Fl eos 
hee 
358 J. Lawrence Smith on Emery. 
and of Naxos.—This old and well known>lo@ality is here 
a ae to, simply because it has furnished me with: specimens, 
the examination of which forms a part of this memoir. It is 
found in large blocks mixed with a red soil and also imbedded in 
white marble. It is taken principally from the north and east side 
of the island—the best comes from Vothrie, nine miles fromthe 
_ Shore, and is embarked at Sulionos. ‘Another good locality is at 
Apperanthes, seven miles from the shore, and it is embarked at a 
small port called Moutzona. In the south of the island it is found 
near Yasso. It is in such abundance on this island, that notwith- 
standing the immense quantity carried. off it is not sie ‘foun d 
necessary to quarry it from the roc 
Conclusions sath reference to the Geology o + Emery. 
The localities at Gumuch-dagh and Kulah are those which 
afforded me the best means of studying the geology of emery, 
although in-every instance I have ems it associated with ce 
old limestoue overlying mica slate, gnei 
Cc. 
‘It is imbedded either in the earth eae covers the limestone a 
in the rock itself; and exists in masses from the size of a 
that of. several tons Weight, generally angular, sometimes Lass 
ed, and when in the latter form they do. not appear to have be- 
come so by attrition. 
The masses in the soil possess but little interest for the weil 
gist, as they may have been left there by the decomposition of 
the rock, or been transported from other positiogs ; still, the latter 
is difficult of supposition, in reference to what is found at Gu- 
much-dagh, for here it is only on the summit and not on the sides 
of the mountain that the emery has. been, traced. _ But having 
had the means of studying the emery and rock in contact, I have 
come to the firm conclusion, that the emery has been formed and 
consolidated in the limestone in which it is found, and that it has 
not been detached from older rocks as granite, gneiss, 62, and 
lodged in the limestone at. the pees of its formation..* My reasons 
for s so thinking are the following— 
Ist. In no instance could the closest investigation of the older 
rocks of these localities, that are below the limestone, furnish 
the slightest indication of the existence of emery there ; 20 
moreover the masses of emery in the limestone never had ‘frag 
ments of another rock attached to them. A few thin layers of 
mica slate were found in the limestone, but they were not in con- 
tact with the emery, nor contained any traces of corundum. 
dwell thus much on this point, because in my specimens the 
careous rock in connection with the emery is under two forms; 
that of the original rock, and that formed by the intl of 
calcareous water in the fissures which exist near the 
