" to Dr. Croll's excentricity theory, which is, that during the last glacial epoch Europe and North America were glaciated very much in proportion to their respective climates now, which are generally admitted to be due to the distribution of oceanic currents. But Dr. Croll admits his theory "to be baseless unless there was a complete diversion of the warm ocean currents from the hemisphere glaciated," in which case there ought to be no difference in the extent of glaciation in Europe and North America. Whether or not this is a correct statement of Dr. Croll's theory, the above objection certainly does not apply to the views here advocated; but as I also hold the "excentricity theory" in a modified form, it may be as well to show why it does not apply. In the first place I do not believe that the Gulf Stream was "completely diverted" during the glacial epoch, but that it was diminished in force, and (as described at p. 144 (#x6_x_6_i27)) partly diverted southward. A portion of its influence would, however, still remain to cause a difference between the climates of the two sides of the Atlantic; and to this must be added two other causes—the far greater penetration of warm sea-water into the European than into the North American continent, and the proximity to America of the enormous ice-producing mass of Greenland. We have thus three distinct causes, all combining to produce a more severe winter climate on the west than on the east of the Atlantic during the glacial epoch, and though the first of these—the Gulf Stream—was not nearly so powerful as it is now, neither is the difference indicated by the ice-extension in the two countries so great as the present difference of winter-temperature, which is the essential point to be considered. The ice-sheet of the United States is usually supposed to have extended about ten, or, at most, twelve, degrees further south than it did in Western Europe, whereas we must go twenty degrees further south in the former country to obtain the same mean winter-temperature we find in the latter, as may be seen by examining any map of winter isothermals. This difference very fairly corresponds to the difference of conditions existing during the glacial epoch and the present time, so far as we are able to estimate them, and it certainly affords no grounds of objection to the theory by which the glaciation is here explained.]
Probable Date of the Glacial Epoch.—The state of extreme glaciation in the northern hemisphere, of which we gave a general description at the commencement of the preceding chapter, is a fact of which there can be no doubt whatever, and it occurred at a period so recent geologically that all the mollusca were the same as species still living. There is clear geological proof, however, that considerable changes of sea and land, and a large amount of valley denudation, took place during and since the glacial epoch, while on the other hand the surface markings produced by the ice have been extensively preserved; and taking all these facts into consideration, the period of about 200,000 years since it reached its maximum, and about 80,000 years since it passed away, is generally considered by geologists to be ample. There seems, therefore, to be little doubt that in increased excentricity we have found one of the chief exciting causes of the glacial epoch, and that we are therefore able to fix its date with a considerable probability of being correct. The enormous duration of the glacial epoch itself (including its interglacial mild or warm phases), as compared with the lapse of time since it finally passed away, is a consideration of the greatest importance, and has not yet been taken fully into account in the interpretation given by geologists of the physical and biological changes that were coincident with, and probably dependent on, it.
Changes of the Sea-level Dependent on Glaciation.—It has been pointed out by Dr. Croll, that many of the changes of level of sea and land which occurred about the time of the glacial epoch may be due to an alteration of the sea-level caused by a shifting of the earth's centre of gravity; and physicists have generally admitted that the cause is a real one, and must have produced some effect of the kind indicated. It is evident that if ice-sheets several miles in thickness were removed from one polar area and placed on the other, the centre of gravity of the earth would shift towards the heavier pole, and the sea would necessarily follow it, and would rise accordingly. Extreme glacialists have maintained that during the height of the glacial epoch, an ice-cap extended from about 50° N. Lat. in Europe, and 40° N. Lat. in America, continually increasing in thickness, till it reached at least six miles thick at the pole; but this view is now generally given up. A similar ice-cap is however believed to exist on the Antarctic pole at the present day, and its transference to the northern hemisphere would, it is calculated, produce a rise of the ocean to the extent of 800 or 1,000 feet. We have, however, shown that the production of any such ice-cap is improbable if not impossible, because snow and ice can only accumulate where precipitation is greater than melting and evaporation, and this is never the case except in areas exposed to the full influence of the vapour-bearing winds. The outer rim of the ice-sheet would inevitably exhaust the air of so much of its moisture that what reached the inner parts would produce far less snow than would be melted by the long hot days of summer.[58 - Dr. Croll objects to this argument, and adduces the case of Greenland as showing that ice may accumulate far from sea. But the width of Greenland is small compared with that of the supposed Antarctic ice-cap. (Climate and Cosmology, p. 78.)] The accumulations of ice were therefore probably confined, in the northern hemisphere, to the coasts exposed to moist winds, and where elevated land and mountain ranges afforded condensers to initiate the process of glaciation; and we have already seen that the evidence strongly supports this view. Even with this limitation, however, the mass of accumulated ice would be enormous, as indeed we have positive evidence that it was, and might have caused a sufficient shifting of the centre of gravity of the earth to produce a submergence of about 150 or 200 feet.
