248 Proceedings of Royal Society of Edinburgh. [sess. 
pot, both made of brass or bronze — relics which, of course, relegate 
the canoe to late mediaeval times (Ancient Scottish Lake Dwellings , 
p. 66). The canoe exposed during the excavation of the Buston 
crannog had been mended by boards fastened to its sides by 
wooden pins. A gold coin of the sixth or seventh century found 
in the debris gives some clue to the date of this crannog. (Ibid., 
p. 206.) 
As to the difficulty about the cork boat-plug, if the material 
really was cork, there is no valid reason why it would not 
have been brought to the Clyde by trading vessels in Roman 
or post-Roman times. Had the clinker-built boat been deposited 
in stratified marine sands anywhere within the substance of 
the 25-feet raised beach above present high-water mark, Sir 
Archibald’s deduction would have some foundation in fact. But 
the record is silent on this crucial point, and only states that 
the boat lay keel uppermost, as if swamped in finely- laminated 
sands, about 250 feet back from the ancient river-margin. Its 
position relative to sea - level may, however, be approximately 
inferred from the fact that it was found near Mr Thomson’s 
new shipbuilding yard. Allowing its depth below the surface 
to have been 19 feet (see footnote, p. 246), it is manifest, from 
the lowness of the locality, that its site could not have been 
much above, but possibly greatly below, the level of present 
high-water mark. 
It is therefore quite evident that canoes were used on the 
Clyde, without any break of continuity, from the Stone Age 
down to mediaeval times. But no specimen, to my knowledge, 
showing evidence of having been made in the Iron Age, or in 
post-Roman times, has been recovered in circumstances which 
would suggest that it was abandoned while the level of the 
Clyde estuary stood 25 feet higher than at present. While, 
therefore, the opinion that some of the Clyde canoes foundered 
in the Stone Age prior to the formation of the raised beach, 
has some foundation in fact, the inference that this change 
had taken place “long after the islanders had become expert 
in the use of metal tools ” can only be regarded as a mere 
gratuitous assertion, unsupported by any kind of evidence. 
Sir Archibald Geikie next deals with the archaeological phe- 
