1916
DOI: 10.1017/s0958841800023632
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Pleistocene Succession in England

Abstract: It has always appeared to me that if any real advance in our knowledge of early man is to be made, it is essential that the sequence of events during the Pleistocene period must be known, but judging from recent literature the prevalent ideas as to this succession are decidedly nebulous. Some years ago Prof. Penck drew up a scheme of Pleistocene chronology based on stratigraphical Alpine evidence which may or may not have been correctly interpreted. Instead of checking this Teutonic theory by English evidence … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

1981
1981
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Differences between the faunal and archaeological assemblages from West Thurrock and the neighbouring Essex sites of Grays Thurrock (Morris 1836) and Little Thurrock (Bridgland & Harding 1993) were recognised at an early stage by Hinton (1910), Kennard (1916), and Warren (1923a), all of whom concluded that the former was significantly younger than the latter two. However, palynological studies subsequently failed to differentiate between them and all three localities have been ascribed to the Ipswichian Interglacial (eg, West 1969;Carreck 1972;Hollin 1977;Gibbard etal.…”
Section: Schreve Et Al a Levailois Knapping Site At West Thurrocmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Differences between the faunal and archaeological assemblages from West Thurrock and the neighbouring Essex sites of Grays Thurrock (Morris 1836) and Little Thurrock (Bridgland & Harding 1993) were recognised at an early stage by Hinton (1910), Kennard (1916), and Warren (1923a), all of whom concluded that the former was significantly younger than the latter two. However, palynological studies subsequently failed to differentiate between them and all three localities have been ascribed to the Ipswichian Interglacial (eg, West 1969;Carreck 1972;Hollin 1977;Gibbard etal.…”
Section: Schreve Et Al a Levailois Knapping Site At West Thurrocmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…28 In all this, Lubbock's views were in marked contrast to those of many of his contemporaries, who retained stubbornly monoglacialist opinions; none more so than his fellow Prestwich medallist, the amateur malacologist, A. S. Kennard. 29 As with many of the great controversies of his day, on this matter Lubbock is seen to have been on the side that eventually won the argument, having shown both prescience and foresight, often ahead of younger scientists such as Kennard.…”
Section: Lubbock On River Terracesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus Wright's (1914) Quaternary Ice Age chiefly concerned glacial stratigraphy, and so did Slater's 1929 account. There were, however, interesting attempts to inject palaeontological evidence into Pleistocene stratigraphy, as with the non-marine molluscs by Woodward and Kennard (Kennard, 1916) and with mammals by Hinton (1910Hinton ( , 1926. These attempts were not successful, since there was inadequate stratigraphical control of the age of the assemblages concerned.…”
Section: Clement Reid In His Classic Work On the Origin Of The Britismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These attempts were not successful, since there was inadequate stratigraphical control of the age of the assemblages concerned. Kennard (1916) pointed out that it was wrong to use the Penck and Bruckner (1909) chronology for the Alps as a basis for the English Pleistocene succession. This fourfold scheme of Alpine glaciations had by then become a chronology widely applied in Europe and elsewhere.…”
Section: Clement Reid In His Classic Work On the Origin Of The Britismentioning
confidence: 99%