44 HYATT ON THE TERTIARY SPECIES 



"NI. Ami Boue in an article entitled " Les depots Tertiaries et Basaltiques de la parti dii 

 Wurteinburg et de la Baviere," ^ describes these Cloister Ridge rocks as a calcareous tufa 

 deposited upon the strata of sands and clays. This hypothesis is, however, inadniissable, 

 since no observer has seen any of the Pit deposits between the underlying Jura rocks and 

 the Brecciated or Cloister ridge Limestones in any locality. The Cloister Ridge rocks are 

 described as resting directly upon the Jura in all cases, and so also is the Breccia of Fraas, 

 and they are both laid down in the official map of which a modified copy heads this chapter, 

 in accordance with these views. The existence of the Lower Steinheini Period though 

 advanced here in distinct terms for the first time, is really to be inferred from the writings 

 of Quenstedt, Fraas, Hilgendorf and Sandberger. Every one of these authors allude 

 either directly or indirectly in such terms to the Neuselhalderhof rocks containing a dis- 

 tinct and older fauna than that of the Upper Steinheim (or Pit) Period. 



The Geological Map of iSteinheim, pi)ge 33, shows the central hill with Steinheim to the 

 north and Sontheim to the sou.th. The Neuselhalder rocks are situated to the westward and 

 are marked like the Breccia of Frass, as arc also the Cloister Ridge rocks forming a half 

 circle on top of the central hill, and also the rocks of the Burgstall, southeasterly from 

 Sontheim. This was done to place clearly in view tlie association of rocks supposed to 

 form together the strata of the Lower Steinheim Period. 



IIL Review of Geological Sections. 



Hilgendorf gives five diflerent and detailed sections in the Old Pit, which do not agree 

 very closely, nor in view of the great disparity of even adjoining parts of the 

 same pit, depart much from the sections here given. His remarks about the New 

 Pit, however, show that here there was a very marked difference. He describes this 

 as very deficient in limestone, whereas, a glance at my Sections 7 and 8 will show 

 that the opposite condition occurs at the present time. This agrees also with the 

 fact that for a long time previous to my visit this had been the pit preferred for the 

 excavation of sand, and had lieen very much enlarged. The two following sections 

 are quoted from the two, which were continued down to the base of the deposits, 

 by Dr. Hilgendorf 



Dii Hilgkndokf".^ FiK.sr Section. 

 Limestoue; formerly tbe Hoor of the pit. 

 Clayey sand. 

 ?.4. Clay with three strips of shell-bearing sand. 

 ( Shell-sand with PL in. sulcalus. 

 3 } Clay. 

 ( Shell-sand with PL m. aulcalns. 



r Clay. 

 „ .' Shell-sand. 

 5i Clay. 



[ Clayey-sand with PL m. tenids and snlcalus, 



( underneath clay with a thin layer of PL m. 

 2 -J Tenuis and below with large angular pieces of 



( Jura-liraestonc. 



^-^ 



Dr. Hilgendokf'.s Second Section (lower p.4.rt). 



' Clay. 



Shell-sand. 



Clay. 



Limestoue. 



Clay. 



Shell-sand. 



Clay. 



Shell-sand. 



Clayey-sand. 



Shell-sand. 



Clayey-sand. 

 ' Shell-sand. 

 I flay. 



Claycy-saud with two shell layers. 

 Massive Fresh-water limestone. 



X 



1 Ann. des Sci. Nat. 1824. Vol. 2sc, p. 5—12. 



