NATO ASI Series Advanced Science Institutes Series
A Series presenting the results of activities sponsored by the NA TO Science Committee, which aims at the dissemination of advanced scientific and technological knowledge, with a view to strengthening links between scientific communities.
The Series is published by an international board of publishers in conjunction with the NATO Scientific Affairs Division
A Life Sciences B Physics
C Mathematical and Physical Sciences
D Behavioural and Social Sciences E Applied Sciences
F Computer and Systems Sciences G Ecological Sciences H Cell Biology
Plenum Publishing Corporation London and New York
Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht, Boston and London
Springer-Verlag Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, London, Paris and Tokyo
Series C: Mathematical and Physical Sciences - Vol. 259
Tectonic Evolution of the Tethyan Region edited by
A.M.C.$engor Department of Geology, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey
with assistance from
Kluwer Academic Publishers
Dordrecht / Boston / London
Published in cooperation with NATO Scientific Affairs Division
Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Study Institute on Tectonic Evolution of the Tethyan Region The Faculty of Mines, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey 23 September - 2 October 1985 in honour of Prof. Dr. rer.nat. ihsan Ketin
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data NATO Advanced Study InstItute on the "Tectonic Evolution of Tethyan
Region" (1986 Istanbul Technical University. Faculty of Mines) Tectonic evolution of the Tethyan Region: proceedings of the NATO
Advanced Study Institute on the "Tectonic Evolution of Tethyan Region" held in the Faculty of Mines, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey, 23rd September-2nd October 1986 in honour of Prof. Dr. rer. nat. lhsan Ketin / edited by A.M.C. ~engor with assistance from Y. Yllmaz, A.I. Okay, and N. Gor~r.
p. cm. -- (NATO ASI series. Series C, Mathematical and physical sciences; no. 259)
Inc 1 udes index. ISBN 0-7923-0067-X 1. Geology--Asia--Congresses. 2. Tethys (Paleography)-
-Congresses. 3. Ketin, lhsan--Congresses. I. ~engor, A. M. Celal. II. Ketin, lhsan. Ill. Title. IV. Series. OE289.N38 1986 551.7' . 0095--dc 19 88-31485
ISBN-13: 978-94-010-7509-1 e-ISBN-13: 978-94-009-2253-2 DOl: 10.1007/978-94-009-2253-2
Published by Kluwer Academic Publishers, P.O. Box 17, 3300 AA Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
Kluwer Academic Publishers incorpor~te.s the publishing programmes of D. Reidel, Martinus Nijhoff, Dr W. Junk,a(ld MTP Press.
Sold and distributed in the U.S.A. and Canada by Kluwer Academic Publishers, 101 Philip Drive, Norwell, MA 02061, U.S.A.
In all other countries, sold and distributed by Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, P.O. Box 322, 3300 AH Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
All Rights Reserved © 1989 by Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Softcover reprint of the reprint of the 1 st edition 1989
No part of the material protected by this copyright notice may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the copyright owner.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface List of Participants List of Contributors Professor ihsan Ketin: An Appreciation
The Tethyside Orogenic System: An Introduction A.M.C. ~engor
One Some Key Features of the Evolution of the Western Alps J. Debelmas
The Geometry of Crustal Shortening in the Western Alps
ni xi
xxvii xxxi
R.W.H. Butler 43 Triassic and Jurassic Oceanic/Paraoceanic Belts in the Carpathian-Pannonian Region and its Surroundings
M. Kazmer and S. Kovacs 77 Major Events of the Tectono-Sedimentary Evolution of the North Hungarian Paleo-Mesozoic: History of the Northwestern Termination of the Late Paleozoic - Early Mesozoic Tethys
S. Kovacs 93 Tectonic Units and Sutures in the Pontides, Northern Turkey
A.I. Okay 109 An Example for the Tectonic Evolution of the Arabian Platform Margin (SE Anatolia) During Mesozoic and Some Criticisms of the Previously Suggested Models
D. Alt1ner 117 Timing of Opening of the Black Sea: Sedimentological Evidence from the Rhodope-Pontide Fragment
N. Gorur 131 Paleomagnetic Study of the Neogene Formations of the Aegean Area
C. Kissel, C. Laj, A. Mazaud, A. Poisson, Y. Savascin, K. Simeakis, C. Fraissinet, J.L. Mercier 137
An Approach to the Origin of Young Volcanic Rocks of Western Turkey
Y. Y1lmaz 159 Tectonic Evolution of Paleotethys in the Caucasus Sector of the Mediterranean Belt: Basic Problems
A.A. Belov 191
VI
Palaeomagnetism of Upper Cretaceous Rocks from the Caucasus and its Implications for Tectonics
M.L. Bazhenov and V.S. Burtman 217 Tethys Evolution in the Afghanistan-Pamir-Pakistan Region
J. Stocklin 241 Tectonogenesis and Evolution of a Segment of the Cimmerides: The Volcano-Sedimentary Triassic of Aghdarband (Kopet-Dagh, North-East Iran)
A. Baud and G.M. Stampfli 265 Geology of the Baluchistan (Pakistan) Portion of the Southern Margin of the Tethys Sea
G.R.McCormick 277 The Himalayan Orogenic Segment
P. Le Fort 289 Crustal Scale Thrusting and Continental Subduction During Himalayan Collision Tectonics on the NW Indian Plate
R.W.H. Butler and M.P. Coward 387 The Tectonic Evolution of Qinghai-Tibet Plateau: A Review
Chang Chen-Fa, Pan Yu-Sheng and Sun Yi-Ying 415 The Neo-Cimmerian Ophiolite Belt in Afghanistan and Tibet: Comparison and Evolution
J. Girardeau, J. Marcoux and C. Montenat 477 The Western End of the Tibetan Plateau
A. Baud 505 Thrusting on the Tibetan flateau Within the Last 5 Ma
K. Burke and L. Lucas 507 Tectonic Evolution of the Yangtze Tectonic Regime
Zhang Qinwen, Qu Jingchuan and Chen Bingwei 513 Mesozoic Suturing in the Huanan Alps and the Tectonic Assembly of South China
K.J. Hsu, Sun Shu and Li Jiliang The Shan Plateau and Western Burma: Mesozoic-Cenozoic Plate Boundaries and Correlations with Tibet
A.H.G. Mitchell The Palaeo-Tethyan Realm and Indosinian Orogenic System of Southeast Asia
C.S. Hutchison The Contribution of Vertebrate Palaeontology to the Geodynamic History of South East Asia
E. Buffetaut Convergent-Plate Tectonics Viewed from the Indonesian Region
W. Hamilton
551
567
585
645
655
PREFACE
The ihsan Ketin NATO Advanced Study Institute on the Tectonic Evolution of the Tethyan Region was conceived in 1982 in Veszprem, Hungary, when three of the organizers (B.C.B., L.H.R. and A.M.C.9.) had come together for a meeting on the tectonics of the Pannonian basin. All three of us had experience in the Tethyan belt and all three of us had been for some time deploring the lack of communication among workers of this immense orogenic belt. Much new work had been completed in such previously little-known areas as Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, the People's Republic of China, the entire Himalayan region, as well as new work in the European parts of the chain. Also, ironically, parts of the belt had just been closed to field work for political reasons, so it seemed as if the time was right to sit back and consider what had been done so far. Because the Istanbul group had had an interest in the whole of the Tethyan belt and because that ancient city was more centrally locElted with excellent opportunities to see both Palaeo- and Neo-Tethyan rocks in a weekend excursion, we thought that Istanbul was a natural place for such a meeting, not mentioning its own considerable attractions for the would-be contributors.
A happy coincidence was that Prof.ihsan Ketin, one of the foremost leaders in the tectonics of the central Tethyan regions and the dean of Turkish geologists, was to retire from active teaching in 1983. We decided to seize the opportunity of gathering to honour Ketin to assemble the Tethyan workers. One of us (B.C.B.) thought that perhaps a NATO ASI was the best medium, but the necessity of involving numerous non-NATO participants and contributors made it imperative that other sources of finance be found. The Istanbul Technical University and its Faculty of Mines immediately declared themselves at our disposal to host the meeting and Dr.Remzi Akkok of Ak§an Engineering and Consulting Co. in Istanbul (a former pupil of Ketin, and a faculty member at the iTO) agreed to organize the logistics in Istanbul and also for the excursion. We also asked Dr.Yticel Yllmaz (then of the University of Istanbul), the noted Tethyan worker and an associate of Ketin whether he would join us as the fourth organizer. Yllmaz enthusiastically accepted and we applied to NATO foran ASI grant, which was swiftly given. To finance the non-NATO workers we were generously supported by the following oil companies: Arco Int., Chevron Overseas Petroleum Inc., Gulf Research and Development Co., Exxon Production and Research Company, Texaco Inc., and Esso Exploration Inc. For the local logistics in Istanbul and for the preparation of the meeting folders we are also grateful to Fruko-Tamek Meyva Sularl Sanayii A.$., istanbul.
vii
viii
The meeting in Istanbul was a success; most of the contributors invi ted had responded .posi ti vely and all of those showed up. The meeting format was an unusual one, with prinicipal contributors designated for 13 segments of the orogenic belts to be supplanted by "commentators". This format worked well h r the meeting, but was a failure for the published proceedings. Four of the principal contributors failed to procude written accounts that considerably disturbed the original plan. Also some of the contributors have provided excellent papers that were more than just "comments" as originally intended. As a result, the original plan had to be given up and a more conventional book with a series of papers of equal standing was accepted.
