CHAPTER VI.

CONTEMPORARIES AND SUCCESSORS OF EOZOON.

The name Eozoon, or Dawn-animal, raises the question whether we shall

ever know any earlier representative of animal life. Here I think

it necessary to explain that in suggesting the name Eozoon for the

earliest fossil, and Eozoic for the formation in which it is contained,

I had no intention to affirm that there may not have been precursors

of the Dawn-animal. By the similar term, Eocene, Lyell did not mean

to affirm that there may not have been modern types in the preceding

geological periods: and so the dawn of animal life may have had its

gray or rosy breaking at a time long anterior to that in which Eozoon

built its marble reefs. When the fossils of this early auroral time

shall be found, it will not be hard to invent appropriate names for

them. There are, however, two reasons that give propriety to the

name in the present state of our knowledge. One is, that the Lower

Laurentian rocks are absolutely the oldest that have yet come under

the notice of geologists, and at the present moment it seems extremely

improbable that any older sediments exist, at least in a condition to

be recognised as such. The other is that Eozoon, as a member of the

group Protozoa, of gigantic size and comprehensive type, and oceanic in

its habitat, is as likely as any other creature that can be imagined

to have been the first representative of animal life on our planet.

Vegetable life may have preceded it, nay probably did so by at least

one great creative æon, and may have accumulated previous stores of

organic matter; but if any older forms of animal life existed, it is

certain at least that they cannot have belonged to much simpler or more

comprehensive types. It is also to be observed that such forms of life,

if they did exist, may have been naked protozoa, which may have left no

sign of their existence except a minute trace of carbonaceous matter,

and perhaps not even this.

But if we do not know, and perhaps we are not likely to know, any

animals older than Eozoon, may we not find traces of some of its

contemporaries, either in the Eozoon limestones themselves, or other

rocks associated with them? Here we must admit that a deep sea

Foraminiferal limestone may give a very imperfect indication of the

fauna of its time. A dredger who should have no other information as

to the existing population of the world, except what he could gather

from the deposits formed under several hundred fathoms of water, would

necessarily have very inadequate conceptions of the matter. In like

manner a geologist who should have no other information as to the

animal life of the Mesozoic ages than that furnished by some of the

thick beds of white chalk might imagine that he had reached a period

when the simplest kinds of protozoa predominated over all other

forms of life; but this impression would at once be corrected by the

examination of other deposits of the same age: so our inferences as to

the life of the Laurentian from the contents of its oceanic limestones

may be very imperfect, and it may yet yield other and various fossils.

Its possibilities are, however, limited by the fact that before we

reach this great depth in the earth's crust, we have already left

behind in much newer formations all traces of animal life except a

few of the lower forms of aquatic invertebrates; so that we are not

surprised to find only a limited number of living things, and those of

very low type. Do we then know in the Laurentian even a few distinct

species, or is our view limited altogether to Eozoon Canadense? In

answering this question we must bear in mind that the Laurentian itself

was of vast duration, and that important changes of life may have taken

place even between the deposition of the Eozoon limestones and that

of those rocks in which we find the comparatively rich fauna of the

Primordial age. This subject was discussed by the writer as early as

1865, and I may repeat here what could be said in relation to it at

that time:--

"In connection with these remarkable remains, it appeared desirable to

ascertain, if possible, what share these or other organic structures

may have had in the accumulation of the limestones of the Laurentian

series. Specimens were therefore selected by Sir W. E. Logan, and

slices were prepared under his direction. On microscopic examination,

a number of these were found to exhibit merely a granular aggregation

of crystals, occasionally with particles of graphite and other foreign

minerals, or a laminated mixture of calcareous and other matters, in

the manner of some more modern sedimentary limestones. Others, however,

were evidently made up almost entirely of fragments of Eozoon, or of

mixtures of these with other calcareous and carbonaceous fragments

which afford more or less evidence of organic origin. The contents of

these organic limestones may be considered under the following heads:--

1. Remains of Eozoon.

2. Other calcareous bodies, probably organic.

3. Objects imbedded in the serpentine.

4. Carbonaceous matters.

5. Perforations, or worm-burrows.

"1. The more perfect specimens of Eozoon do not constitute the mass

of any of the larger specimens in the collection of the Survey; but

considerable portions of some of them are made up of material of

similar minute structure, destitute of lamination, and irregularly

arranged. Some of this material gives the impression that there may

have been organisms similar to Eozoon, but growing in an irregular

or acervuline manner without lamination. Of this, however, I cannot

be certain; and on the other hand there is distinct evidence of the

aggregation of fragments of Eozoon in some of these specimens. In

some they constitute the greater part of the mass. In others they

are embedded in calcareous matter of a different character, or in

serpentine or granular pyroxene. In most of the specimens the cells of

the fossils are more or less filled with these minerals; and in some

instances it would appear that the calcareous matter of fragments of

Eozoon has been in part replaced by serpentine."

"2. Intermixed with the fragments of Eozoon above referred to, are

other calcareous matters apparently fragmentary. They are of various

angular and rounded forms, and present several kinds of structure. The

most frequent of these is a strong lamination varying in direction

according to the position of the fragments, but corresponding, as

far as can be ascertained, with the diagonal of the rhombohedral

cleavage. This structure, though crystalline, is highly characteristic

of crinoidal remains when preserved in altered limestones. The more

dense parts of Eozoon, destitute of tubuli, also sometimes show this

structure, though less distinctly. Other fragments are compact and

structureless, or show only a fine granular appearance; and these

sometimes include grains, patches, or fibres of graphite. In Silurian

limestones, fragments of corals and shells which have been partially

infiltrated with bituminous matter, show a structure like this. On

comparison with altered organic limestones of the Silurian system,

these appearances would indicate that in addition to the debris of

Eozoon, other calcareous structures, more like those of crinoids,

corals, and shells, have contributed to the formation of the

Laurentian limestones.

