Kjove Land -- ice flow west to east, or east to west?

New satellite image showing with great clarity the morainic ridge remnants in the vicinity of Hjörnemoraene (Corner Moraine) in Kjove Land.  It is clear from this evidence that a diffluent lobe of ice flowed down from the interior of the Pythagoras Massif.  This was probably contemporaneous with ice from the main Nordvestfjord Glacier spilling eastwards across Syd Kap Bay and possibly terminating at a floating ice edge near Nordostbugt.

Map of raised marine features in Kjove Land, from our 1965 paper.  With no satellite imagery at our disposal, we failed to recognise the evidence for the Pythagoras Bjerg diffluent ice lobe.

A fascinating new paper has been published:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277379125003518?via%3Dihub

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2025.109531


Relative summer temperature changes from glacial fluctuations in the Scoresby Sund region, Central East Greenland, during late-glacial time (2025) 
Meredith A. Kelly, Thomas V. Lowell, Brenda L. Hall, Laura B. Levy, Colby A. Smith, Katherine Salamido, Roseanne Schwartz and Jennifer A. Howley
Quaternary Science Reviews
Volume 367, 1 November 2025, 109531

Abstract

Understanding climate conditions in the mid-to-high-latitude North Atlantic region during late-glacial time can provide valuable information to test hypotheses concerning the mechanisms of climate change that ended the last glacial period. Glaciers (particularly mountain glaciers) are sensitive recorders of summer temperature change because of its influence on the ablation season, snowline elevation and, hence, glacier length. Here, we develop a record of glacial fluctuations in the Scoresby Sund region in Central East Greenland and use these data to infer the timing and pattern of summer temperature changes in the mid-to-high-latitude North Atlantic region. We present 64 new 10Be ages of glacial landforms and remap and recalculate an additional 65 10Be ages from prior work in the region. Even with boulders with inherited nuclides in some of the datasets, a two-step pattern of glacial fluctuations is apparent, with an outer moraine dating to ∼14.0–12.8 ka, an inner moraine dating to ∼11.7–11.3 ka, and ice retreat in the time between moraine deposition. A comparison of these data with 10Be chronologies of mountain glacier fluctuations in Northeast Greenland, Svalbard, Norway and Scotland, shows a consistent pattern throughout the mid-to-high-latitude North Atlantic region of summer cooling and warming during late-glacial time.

Quote:

In both Holger Danskes Briller and Kjove Land, prominent lateral moraines demarcate a relatively young landscape (proximal to the moraines) from this older, more weathered landscape (distal to the moraines). Lateral moraines occur on both walls of Holger Danskes Briller and mark the margins of a glacier that filled the valley and flowed into Nordostbugt (Fig. 3, Fig. 6). On the right-lateral (south) valley wall, these moraines are contiguous with moraines in Kjoveland that mark the left-lateral margin of an ice-sheet outlet that filled Nordvestfjord. All these moraines are relatively high relief and have high surface boulder concentrations. Based on the geomorphology and elevations of the highest elevation lateral moraines in Holger Danskes Briller (both ∼300 m asl) and Kjoveland (∼260–280 m asl), we assume that they were deposited at the same time. 10Be ages of thirteen boulders on these highest elevation moraines are ∼11.8–18.9 ka. Multiple lateral moraines occur on the slopes below the highest moraines. We dated five boulders on lower elevation moraines (∼190–240 m asl) in Kjoveland. Four ages are ∼12.1–16.4 ka and one (∼30.4 ± 1.1 ka, MKG-71) is a statistical outlier. Based on their prominence and position at a weathering boundary, we consider all of these landforms to be associated with the outer moraine set. They consist entirely of lateral moraines and lack terminal features, possibly because the ice terminated offshore. The peak age of the moraines is ∼12.2 ka (n = 17) and the youngest age is ∼11.8 ± 0.4 ka (MKG-179)(Fig. 6).