But this would only be the case if the accumulation of ice on one pole was accompanied by a diminution on the other, and this may have occurred to a limited extent during the earlier stages of the glacial epoch, when alternations of warmer and colder periods would be caused by winter occurring in perihelion or aphelion. If, however, as is here maintained, no such alternations occurred when the excentricity was near its maximum, then the ice would accumulate in the southern hemisphere at the same time as in the northern, unless changed geographical conditions, of which we have no evidence whatever, prevented such accumulations. That there was such a greater accumulation of ice is shown by the traces of ancient glaciers in the Southern Andes and in New Zealand, and also, according to several writers, in South Africa; and the indications in all these localities point to a period so recent that it must almost certainly have been contemporaneous with the glacial period of the northern hemisphere.[59 - The recent extensive glaciation of New Zealand is generally imputed by the local geologists to a greater elevation of the land; but I cannot help believing that the high phase of excentricity which caused our own glacial epoch was at all events an assisting cause. This is rendered more probable if taken in connection with the following very definite statement of glacial markings in South Africa. Captain Aylward in his Transvaal of To-day (p. 171) says:—"It will be interesting to geologists and others to learn that the entire country, from the summits of the Quathlamba to the junction of the Vaal and Orange rivers, shows marks of having been swept over, and that at no very distant period, by vast masses of ice from east to west. The striations are plainly visible, scarring the older rocks, and marking the hill-sides—getting lower and lower and less visible as, descending from the mountains, the kopjies (small hills) stand wider apart; but wherever the hills narrow towards each other, again showing how the vast ice-fields were checked, thrown up, and raised against their Eastern extremities."This passage is evidently written by a person familiar with the phenomena of glaciation, and as Captain Aylward's preface is dated from Edinburgh, he has probably seen similar markings in Scotland. The country described consists of the most extensive and lofty plateau in South Africa, rising to a mountain knot with peaks more than 10,000 feet high, thus offering an appropriate area for the condensation of vapour and the accumulation of snow. At present, however, the mountains do not reach the snow-line, and there is no proof that they have been much higher in recent times, since the coast of Natal is now said to be rising. It is evident that no slight elevation would now lead to the accumulation of snow and ice in these mountains, situated as they are between 27° and 30° S. Lat.; since the Andes, which in 32° S. Lat. reach 23,300 feet high, and in 28° S. Lat. 20,000, with far more extensive plateaus, produce no ice-fields. We cannot, therefore, believe that a few thousand feet of additional elevation, even if it occurred so recently as indicated by the presence of striations, would have produced the remarkable amount of glaciation above described; while from the analogy of the northern hemisphere, we may well believe that it was mainly due to the same high excentricity that led to the glaciation of Western and Central Europe, and Eastern North America.These observations confirm those of Mr. G. W. Stow, who, in a paper published in the Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society (Vol. XXVII. p. 539), describes similar phenomena in the same mountains, and also mounds and ridges of unstratified clay packed with angular boulders; while further south the Stormberg mountains are said to be similarly glaciated, with immense accumulations of morainic matter in all the valleys. We have here most of the surface phenomena characteristic of a glaciated country, only a few degrees south of the tropic; and taken in connection with the indications of recent glaciation in New Zealand, and those discovered by Dr. R. von Lendenfeld in the Australian Alps between 6,000 and 7,000 feet elevation (Nature, Vol. XXXII. p. 69), we can hardly doubt the occurrence of some general and wide-spread cause of glaciation in the southern hemisphere at a period so recent that the superficial phenomena are almost as well preserved as in Europe. Other geologists however deny that there are any distinct indications of glacial action in South Africa; but the recent discovery by Dr. J. W. Gregory, F.G.S., of the former extension of glaciers on Mount Kenya 5,000 feet below their present limits, renders probable the former glaciation of the South African Highlands.] This greater accumulation of ice in both hemispheres would lower the whole ocean by the quantity of water abstracted from it, while any want of perfect synchronism between the decrease of the ice at the two poles would cause a movement of the centre of gravity of the earth, and a slight rise of the sea-level at one pole and depression at the other. It is also generally believed that a great accumulation of ice would cause subsidence by its pressure on the flexible crust of the earth, and we thus have a very complex series of agents leading to elevations and subsidences of limited amount, such as seem always to have accompanied glaciation. This complexity of the causes at work may explain the somewhat contradictory evidence as to rise and fall of land, some authors maintaining that it stood higher, and others lower, during the glacial period.