The publication of the proceedings took an unusually long time for a NATO ASI for two principal reasons. One was the slow inflow of manuscripts that had been asked to be delivered at the meeting in September 1985. The last manuscript was received in late 1987 and the book had to be closed in early 1988 owing to pressure of time (and t~1e publisher), despite that one major paper was still pending. The second reason was the requirement that the book had to be author-prepared for copy-printing. This requires high quality typewriters and acceptable English. Many of the contributors seemingly had little experience in preparing author-prepared manuscripts and consequently many had to be retyped in Istanbul, for which some currency exchange problem prevented NATO to supply the funds. Also a large number of the papers had to be thoroughly edited for improving the English, which, in places deteriorated to unintelligibility. Most of the figures had to be reshot for reduction.
Having been reduced to a copy-editor and page designer with no funds, I was compelled to ask for help from a few friends to have the papers typed and figures reshot. Done on a charity basis, we simply had to await the gaps in the heavy schedules of the companies who deci.ded to assist us. Yticel Yllmaz, Naci Gortir, Aral Okay and Remzi Akkok all shared bits of the editorial responsibilty and Remzi kindly delegated to us office space in which the book could be assembled away from the daily turbulance of the university. I must thank all of these people and the Ajans-Tek for the numerous photographic reproductions and the Stirat Daktilo Company for typing many of the papers despite their heavy schedules. Yticel Yllmaz did much to expediate the editing while I was busy with other things.
The resulting book is a heterogeneous one, both physically and in terms of the contents of the contributions. Only two papers submitted had to be rejected owing to low scientific standards. A few others for which one reviewer recommended rejection were accepted on the basis of two considerations: either the paper represented a common view in a given region and we felt that this had to be known, even if we disaggreed with it for good reasons, or the paper represented a band-wagon approach to a certain problem, for which this approach was not the most appropriate. This last category was given a place so that the reader of this book will know what is being done by a large number of workers.
ix
The book as a whole is somewhat skewed towards Asia. This was desirable, as Asia is the place from where the flow of information is most irregular. But as a whole we hope it provides a good basis for general Tethyan reading. More important, it is our hope that such Tethyan meetings and Tethyan compendia of papers will become more frequent in the future. This meeting taught us what the problems might be in organizing such endeavours and we now know how to tackle them. But most important of all we know how willing the Tethyan workers are to come together and argue about their problems. That this meeting united people from Europe, Asia, North America·, Austraila, and Africa shows that there really are no barriers that cannot be broken from one end of the Tethysides to the other. This sincere "internationalism" is the spirit of the sponsors of this meeting, it is the spirit of the man in whose honour we all came together, and is the spirit of the founders of the Technical University, whose hospitality we all enjoyed. Before I close this preface, I need to thank Prof.Dr.Kemal Kafall, the energetic Rector Magnificus of the iTtl, and ProLDr .Erdogan Ytizer, the equally enthusiastic Dean of the Faculty of Mines of the iTti. We also thank Kevin Burke who substituted for Clark Burchfiel as Institute Director while Clark was hammering at Tethyside outcrops at Ulu Muztagh!
A. Mo C. Sengor
for the Organizers: B. C. Burchfiel L. H. Royden A. M. C. Seng~r Y. Yllmaz
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Dr.Demir Altlner Ortadogu Teknik Vniversitesi Mlihendislik Fakliltesi Jeoloji Bollimti Ankara, TURKEY 237100/2692 or 2682
Mustafa Aydln Tlirkiye Petrolleri A.$. Arama Grubu Mtidafaa Caddesi 22, P.K.209 Jakanllklar, Ankara TURKEY
Ozer Balka$ Tlirkiye Petrolleri A.$. Arama Grubu Mtidafaa Caddesi 22, P.K. 209 Bakanllklar, Ankara TURKEY
Muawia Barazangi Institute for the Study of the Continents Snee Hall Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853 USA (607) 256-6411 Telex: 937478
Aymon Baud Geological Institute Palais de Rumine CH-1005 Lausanne SWITZERLAND
xi
xii
Dr.A.A.Belov Geological Institute Academy of Sciences pzyhewsky 7 109017 Moscow USSR
Dr.Ziad R.Beydoun Marathon International Petroleum (G.B.) Ltd. Marathon House, 174 Marylebone Road London, NMI SAT. Tel. 0l-486 0222 Telex 297183 ENGLAND
Jean-Pierre Brun Labo Tectoniquew VER Sciences Physique de la Terre Tour 25 ler Et. 2 Pl. Jussieu 75230 Paris, FRANCE 633-07-29
Dr.Eric Buffetaut University of Paris 6 Lab. of Vertebrate Paleontology 4 Place Jussieu 75230 Paris Cedex 05 FRANCE
Dr.Jean-Pierre Burg Department of Geology University of Melbourne Parkville, Victoria 3052 AUSTRALIA 3416740 - AA35185
Dr.Kevin Burke Lunar and Planetary Institute 3303 NASA Road Houston, TX 77058 (713) 486- 2180
Robert W.H.Butler Dept. of Geolog. Sciences The University South Road Durham DHI 3LE United Kingdom 0385-64971 (ext 432)
Dr.Chang Chen fa Academia Sinica Institute of Geology P.O. Box 634 Beijing, China
Tristan M.M. Clube. Department of Geophysics University of Edinburgh Edinburgh, SCOTLAND 031-667-1081 ext. 2944 Telex: 727442
Dana Quentin Coffield Earth Sciences and Resources Inst. University of So. Carolina Columbia, SC 29208 USA (803) 777-6484 Telex 805038
Dr.Millard Fillmore Coffin Bureau of Mineral Resources GPO Box 378 Canberra A.C.T. 2601 AUSTRALIA
Dr.Michel Colchen Universite de Poitiers Laboratoire de Geologie Stratigraphique 40 Av. de Recteur Pineau 86022 Poitiers Cedex FRANCE
J.Calvin Cooper Dept. of Geology Rice University Houston, TX 77251 USA (713) 525-8101 ext 3337
Michael Peter Coward Dept. of Geology Imperial College London SW7 2BP ENGLAND 01-589-5111 x5504 Telex: 261503
xiii
xiv
Kenneth M.Creer Department of Geophysics University of Edinburgh James Clerk Maxwell Building Mayfield Road Edinburgh, EH9 3J2 SCOTLAND (031) 667 1081 ext. 2952 Telex: 727442 Unived G.
