Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-7qhmt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T14:30:32.424Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Eulysites and related rock types from Loch Duich, Ross-shire

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2018

C. E. Tilley*
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge

Extract

Our knowledge of the rare rock type eulysite (A. J. Erdmann, 1846) comes almost wholly from Swedish occurrences amt hitherto no examples have been recognized from Britain. It is therefore of interest to place on record a new Occurrence of eulysites and related rocks from among Lewisian rocks of the Glenelg area, Scotland.

The rocks shortly to be described come from the vicinity of Totaig on Loch Duich between Totaig and Letterfearn, little more than half a mile from the first described occurrence of eclogite in Britain. These eulysitic rocks crop out on the hillside immediately south-west of Druideig Lodge. About 200 yards south-west of the lodge coarse garnet-paragneisses form outcrops associated with grunerite- and cummingtonite-garnet-gneisses, and a similar interbanded association is found at higher levels.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1936

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 331 note 1 Teall, J. J. H., On an eclogite from Loch Duich. Min. Mag., 1891, vol. 9, p. 217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 332 note 1 Geology of Glenelg, Mere. Geol. Surv. Scotland, 1910, p. 26.

page 334 note 1 Geijer, p., Årsbok Sveriges Geol. Undersökning, 1925, ser. C, no. 324 (for 1923), pp. 4 and 9.Google Scholar

page 334 note 2 Henry, N. F. M., Min. Mag., 1935, vol. 24, p. 221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 339 note 1 Rosenbusch, H., Elemente der Gesteinslehre, 1910, p. 217.Google Scholar

page 339 note 2 Högbom, A. G., Handb. reg. Geologie, 1913, vol. 4, Abt. 3, p. 21.Google Scholar

page 339 note 3 Palmgren, J., Bull. Geol. Inst. Upsala, 1917, voL 14, p. 109.Google Scholar

page 340 note 1 Lacroix, A., Bull. Soc. Franç. Min., 1917, vol. 40, p. 62.Google Scholar

page 340 note 2 yon Eckermann, H., Geol. För. Förh. Stockholm, 1922, vol. 44, p. 253.Google Scholar

page 340 note 3 yon Eckermann, H., ibid., 1936, vol. 58, p. 165.Google Scholar

page 340 note 4 Carstens, C. W., ibid., 1924, vol. 46, p. 248.Google Scholar

page 340 note 5 Geijer, p., Årsbok Sveriges Geol. Undersök., 1925, ser. C, no. 324 Google Scholar (for 1923).

page 340 note 6 Harker, A., Metamorphism, 1932, p. 237.Google Scholar

page 341 note 1 Van Hise, C. R. and Leith, C. K., Monogr. U.S. Geol. Surv., 1911. no. 52.Google Scholar

page 341 note 2 Van Bemmelen, J. M., Zeits. Anorg. Chemie, 1900, vol. 22, p. 319.Google Scholar

page 341 note 3 Ramdohr, P., Neues Jahrb. Min., 1927, Beil. Bd. 55, p. 333.Google Scholar

page 342 note 1 Direct confirmation of these figures is much to be desired. Joliffe's results include metagreenalite and are obtained indirectly. Gruner (Amer. Min., 1936, vol. 21, p. 205) states that X-ray powder photographs of greenalite resemble those of serpentine.