"3. In the serpentine[AE] filling the chambers of a large specimen of

Eozoon from Burgess, there are numerous small pieces of foreign matter;

and the silicate itself is laminated, indicating its sedimentary

nature. Some of the included fragments appear to be carbonaceous,

others calcareous; but no distinct organic structure can be detected

in them. There are, however, in the serpentine, many minute silicious

grains of a bright green colour, resembling green-sand concretions;

and the manner in which these are occasionally arranged in lines and

groups, suggests the supposition that they may possibly be casts of

the interior of minute Foraminiferal shells. They may, however, be

concretionary in their origin.

[Footnote AE: This is the dark green mineral named loganite by Dr.

Hunt.]

"4. In some of the Laurentian limestones submitted to me by Sir W.

E. Logan, and in others which I collected some years ago at Madoc,

Canada West, there are fibres and granules of carbonaceous matter,

which do not conform to the crystalline structure, and present forms

quite similar to those which in more modern limestones result from

the decomposition of algæ. Though retaining mere traces of organic

structure, no doubt would be entertained as to their vegetable origin

if they were found in fossiliferous limestones.

"5. A specimen of impure limestone from Madoc, in the collection of

the Canadian Geological Survey, which seems from its structure to

have been a finely laminated sediment, shows perforations of various

sizes, somewhat scalloped at the sides, and filled with grains of

rounded silicious sand. In my own collection there are specimens

of micaceous slate from the same region, with indications on their

weathered surfaces of similar rounded perforations, having the aspect

of Scolithus, or of worm-burrows.

"Though the abundance and wide distribution of Eozoon, and the

important part it seems to have acted in the accumulation of limestone,

indicate that it was one of the most prevalent forms of animal

existence in the seas of the Laurentian period, the non-existence of

other organic beings is not implied. On the contrary, independently of

the indications afforded by the limestones themselves, it is evident

that in order to the existence and growth of these large Rhizopods, the

waters must have swarmed with more minute animal or vegetable organisms

on which they could subsist. On the other hand, though this is a less

certain inference, the dense calcareous skeleton of Eozoon may indicate

that it also was liable to the attacks of animal enemies. It is also

possible that the growth of Eozoon, or the deposition of the serpentine

and pyroxene in which its remains have been preserved, or both, may

have been connected with certain oceanic depths and conditions, and

that we have as yet revealed to us the life of only certain stations

in the Laurentian seas. Whatever conjectures we may form on these more

problematic points, the observations above detailed appear to establish

the following conclusions:--

"First, that in the Laurentian period, as in subsequent geological

epochs, the Rhizopods were important agents in the accumulation of

beds of limestone; and secondly, that in this early period these low

forms of animal life attained to a development, in point of magnitude

and complexity, unexampled, in so far as yet known, in the succeeding

ages of the earth's history. This early culmination of the Rhizopods is

in accordance with one of the great laws of the succession of living

beings, ascertained from the study of the introduction and progress of

other groups; and, should it prove that these great Protozoans were

really the dominant type of animals in the Laurentian period, this fact

might be regarded as an indication that in these ancient rocks we may

actually have the records of the first appearance of animal life on our

planet."

With reference to the first of the above heads, I have now to state

that it seems quite certain that the upper and younger portions of

the masses of Eozoon often passed into the acervuline form, and the

period in which this change took place seems to have depended on

circumstances. In some specimens there are only a few regular layers,

and then a heap of irregular cells. In other cases a hundred or more

regular layers were formed; but even in this case little groups of

irregular cells occurred at certain points near the surface. This

may be seen in plate III. I have also found some masses clearly not

fragmental which consist altogether of acervuline cells. A specimen

of this kind is represented in fig. 31. It is oval in outline, about

three inches in length, wholly made up of rounded or cylindrical

cells, the walls of which have a beautiful tubular structure, but

there is little or no supplemental skeleton. Whether this is a portion

accidentally broken off from the top of a mass of Eozoon, or a

peculiar varietal form, or a distinct species, it would be difficult

to determine. In the meantime I have described it as a variety,

"_acervulina_," of the species Eozoon Canadense.[AF] Another variety

also, from Petite Nation, shows extremely thin laminæ, closely placed

together and very massive, and with little supplemental skeleton. This

may be allied to the last, and may be named variety "_minor_."

[Footnote AF: _Proceedings of Geological Society_, 1875.]

[Illustration: Fig. 31. _Acervuline Variety of Eozoon, St. Pierre._

(_a._) General form, half natural size. (_b._) Portion of cellular

interior, magnified, showing the course of the tubuli.]

All this, however, has nothing to do with the layers of fragments of

Eozoon which are scattered through the Laurentian limestones. In these

the fossil is sometimes preserved in the ordinary manner, with its

cavities filled with serpentine, and the thicker parts of the skeleton

having their canals filled with this substance. In this case the

chambers may have been occupied with serpentine before it was broken

up. At St. Pierre there are distinct layers of this kind, from half an

inch to several inches in thickness, regularly interstratified with

the ordinary limestone. In other layers no serpentine occurs, but the

interstices of the fragments are filled with crystalline dolomite or

magnesian limestone, which has also penetrated the canals; and there

are indications, though less manifest, that some at least of the layers

of pure limestone are composed of fragmental Eozoon. In the Laurentian

limestone of Wentworth, belonging apparently to the same band with

that of St. Pierre, there are many small rounded pieces of limestone,

evidently the debris of some older rock, broken up and rounded by

attrition. In some of these fragments the structure of Eozoon may be

plainly perceived. This shows that still older limestones composed of

Eozoon were at that time undergoing waste, and carries our view of the

existence of this fossil back to the very beginning of the Laurentian.