The State of the Planet Mars, as Bearing on the Theory of Excentricity as a Cause of Glacial Periods.—It is well known that the polar regions of the planet Mars are covered with white patches or discs, which undergo considerable alterations of size according as they are more or less exposed to the sun's rays. They have therefore been generally considered to be snow or ice-caps, and to prove that Mars is now undergoing something like a glacial period. It must always be remembered, however, that we are very ignorant of the exact physical conditions of the surface of Mars. It appears to have a cloudy atmosphere like our own, but the gaseous composition of that atmosphere may be different, and the clouds may be formed of other matter besides aqueous vapour. Its much smaller mass and attractive power must have an effect on the nature and extent of these clouds, and the heat of the sun may consequently be modified in a way quite different from anything that obtains upon our earth. Bearing these difficulties and uncertainties in mind, let us see what are the actual facts connected with the supposed polar snows of Mars.[60 - The astronomical facts connected with the motions and appearance of the planet are taken from a paper by Mr. Edward Carpenter, M.A., in the Geological Magazine of March, 1877, entitled, "Evidence Afforded by Mars on the Subject of Glacial Periods," but I arrive at somewhat different conclusions from those of the writer of the paper.]
Mars offers an excellent subject for comparison with the Earth as regards this question, because its excentricity is now a little greater than the maximum excentricity of the Earth during the last million years,—(Mars excentricity 0.0931, Earth excentricity, 850,000 years back, 0.0707); the inclination of its axis is also a little greater than ours (Mars 28° 51′, Earth 23° 27′), and both Mars and the Earth are so situated that they now have the winter of their northern hemispheres in perihelion, that of their southern hemisphere being in aphelion. If, therefore, the physical condition of Mars were the same or nearly the same as that of the Earth, all circumstances combine, according to Dr. Croll's hypothesis, to produce a severe glacial epoch in its southern, with a perpetual spring or summer in its northern, hemisphere; while on the hypothesis here advocated we should expect glaciation at both poles. As a matter of fact Mars has two snow-caps, of nearly equal magnitude at their maximum in winter, but varying very unequally. The northern cap varies slowly and little, the southern varies rapidly and largely.
In the year 1830 the southern snow was observed, during the midsummer of Mars, to diminish to half its former diameter in a fortnight (the duration of such phenomena on Mars being reckoned in Martian months equivalent to one-twelfth of a Martian year). Thus on June 23rd it was 11° 30′ in diameter, and on July 9th had diminished to 5° 46′, after which it rapidly increased again. In 1837 the same cap was observed near its maximum in winter, and was found to be about 35° in diameter.
