Plants being more directly affected than animals by changes of temperature and rainfall, remarks Mr. Clement Reid (p. 185), give evidence of the highest value when we inquire into former climatic conditions. The severity of the climate during the Glacial period is often assumed from the occurrence in pleistocene strata of such plants as _Dryas octopetala_, some species of willow, the dwarf birch, and others, which are now found in high latitudes and in the Alps, but are, as a rule, absent from the plain of Northern Europe. Professor J. Geikie goes so far as to state (p. 398) that it was unlikely that southern England during the climax of the glacial cold had much if any vegetation to boast of, and continues, "It is certain, however, that it was clothed and peopled by an Arctic flora and fauna when the climatic conditions were somewhat less severe, relics of that flora having been detected at Bovey Tracey." He believes, therefore, that an Arctic flora took possession of England as soon as the climate enabled it to live in the country. Arctic plants, according to this explanation of the sequence of events, were the first immigrants to reconquer the dreary, plantless wastes and make them habitable for mammals.
Fortunately these views do not at all agree with those of many of our leading European botanists and others entitled to have a voice in the matter. Professor Warming is of opinion that the main mass of the present flora of Greenland survived the Glacial period in that country (p. 403); whilst Professor Drude has shown (p. 288) that all plant life could not possibly have been destroyed in northern countries. He maintains that the greater part of the Arctic floral elements which unite Greenland and Scandinavia must have survived the Glacial period in these countries in sheltered localities. Indeed, he justly remarks, where at the present moment do we find such plantless wastes? Greenland, Franz-Josef Land, and Grinnell Land, situated in high Arctic latitudes, all have a flora composed of flowering plants and cryptograms. "I cannot understand," he continues (p. 286), "why a flora, possibly mixed with northern forms but in the main points agreeing with our present floral elements, should not have persisted throughout the Ice Age even in the heart of Germany." "To my mind," says Col. Feilden, the well-known Arctic traveller (_b_, p. 51), "it seems indisputable that several plants now confined to the polar area must have originated there, and have outlived the period of greatest ice-development in that region." The theory in favour of a survival of the pre-glacial flora has been especially strengthened by the late Mr. Ball (than whom probably no botanist possessed a better knowledge of Alpine plants), who was strongly in favour of this view as far as the Alps are concerned. "Is it credible," he says (p. 576), "that in the short interval since the close of the Glacial period hundreds of very distinct species and several genera have been developed on the Alps, and, what is no less hard to conceive, that several of these non-Arctic species and genera should still more recently have been distributed at wide intervals throughout a discontinuous mountain chain some 1,500 miles in length, from the Pyrenees to the Eastern Carpathians?" Mr. Ball's remarks, indeed, just touch upon a very important characteristic of all the so-called _Alpine plants_. In Europe they chiefly occur in Scandinavia and the central and southern mountain ranges, whilst they are mostly absent from the intervening lowlands. Again, we find a large number of species in the mountains of Central Asia and in some of the North American mountains. Almost all species of Alpine plants, in fact, are examples of discontinuous distribution; and this, as every naturalist knows, is always, in both animals and plants, a proof of antiquity.