With respect to organic fragments not showing the structure of Eozoon,

I have not as yet been able to refer these to any definite origin. Some

of them may be simply thick portions of the shell of Eozoon with their

pores filled with calcite, so as to present a homogeneous appearance.

Others have much the appearance of fragments of such Primordial forms

as _Archæocyathus_, to be described in the sequel; but after much

careful search, I have thus far been unable to say more than I could

say in 1865.

[Illustration: Fig. 32. _Archæospherinæ from St. Pierre._

(_a._) Specimens dissolved out by acid. The lower one showing interior

septa. (_b._) Specimens seen in section.]

[Illustration: Fig. 33. _Archæospherinæ from Burgess Eozoon._

Magnified.]

[Illustration: Fig. 34. _Archæospherinæ from Wentworth Limestone._

Magnified.]

It is different, however, with the round cells infiltrated with

serpentine and with the silicious grains included in the loganite. I

have already referred to and figured (fig. 18) the remarkable rounded

bodies occurring at Long Lake. I now figure similar bodies found mixed

with fragmental Eozoon and in separate thin layers at St. Pierre (fig.

32), also some of the singular grains found in the loganite occupying

the chambers of Eozoon from Burgess (fig. 33), and a beaded body set

free by acid, with others of irregular forms, from the limestone of

Wentworth (fig. 34). All these I think are essentially of the same

nature, namely, chambers originally invested with a tubulated wall

like Eozoon, and aggregated in groups, sometimes in a linear manner,

sometimes spirally, like those Globigerinæ which constitute the mass

of modern deep-sea dredgings and also of the chalk. These bodies occur

dispersed in the limestone, arranged in thin layers parallel to the

bedding or sometimes in the large chamber-cavities of Eozoon. They

are so variable in size and form that it is not unlikely they may be

of different origins. The most probable of these may be thus stated.

First, they may in some cases be the looser superficial parts of the

surface of Eozoon broken up into little groups of cells. Secondly,

they may be few-celled germs or buds given off from Eozoon. Thirdly,

they may be smaller Foraminifera, structurally allied to Eozoon, but

in habit of growth resembling those little globe-shaped forms which,

as already stated, abound in chalk and in the modern ocean. The latter

view I should regard as highly probable in the case of many of them;

and I have proposed for them, in consequence, and as a convenient name,

_Archæospherinæ_, or ancient spherical animals.

Carbonaceous matter is rare in the true Eozoon limestones, and, as

already stated, I would refer the Laurentian graphite or plumbago

mainly to plants. With regard to the worm-burrows referred to in 1865,

there can be no doubt of their nature, but there is some doubt as to

whether the beds that contain them are really Lower Laurentian. They

may be Upper Laurentian or Huronian. I give here figures of these

burrows as published in 1866[AG] (fig. 35). The rocks which contain

them hold also fragments of Eozoon, and are not known to contain other

fossils.

[Footnote AG: _Journal of Geological Society._]

[Illustration: Fig. 35. _Annelid Burrows, Laurentian or Huronian._

Fig 1. _Transverse section of Worm-burrow_--magnified, as a transparent

object. (_a._) Calcareo-silicious rock. (_b._) Space filled with

calcareous spar. (_c._) Sand agglutinated and stained black. (_d._)

Sand less agglutinated and uncoloured. Fig. 2. _Transverse section of

Worm-burrow on weathered surface_, natural size. Fig. 3. _The same_,

magnified.]

If we now turn to other countries in search of contemporaries of

Eozoon, I may refer first to some specimens found by my friend Dr.

Honeyman at Arisaig, in Nova Scotia, in beds underlying the Silurian

rocks of that locality, but otherwise of uncertain age. I do not vouch

for them as Laurentian, and if of that age they seem to indicate a

species distinct from that of Canada proper. They differ in coarser

tubulation, and in their canals being large and beaded, and less

divergent. I proposed for these specimens, in some notes contributed to

the survey of Canada, the name _Eozoon Acadianum_.

Dr. Gümbel, the Director of the Geological Survey of Bavaria, is

one of the most active and widely informed of European geologists,

combining European knowledge with an extensive acquaintance with the

larger and in some respects more typical areas of the older rocks in

America, and stratigraphical geology with enthusiastic interest in the

microscopic structures of fossils. He at once and in a most able manner

took up the question of the application of the discoveries in Canada

to the rocks of Bavaria. The spirit in which he did so may be inferred

from the following extract:--

"The discovery of organic remains in the crystalline limestones of the

ancient gneiss of Canada, for which we are indebted to the researches

of Sir William Logan and his colleagues, and to the careful microscopic

investigations of Drs. Dawson and Carpenter, must be regarded as

opening a new era in geological science.

"This discovery overturns at once the notions hitherto commonly

entertained with regard to the origin of the stratified primary

limestones, and their accompanying gneissic and quartzose strata,

included under the general name of primitive crystalline schists. It

shows us that these crystalline stratified rocks, of the so-called

primary system, are only a backward prolongation of the chain of

fossiliferous strata; the elements of which were deposited as oceanic

sediment, like the clay-slates, limestones, and sandstones of the

palæozoic formations, and under similar conditions, though at a time

far more remote, and more favourable to the generation of crystalline

mineral compounds.

"In this discovery of organic remains in the primary rocks, we hail

with joy the dawn of a new epoch in the critical history of these

earlier formations. Already in its light, the primeval geological time

is seen to be everywhere animated, and peopled with new animal forms

of whose very existence we had previously no suspicion. Life, which

had hitherto been supposed to have first appeared in the Primordial

division of the Silurian period, is now seen to be immeasurably

lengthened beyond its former limit, and to embrace in its domain the

most ancient known portions of the earth's crust. It would almost

seem as if organic life had been awakened simultaneously with the

solidification of the earth's crust.