In contrast, on the Holger Danskes Briller valley floor, an ice-contact delta is spectacularly preserved, with a steep and boulder-covered ice-contact slope and kettles and meltwater channels on its surface (Fig. 3E). The upper delta surface is at ∼101 m asl. 10Be ages of seven boulders on the delta are ∼11.6–15.3 ka with a peak age of ∼11.7 ka (n = 7) and youngest age of ∼11.6 ± 0.3 ka (MKG-172)(Fig. 6). Given the substantial distance between inferred minimum terminal ice positions of the outer moraines and this ice-contact delta, as well as the fact that the delta grades to 101 m asl, well-below the 135 m asl sea level associated with at least one outer moraine in Gurreholm Dal, we conclude that the delta is associated with the inner moraine set.

----------------

The paper contains some fascinatingf material, particularly withy respect to the cosmogenic dating of assorted morainic features.  This is a wonderful image of the HDB ice-contact delta, associated with a sea level at 101m:

Because of its association with a sea level at 101m, the authors suggest that the HDB feature is one of the "inner moraines", linked in age (c 11,000 yrs BP) and origin to some of the moraines associated with the glaciers in the Schuchert Valley.

However, in trying to understand the complexities of the morainic topography of the area around Hjörnemoraene, I think the authors have missed the point that there was (1) a diffluent ice lobe coming from the Pythagoras Bjerg plateau, with a loop of moraines around 270m asl; (2) a series of lateral moraines at a lower level, around 200 - 190 m asl, associated with the Nordvestfjord outlet glacier; and (3) an intervening "proglacial" strip of land characterised by older morainic deposits and some washed surfaces. This can be picked up rather clearly on Figure 6 of the article:

Sampling point 83, labelled as "distal to moraines" should have been labelled "proximal to moraines" because it is inside the diffluent glacier morainic loop.  This makes sense, because the date (13,600 yrs BP) is younger than some of those obtained from boulders on the moraines themselves.

The highest ridge of lateral moraine associated with the Nordvestfjord Glacier at c 200m, near Hjörnemoraene.  Additional annotations by me -- on the authors' Fig 3.

My annotations on another of the authors' photos, in Fig 3 of the article. This is a close-up of the same ridge featured in the photo above.

All in all, a somewhat messy situation, with the morainic features of Kjove Land interpreted in three different ways.  In 1965 David Sugden and I interpreted the features as associated with two glacier retreat stages or readvances, coinciding with sea-level stillstands at 134m and 101m.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262414669_The_Raised_Marine_Features_of_Kjove_Land_East_Greenland

We has no sophisticated dating techniques available to us in 1962, but we used shell faunas in the Gurreholmsdal raised delta staircase in our interpretations, and our estimates of the nature of the morainic and delta features and their ages were not far wide of the mark.

In some of the early papers on the Milne Land Stage it was assumed that the Kjove Land and Pythagoras Bjerg moraines were associated with an extended Schuchert Glacier, flowing down the Schuchertv Valley and then pushing into Hall Bredning and westwards across Syd Kap Bay.  That idea does not seem to be supported by any of the more recent papers.  The third interpretation, involving a lobe of diffluent ice pushing south-eastwards from the plateau of Pythagoras Bjerg, is one I am increasingly attracted by, as seen in assorted posts on this blog.

I think the landforms of the plateau suggest a long history of diffluent ice flow, maybe during several distinct glaciations.   But the most recent ice flow, associated with the creation of two sets of prominent morainic ridges above Hjörnemoraene, appears to have been associated with the Late Glacial readvance that occurred around 13,000 years ago.

The new work -- associated with an extensive cosmogenic dating programme -- confirms that the late-glacial readvance phases here were not very closely synchronised with the old Zone I (cold) >> Zone II / Allerodn (warmer) >> Zone III (cold) sequence.   Everything here in East Greenland seems to have been slightly out of step, for reasons still to be properly elucidated.