In the same year the northern snow-cap was observed during its summer, and was found to vary as follows:—
We thus see that Mars has two permanent snow-caps, of nearly equal size in winter but diminishing very unequally in summer, when the southern cap is reduced to nearly one third the size of the northern; and this fact is held by Mr. Carpenter, as it was by the late Mr. Belt, to be opposed to the view of the hemisphere which has winter in aphelion (as the southern now has both in the Earth and Mars), having been alone glaciated during periods of high excentricity.[61 - In an article in Nature of Jan. 1, 1880, the Rev. T. W. Webb states that in 1877 the pole of Mars (? the south pole) was, according to Schiaparelli, entirely free of snow. He remarks also on the regular contour of the supposed snows of Mars as offering a great contrast to ours, and also the strongly marked dark border which has often been observed. On the whole Mr. Webb seems to be of opinion that there can be no really close resemblance between the physical condition of the Earth and Mars, and that any arguments founded on such supposed similarity are therefore untrustworthy.]
Before, however, we can draw any conclusion from the case of Mars, we must carefully scrutinise the facts, and the conditions they imply. In the first place, there is evidently this radical difference between the state of Mars now and of the Earth during a glacial period—that Mars has no great ice-sheets spreading over its temperate zone, as the Earth undoubtedly had. This we know from the fact of the rapid disappearance of the white patches over a belt three degrees wide in a fortnight (equal to a width of about 100 miles of our measure), and in the northern hemisphere of eight degrees wide (about 280 miles) between May 4th and July 12th. Even with our much more powerful sun, which gives us more than twice as much heat as Mars receives, no such diminution of an ice-sheet, or of glaciers of even moderate thickness, could possibly occur; but the phenomenon is on the contrary exactly analogous to what actually takes place on the plains of Siberia in summer. These, as I am informed by Mr. Seebohm, are covered with snow during winter and spring to a depth of six or eight feet, which diminishes very little even under the hot suns of May, till warm winds combine with the sun in June, when in about a fortnight the whole of it disappears, and a little later the whole of northern Asia is free from its winter covering. As, however, the sun of Mars is so much less powerful than ours, we may be sure that the snow (if it is real snow) is much less thick—a mere surface-coating in fact, such as occurs in parts of Russia where the precipitation is less, and the snow accordingly does not exceed two or three feet in thickness.
We now see the reason why the southern pole of Mars parts with its white covering so much more quickly and to so much greater an extent than the northern, for the south pole during summer is nearest the sun, and, owing to the great excentricity of Mars, would have about one-third more heat than during the summer of the northern hemisphere; and this greater heat would cause the winds from the equator to be both warmer and more powerful, and able to produce the same effects on the scanty Martian snows as they produce on our northern snow-plains. The reason why both poles of Mars are almost equally snow-covered in winter is not difficult to understand. Owing to the greater obliquity of the ecliptic, and the much greater length of the year, the polar regions will be subject to winter darkness fully twice as long as with us, and the fact that one pole is nearer the sun during this period than the other at a corresponding period, will therefore make no perceptible difference. It is also probable that the two poles of Mars are approximately alike as regards their geographical features, and that neither of them is surrounded by very high land on which ice may accumulate. With us at the present time, on the other hand, geographical conditions completely mask and even reverse the influence of excentricity, and that of winter in perihelion in the northern, and summer in perihelion in the southern, hemisphere. In the north we have a preponderance of sea within the Arctic circle, and of lowlands in the temperate zone. In the south exactly opposite conditions prevail, for there we have a preponderance of land (and much of it high land) within the Antarctic circle, and of sea in the temperate zone. Ice, therefore, accumulates in the south, while a thin coating of snow, easily melted in summer, is the prevalent feature in the north; and these contrasts react upon climate to such an extent, that in the southern ocean, islands in the latitude of Ireland have glaciers descending to the level of the sea, and constant snowstorms in the height of summer, although the sun is then actually nearer the earth than it is during our northern summer!
It is evident, therefore, that the phenomena presented by the varying polar snows of Mars are in no way opposed to that modification of Dr. Croll's theory of the conditions which brought about the glacial epochs of our northern hemisphere, which is here advocated; but are perfectly explicable on the same general principles, if we keep in mind the distinction between an ice-sheet—which a summer's sun cannot materially diminish, but may even increase by bringing vapour to be condensed into snow—and a thin snowy covering which may be annually melted and annually renewed, with great rapidity and over large areas. Except within the small circles of perpetual polar snow there can at the present time be no ice-sheets in Mars; and the reason why this permanent snowy area is more extensive around the northern than around the southern pole may be partly due to higher land at the north, but is perhaps sufficiently explained by the diminished power of the summer sun, owing to its greatly increased distance at that season in the northern hemisphere, so that it is not able to melt so much of the snow which has accumulated during the long night of winter.