"The great importance of this discovery cannot be clearly understood,

unless we first consider the various and conflicting opinions

and theories which had hitherto been maintained concerning the

origin of these primary rocks. Thus some, who consider them as the

first-formed crust of a previously molten globe, regard their apparent

stratification as a kind of concentric parallel structure, developed

in the progressive cooling of the mass from without. Others, while

admitting a similar origin of these rocks, suppose their division

into parallel layers to be due, like the lamination of clay-slates,

to lateral pressure. If we admit such views, the igneous origin of

schistose rocks becomes conceivable, and is in fact maintained by many.

"On the other hand, we have the school which, while recognising the

sedimentary origin of these crystalline schists, supposes them to

have been metamorphosed at a later period; either by the internal

heat, acting in the deeply buried strata; by the proximity of eruptive

rocks; or finally, through the agency of permeating waters charged with

certain mineral salts.

"A few geologists only have hitherto inclined to the opinion that

these crystalline schists, while possessing real stratification,

and sedimentary in their origin, were formed at a period when the

conditions were more favourable to the production of crystalline

materials than at present. According to this view, the crystalline

structure of these rocks is an original condition, and not one

superinduced at a later period by metamorphosis. In order, however,

to arrange and classify these ancient crystalline rocks, it becomes

necessary to establish by superposition, or by other evidence,

differences in age, such as are recognised in the more recent

stratified deposits. The discovery of similar organic remains,

occupying a determinate position in the stratification, in different

and remote portions of these primitive rocks, furnishes a powerful

argument in favour of the latter view, as opposed to the notion which

maintains the metamorphic origin of the various minerals and rocks of

these ancient formations; so that we may regard the direct formation of

these mineral elements, at least so far as these fossiliferous primary

limestones are concerned, as an established fact."

His first discovery is thus recorded, in terms which show the very

close resemblance of the Bavarian and Canadian Eozoic.

"My discovery of similar organic remains in the serpentine-limestone

from near Passau was made in 1865, when I had returned from my

geological labours of the summer, and received the recently published

descriptions of Messrs. Logan, Dawson, etc. Small portions of this

rock, gathered in the progress of the Geological Survey in 1854,

and ever since preserved in my collection, having been submitted

to microscopic examination, confirmed in the most brilliant manner

the acute judgment of the Canadian geologists, and furnished

palæontological evidence that, notwithstanding the great distance which

separates Canada from Bavaria, the equivalent primitive rocks of the

two regions are characterized by similar organic remains; showing at

the same time that the law governing the definite succession of organic

life on the earth is maintained even in these most ancient formations.

The fragments of serpentine-limestone, or ophicalcite, in which I first

detected the existence of Eozoon, were like those described in Canada,

in which the lamellar structure is wanting, and offer only what Dr.

Carpenter has called an acervuline structure. For further confirmation

of my observations, I deemed it advisable, through the kindness of

Sir Charles Lyell, to submit specimens of the Bavarian rock to the

examination of that eminent authority, Dr. Carpenter, who, without any

hesitation, declared them to contain Eozoon.

"This fact being established, I procured from the quarries near Passau

as many specimens of the limestone as the advanced season of the year

would permit; and, aided by my diligent and skillful assistants,

Messrs. Reber and Schwager, examined them by the methods indicated by

Messrs. Dawson and Carpenter. In this way I soon convinced myself of

the general similarity of our organic remains with those of Canada.

Our examinations were made on polished sections and in portions etched

with dilute nitric acid, or, better, with warm acetic acid. The most

beautiful results were however obtained by etching moderately thin

sections, so that the specimens may be examined at will either by

reflected or transmitted light.

"The specimens in which I first detected Eozoon came from a quarry

at Steinhag, near Obernzell, on the Danube, not far from Passau. The

crystalline limestone here forms a mass from fifty to seventy feet

thick, divided into several beds, included in the gneiss, whose general

strike in this region is N.W., with a dip of 40°-60° N.E. The limestone

strata of Steinhag have a dip of 45° N.E. The gneiss of this vicinity

is chiefly grey, and very silicious, containing dichroite, and of

the variety known as dichroite-gneiss; and I conceive it to belong,

like the gneiss of Bodenmais and Arber, to that younger division of

the primitive gneiss system which I have designated as the Hercynian

gneiss formation; which, both to the north, between Tischenreuth and

Mahring, and to the south on the north-west of the mountains of Ossa,

is immediately overlaid by the mica-slate formation. Lithologically,

this newer division of the gneiss is characterized by the predominance

of a grey variety, rich in quartz, with black magnesian-mica and

orthoclase, besides which a small quantity of oligoclase is never

wanting. A further characteristic of this Hercynian gneiss is the

frequent intercalation of beds of rocks rich in hornblende, such as

hornblende-schist, amphibolite, diorite, syenite, and syenitic granite,

and also of serpentine and granulite. Beds of granular limestone,

or of calcareous schists are also never altogether wanting; while

iron pyrites and graphite, in lenticular masses, or in local beds

conformable to the great mass of the gneiss strata, are very generally

present.

"In the large quarry of Steinhag, from which I first obtained the

Eozoon, the enclosing rock is a grey hornblendic gneiss, which

sometimes passes into a hornblende-slate. The limestone is in many

places overlaid by a bed of hornblende-schist, sometimes five feet

in thickness, which separates it from the normal gneiss. In many

localities, a bed of serpentine, three or four feet thick, is

interposed between the limestone and the hornblende-schist; and in

some cases a zone, consisting chiefly of scapolite, crystalline and

almost compact, with an admixture however of hornblende and chlorite.