The "Younger Dryas Question" has still not been satisfactorily answered.......

The Nordvestfjord "bench"

I found another striking image of the bench on the north side of Nordvestfjord while going through my vast air photo collection.  It shows the feature with great clarity -- looking from NW towards SE.  In the far distance we can see Scoresbysund and Jameson Land.  

The bench is referred to as a relict planation feature -- and labelled as part of the LPS or lower planation surface by Bonow and Japsen.  If the dissected plateau edge coincides with the outcrop of a basaltic layer, we can argue for some geological control.  Bonow and Japsen argue that there is an erosion surface that passes beneath the basalt -- they refer to this as an "etchplain".   They claim thast the feature must have formed later than mid-Miocene..........

But the extent of ice moulding is also very striking.  All in all, this has to be a composite feature owing its origin to multiple changes of climate over a vast stretch of geological time.   

 

Nordvestfjord -- a new image

 

This is a new (2025) Bing image of the whole of Nordvestfjord -- the innermost part of the Scoresbysund fjord complex.

There is enormous detail -- click to enlarge.

Nordvestfjord middle reaches

 

 I rediscovered the above B/W photo in my office the other day -- it's one of the old Geodetic Institute photos that we used in our 1962 expedition to the Scoresbysund area of East Greenland.  I have speculated about this before, but the most striking feature of the photo is the extraordinary "break"on the fjord side  between  a lower relatively gentle slope of highly ice-scoured bedrock and an upper section which we can refer to as a dissected plateau edge.  If we like, we can refer to this junction as a "trim line" because it must separate a lower heavily glaciated landscape from an upper zone which was at one time ice-free.

As we move down the fjord this lower slope with a modest gradient gradually disappears, to be replaced by vertical (and in places overhanging) cliffs, especially on the outside of bends, where the intensity of glacial erosion has been at its greatest.  This is related to a gradual increase in glacier discharge as one passes from the middle trough to the lower or outer trough.  Those areas of steep fjord sides should be the ones where trough depth is at its greatest -- indeed there are water depths of over 1500m as one approaches the outer fjord threshold, but the deepest continuous stretch in the fjord long profile (with a depth of over 1400m) is a 30 km stretch which coincides with relatively gentle fjordsides as in th photos above.  That's a bit of a puzzle........

What is the glaciological explanation of this phenomenon?  This is not your classic U-shaped fjord or outlet glacier trough cross profile. And why do we not see this "middle fjord bench" in Sognefjord in Norway,  and in many of the other big fjord systems of the Northern Hemisphere?  Are we seeing evidence here of the gradual transition, in a brutalised dendritic fjord system, from areal scouring to highly concentrated linear erosion?  Is this all explained by reference to glacier thermal regime, with a transition from cold-based ice to warm-based ice?

Two other possibilities.  The lower, gentle, slope segments might be remnants of an ancient fluvially -influenced landscape, possibly dating back to pre-glacial times?  I don't like that theory, since it does not adequately explain the sudden break of slope at the "trim line".  The other possibility is that the "trim line" is a geologically controlled feature. coinciding with the junction between relatively hard rocks and relatively soft ones.  I have looked at the geological map for the area, and there is no obvious geological boundary -- all of the rocks in the area are described as belonging to the basement complex -- crystalline or metamorphic rocks, and granite intrusions influenced by Caledonian orogeny.  However, in some parts of the East Greenland fjord country thick basalts lie on top of sedimentary and metamorphic rocks, providing at least a partial explanation for the bench on the fjordside, with steep slopes above and gentler slopes below.

In a significant research article, Bonow and Japsen (2021)  attribute many of the features of the fjordland landscape to the existence of two peneplains -- with an upper surface coinciding with the extensive plateaux which support multiple small ice caps today, and a lower peneplain which reveals itself in fjordside "benches" such as those desctibed above. 

