CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Hopeman Sandstone Formation

geological formation in Scotland

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 27, 2026
Entity authorityQ54869662 ↗
Source-derived summary

The Hopeman Sandstone Formation is a geologic formation in Scotland. It preserves fossil footprints and body fossils from the Guadalupian Epoch in the Late Permian, to the Early Triassic, It preserves fossils and fossil footprints from various extinct animals such as pareiasaurs and dicynodonts, which are collectively often referred to as the Elgin Reptiles.

The formation, named for the village of Hopeman, lies unconformably over the Devonian Upper Old Red Sandstone, and it underlies the waterlain sandstones of the Burghead Sandstone Formation. It represents a windswept dune landscape.

The Hopeman Sandstones were previously referred to as the Cutties Hillock Sandstone, Quarry Wood Sandstones, Sandstones of Hopeman, and Hopeman-Cummingstown Sandstone, but these names have since been superseded.

Lithology

The Hopeman Sandstone Formation is predominantly composed of fine- to coarse-grained yellowish sand with well rounded grains, mostly deposited as wind-blown dunes, but occasionally deposited by sheet floods. Basal beds are pebbly and the unit varies, exhibiting large-scale crossbedding to fine rarely contorted laminations. Some beds are friable, while others hard and siliceous.

Origin of names

The name Cutties Hillock is believed to derive from the Scottish Gaelic ceide sealge, meaning 'hill brow of the hunting'. The name first appeared in print after the discovery of the Elgin Reptiles in 1884.

Editorial summary

“Hopeman Sandstone Formation” enters the record as geological formation in Scotland. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Hopeman, Sandstone and Formation can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1884—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Hopeman, Sandstone and Formation.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Hopeman Sandstone Formation” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Hopeman, Sandstone and Formation provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 27, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q54869662. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1884.

Critical limits

Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Hopeman Sandstone Formation”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Hopeman Sandstone Formation primary sources, Hopeman Sandstone Formation archive and Hopeman research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Hopeman Sandstone Formation”?
  2. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
  3. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Hopeman Sandstone Formation” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.