Dr.John Gordon Dennis Department of Geological Sciences California State University Long Beach, CA. 90840 USA (213) 430-6903 (home) (213) 498-4404 (office)
Mr.Aksoy Ercan Flrat Universitesi Mtihendislik Faktiltesi Jeoloji Boltimti Ara~tlrma Gorevlisi Elazlg, TURKEY
Prof.Dr.Kazlm Ergin iTti Maden Faktiltesi Te~vikiye, istanbul TURKEY
Dr.Ayhan Erler Ortadogu Teknik Universitesi Mtihendislik Faktiltesi Jeoloji Boltimti Ankara, TURKEY
Phillip Bruce Gans Dept. of Geology, Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305 (415) 497-2537 or 497-1149
Dr.David Gee Geological Survey of Sweden Box 670 751 28 Uppsala SWEDEN
Klaus H.A. Gohrbandt Chevron Overseas Petroleum Inc. 6001 Bollinger Canyon Road, San Ramon, California Mail P.O. Box 5046, San Ramon, CA 94583-0946 Tel. (415)842-3708 Telex: ITT 470074 CHEV UI(International) USA
Dr.Naci Gortir iTO Maden Faktiltesi Jeoloji Mtihendisligi Boltimti Genel Jeoloji Anabilim Dall Te~vikiye, Istanbul TURKEY
Dr.Warren Hamilton U.S.Geological Survey Mail Stop 964 Box 25046 Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 USA
Samir S.Hanna Earth Resources Institute Department of Geology University College of Swansea SA2 8PP United Kingdom (0792) 295140 Telex: 48358 ULSWAN G
Dr.Mark R.Hempton Shell Dev. Co. P.O.Box 481 Houston, TX 77001 Tel.: (713) 663-2120
Dr.Ken Hsu Geologisches Institut E.T.H.-Zentrum Sonneggstrasse 5 CH-8092 Zurich SWITZERLAND
Mary Hubbard MIT 54-1020 Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
xv
xvi
Dr.C.Hutchison University of Malaya Department of Geology Kuala Lumpur 2211 MALAYSIA
Cemal Kaplangl Tlirkiye Petrolleri A.$. Arama Grubu Mlidafaa Caddesi 22, P.K. 209 Bakanllklar, Ankara TURKEY
Daniel Edmund Karig Department of Geological Sciences Cornell University Ithaca,N.Y. 14853 USA (607) 256-369
Miklos Kazmer Dept. of Paleontology Eotvos University Kun Bela ter 2 Budapest H-1083 HUNGARY
Ilyas Erdal Kerey Flrat Vniversitesi Mlihendislik Fakliltesi Jeoloji Mlihendisligi Bollimli Elazlg, Turkey
Prof.Dr.lhsan Ketin ITO Maden Fakliltesi Jeoloji Mlihendisligi Bollimli Genel Jeoloji Anabilim Dall Te~vikiye, Istanbul TURKEY
Catherine Kissel Centre des Faibles Radioactivites BP no.l Avenue de la Terrasse 91190 Gif s/Yvette FRANCE 3311-(6) 907-78-28 ext 791 691.137 F
Carlo E.G. Laj Centre des Faib1es Radioactivites BP No.1 Avenue de 1a Terrasse 91190 Gif s/Yvette FRANCE 3311-(6) 907-78-28 ext 791 691.137 F
Patrick LeFort Centre de Recherches Petrographiques et Geochimiques B.P.20 Vanoeuvre-1es-Nancy F-54501 FRANCE (8) 351-2213 Telex: 960431 adnancy
William S.Leith Lamont-Doherty Geo1. Observatory Palisades, NY 10964 USA (914) 359-2900 Telex: 710-576-2653
Dr.Jean Marcoux Universite de Paris VII Laboratoire de tectoniquede 1a Terre Sciences physiques de 1a Terre Tour 25-24 10 etagedex 2 Place Jussieu 75230 Paris Cedex 05 FRANCE
Mr.Ron Marr Conoco, Inc. P.O. Box 4800 The Woodlands, TX 77380 Tel.: (713) 367-3305 Telex: 775347
George Robert McCormick Department of Geology University of Iowa Iowa City, Iowa 52242 USA (313) 353-4318 or (313)353-4105
Metin Me§hur Ttirkiye Petro11eri A.$. Arama Grubu Mtidafaa Caddesi 22, P.K. 209 Bakan11k1ar, Ankara TURKEY
xvii
xviii
Elizabeth L.Mi11er Dept. of Geology Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305 (415)497-2537 or 497-1149
Andrew H.G.Mitche11 C/o UNDP P.O. Box 7285 ADC M.I.A. Road Pasay City M. Manila Philippines
Shankar Mitra Arco Resources Technology 2300 W.P1ano Parkway (PAC 3063) Plano, TX 75075 (214) 422-6219
John Nabe1ek MIT, E34-406 Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
Jay Namson 3054 ARCO Resources Technology 2300 Plano Parkway Plano TX 75075 USA
Dr.Rudo1f Oberhauser Geological Survey of Austria 23 Rasumofskygasse A-103l Vienna Austria 76 56 74/42 Telex: 13297 GEOBA-A
Dr.Aral Okay iTO Maden Fakti1tesi Jeoloji Mtihendisligi Bo1timti Gene1 Jeoloji Anabi1irn Da11 Te~vikiye, Istanbul TURKEY
Dr.Necdet Ozgti1 iTO Maden Fakti1tesi Jeoloji Mtihendisligi Boltirnti Gene1 Jeo1oji Anabilirn Dall Te~vikiye, Istanbul TURKEY
Laurence Page MIT 54-611 Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
Dr.Dimitrios Papaniko1aou Department of Geology University of Athens Panepistimiopo1is Zografou Athens 15771 Greece
Prof.Dr.Niko1a Pantic Geo1osko-Pa1eonto1oski Zavod Univerzite Beogradu Kamenicka 6 11000 Beograd JUGOSLOWIA
Malcolm G.Parsons Esso Exploration Turkey, S.A. P.O.Box 16 Ankara, TURKEY
T.L.Patton Amoco Turkey Petroleum Co. Re§it Ga1ip Caddesi ';'60 Gaziosmanpa§a Ankara, TURKEY
Dr.Dogan Perin~ek Ttirkiye Petro11eri A.~. Arama Grubu Mtidafaa Caddesi 22, P.K. 209 Bakan11k1ar, Ankara TURKEY
Dr.Zhang Qinwen Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences Baiwanzhuang Road 26 West City, Beijing People's Republic of China
Dr.A1ison C.Ries University College of Swansea Singleton Park Swansea SA2 8PP Tel.: 0792-295496 Telex: 48358 ULSWAN G(attn. ERI) UNITED KINGDOM
xix
xx
Dr.John Rodgers Department of Geology and Geophysics Box 6666 Yale University New Haven, CT. 06511 USA (203) 436-0616
Dr.Leigh H.Royden Department of Earth, Atmospheric & Planetary Sciences, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139 USA
Dr.Branch J.Russell Marathon Research Center P.O. Box 269 Littleton, CO 80160 Tel.: (303) 794-2601
Dr.Mircea Sandulescu Institut de Geologie et Geophysique 1, rue Caransebes Bucarest, ROMANIA
Mustafa Sarlbudak iTO Maden Faktiltesi Jeoloji Boltimti Te~vikiye, istanbul TURKEY
Elizabeth Schermer MIT 54-1024 Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
Michael Paul Searle Department of Geology University of Leicester Leicester LEI 7RH United Kingdom 0533-554455 ext 107 Telex: UNIVLIB LESTER 341198
SUMMER ADDRESS 10 Lagoon Close Lilliput Poole Dorset UNITED KING DOOM
Dr.Celal ~engor iTO Maden Fakliltesi Jeoloji Bollimli Te§vikiye, istanbul TURKEY
Dr.Sigmund Snelson Shell Development Corporation P.O. Box 481 Houston, TX. 77001 (713) 663-2622 Telex: 76-2248
Dr.Freddie Yiying Sun Institute of Geology Academia Sinica P.o.Box 134 Beijing, China
Mr.Ozan Sungurlu Tlirkiye Petrolleri A.~. Arama Grubu Ba§kan1 Mlidafaa Cad. 22, P.K. 209 Bakan11klar, Ankara TURKEY
Neptune Srimal Dept. of Geological Sciences University of Rochester Rochester, NY 14627 (716) 275-2409
Dr.J.Stocklin Erbduhlstr 4 8472 Seuzach Zurich, SWITZERLAND
Tarquin Teale Dept. of Geology Imperial College Prince Consort Road London SW7 2BP U.K. 01-589 5111 x5537 Telex: 261503
Dr.Cestmir Tomek Geofyzika Brno P.O. Box 62, Brno 61246 CZECHOSLOVAKIA Telephone: 05 57464 Telex: 625 12
xxi
xxii
James W.Tucker ARCO International Oil and Gas Company 444 South Flower Street Los Angeles, California 90017 Tel.: 213486 2735 Telex: 19-4154 USA
Timur Ustaomer ITO Maden Faktiltesi Jeoloji boltimti Te~vikiye, Istanbul TURKEY
Lester Craig Ward 10, Walpole Road Colliers Wood London SW19 2B2 GREAT BRITAIN 01-542-9649
Dr.Brian Windley Department of Geology The University Leicester LEI 7RH England (0533) 554455 Ext. 107 Telex: UNIVLIB LESTER 341198
Mr.Barry G.Wood Marathon Int. Petroleum (GB) Ltd. 174 Marylebone Road London, NW15AT ENGLAND 01-486-0222 Telex: 297183
Dr.Yticel Yllmaz Istanbul Dniversitesi Mtihendislik Faktiltesi Jeoloji Boltimti Vezneciler, Istanbul TURKEY
Dr.Plnar Yllmaz c/o Dr.Kevin T.Biddle Esso Exploration and Production UK Limited Biwater House Portsmouth Road Esner Surrey KTlO 9SJ ENGLAND
Dr.Ken Hsti Geologisches Institut E.T.H.-Zentrum Sonneggstrasse 5 CH-8092 Zurich SWITZERLAND
Dr.C.Hutchison University of Malaya Department of Geology Kuala Lumpur 2211 MALAYSIA
Li Jiliang Institute of Geology Academia Sinica P.O.Box Beijing PRC
Qu Jingchuan The Institute of Geology Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences Baiwanzhuang Road 26 Fuchenmengwai, Beijing PRC