Bonow & Japsen 2021: GEUS Bulletin 45 (1). 5297. https://doi.org/10.34194/geusb.v45.5297

The authors say:  The low-relief Upper Planation Surface (UPS; c. 2 km above sea level) cuts across basement and Palaeogene basalts, indicating that it was graded to base level defined by the Atlantic Ocean in post-basalt times and subsequently uplifted. The UPS formed prior to the deposition of mid-Miocene lavas that rest on it, south of the study area. In the interior basement terrains, the Lower Planation Surface (LPS) forms fluvial valley benches at c. 1 km above sea level, incised below the UPS. The LPS is thus younger than the UPS, which implies that it formed post mid-Miocene. Towards the coast, the valley benches merge to form a coherent surface that defines flat-topped mountains. This shows that the LPS was graded to near sea level and was subsequently uplifted.

Here is another photo of the upper reach of Nordvestfjord, taken from above the snout of Daugaard-Jensens Gletscher.  It also shows the relatively gentle gradients of the fjordside slopes and the deeply scoured nature of the whole of the ice-free landscape.

See these articles:

Nordvestfjord: a major East Greenland fjord system
J. A. DOWDESWELL, C. L. BATCHELOR, K. A. HOGAN & H.-W. SCHENKE

2015, Geol Soc of London

HARBOR, J. M. 1992. Numerical modelling of the development of U-shaped valleys by glacial erosion. Bulletin Geological Society of America, 104, 1364-1375

For the contrast between the middle fjord and the outer fjord, see these photos of the west side of Nordvestfjord, taken from near Syd Kap and the flank of Pythagoras Bjerg:

..... and this one, which is seriously spectacular.  I haven't been able to discover where exactly it was taken, but it reminds me of the fjord wall near "Hell's Bells" (as we called it), between Syd Kap and the diffluent trough occupied by the twin lakes of Holger Danskes Briller.

The fjord walls on the west side of this outer zone are steeper than in the inner zone, and are sustantially more broken up as a result of complex interactions between the main Nordvestfjord glacier and abundant tributary glaciers flowing from ice caps and from smaller "alpine" glacier catchments.

PS.

There is amazing new 2025 satellite coverage of this area available via Bing Maps. Just discovered it.  
Here we see the same area as featured at the head of this post.

Asymmetric cross profile of Nordvestfjord trough are clearly seen in the middle section.

The is the relationship between the upper planation surface and the lower one, according to Bonow and Japsen:

This photo shoes the various elements in Gåseland.  The photo below shows Nordvestfjord, in its middle section:

The section shown in the photo at the head of this post is in the distance, to the right of top centre.  The authors clearly see the plateau supporting the small ice cap as a part of the UPS, and the lower fjordside slopes as part of the LPS.  If there is one criticidm I have of the paper by Bonow and Japsen, it is that they are too preoccupied with "inherited features" and ancient landscapes, and do not pay sufficient  attention to glaciology and glacial erosional features.  Of course, every landscape tells a multitude of stories........

How old are the South Wales caves?

Paviland Cave -- burial place for the "red lady" -- but how old is the cave?

This is an interesting paper, aimed largely at the book by Prof Peter Kokelaar in which he argues that some of the caves on Gower are very old indeed.  Faulkner takes the view that the caves are very recent, formed very largely during the "wastage"phases of the Anglian and Devensian glaciations.  So how convincing are his arguments?

I have to say that I am not entirely convinced.  One problem is that Faulkner sticks to a "two glaciation" scenario, referring to the Anglian and Late Devensian glaciations and ignoring the Wolstonian (MIS-6 to MIS-10), let alone considering the possibility of a cold "event" in the Early or Middle parts of the Devensian.  I don't blame Faulkner for this, since this more complex chronology of glacial events has come into the frame very recently.......