CHAPTER IX
ANCIENT GLACIAL EPOCHS, AND MILD CLIMATES IN THE ARCTIC REGIONS
Dr. Croll's Views on Ancient Glacial Epochs—Effects of Denudation in Destroying the Evidence of Remote Glacial Epochs—Rise of Sea-level Connected with Glacial Epochs a Cause of Further Denudation—What Evidence of Early Glacial Epochs may be Expected—Evidences of Ice-action During the Tertiary Period—The Weight of the Negative Evidence—Temperate Climates in the Arctic Regions—The Miocene Arctic Flora—Mild Arctic Climates of the Cretaceous Period—Stratigraphical Evidence of Long-continued Mild Arctic Conditions—The Causes of Mild Arctic Climates—Geographical Conditions Favouring Mild Northern Climates in Tertiary Times—The Indian Ocean as a Source of Heat in Tertiary Times—Condition of North America During the Tertiary Period—Effect of High Excentricity on Warm Polar Climates—Evidences as to Climate in the Secondary and Palæozoic Epochs—Warm Arctic Climates in Early Secondary and Palæozoic Times—Conclusions as to the Climates of Secondary and Tertiary Periods—General View of Geological Climates as Dependent on the Physical Features of the Earth's Surface—Estimate of the Comparative Effects of Geographical and Physical Causes in Producing Changes of Climate.
If we adopt the view set forth in the preceding chapter as to the character of the glacial epoch and of the accompanying alternations of climate, it must have been a very important agent in producing changes in the distribution of animal and vegetable life. The intervening mild periods, which almost certainly occurred during its earlier and later phases, may have been sometimes more equable than even our present insular climate, and severe frosts were probably then unknown. During the four or five thousand years that each specially mild period may have lasted, some portions of the north temperate zone, which had been buried in snow or ice, would become again clothed with vegetation and stocked with animal life, both of which, as the cold again came on, would be driven southward, or perhaps partially exterminated. Forms usually separated would thus be crowded together, and a struggle for existence would follow, which must have led to the modification or the extinction of many species. When the survivors in the struggle had reached a state of equilibrium, a fresh field would be opened to them by the later ameliorations of climate; the more successful of the survivors would spread and multiply; and after this had gone on for thousands of generations, another change of climate, another southward migration, another struggle of northern and southern forms would take place.
But if the last glacial epoch has coincided with, and has been to a considerable extent caused by, a high excentricity of the earth's orbit, we are naturally led to expect that earlier glacial epochs would have occurred whenever the excentricity was unusually large. Dr. Croll has published tables showing the varying amounts of excentricity for three million years back; and from these it appears that there have been many periods of high excentricity, which has often been far greater than at the time of the last glacial epoch.[62 - London, Edinburgh and Dublin Philosophical Magazine, Vol. XXXVI., pp. 144-150 (1868).] The accompanying diagram has been drawn from these tables, and it will be seen that the highest excentricity occurred 850,000 years ago, at which time the difference between the sun's distance at aphelion and perihelion was thirteen and a half millions of miles, whereas during the last glacial period the maximum difference was ten and a half million miles.
DIAGRAM SHOWING THE CHANGES OF EXCENTRICITY DURING THE LAST THREE MILLION YEARS.