Miklos Kazmer Dept. of Paleontology Eotvos University Kun Bela ter 2 Budapest H-l083 HUNGARY
Catherine Kissel Centre des Faibles Radioactivites BP no.l Avenue de la Terrasse 91190 Gif s/Yvette FRANCE 3311-(6) 907-78-28 ext 791 691.137 F
S.Kovacs Hungarian Geological Institute H-1442 Budapest P.O.Box 106 HUNGARY
XXlll
xxiv
Carlo E.G. Laj Centre des Faib1es Radioactivites BP No.1 Avenue de 1a Terdioactivites BP No.1 Avenue de 1a Terrasse 91190 Gif s/Yvette FRANCE 3311-(6) 907-78-28 ext 791 691.137 F
Pa trick LeFort Centre de Recherches Petrographiques et Geochimiques B.P.20 Vanoeuvre-1es-Nancy F-54501 FRANCE (8) 351-2213 Telex: 960431 adnancy
L.Lucas Lunar and Planetary Institute 3303 Nasa Road 1 Houstan, TX 77058 and Department of Geosciences University of Houston, University Park, Houston, Texas 77004 USA
Dr.Jean Marcoux Universite de Paris VII Laboratoire de tectoniquede 1a Terre Sciences physiques de 1a Terre Tour 25-24 10 etagedex 2 Place Jussieu 75230 Paris Cedex 05 FRANCE
George Robert McCormick Department of Geology Universite of Iowa Iowa City, Iowa 52242 USA (313) 353-4318 or (313) 353-4105
Andrew H.G.Mitche11 C/o UNDP P.O. Box 7285 ADC M.I.A. Road Pasay City M. Manila Philippines
Dr.C.Montenat Laboratoire de Geologie Institut Geologique Albert-de-Lapparent, 21 rue d'Assas 75270 Paris cedex 06 FRANCE
Dr .Aral LOkay iTD Maden Faktiltesi Jeoloji Mtihendisligi Boltimti Genel Jeoloji Anabilim Dall Te~vikiye, Istanbul TURKEY
xxv
Aymon Baud Geological Institute Palais de Rumine CH-1005 Lausanne SWITZERLAND
M.L.Bazhenov Geological Institute, Academy of Sciences of the USSR Pyzhevsky per., 7 109017 Moscow USSR
Dr.A.A.Belov Geological Institute Academy of Sciences pzyhewsky 7 109017 Moscow USSR
Cheng Bingwei The Institute of Geology Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences Baiwanzhuang Road 26 Fuchengmenwai, Beijing PRC.
V.S.Burtman Geological Institute, Academy of Sciences of the USSR Pyzhersky per., 7 109017 Moscow USSR
xxvii
xxviii
Dr.Eric Buffetaut University of Paris 6 Lab. of Vertebrate Paleontology 4 Place Jussieu 75230 Paris Cedex 05 FRANCE
Dr.Kevin Burke Lunar and Planetary Institute 3303 NASA Road Houston, TX 77058 (713) 486-2180
Robert W.H.Butler Dept. of Geolog. Sciences The University South Road Durham DHI 3LE United Kingdom 0385-64971 (ext 432)
Dr .Chang Chenfa Academia Sinica Institute of Geology P.O. Box 634 Beijing, China
Michael Peter Coward Dept. of Geology Imperial College London SW7 2BP ENGLAND 01-589-5111 x5504 Telex: 261503
Prof.Jacques Debelmas Geology Dept. , University, F3803l Grenoble FRANCE
Dr.J.Girardeau Laboratoire de Petrologie Physique, Universite Paris VlIet Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, Place Jussieu, 75230 Paris Cedex OS, FRANCE
Dr. Naci Gortir iTti Maden Faktiltesi Jeoloji Mtihendisligi Boltimti Genel Jeoloji Anabilim Dall Te~vikiye, Istanbul TURKEY
Dr.Warren Hamilton U.S.Geological Survey Mail Stop 964 Box 25046 Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 USA
Dr.Zhang Qinwen Chinese Academy of Geological Sciences Baiwanzhuang Road 26 West City, Beijing People's Republic of China
Sun Shu Institute of Geology Academia Sinica P.O.Box Beijing PRC
Dr.A.M.Celal $engor iTti Maden Fakultesi Jeoloji BOlumu Te§vikiye, istanbul TURKEY
Dr.Freddie Yiying Sun Institute of Geology Academia Sinica P.o.Box 134 Beijing, China
Dr.J. Stocklin Erbduhlstr 4 8472 Seuzach Zurich, SWITZERLAND
Dr .yucel Yllmaz istanbul tiniversitesi Muhendislik Fakultesi Jeoloji Bolumu Vezneciler, istanbul TURKEY
Pan Yu-Sheng Institute of Geology, Academia Sinica P.O.Box 634 Beijing CHINA
xxix
PROFESSOR iHSAN KETiN: AN APPRECIATION
The organizers and participants of the NATO Advanced Study Insti tute "Tectonic Evolution of the Tethyan Region" wish to dedicate this Institute and its published proceedings to Dr.rer.nat. Ihsan Ketin, emeritus professor of geology in the Istanbul Technical University in grateful recognition of his important contributions to our understanding of the geological structure and evolution of the central part of the Alpine-Himalayan mountain ranges. In doing so we also wish to underline that the influence of Ketin' s work has long overflowed the boundaries of the Alpine-Himalayan system and made a conspicuous impact on theoretical tectonics in general. His discovery in 1948 of the North Anatolian strike-slip fault and with it the 'west-drift' of a rigid Anatolian block with respect to its surroun4ings not only was an important step in the recognition of the widespread occurrence of large strike-slip faults in the world, but it also constitutes one of the earliest papers in which the tectonics of a large area was interpreted in terms of relative horizontal motion of a few internally rigid blocks along narrow zones of displacement. His discovery in 1956 of the late Cretaceous-early Cainozoic age of the central Anatolian crystalline axis disposed of Kober's theory of symmetric orogens with ancient median masses along the axis of symmetry in one of its type localities: Instead, Ketin showed in 1959 that Asia Minor as a whole was an asymmetric south-vergent orogen whose construction lasted through several episodes of mountain-building from the late Palaeozoic to the present. This view formed the main basis for most plate tectonic interpretations of Turkey in the last two decades.
Ihsan Ketin was born on 10th of April in the ancient central Anatolian town of Kayseri (Caesarea), located at the foot of the mighty volcano of Erciyes (Mt.Aergus) as a subject of Sultan Mehmed V. in that eventful year of 1914. The family, of which Ketin was the second child, was of modest means. His father, Ali Efendi, was compelled to spend much of the time during which Ketin grew up as a child, fighting for his country: first through World War I and then, until 1922, in Mustafa Kemal's War of Liberation. During this time Ketin came under two powerful influences that eventually determined the course of his life: The first was that of his maternal grandmother Hatice Hanlm, a strong-willed Anatolian woman who instilled in Ketin the desire to do something worthwhile. The second source of influence was mute, but possibly more powerful: the towering Mt.Erciyes awakened in Ketin a love of nature, especially of her mineral kingdom that eventually became the child's life-long occupation.
Before Ketin completed the first decade of his life the Ottoman Empire had become history and the new Republic of Turkey had been declared with Mustafa Kemal as its first president. This extraordinary
xxxi
xxxii
man was determined to transform the old Ottoman society into a new Turkish nation and was aware that education was his most effective weapon. He sent hordes of young men to various western European countries to receive a university education with the instruction to come back "to raise Turkey to the highest level of contemporary civilisation."
When Ketin boarded the train to go to Berlin in 1932 his heart was filled with the inspiration that radiated from Mustafa Kemal to learn the science of the west and to bring it back to his homeland, where, Ketin hoped, it could take root and flourish. But the Berlin Ketin arrived at was the troubled capital of the Weimar Republic, the artificial child of the Versailles Treaty, which was about to expire in the bloody hands of the architect of the infamous Third Reich, Adolf Hitler. The raging inflation, cancerous unemployment, rampant terrorism and the resulting misery induced the quiet natured Anatolian youth after his first semester in the university to move away from Berlin, where he had been exposed to the ideas of Hans Stille at his lectures.