However, I do not find the emphasis on ice dammed lakes all that convincing, since it does not seem to be backed up with much hard evidence in the field.  And it is rather fanciful to refer to ancient cave systems -- originating maybe several millions of years ago -- as having been eroded away without trace by the gradual lowering of the land surface.  The term "caves in the sky" is used......

On balance, I am rather persuaded by the view that the cave systems are very old and continuously evolving in response to sub-surface water table oscillations and climatic changes.  Evidence from Pontnewydd Cave and Dan-yr-Ogof suggests a great age for parts of the cave systems, and it is widely assumed that the cave and tunnel networks of the Mendips (for example) date back to a time of subterranean limestone dissolution more than a million years ago.  Uranium series dating of around 600,000 years, for example (close to the limit for the technique), indicates that the caves in which they were found were substantially  older.  Occupation by humans during the Palaeolithic seems to confirm that.

While some of the narrow tubes or tunnels mightc well be of "modern" origin, it seems more reasonable to assume that the big open caves are very much older, with complex histories. Anyway, an interesting debate........

==============

Quaternary deglacial speleogenesis on the Gower Peninsula, South Wales, UK 

Trevor Faulkner

Conference Paper · August 2025
19th International Congress of Speleology, 20-27 July 2025
At: Belo Horizonte, Brazil, Volume: 2, pp202-207

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/394570850_Quaternary_deglacial_speleogenesis_on_the_Gower_Peninsula_South_Wales_UK

Abstract

Renewed interest in the caves of the Gower Peninsula of southern Wales was sparked by the recent re-opening of Llethryd Swallet, the dis-covery of several other significant caves, and a new book. The latter proposes that the local water supplies are derived from precipitation falling on Gower, rather than from the northern limb of limestone in the South Wales Coalfield Syncline. However, claims are made that some of the existing caves are older than ten million years. This paper offers a simpler hypothesis, from considerations of cave passage sizes, morphologies and lacustrine sediments and of surface deposits at the southern coast. The caves remaining on Gower were probably initially developed during the deglaciations of the Anglian and/or Devensian icesheets. In particular, the Llethryd Swallet−Tooth Cave system was likely initiated by phreatic dissolution during the Anglian deglaciation, when an annular ice-dammed lake surrounded Cefn Bryn and perhaps extended eastwards beyond Hunts Bay, before collapsing at a jökulhlaup. Further development by vadose entrenchment, plus phreatic dissolution at lower levels, occurred during the subsequent interglacials, with renewed phreatic enlargement by similar processes during the Devensian deglaciation.

The strange case of the earth scientists who look but do not see

"They do say that in the bad old days geologists like us used to work 

out there, in the rain........."

In the latest tirade against the glacial transport hypothesis, there is a systematic attempt to diminish or ignore the effects of natural processes in the Quaternary environment.  This is really rather bizarre, given that several of the authors (Ixer, Bevins, Pearce and Scourse) are earth scientists.  For example, they refer to the Newall Boulder as a "joint controlled block" or as a "broken joint block" and pretend that all of the surface features which make it rather interesting can be explained by natural weathering processes within the last 5,000 years or so.  They also argue against glacial processes operating on the south shore of the Bristol Channel, and seem intent upon maintaining a convoluted and highly unreliable argument that the large erratics in the shore zone are all ice-rafted.  That flies in the face of evidence from Paul Madgett, Paul Berry and others who have recorded erratics well above the shore zone in the Saunton and Croyde area up to an altitide of c 80m.

Bennett, J. A., Cullingford, R. A., Gibbard, P. L., Hughes, P. D., & Murton, J. B. (2024). The Quaternary Geology of Devon. Proceedings of the Ussher Society, 15, 84-130.
https://ussher.org.uk/wp- content/uploads/benettetal1584130v2.pdf

In the studies of the so-called quarries at Rhosyfelin and Carn Goedog there are hardly any mentions of the Quaternary stratigraphic sequence or of natural rockfalls, scree accumulation and glacial erosional and depositional features. The features described are simply assumed to be man-made, without any serious consideration of natural processes.  The two 2015 articles written by my colleagues Dyfed Alis-Gruffydd and John Downes have been systematically ignored for a decade without a single citation from Ixer, Bevins and Co.