Below the serpentine band, the crystalline limestone appears divided

into distinct beds, and encloses various accidental minerals, among

which are reddish-white mica, chlorite, hornblende, tremolite,

chondrodite, rosellan, garnet, and scapolite, arranged in bands.

In several places the lime is mingled with serpentine, grains or

portions of which, often of the size of peas, are scattered through

the limestone with apparent irregularity, giving rise to a beautiful

variety of ophicalcite or serpentine-marble. These portions, which are

enclosed in the limestone destitute of serpentine, always present a

rounded outline. In one instance there appears, in a high naked wall

of limestone without serpentine, the outline of a mass of ophicalcite,

about sixteen feet long and twenty-five feet high, which, rising from

a broad base, ends in a point, and is separated from the enclosing

limestone by an undulating but clearly defined margin, as already well

described by Wineberger. This mass of ophicalcite recalls vividly a

reef-like structure. Within this and similar masses of ophicalcite in

the crystalline limestone, there are, so far as my observations in 1854

extend, no continuous lines or concentric layers of serpentine to be

observed, this mineral being always distributed in small grains and

patches. The few apparently regular layers which may be observed are

soon interrupted, and the whole aggregation is irregular."

It will be observed that this acervuline Eozoon of Steinhag appears to

exist in large reefs, and that in its want of lamination it differs

from the Canadian examples. In fossils of low organization, like

Foraminifera, such differences are often accidental and compatible with

specific unity, but yet there may be a difference specifically in the

Bavarian Eozoon as compared with the Canadian.

Gümbel also found in the Finnish and Bavarian limestones knotted

chambers, like those of Wentworth above mentioned (fig. 36), which he

regards as belonging to some other organism than Eozoon; and flocculi

having tubes, pores, and reticulations which would seem to point to the

presence of structures akin to sponges or possibly remains of seaweeds.

These observations Gümbel has extended into other localities in Bavaria

and Bohemia, and also in Silesia and Sweden, establishing the existence

of Eozoon fossils in all the Laurentian limestones of the middle and

north of Europe.

[Illustration: Fig. 36. _Archæospherinæ from Pargas in Finland._

(_After Gümbel._)

Magnified.]

Gümbel has further found in beds overlying the older Eozoic series,

and probably of the same age with the Canadian Huronian, a different

species of Eozoon, with smaller and more contracted chambers, and

still finer and more crowded canals. This, which is to be regarded as

a distinct species, or at least a well-marked varietal form, he has

named _Eozoon Bavaricum_ (fig. 37). Thus this early introduction of

life is not peculiar to that old continent which we sometimes call the

New World, but applies to Europe as well, and Europe has furnished a

successor to Eozoon in the later Eozoic or Huronian period. In rocks of

this age in America, after long search and much slicing of limestones,

I have hitherto failed to find any decided organic remains other than

the Tudor and Madoc specimens of Eozoon. If these are really Huronian

and not Laurentian, the Eozoon from this horizon does not sensibly

differ from that of the Lower Laurentian. The curious limpet-like

objects from Newfoundland, discovered by Murray, and described by

Billings,[AH] under the name _Aspidella_, are believed to be Huronian,

but they have no connection with Eozoon, and therefore need not detain

us here.

[Footnote AH: _Canadian Naturalist_, 1871.]

[Illustration: Fig. 37. _Section of Eozoon Bavaricum, with Serpentine,

from the Crystalline Limestone of the Hercynian primitive Clay-state

Formation at Hohenberg; 25 diameters._

(_a._) Sparry carbonate of lime. (_b._) Cellular carbonate of lime.

(_c._) System of tubuli. (_d._) Serpentine replacing the coarser

ordinary variety. (_e._) Serpentine and hornblende replacing the finer

variety, in the very much contorted portions.]

Leaving the Eozoic age, we find ourselves next in the Primordial or

Cambrian, and here we discover the sea already tenanted by many

kinds of crustaceans and shell-fishes, which have been collected and

described by palæontologists in Bohemia, Scandinavia, Wales, and North

America;[AI] curiously enough, however, the rocks of this age are

not so rich in Foraminifera as those of some succeeding periods. Had

this primitive type played out its part in the Eozoic and exhausted

its energies, and did it remain in abeyance in the Primordial age to

resume its activity in the succeeding times? It is not necessary to

believe this. The geologist is familiar with the fact, that in one

formation he may have before him chiefly oceanic and deep-sea deposits,

and in another those of the shallower waters, and that alternations

of these may, in the same age or immediately succeeding ages, present

very different groups of fossils. Now the rocks and fossils of the

Laurentian seem to be oceanic in character, while the Huronian and

early Primordial rocks evidence great disturbances, and much coarse

and muddy sediment, such as that found in shallows or near the land.

They abound in coarse conglomerates, sandstones and thick beds of slate

or shale, but are not rich in limestones, which do not in the parts

of the world yet explored regain their importance till the succeeding

Siluro-Cambrian age. No doubt there were, in the Primordial, deep-sea

areas swarming with Foraminifera, the successors of Eozoon; but these

are as yet unknown or little known, and our known Primordial fauna is

chiefly that of the shallows. Enlarged knowledge may thus bridge over

much of the apparent gap in the life of these two great periods.

[Footnote AI: Barrande, Angelin, Hicks, Hall, Billings, etc.]