From the Prussian capital Ketin moved to the sphere of influence of another giant of tectonics in Bonn. Hans Cloos, the holder of the chair of geology in Bonn and at the same time the influential editor-in-chief of the Geologische Rundschau became not only Ketin' s teacher and eventual doctoral advisor, but also his close, almost fatherly friend. Between 1935 and 1938 Ketin remained under Closs' tutelage that imparted on him a zeal for careful field observation, especially geologic mapping, and a large reservoir of knowledge along wi th a humanism that contrasted sharply with the prevailing racism of the Nazi Germany, but that found a warm echo in Ketin's upbringing that had taken place in the heartland of the Ottoman Empire, in which numerous ethnic groups had peacefully coexisted for centuries. Ketin ended his studies with a doctoral dissertation on the tectonics and volcanism of the region around Bad Bertrich, which was published in 1940.
Following the completion of his formal studies in Germany, Ketin returned to Turkey in the Autumn of 1938 and was appointed assistant professor at the Institute of Geology of the University of Istanbul, where, during World War I, the noted German geomorphologist and structural geologist Walther Penck had been the head of the Institute. When Ketin arrived in Istanbul, he found himself the third Turkish citizen with a Ph D in geology! The first, a certain Anastase Georgiades from Istanbul had obtained his doctorate from Zurich in 1918, but evidently had not returned to Turkey. The second, Dr.Ahmet Can Okay was an immigrant from the Soviet Central Asia and had come to Turkey after he had completed his studies in Germany. Thus Ketin was the first native of Turkey to work in his country with a Ph D in geology.
When Ketin joined the Faculty of the Institute of Geology in Istanbul Professor Hamit Nafiz Pamir, the one-time assistant and interpreter to Walther Pecnk was the head of the Institute. A graduate of the Uni versi ty of Geneva, Pamir had had to interrupt his doctoral studies owing to World War I. Since then he had been compelled to spend
XXXlll
more time organizing the earth sciences in the newly-founded Republic of Turkey than doing research. Therefore, when Ketin returned to his country he found that no research tradition existed in geology. One had to be created and it is perhaps Ketin's greatest achievement that during the course of his professional life his work became in Turkey the
cornerstone of a research tradition in geology.
Ketin's initial activity in Turkey was split between research and teaching. His first research projects naturally reflected the strong influence of Cloos and Ketin plunged energetically into mapping granites and brittle structures.
A year after Ketin' s arrival in Istanbul, a long-dormant zone of earthquakes in northern Turkey, the structure that Ketin was to make popular throughout the world under the designation of the North Anatolian Fault resumed its activity with the disastrous Erzincan quake of 29th December, 1939 that took the lives of more than 30,000 inhabitants. Between 1940 and 1948 Ketin devoted a number of mainly descriptive papers to the earthquakes that progressed westwards from Erzincan.
Finally, in 1948 Ketin published his classic paper "tiber die tektonisch-mechanischen Folgerungen aus den grossen anatolischen Erd beben des letzten Dezennium" (On the tectonic-mechanic implications of the great Anatolian earthquakes of the last decade). In this paper he documented that the earthquakes in northern Turkey had all occurred along an east-west fault zone that had the character of a right-lateral strike-slip fault. Ketin noticed that with one exception, all of the recent earthquakes had taken place along this fault zone, while vast areas of the Anatolian highland remained aseismic. Ketin deduced from this that an "Anatolian Block", composed of the aseismic areas was "drifting westwards" with respect to the areas to the north.
Ketin also noted that one earthquake had occurred near Kozan near the northeastern corner of the Eastern Mediterranean. This, he speculated, may be the expression of another fault that perhaps delimits the "Anatolian Block" against the Arabian platform. This prediction was vindicated only 23 years later when the Bingeil earthquake of 22nd May, 1971 took place on what was to be called the East Anatolian Fault, the left-lateral conjugate pair of the North Anatolian Fault.
Ketin's 1948 paper was the second, after W.Q.Kennedy's 1946 paper on the Great Glen Fault, of a series of papers that led to the recognition of the widespread presence and importance of large, in many places orogen-parallel, strike-slip faults, a recognition for which plate tectonics was to supply the rationale nearly a quarter of a century later.
In the meantime Ketin also spent all his summers mapping in diverse parts of his previously only sparsely mapped country. Although he initially had to map on a scale of 1:100.000, his maps were immaculate: I remember going to the field in Bursa with Ketin in 1984, with his 1946 manuscript map in our hands. We were in an ophiolitic melange terrain
xxxiv
and nearly 40 years ago Ketin had carefully mapped the larger blocks ~ The result of one of these summer1y mapping exercises served as his "Habilitation Thesis" and Ketin was promoted to associate professorship in 1945, three years after he had married a young teacher of geography. Miss Bedia A1plin.
In 1953 Ketin moved to the then newly founded Faculty of Mines of the old Istanbul Technical University. Here Ketin continued his studies both on the neo- and palaeotectonics of Turkey. In the interval 1953-1956 he was particularly concerned with testing the hypothesis of Sir Edward Bailey and J.W.McCallien, then of the University of Ankara. Bailey and McCa11ien had discovered an extensive outcrop of an ophiolitic melange to the immediate southeast of Ankara and assumed that it underlay the Klr~ehir Massif, interpreted as a giant klippe of northerly origin. Ketin's mapping showed that this was not the case and the Massif in reality underlay the ophiolites. He showed further that the Massif itself had formed only in the late Cretaceous, contrary to the prevailing view of a much older (Palaeozoic or even Precambrian) age. Ketin thus demonstrated that the northern marginal ranges of Turkey, called Pontides after the Pontus Euxinus (Black Sea), were older than the Klr~ehir Massif, whereas the southern marginal chains, the Taurides (after the Taurus of the classical geographers), in which sedimentary successions reach from the Cambrian to the Eocene (in places even Miocene) without a major angular unconformity, were clearly younger. This implied that Turkey had grown from north to south during much of the Phanerozoic, a recognition that clashed with the then-fashionable two-sided orogen model of Kober and Stille, according to which the Ponti des represented the north-vergent north flank, while the Taurides were the south-vergent south flank of a symmetric Anatolian orogen with the crystalline massifs of Menderes and Klr~ehir formeing the axial Zwischengebirge. When Ketin presented some of his conclusions in 1955 at the "Geotectonics Symposium" held in honour of Stille in Hannover, the old and dogmatic German master told Ketin that he found this story hard to believe. Although Ketin had submitted a manuscript intended for the proceedings of the symposium, his paper was somehow left out of the final Festschrift. He later published different versions in Turkey and in Austria and those papers formed the basis of our modern views of the palaeotectonic evolution of Turkey.
In 1959 Ketin published his first palaeotectonic synthesis of Turkey. This paper represents a clear break from the Kober-Stille model and a kind of return to Suess' original view of 1909, that portrayed Turkey as a south-vergent outer arc of his Asiatic structure (Asiatischer Bau). Here Ketin showed that orogenic deformation during the Phanerozoic generally migrated from north to south in Turkey. On the basis of the age of the final orogeny and the palaeogeographic development, Ketin distinguished four major tectono-stratigraphic zones three of which extended west to east along the entire length of the country. Only the fourth, the southernmost unit, was confined to the southeastern extremity of the country, being located on the Arabian Platform. Ketin's zones were the following, from north to south:
1- Ponti des (Palaeozoic and Mesozoic orogenic deformation) 2- Anato1ides (Mesozoic and Cainozoic orogenic deformation) 3- Taurides (early Cainozoic orogenic deformation) 4- Border Folds (late Cainozoic orogenic deformation)
xxxv
In 1961 and 1966 Ketin further refined this classification, which for many years, until the advent of the theory of plate tectonics, served as the basis for all palaeotectonic studies in Turkey. When ;;engor (1979) and ;;engor and Yl1maz (1981) synthesized the tectonic evolution of Turkey from the viewpoint of plate tectonics, all they had to do was to give dif ferent names to the same units that Ketin had distinguished more than two decades earlier. Thus, the Pontides became the Pontide island arc (to be split into a Rhodope-Pontide arc and a Sakarya arc in 1981), the Anato1ides and the Taurides were united into an Anato1ide/Tauride platform (from which ;;engor et a1., 1982, separated a Klrgehir block as an independent unit), and the Border Folds remained the same (in 1979 Ozan Sungur1u suggested to rename them as the Assyrides to maintain para1e11ism with the other three units' names).
Since the publication of these landmark papers Ketin maintained his activity both in pa1aeo- and in neotectonics. His fieldwork largely was the basis for the concept of the East Anatolian Accretionary Complex (perhaps the most fundamental modification introduced into his 1966 classification), for the discovery of the Palaeo-Tethyan suture in Turkey, and for the classification of the neotectonic uinits of Turkey.
