I02 



JOHAN KIÆR. M.-N. Kl. 



above has been quite uncertain and changeable, this being a natural conse- 

 quence of the lack of fossils. Th. Münster^ regarded it as Cambrian, whilst 

 W. C. Brøgger^ called it Eo-Cambrian, which was intended to indicate its 

 close connection with our fossil-bearing Lower Cambrian and the slight]}' 

 altered character of the rocks, and must not be supposed to indicate that 

 he includes it amongst the oldest part of the Cambrian. In fact he regards 

 it as the youngest part of the Precambrian or Algonkian formations, that 

 are now usually regarded as belonging to an era between the Archeic and 

 the Paleozoic. K. O. Bjorlykke^ and H. Reusch-* also agree with this 

 view. Similar opinions are held by the majority of Swedish and Finnish 

 scientists that have dealt with these ancient formations. 



It does not appear to be very reasonable to regard the Quartz sandstone 

 as the lowest of our Cambrian formations, and to place the borders between 

 our Paleozoic and Proterozoic (Algonkian) formations below it. Indeed we 

 have no proof that the Quartz sandstone indicates the beginning of the 

 Lower Cambrian marine transgression. It is not until we reach the Sand- 

 stone shales, that form a transition from the former to the greygreen shale 

 series, that we find the oldest traces of marine animal life. If there has 

 been a transition in this series from continental to marine facies, which we 

 regard as highly probale, we should therefore be most inclined to believe 

 that this change of facies took place above and not below the real Quartz 

 sandstone. 



In addition, it is difficult to separate the Quartz sandstone from the 

 Sparagmite formation. 



At the northern end of Mjesen, as shown by the investigations of 

 Th. Münster ° and V. M. Goldschmidt'', it may seem natural to distinguieh 

 it as a special series of deposits above the younger sparagmite. 



In consequence of the minute studies of O. A. Schiøtz^ of the 

 tectonic farther to the east by the River Glommen, and the recent inve- 

 stigations of O. Holtedahl ^ farther to the west at the north end of Rands- 

 fjord, the tectonical structure and the original sequence of the strata at 

 Mjøsen must be given renewed investigation. It will then presumably be 

 found, as also indicated by the conditions farther to the north, that the 



1 Beskrivelse til' Kartbladet Lillehammer (Norges Geol. Unders. No. 30, 1900). 

 '^ "Norges Geologi" in "Norge i 19de Aarhundred", 1905. 

 3 Det centrale Norges bjergbygning, Norges Geol. Unders. No. 39, 1905. 

 * Norges Geologi, 1910. 



5 Beskrivelse til Kartbladet Lillehammer (Norges Geol. Unders. No. 30, 1900). 



6 Profilet Ringsaker-Brøttum (Norges Geol. Unders. Aarb. 1908). 



" Den sydøstlige del av Sparagmit-kvartsfjelfet (Norges Geol. Unders. No. 35, 1902). 

 S Iagttagelser over fjeldbygningen omkr. Randsfjordens Nordende. (Norges Geol. Unders. 

 Aarb. 1915) 