Only as yet on the coast of Labrador and neighbouring parts of North

America, and in rocks that were formed in seas that washed the old

Laurentian rocks, in which Eozoon was already as fully sealed up as

it is at this moment, do we find Protozoa which can claim any near

kinship to the proto-foraminifer. These are the fossils of the genus

_Archæocyathus_--"ancient cup-sponges, or cup-foraminifers," which

have been described in much detail by Mr. Billings in the reports of

the Canadian Survey. Mr. Billings regards them as possibly sponges,

or as intermediate between these and Foraminifera, and the silicious

spicules found in some of them justify this view, unless indeed, as

partly suspected by Mr. Billings, these belong to true sponges which

may have grown along with Archæocyathus or attached to it. Certain

it is, however, that if allied to sponges, they are allied also to

Foraminifera, and that some of them deviate altogether from the sponge

type and become calcareous chambered bodies, the animals of which can

have differed very little from those of the Laurentian Eozoon. It is

to these calcareous Foraminiferal species that I shall at present

restrict my attention. I give a few figures, for which I am indebted to

Mr. Billings, of three of his species (figs. 38 to 40), with enlarged

drawings of the structures of one of them which has the most decidedly

foraminiferal characters.

[Illustration: Fig. 38. _Archæocyathus Minganensis--a Primordial

Protozoon._ (_After Billings._)

(_a._) Pores of the inner wall.]

[Illustration: Fig. 39. _Archæocyathus profundus--showing the base of

attachment and radiating chambers._ (_After Billings._)]

[Illustration: Fig. 40. _Archæocyathus Atlanticus--showing outer

surface and longitudinal and transverse sections._ (_After Billings._)]

[Illustration: Fig. 41. _Structures of Archæocyathus Profundus._

(_a._) Lower acervuline portion. (_b._) Upper portion, with three of

the radiating laminæ. (_c._) Portion of lamina with pores and thickened

part with canals. In figs. _a_ and _b_ the calcareous part is unshaded.]

To understand Archæocyathus, let us imagine an inverted cone of

carbonate of lime from an inch or two to a foot in length, and with

its point buried in the mud at the bottom of the sea, while its open

cup extends upward into the water. The lower part buried in the soil

is composed of an irregular acervuline network of thick calcareous

plates, enclosing chambers communicating with one another (figs. 40

and 41 A). Above this where the cup expands, its walls are composed

of thin outer and inner plates, perforated with innumerable holes,

and connected with each other by vertical plates, which are also

perforated with round pores, establishing a communication between the

radiating chambers into which they divide the thickness of the wall

(figs. 38, 39, and 41 B). In such a structure the chambers in the wall

of the cup and the irregular chambers of the base would be filled with

gelatinous animal matter, and the pseudopods would project from the

numerous pores in the inner and outer wall. In the older parts of the

skeleton, the structure is further complicated by the formation of

thin transverse plates, irregular in distribution, and where greater

strength is required a calcareous thickening is added, which in some

places shows a canal system like that of Eozoon (fig. 41, B, C).[AJ]

As compared with Eozoon, the fossils want its fine perforated wall,

but have a more regular plan of growth. There are fragments in the

Eozoon limestones which may have belonged to structures like these;

and when we know more of the deep sea of the Primordial, we may

recover true species of Eozoon from it, or may find forms intermediate

between it and Archæocyathus. In the meantime I know no nearer bond of

connection between Eozoon and the Primordial age than that furnished

by the ancient cup Zoophytes of Labrador, though I have searched very

carefully in the fossiliferous conglomerates of Cambrian age on the

Lower St. Lawrence, which contain rocks of all the formations from the

Laurentian upwards, often with characteristic fossils. I have also made

sections of many of the fossiliferous pebbles in these conglomerates

without finding any certain remains of such organisms, though the

fragments of the crusts of some of the Primordial tribolites, when

their tubuli are infiltrated with dark carbonaceous matter, are so like

the supplemental skeleton of Eozoon, that but for their forms they

might readily be mistaken for it; and associated with them are broken

pieces of other porous organisms which may belong to Protozoa, though

this is not yet certain.

[Footnote AJ: On the whole these curious fossils, if regarded as

Foraminifera, are most nearly allied to the Orbitolites and Dactyloporæ

of the Early Tertiary period, as described by Carpenter.]

Of all the fossils of the Silurian rocks those which most resemble

Eozoon are the _Stromatoporæ_, or "layer-corals," whose resemblance

to the old Laurentian fossil at once struck Sir William Logan; and

these occur in the earliest great oceanic limestones which succeed the

Primordial period, those of the Trenton group, in the Siluro-Cambrian.

From this they extend upward as far as the Devonian, appearing

everywhere in the limestones, and themselves often constituting large

masses of calcareous rock. Our figure (fig. 42) shows a small example

of one of these fossils; and when sawn asunder or broken across and

weathered, they precisely resemble Eozoon in general appearance,

especially when, as sometimes happens, their cell-walls have been

silicified.

[Illustration: Fig. 42. _Stromatopora rugosa, Hall--Lower Silurian,

Canada._ (_After Billings._)

The specimen is of smaller size than usual, and is silicified. It is

probably inverted in position, and the concentric marks on the outer

surface are due to concretions of silica.]

There are, however, different types of these fossils. The most common,

the Stromatoporæ properly so called, consist of concentric layers of

calcareous matter attached to each other by pillar-like processes,

which, as well as the layers, are made up of little threads of

limestone netted together, or radiating from the tops and bottoms of

the pillars, and forming a very porous substance. Though they have

been regarded as corals by some, they are more generally believed

to be Protozoa; but whether more nearly allied to sponges or to

Foraminifera may admit of doubt. Some of the more porous kinds are

not very dissimilar from calcareous sponges, but they generally want

true oscula and pores, and seem better adapted to shield the gelatinous

body of a Foraminifer projecting pseudopods in search of food, than

that of a sponge, living by the introduction of currents of water. Many

of the denser kinds, however, have their calcareous floors so solid

that they must be regarded as much more nearly akin to Foraminifers,

and some of them have the same irregular inosculation of these floors

observed in Eozoon. Figs. 43, A to D, show portions of species of

this description, in which the resemblance to Eozoon in structure and

arrangement of parts is not remote.