In addition to his research activity in Turkey, Ketin also stands out as an earth-science teacher and an organizer of the earth sciences in the country. As a teacher he not only instructed myriads of students, but also is the author of the most widely used text-books of physical geology, structural geology and the geology of Turkey in this country. His lecture notes on such diverse topics as the recent developments in the earth sciences and the tectonics of Africa are monuments to conciseness and clarity. Ketin is an enthusiastic field geologist and his enthusiasm is contagious. To this day he delights in introducing students into their first mapping area, in acquanting them "with the language of the rocks" as he is fond of saying, in demonstrating for them how to record their observations in minute detail and showing them how to sketch outcrops and panoramas! Ketin was the one who established the 1.T.U. tradition that every post-graduate geology student has to prepare at least one detailed geological map as a part of his or her thesis work. In addition to his formal teaching duties, Ketin has been also the foremost popularizer of the earth sciences in Turkey. Amidst his multifarious duties he has found time always to write popular articles for the general education of the public.
Ketin's organizational skills are best displayed by his ability to form and direct research groups. Today his group is the most active and internationally best-known in this country. As a department head, Ketin has always made sure that even the youngest member of his team became an independent researcher. He has repeatedly stressed throughout his career that he expected his students and associates to improve what had
xxxvi
been done earlier. More than once he exclaimed: "Don't come to me to tell me that I was right. Come to me if you found that I had been wrong!"
Ketin was once the president of the Geological Society of Turkey and twice the Dean of the Faculty of Mines of the I.T.U. For many years he was a panel member of the Turkish National Research Council for Research and Technology. He also represented Turkey on many international scientific committees and was the Turkish contributor of the International Tectonic Map of Europe.
Ketin's activity as a scientist, university teacher, and scientific organizer found the highest recognition both in Turkey and abroad. In 1981 he became the first recipient of the Hamit-Nafiz-Pamir Medal of the Geological Society of Turkey. In the same year the Turkish National Research Council for Science and Technology (Ttibitak) gave him the Science Award for the totality of his works, the highest recognition for a scientist in Turkey. Ketin was elected an Honorary Fellow of the Geological Society of London in 1984 and of the Geological Society of America in 1988. Also in 1988 he received the prestigious Gustav-Steinmann-Medai11e of the Geo10gische Vereinigung in the Federal Repbulic of Germany for his "far-sighted geotectonic work, contributions to the geology of Turkey and to international co-operation in the earth sciences".
I here speak in the name of the organizers, the contributors, and the participants of the Ihsan Ketin Nato Advanced Study Institute on the Tectonic Evolution of the Tethyan Region in wishing Professor Ketin a long, healthy, and productive life.
A.M.C.:?engor
A.M.C.:;>engor iTO Maden Faktiltesi, Jeoloji Boliimii, Te§vikiye 80394 istanbul, TURKEY
ABSTRACT. The Tethysides are the orogenic belts that grew out of the mostly collisional obliteration of the Tethyan domain. The Tethyan domain includes both the Palaeo-Tethys (the original triangular gap in Pangaea), and the Neo-Tethys (Tethys opened behind the Cimmerian Continent as it rifted away from northern Gondwana-Land and rotated to close Palaeo-Tethys) plus their continental margins of diverse types. The term Tethys was defined as a tectonic equivalent of the Centrall Mediterranean of Neumayr and should not be used as a palaeogeographic entity only. The evolution of the Tethysides discloses large amounts of orogen parallel (or subparallel) strike-slip faulting that significantly disru pted the Tethyan orogenic collage. The concept of "allochthonous terranes" is viewed to be little more than the concept of nappes (since the latter also included strike-slip generated slivers) and found a retrogressive step, if used in place of genetic concepts that have long superceded nappe descriptions in the Alpine System at least.
INTRODUCTION
Apart from Argand' s monumental La Tectonique de l' Asie there is still no comprehensive account dealing with the entire Tethyan orogenic belt. It is a very difficult mountain system to write a comprehensive synthesis about, because geological knowledge about its various parts is extremely heterogeneous in quantity, in quality, and in terms of the theoretical systems in the framework of which it is gathered and/or the languages in which it is written. This variety makes communication very difficult and, from time to time, political instability renders large parts of the system entirely inaccessible to observation. Such isolation also hinders flow of information in and out of closed areas. If we add to this the great physical difficulties involved in doing field work in considerable portions of the Tethyan belt owing to hostile climatic and physiographic conditions, one could perhaps better appreciate why the Tethyan belt is not better known than it is, des pi te the fact that it stretches from one end of the "Old World" to the other, uniting like a chain two centres of ancient civilisation: Mediterranean Sea and China.
Notwithstanding these difficulties, it has been the Tethyan belt that has continuously shaped our theoretical conceptions of mountain-building
A. M. C. !'jengor (ed.), Tectonic Evolution o/the Tethyan Region, 1-22. © 1989 by Kluwer Academic Publishers.
2
and indeed earth's evolution since the times of the ancient Greeks. First theories of orogeny were conceived using Alpine examples, and again on the example of the Alps and the Himalaya that these older theories were falsified. It was in the Alpine foreland that the first important overthrust was discovered and debated in the early 1800' (the Lausi tzer Uberschieburg that passes through Dresden in East Germany), and the widespread occurrence of nappes was confirmed first in the Alpine chain, once more including the Himalaya. The first strike-slip fault was recognised in the Alps by Escher and their widespread occurrence was also noticed on the example of the Tethyan chains by Suess.
Why did we find out so much so early about such an enormously large and difficult mountain system? I think there are two main reasons. The first is tradition. Human civilisation began developing in and around the Tethyan system and, following Popper(l) we know that critical thinking, i.e. the habit of criticising others' hypotheses originated in the southern Tethyan foreland, in Alexandria. Natural sciences were thus born essentially in the lap of the Tethyan chains and a tradition became established of studying them at least at their western extremity. Although their eastern extremity was looked at from very different angles, it too was studied, and, put to good use: in China, the legend of the Great Yti, and the splendid irrigation system of Dujiangyan, constructed where the Min Jiang leaves the Longmen Shan by the world's first engineering geologist Li Bing around 250 B.C., testify to a profound understanding of the geology and geomorphology of mountains (see, for example, von Richthofen' s acoount of the Great Yti(2)). This tradition affected also the central parts of the chain and the great physician Ibn Sina (Avicenna) of the present Tadjikistan in the USSR wrote a treatise on the origin of mountains, no doubt inspired by the lofty peaks of the Paropamisus (Band-e Turkestan) range and the Pamirs.
Following the re-awakening in the Renaissance, the study of mountain ranges by direct observation wath made fashionable in the Tethyan system: Steno in the Apeninnes (XVII century) and later Johagg Jakob Scheuczher and Horace Benedict de Saussure in the Alps(XVIII century).
After the birth of modern geology in the XIXth century, two centres of study stood out from among all others in the world, which devoted a huge amount of energy to the study of the earth in general and the Tethyan chains in particular. One of these was Suess' school of global tectonics in Vienna. This school initiated, in the person of its leader, a comparative method of studying world-wide geology. Its members did palaeontology, stratigraphy, palaeogeography, and also tectonics on a truly world-wide basis. Intellectually these people were true children of the Enlightenment and yet in their attitude towards nature, towards out-of-doors activity, they were Romantics. In the second half of the XIXth century they roamed the Alps, the circum-Mediterranean countries studying mainly the Mesozoic and Cainozoic deposits. They corresponded with their colleagues the world over and prepared the first global
3
palaeogeographic maps. These maps led them to the discovery of such novel concepts as eustatic movements of the sea-level. From a study of their maps they also saw that all hopes of arriving at a perfectly geometric law of mountain formation, such as the one Elie de Beaumont derived, were baseless. They realised and taught in their lecture-halls that the only way to understand orogenic belts was to go out and prepare geologic maps, compile stratigraphic colums, analyse magmatic rocks, look at fossils from biogeographic angles and to distill all these data into syntheses of vast scope. Out of this activity emerged, towards the end of the XIXth century, the greatest geological synthesis ever, Das Antlitz der Erde (The Face of the Earth) by Eduard Suess.
Thus, in the second half of the XIXth century the capital of the Austro-Hungarian Empire was like a geological bee-hive collecting and working on geological data to generate hypotheses to be tested in the field. The concept of the Tethys, asymmetric structure of orogenic belts, non-catastrophic views of mountain-building were all products of the Vienna school. Even the discovery of nappes, by Bertrand, happened under the direct influence of the Vienna school.
