56 MR. A. HARKER 01ST THE GEOLOGICAL [Feb. I906, 



Hay Cunningham, 1 upon no grounds ascertainable from his 

 memoir, flatly contradicts Macculloch's statements as to the mode 

 of occurrence of the fossil wood. He asserts that the wood has 

 never been found in situ, and adds, inconsequently, 



'it is evident from the point where its fragments maybe obtained, that its 

 matrix is the rock of the Scuir ' 



Hugh Miller described quite clearly the manner of occurrence of 

 the wood, as follows : — 



' We were successful in procuring several good specimens of the Eigg pine, 

 at a depth, in the conglomerate, of from 8 to 18 inches. Some of the 

 upper pieces we found in contact with the decomposing trap out of which 



the hollow piazza above had been scooped; but the greater number 



lay imbedded in the original Oolitic grit in which they had been locked 

 up ' 2 



It is to be remarked that at that time, notwithstanding Maccul- 

 loch's earlier work, the basaltic rocks were generally believed to be 

 lavas of Oolitic age. Assuming this, Miller included the con- 

 glomerate in the same series, and regarded the fossil wood as the 

 relics of contemporaneous vegetation entombed in the ' deep-sea 

 bottom.' Not only did he speak of the Eigg pine as ' an ancient 

 tree of the Oolites,' but he stated that it is found in this formation 

 in other parts of Scotland : — 



' The fossil trees found in such abundance in the neighbourhood of Helmsdale 

 that they are burnt for lime, — the fossil wood of Eathie in Cromartj^shire, 

 and that of Shandwick in Ross — all belong to the Pinites eiggensis ' (op. cit. 

 p. 39). 



It does not appear, however, that this statement was based on 

 any minute comparison of specimens ; and, indeed, in a later work 

 Miller did not insist upon the specific identity, but spoke of the 

 examples from the eastern part of Scotland as ' branches and 

 portions of the trunks of a similar pine ' to that of Eigg. 3 It should 

 be noted that Miller's Eigg specimens came partly from the decom- 

 posing base of the pitchstone, but mostly from the underlying 

 breccia or agglomerate. My own specimens from the latter 

 situation include some which do not belong to Pinites ; but small 

 pieces of this also occur here, as w T ell as in the band above. 



Sir Archibald Geikie 4 seems to have found only the small pieces 

 of wood which occur mingled with fragments of various rocks in 

 the breccia, as distinct from the brecciated and decaying base 

 of the pitchstone, although his brief account does not explicitly 

 separate the two fragmental bands which occur at this place. 

 I have no doubt that the two are quite distinct, and that their 

 conjunction here is accidental. The brecciation of the basal part 

 of the pitchstone (or its felsitic modification) and alteration to a soft 



1 Mem. Wern. Nat. Hist. Soc. vol. viii (1839) p. 156. 



2 ' Cruise of the Betsey ' 1858, p. 37. 



3 ' Sketch-Book of Popular Geology ' 1859, p. 138. 



4 Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xxvii (1871) p. 307. 