[Illustration: Fig. 43. _Structures of Stromatopora._

(_a._) Portion of an oblique section magnified, showing laminæ and

columns. (_b._) Portion of wall with pores, and crusted on both sides

with quartz crystals. (_c._) Thickened portion of wall with canals.

(_d._) Portion of another specimen, showing irregular laminæ and

pillars.]

These fossils, however, show no very distinct canal system or

supplemental skeleton, but this also appears in those forms which have

been called Caunopora or Cœnostroma. In these the plates are traversed

by tubes, or groups of tubes, which in each successive floor give out

radiating and branching canals exactly like those of Eozoon, though

more regularly arranged; and if we had specimens with the canals

infiltrated with glauconite or serpentine, the resemblance would be

perfect. When, as in figs. 44 and 45 A, these canals are seen on the

abraded surface, they appear as little grooves arranged in stars,

which resemble the radiating plates of corals, but this resemblance

is altogether superficial, and I have no doubt that they are really

foraminiferal organisms. This will appear more distinctly from the

sections in fig. 45 B, C, which represents an undescribed species

recently found by Mr. Weston, in the Upper Silurian limestone of

Ontario.

[Illustration: Fig. 44. _Caunopora planulata, Hall--Devonian; showing

the radiating canals on a weathered surface._ (_After Hall._)]

[Illustration: Fig. 45. _Cœnostroma--Guelph Limestone, Upper Silurian,

from a specimen collected by Mr. Weston, showing the canals._

(_a._) Surface with canals, natural size. (_b._) Vertical section,

natural size. (_c._) The same magnified, showing canals and laminæ.]

There are probably many species of these curious fossils, but their

discrimination is difficult, and their nomenclature confused, so that

it would not be profitable to engage the attention of the reader

with it except in a note. Their state of preservation, however, is

so highly illustrative of that of Eozoon that a word as to this

will not be out of place. They are sometimes preserved merely by

infiltration with calcite or dolomite, and in this case it is most

difficult to make out their minute structures. Often they appear

merely as concentrically laminated masses which, but for their mode

of occurrence, might be regarded as mere concretions. In other cases

the cell-walls and pillars are perfectly silicified, and then they

form beautiful microscopic objects, especially when decalcified with

an acid. In still other cases, they are preserved like Eozoon, the

walls being calcareous and the chambers filled with silica. In this

state when weathered or decalcified they are remarkably like Eozoon,

but I have not met with any having their minute pores and tubes so

well preserved as in some of the Laurentian fossils. In many of them,

however, the growth and overlapping of the successive amœba-like coats

of sarcode can be beautifully seen, exactly as on the surface of a

decalcified piece of Eozoon. Those in my collection which most nearly

resemble the Laurentian specimens are from the older part of the Lower

Silurian series; but unfortunately their minute structures are not well

preserved.

In the Silurian and Devonian ages, these Stromatoporæ evidently carried

out the same function as the Eozoon in the Laurentian. Winchell tells

us that in Michigan and Ohio single specimens can be found several feet

in diameter, and that they constitute the mass of considerable beds of

limestone. I have myself seen in Canada specimens a foot in diameter,

with a great number of laminæ. Lindberg[AK] has given a most vivid

account of their occurrence in the Isle of Gothland. He says that they

form beds of large irregular discs and balls, attaining a thickness of

five Swedish feet, and traceable for miles along the coast, and the

individual balls are sometimes a yard in diameter. In some of them the

structure is beautifully preserved. In others, or in parts of them,

it is reduced to a mass of crystalline limestone. This species is of

the Cœnostroma type, and is regarded by Lindberg as a coral, though

he admits its low type and resemblance to Protozoa. Its continuous

calcareous skeleton he rightly regards as fatal to its claim to be a

true sponge. Such a fossil, differing as it does in minute points of

structure from Eozoon, is nevertheless probably allied to it in no very

distant way, and a successor to its limestone-making function. Those

which most nearly approach to Foraminifera are those with thick and

solid calcareous laminæ, and with a radiating canal system; and one

of the most Eozoon-like I have seen, is a specimen of the undescribed

species already mentioned from the Guelph (Upper Silurian) limestone

of Ontario, collected by Mr. Weston, and now in the Museum of the

Geological Survey. I have attempted to represent its structures in fig.

44.

[Footnote AK: _Transactions of Swedish Academy_, 1870.]

[Illustration: Fig. 46. _Receptaculites, restored._ (_After Billings._)

(_a._) Aperture. (_b._) Inner wall. (_c._) Outer wall. (_n._) Nucleus,

or primary chamber. (_v._) Internal cavity.]

[Illustration: Fig. 47. _Diagram of Wall and Tubes of Receptaculites._

(_After Billings._)

(_b._) Inner wall. (_c._) Outer wall. (_d._) Section of plates. (_e._)

Pore of inner wall. (_f._) Canal of inner wall. (_g._) Radial stolon.

(_h._) Cyclical stolon. (_k._) Suture of plates of outer wall.]

[Illustration: Fig. 48. _Receptaculites, Inner Surface of Outer Wall

with the Stolons remaining on its Surface._ (_After Billings._)]

In the rocks extending from the Lower Silurian and perhaps from the

Upper Cambrian to the Devonian inclusive, the type and function of

Eozoon are continued by the Stromatoporæ, and in the earlier part of

this time these are accompanied by the Archæocyathids, and by another

curious form, more nearly allied to the latter than to Eozoon, the

_Receptaculites_. These curious and beautiful fossils, which sometimes

are a foot in diameter, consist, like Archæocyathus, of an outer and

inner coat enclosing a cavity; but these coats are composed of square

plates with pores at the corners, and they are connected by hollow

pillars passing in a regular manner from the outer to the inner coat.