Another extremely fruitful centre of Tethyan research was founded in 1851 in Calcutta under the title of the "Geological Survey of India". Initiated to search for coal, this organisation rapidly developed into a first-class research centre in Asiatic geology and has made first-class contributions to the earth sciences throughout its distinguished history until the fifties. Although the Survey continues its activity to this day(3), its reputation as a leading centre of research in the earth sciences has declined.
In the last decades of the XIXth century, a historical link was established between Vienna and Calcutta, when the Survey began hiring Suess' students. One of these, C.L.Griesbach eventually rose to the leadership of the Survey. It was during this episode that the Tethyan research really blossomed. Most of the details of the Triassic stratigraphy were worked out and the past history of the Tethys was clarified. The Survey extended its activity from east Iran to Burma including Afghanistan and Tibet, and thus embraced a very large part of the Asiatic Tethyan chains. This activity, when combined with the information from the European part, began to yield a clear picture of the Alpine-Himalayan system. Even the Ottoman Empire had begun to pitch in its share of information, partly through the industry of its own workers such as Dr .Abdullah Bey (an Austrian political refugee from Vienna: ), and partly through the travels of foreigners such as Piotr Tchichatcheff, and Ami Boue.
Then came that eventful day of 28th June, 1914 - a day that commenced a deplorable process that not only put an end to European peace and international scientific collaboration, but also to the activities of the Vienna school. Most of its members had already died, such as Neumayr, Mojsisovics, Bittner, and Uhlig and of the remaining,
4
Fuchs had already retired from active research following his wife's demise. Suess himself had passed away on 26th April 1914, a few months before the beginning of the hostilities.
The Vienna school did not survive the war. Along with the Empire that had nourished it, it became a part of history. In post-war Europe, reactionary schools of thought, representing a return to Elie de Beaumont's views, dominated thinking both in Vienna and elsewhere, with two exceptions. One of these was a survivor of the Vienna school, Franz Eduard Suess, Suess' geologist son. The other, of greater proportions, was Emile Argand, the true heir to Suess' throne. Argand lived in Switzerland and therefore escaped the war. His training had taken place under the able hand of Maurice Lugeon, heir to Bertrand, and thus under the indirect influence of Vienna. He and Argand had worked out the geometry of the Pennine nappes, and, during the war, Argand had sketched a theory to explain how they might have formed. This theory Argand called "embryonic tectonics" alluding to the dominant role of nappe embryos controlling Mesozoic-Cainozoic Alpine palaeogeography (concept of embryonic folding had originated with Suess' famous booklet "Die Entstehung der Alpen" in 1875). This theory required too much crustal shortening for the prevailing contraction theory, so Argand chose to abandon the theory and opted for the then novel theory of continental drift.
Both Argand and F.E.Suess produced their most influential work on the basis of the theory of continental drift. Although the theory itself had not been conceived on Tethyan examples, its intellectual basis, the presence of two fundamentally different crust types, sal (later sial) and sima, was a discovery of the father Suess. --- ----
Argand and F. E. Suess were the only true followers of the Vienna style, although the former never had had direct contact with Vienna. After their deaths, Tethyan geology became almost entirely an exercise of finding more and more nappes and arguing on their place of origin. The intellectual stimulus to solve what Suess had called "die grossere Aufgaben der Geologie" had vanished along with the Viennese giants themsel ves. With Kober and Stille geologizing became little more than the job of an archivsit, cataloging nappes, orogenic phases, and orogens and kratogens on the face of the earth. Although the Alps became a place of pilgrimage for the world's tectonicists, many of them came to admire the classical outcrops of an Arnold Escher, of a Suess, of a Heim, of a Bertrand, of a Mojsisovics, of an Uhlig, of a Schardt, of a Lugeon, of an Argand ...
Thus by World War II, the Tethyan geology had alread y lost its leading role in the earth sciences, despite the delightful eulogies written about it such as the one by Sir Edward Bailey(4).
With the rise of plate tectonics, the Alpine-Himalayan system became the type example of a collisional orogenic belt and just one of
5
many orogenic belts to be studied and understood in terms of plate tectonics. In the general enthusiasm of acounting for orogenic belts in plate tectonic frames outside the Alpine-Himalayan system, much of what we had learned from them had not been taken into account sufficiently. Conversely, many Tethyan geologists had difficulty switching their language and in the process were left behind. As a result both Tethyan geology and orogenic geology as a whole suffered. One excellent case in point is the "novel" terrane concept that rose in western North America. If one looks at the history of this concept and that of the nappe concept in the Alps, one would be astonished at the amount of ink spilled about the former almost identical to the latter that is now more than a century old and all of the latter's aspects already overtaken in the Alps!
One of the most serious dangers threatening the Tethyan geology now is difficulty of communication among its students owing to linguistic, poli tical, and even financial problems. It was to diminish this and perhaps to initiate a tradition of "Tethyan" meetings that the Ihsan Ketin Nato Advanced Study Institute was conceived. As its history is briefly outlined in the Preface, I omit it here. In the following I give a few general definitions concerning the Tethyan orogenic belts as a whole to assist not only the outsider, but also the geologists specializing on only parts of the Tethyan system to be able to conceptualise the entire belt in his or her mind.
SOME DEFINITIONS
It is no doubt useful to give here first the original definition of the Tethys, as it was spelled out by Suess. He wrote in 1893 "the folded and crumpled deposits of a great ••• ocean which once stretched across part of Eurasia ... stand forth to Heaven in Thibet, Himalaya, and the Alps" (Suess, 1893, p.183; ref.5). The existence of this "ocean" was first conceived by Suess' son-in-law, the great German stratigrapher Melchior Neumayr, when he compiled and synthesized world-wide stratigraphic and palaeobiogeographic data pertaining to Jurassic strata. From the Caribbean to Burma, sandwiched between a number of northern land-masses and a major southern Brasilian-Ethiopian continent, Neumayr (1885, ref. 6) distinguished a Centrales Mittelmeer. When Suess adopted and renamed this ocean, he also attached to it a tectonic connotation, as the mother ocean of the Alpine-Himalayan ranges. In 1895 (ref.7) Suess indicated that the age of the Tethys reached down into the Triassic (as evidenced by the pelagische Trias). In Das Antlitz der Erde, he pointed out that in the eastern Asia, there were places where the Tethys existed already in the late Palaeozoic.
Thus, already at its beginning two points concerning the Tethys concept emerged, which later became subjects of debate: One is that it was originally defined as a tectonic concept on the basis of an older palaeogeographic concept. Suess renamed Neumayr's Centrales Mittelmeer,
6
simply because what he was proposing was not conceptually its equivalent (if it were, Suess would not have needed a new term). The second point pertains to the age of the Tethys. Suess made it clear that it was dominantly a Mesozoic phenomenon, which in places began in the late Palaeozoic and in others lasted into the Cainozoic, even into the present day. Suess emphasized that the present Mediterranean was a remnant of the original Tethys (this is now known to be the case only for the Eastern Mediterranean).
After Suess two fundamentally different schools of thought dominated tectonics. One, which I elsewhere called the Kober-Stille school(8) adopted a Beaumontian catastrophist outlook on tectonic phenomena with a strictly determinist philosophy. The other school, which I called Wegener-Argandian(8), adopted a uniformitarian approach similar to Suess' and had a non-deterministic philosophy. The Wegener-Argandians quickly went away from the fixist tectonic theories and developed continental drift, whereas the Kober-Stilleans remained anchored in a fixist world. Corresponding with these two schools, two different conceptions of Tethys evolved after Suess. One viewed the Tethys as a late Proterozoic geosyncline (formed after Stille's Algonkian regeneration) that became progressively consolidated during the Caledonian, Hercynian, and the Al pine orogenic eras. Throughout these times it separated a tectonically dead southern world (Gondwana-Land) from a tectonically lively northern world, as Stille expressed it in 1949. The Wegener-Argandians also thought that the Tethys was a geosyncline, but their conception of a geosyncline was vastly different from that of the fixists (see ref.8). Wegener-Argandians adhered somewhat more closely to Suess' original concept in rear ding the Tethys as a late Palaeozoic 1J.hrough Cainozoic phenomenon, although Argand differed from Suess by considering the Mediterranean a new product separate from the Tethys.
Fig.l. shows the various conceptions of the Tethys, including Neumayr's. With the onset of plate tectonics, the whole question of the Tethys took on a new countenance. Bullard et a1. (9) reconstructed the continents around the Atlantic and the Indian oceans without disturbing the torsional rigidity of the continents. One consequence of this was the production of a yawning gap in Pangaea that opened eastwards and separated Gondwana-Land from Laurasia (Fig.2). This was promptly proclaimed to be the Tethys (as had been done before Bullard et al. by Carey in 1958 and Wilson in 1963).