The obvious faceting, edge abrasion and weathering of the bulk of Stonehenge bluestone boulders is similarly ignored by the geologists, who still pretend that they are quarried blocks which have been subject to surface weathering over the past 5,500 years.

They claim that since the big sarsens at Stonehenge have hed their edges rounded off since the Neolithic, then so have the bluestones -- and claim that this somehow demonstrates the inadequacy of the glacial transport theory.  That argument is fundamentally flawed -- the sarsens have been exposed to weathering for millions of years, and the bluestones have not.

In the papers relating to the imaginary (and now discredited) "giant stone circle" at Waun Mawn, there is a singular lack of awareness of the thin cover of Devensian till that blankets the ground surface across the landscape, and a pretence that the surface layers of superficial deposits are either man-made or at least manipulated in association with stone setting work.  Almost every slight depression deemed to be in a "correct" area for the setting of a standing stone is interpreted as a stone socket, regardless of its actual physical characteristics.  No attempt is made to assess (through comparisons with other areas) whether these so-called stone sockets are unique or significant.  Basic geomorphological and sedimentary work has clearly not been a part of the research agenda.

In seeking to determine where the Waun Mawn standing and recumbent stones might have come from, the assumption from the outset was that they were "brought" from significant places.  The idea that the stones might have simply been picked up in the immediate neighbourhood seems not to have occurred to anybody in the research team.

As I have pointed out frequently on this blog, there is always (in the work of Bevins, Ixer et al) an assumption that the bluestones at Stonehenge must have come from prominent craggy features in the landscape such as tors.  There are no considerations of glacial entrainment and transport processes  -- as a result of which perfectly feasible alternative bluestone sources are entirely ignored.

It is really quite concerning that three of the authors of the recent "distant sources" article (Bevins, Pearce and Ixer) are geologists, and that they appear to be fully signed up to a ruling hypothesis that completely denies any role for natural processes in the movement of stones in areas known to have been heavily glaciated on several occasions. How weird is that?

It gets even more bizarre when you realise that both Ixer and Bevins have themselves  been involved in glacial erratic studies -- Ixer in regard to the erratics found and publicised in the Birmingham area in the last few years, and Bevins in the study of the Storrie Collection of erratics found in Pencoed, near Bridgend. Perhaps both of them suffer from some strange ailment which manifests itself in the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing? 

All very strange........

Oolitic Limestone slabs used in West Kennet Long Barrow

 

Here is some info:

https://reports.cotswoldarchaeology.co.uk/content/uploads/2018/01/Binder1.pdf

I have in the past cast serious doubt on some of the more excitable claims made for the transport of raw materials used in the construction of Newgrange -- and I have noted that the somewhat imaginative reconstruction of said monument caused a considerable stir at the time.

There is a similar issue at West Kennet -- and of particular interest is the discovery of about a tonne of small Oolitic Limestone slabs, assumed to have come either from near Calne or near Frome.  Apparently the slabs were very rotten when they were exposed during the digs by Piggott and others, and were replaced with a tonne of nice shiny new slabs in the 1950's by those who wanted to preserve the site for posterity. The work included the installation of a nice skylight.

Apparently the barrow was rebuilt significantly above its original level using new (imported) and relocated stones. Concerns at the time included a lack of clear guidance from the original excavators, the omission of the original stone numbering system, and questions about whether the stones were returned to their true original positions, raising doubts about the accuracy and integrity of the restored structure.

Now here is a question.  How long does it take for a slab of Oolitic Limestone to rot away and lose its coherence?

Here is the CoralJackz video about the site, making some very interesting points:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFCQ4ctN8hU&t=173s