They have been regarded by Salter as Foraminifers, while Billings

considers their nearest analogues to be the seed-like germs of some

modern silicious sponges. On the whole, if not Foraminifera, they must

have been organisms intermediate between these and sponges, and they

certainly constitute one of the most beautiful and complex types of

the ancient Protozoa, showing the wonderful perfection to which these

creatures attained at a very early period. (Figs. 46, 47, 48.)

I might trace these ancient forms of foraminiferal life further up in

the geological series, and show how in the Carboniferous there are

nummulitic shells conforming to the general type of Eozoon, and in some

cases making up the mass of great limestones.[AL] Further, in the great

chalk series and its allied beds, and in the Lower Tertiary, there are

not only vast foraminiferal limestones, but gigantic species reminding

us of Stromatopora and Eozoon.[AM] Lastly, more diminutive species are

doing similar work on a great scale in the modern ocean. Thus we may

gather up the broken links of the chain of foraminiferal life, and

affirm that Eozoon has never wanted some representative to uphold its

family and function throughout all the vast lapse of geological time.

[Footnote AL: _Fusulina_, as recently described by Carpenter,

_Archæodiscus_ of Brady, and the Nummulite recently found in the

Carboniferous of Belgium.]

[Footnote AM: _Parkeria_ and _Loftusia_ of Carpenter.]

NOTES TO CHAPTER VI.

(A.) Stromatoporidæ, Etc.

For the best description of Archæocyathus, I may refer to _The

Palæozoic Fossils of Canada_, by Mr. Billings, vol. i. There also,

and in Mr. Salter's memoir in _The Decades of the Canadian Survey_,

will be found all that is known of the structure of Receptaculites.

For the American Stromatoporæ I may refer to Winchell's paper in the

_Proceedings of the American Association_, 1866; to Professor Hall's

Descriptions of New Species of Fossils from Iowa, _Report of the

State Cabinet, Albany_, 1872; and to the Descriptions of Canadian

Species by Dr. Nicholson, in his _Report on the Palæontology of

Ontario_, 1874.

The genus Stromatopora of Goldfuss was defined by him as consisting

of laminæ of a solid and porous character, alternating and

contiguous, and constituting a hemispherical or sub-globose mass.

In this definition, the porous strata are really those of the

fossil, the alternating solid strata being the stony filling of the

chambers; and the descriptions of subsequent authors have varied

according as, from the state of preservation of the specimens or

other circumstances, the original laminæ or the filling of the spaces

attracted their attention. In the former case the fossil could be

described as consisting of laminæ made up of interlaced fibrils of

calcite, radiating from vertical pillars which connect the laminæ.

In the latter case, the laminæ, appear as solid plates, separated

by very narrow spaces, and perforated with round vertical holes

representing the connecting pillars. These Stromatoporæ range from

the Lower Silurian to the Devonian, inclusive, and many species have

been described; but their limits are not very definite, though there

are undoubtedly remarkable differences in the distances of the laminæ

and in their texture, and in the smooth or mammillated character

of the masses. Hall's genus Stromatocerium belongs to these forms,

and D'Orbigny's genus Sparsispongia refers to mammillated species,

sometimes with apparent oscula.

Phillip's genus Caunopora was formed to receive specimens with

concentric cellular layers traversed by "long vermiform cylindrical

canals;" while Winchell's genus Cœnostroma includes species with

these vermiform canals arranged in a radiate manner, diverging from

little eminences in the concentric laminæ. The distinction between

these last genera does not seem to be very clear, and may depend

on the state of preservation of the specimens. A more important

distinction appears to exist between those that have a single

vertical canal from which the subordinate canals diverge, and those

that have groups of such canals.

Some species of the Cœnostroma group have very dense calcareous

laminæ traversed by the canals; but it does not seem that any

distinction has yet been made between the proper wall and the

intermediate skeleton; and most observers have been prevented from

attending to such structures by the prevailing idea that these

fossils are either corals or sponges, while the state of preservation

of the more delicate tissues is often very imperfect.

(B.) Localities of Eozoon, or of Limestones supposed to contain it.

In Canada the principal localities of Eozoon Canadense are at

Grenville, Petite Nation, the Calumets Rapids, Burgess, Tudor, and

Madoc. At the two last places the fossil occurs in beds which may be

on a somewhat higher horizon than the others. Mr. Vennor has recently

found specimens which have the general form of Eozoon, though the

minute structure is not preserved, at Dalhousie, in Lanark Co.,

Ontario. One specimen from this place is remarkable from having been

mineralized in part by a talcose mineral associated with serpentine.

I have examined specimens from Chelmsford, in Massachusetts, and from

Amity and Warren County, New York, the latter from the collection of

Professor D. S. Martin, which show the canals of Eozoon in a fair

state of preservation, though the specimens are fragmental, and do

not show the laminated structure.

In European specimens of limestones of Laurentian age, from Tunaberg

and Fahlun in Sweden, and from the Western Islands of Scotland, I

have hitherto failed to recognise the characteristic structure of

the fossil. Connemara specimens have also failed to afford me any

satisfactory results, and specimens of a serpentine limestone from

the Alps, collected by M. Favre, and communicated to me by Dr. Hunt,

though in general texture they much resemble acervuline Eozoon, do

not show its minute structures.

[Illustration:

Plate VII.

_Untouched nature-print of part of a large specimen of Eozoon, from

Petite Nation._

The lighter portions are less perfect than in the original, owing to

the finer laminæ of serpentine giving way. The dark band at one side is

one of the deep lacunæ or oscula.]

Life's Dawn on Earth Being the history of the oldest known fossil remains, and their relations to geological time and to the development of the animal kingdom · 第 6 / 8 章