Now, judging by the amount of organic and physical change that occurred during and since the glacial epoch, and that which has occurred since the Miocene period, it is considered probable that this maximum of excentricity coincided with some part of the latter period; and Dr. Croll maintains that a glacial epoch must then have occurred surpassing in severity that of which we have such convincing proofs, and consisting like it of alternations of cold and warm phases every 10,500 years. The diagram also shows us another long-continued period of high excentricity from 1,750,000 to 1,950,000 years ago, and yet another almost equal to the maximum 2,500,000 years back. These may perhaps have occurred during the Eocene and Cretaceous epochs respectively, or all may have been included within the limits of the Tertiary period. As two of these high excentricities greatly exceed that which caused our glacial epoch, while the third is almost equal to it and of longer duration, they seem to afford us the means of testing rival theories of the causes of glaciation. If, as Dr. Croll argues, high excentricity is the great and dominating agency in bringing on glacial epochs, geographical changes being subordinate, then there must have been glacial epochs of great severity at all these three periods; while if he is also correct in supposing that the alternate phases of precession would inevitably produce glaciation in one hemisphere, and a proportionately mild and equable climate in the opposite hemisphere, then we should have to look for evidence of exceptionally warm and exceptionally cold periods, occurring alternately and with several repetitions, within a space of time which, geologically speaking, is very short indeed.
Let us then inquire first into the character of the evidence we should expect to find of such changes of climate, if they have occurred; we shall then be in a better position to estimate at its proper value the evidence that actually exists, and, after giving it due weight, to arrive at some conclusion as to the theory that best explains and harmonises it.
Effects of Denudation in Destroying the Evidence of Remote Glacial Epochs.—It may be supposed, that if earlier glacial epochs than the last did really occur, we ought to meet with some evidence of the fact corresponding to that which has satisfied us of the extensive recent glaciation of the northern hemisphere; but Dr. Croll and other writers have ably argued that no such evidence is likely to be found. It is now generally admitted that sub-aërial denudation is a much more powerful agent in lowering and modifying the surface of a country than was formerly supposed. It has in fact been proved to be so powerful that the difficulty now felt is, not to account for the denudation which can be proved to have occurred, but to explain the apparent persistence of superficial features which ought long ago to have been destroyed.
A proof of the lowering and eating away of the land-surface which every one can understand, is to be found in the quantity of solid matter carried down to the sea and to low grounds by rivers. This is capable of pretty accurate measurement, and it has been carefully measured for several rivers, large and small, in different parts of the world. The details of these measurements will be given in a future chapter, and it is only necessary here to state that the average of them all gives us this result—that one foot must, on an average, be taken off the entire surface of the land each 3,000 years in order to produce the amount of sediment and matter in solution which is actually carried into the sea. To give an idea of the limits of variation in different rivers it may be mentioned that the Mississippi is one which denudes its valley at a slow rate, taking 6,000 years to remove one foot; while the Po is the most rapid, taking only 729 years to do the same work in its valley. The cause of this difference is very easy to understand. A large part of the area of the Mississippi basin consists of the almost rainless prairie and desert regions of the west, while its sources are in comparatively arid mountains with scanty snow-fields, or in a low forest-clad plateau. The Po, on the other hand, is wholly in a district of abundant rainfall, while its sources are spread over a great amphitheatre of snowy Alps nearly 400 miles in extent, where the denuding forces are at a maximum. As Scotland is a mountain region of rather abundant rainfall, the denuding power of its rains and rivers is probably rather above than under the average, but to avoid any possible exaggeration we will take it at a foot in 4,000 years.
Now if the end of the glacial epoch be taken to coincide with the termination of the last period of high excentricity, which occurred about 80,000 years ago (and no geologist will consider this too long for the changes which have since taken place), it follows that the entire surface of Scotland must have been since lowered an average amount of twenty feet. But over large areas of alluvial plains, and wherever the rivers have spread during floods, the ground will have been raised instead of lowered; and on all nearly level ground and gentle slopes there will have been comparatively little denudation; so that proportionally much more must have been taken away from mountain sides and from the bottoms of valleys having a considerable downward slope. One of the very highest authorities on the subject of denudation, Mr. Archibald Geikie, estimates the area of these more rapidly denuded portions as only one-tenth of the comparatively level grounds, and he further estimates that the former will be denuded about ten times as fast as the latter. It follows that the valleys will be deepened and widened on the average about five feet in the 4,000 years instead of one foot; and thus many valleys must have been deepened and widened 100 feet, and some even more, since the glacial epoch, while the more level portions of the country will have been lowered on the average only about two feet.