Problems arose shortly after this victorious (!) reconstruction that predicted the Tethys without looking at the Alpine-Himalayan system itself! Smith(lO) pointed out that no ophiolites older than the Triassic and no continental margins of similar age could be found in the Alpine-Himalayan ranges to corroborate what the reconstructions predicted. It soon became clear that the classical Tethys really was a Mesozoic creation, an ocean that everywhere had opened not before the Permian at the earliest. As in central and western Europe no orogenies
o Z
G rt
!I u
e .w
i,s c:
i. dl
ic k 9 e m i i 1 i i g ~ n Z
or u.
Fig.1C: Argand's mobilis view of the Tethys.
had intervened between the end of the Hercynian events and the onset of Alpine deformation, this new situation led to pessimism concerning the success of plate tectonis and to expanding earth models. In Asia, however, the situation was different. Even in southern Europe, Suess had already indicated the presence of orogenic events of middle Mesozoic age, located in an orogenic system independent of his Alpides, and following Prof.Mrazec's suggestion had called this new system, of which he was able to reconstruct only incomplete fragments, the Cimmerian Mountains, after the Cimmerii the oldest known inhabitants of the NW parts of the Black Sea shore, according to the recitations of Homer. Stocklin announced the discovery of some pre-Jurassic ophiolites in NE Iran,near the town of Meshhed, and pointed out that these could possibly be the remnants of an older Tethys, the one suggested by the reconstructions of Bullard et al. and their successors (e.g.(ll)).
In 1978 Ken HsU came to Turkey to attend a meeting of the C.I.E.S.M. in Antalya along the south coast. We had agreed that he would fly to Istanbul and that we would drive down to Antalya while looking at the geology of western Turkey along a N-S cross-section. The first night on the way to Antalya was spent in Bursa, after Ken had seen the Intra-Pontide suture and in anticipation of seeing, on the next day, the lzmir-Ankara suture. In Bursa Ken continuously questioned me whether any of these could be the suture of the older Tethys, what Stocklin had called the Palaeo-Tethys. I laid out the observations to him and he became convinced that they could not be. "Then" he said "you must look
F ig
o
11
for it north of Turkey, in the Dobrudja, in the Crimea, .where the Cimmerian orogenic events may be the witnesses of its closure.".
A year later, while I was preparing some lecture notes on the geology of Turkey in Albany,N.Y., I came across references to pre-Liassic ophiolites, ophiolitic melange, and orogenic deformation in N Turkey, in the Pontide tectonic unit of Ketin(12). I jumped out of my seat: Ken was right! Palaeo-Tethys had been there, its evidence staring at me out of the papers of Ketin, Blumenthal, Fourquin, and Radelli, papers which I had read on several previous occasions never thinking that here was the suture zone of the Palaeo-Tethys. A quick review of the geology of the Dobrudja and the Crimea, along with Stocklin's papers on Iran left no room for doubt that the Cimmerian zone of deformation indeed was a suture zone of mid-Mesozoic age (pre-late Jurassic in Turkey, older in Iran) and that it was located N of the Palaeozoic of Istanbul, i.e. it had no contact with the Neo-Tethyan sutures farther S.
Later collaboration with Ketin, Yticel Yllmaz, and Ozan Sungurlu largely clarified the first order organization of this older orogenic bel t and pointed out where the new research effort should be located. I undertook a synthesis of it throughout the Tethyan belt and showed that the closure of Palaeo-Tethys was a complicated affair, involving the generation of a veritable orogenic collage ($engor, 1984, ref.13). At this time new work in Iran (mainly by Berberian and his colleagues), in Afghanistan (mainly by the French geologists), and in China (mainly by Chinese geologists) brought in much new data. A number of Soviet scientists, mainly Belov, Adamia and his colleagues in the Caucasus, the late Viktor Shvolman in the Pamirs, and the late Academician Peyve and his group in the whole of Asia tracked down the remnants of the Palaeo-Tethys. In Bulguria, the painstaking field work of G.A.Chatalov in the Strandja documented the complicated structure of the Cimmeride orogen that involved oceanic rocks i Chatalov's Strandja-type Triassic. A number of these new results are contained in the papers in this book. Fig.3 shows the suture network of the Tethyan chains, whiCh I called the Tethysides, that divide it into innumerable blocks. The new conception of the Tethys and its evolution necessisated the generation of the following nomenclature:
Al pine-Himalayan System: This is the morphologic mountain range that stretches from the Pyrenees and the Betic and Riff cordilleras through the Alpine chains of Europe, the Carpathians, Dinarides, Hellenides, the Turkish chains, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Tibet and Burma into Indochina and Indonesian Archipelago. As seen in Fig.4, this system is accompanied by an apron of lesser mountains to the north (e.g. the Mittelgebirge in German, the Tien Shan in Central Asia, etc.), which also formed as a result of orogeny in the Alpine-Himalayan system.
Tethys sensu lato: Includes all Tethyan oceans without connotation of age and thus includes both the Palaeo- and the Neo-Tethys. Tectonically it includes the oceans and their continental margins including the shelves, and I have often recommended that the term Tethys be confined
12
~~ Alpide suture (ticks on upp2r plate) ~ ~ ~ Alpide sutures of 'sialic oceans'
11111111111111:111 Alpide subduction/accretion complex U I on oce.anlc 5ubstro1tum
/ Cimmeride suture (ticks on upper plate ~ /polarity unknown)
•.• " ...• Conj£ctural Cimmeride suture
Boundary of major tectonic - ~- subdivisions of Eurasia 0
1.1 __ --1
Mesozoic-Cenozoic Tethysides
:::::: Cimmerian •••••• Continent
..A......A.. Active subduction (teeth on upp2r plate)
Fig.3: Generalized tectonic map showing the major tectonic subdivisions of Eurasia and the suture distribution within the Tethysides. Cimmeride sutures: I- Paleo-Tethyan suture in the Balkan/Carpathian Cimmerides, II- Karakaya, III- Luncavita-Consul, IV- North Turkish, V- Paleo-Tethyan suture in the Caucasus, V- Chorchana-Utslevi zone, VI- Talesh-Mashhad, VII- Waser (Farah-Rud), VIII- Paropamisus-Hindu Kush-North Pamir, VIII­ Kopet Dagh, IX- South Ghissar, X- Northern "synclinorium" of western Kuen-Lun, X'- Qiman-Dagh, XI- Altln Dagh, XII- Suelun Hegen Mts., XIII and XIII'- Inner Mongolian, XIV- Suolun-Xilamulun, XV- Da Hingan (G.Khingar), XVI- Tergun Daba Shan-Qinhai Nanshan, XVII- Southern "synclinorium" of western Kuen-Lun, XVIII- Burhan Budai Shan-Anyemaqen Shan, XIX- Lancan Jiang-Litien. XX- Jinsha Jinag, XXI- Litang, XXI'-
13
Luochou "arc-trench belt", XXII- Banggong Co-Nu Jiang, XXII'­ Mid-Qangtang, XXIII- Shiquanhe, XXIV- Southwest Karakorum, XXV­ Nan-Uttaradit-Sra Kaeo, XXVI- Tamky-Phueson, XXVII- Song Ma (Red River), XXVIII- Song Da (Black River), XXIX- Bentong-Raub, XXX- West Borneo, XXXI- Qin-Ling, XXXII- Longmen Shan-Qionglai Shan, XXXIII- Mid-South China. XXXIV- Korea, XXXV- Helan Shan, XXXVI- Mandalay, XXXVII- Shilka. Alpide sutures: 1- Pyrenean, 2- Betic':', 3- Riff*, 4- High Atlas*, 5- Saharan Atlas*, 6- Kabylian*, 7- Apennine, 8- Alpine, 9- Pieniny Klippen melt, 10- Circum-Moesian, 11- Mures, 12- Srednogorie, 13- Peonias-INtra-Pontide, 14- Almopias-Izmir-Ankara, 15- Pindos-Budva-Blikk, 16- Ilgaz-Erzincan, 17- Inner-Tauride, 18- Antalya, 19- Cyprus, 20- Assyrian, 21- Maden, 22- Sevan-Akera-Qaradagh, 23- Slate-Diabase zone, 24- Zagros, 25- Circum-Central Iranian microcontinent, 26- Oman, 27- Waziristan, 28- Kohistan sutures, 29- Ladakh sutures (northeast: Shyok; southwest: Indus), 30- Indus-Yarlung-ZAngbo, 31- Burma, 32- Mid-Sumatra, 33- Meratus (Asterisks indicate sutures of sialic oceans sensu $engHr & Monod 1980). Tethyside block: a- Moroccan Meseta, b- Oran Meseta, c­ Alboran, d- Iberian Meseta, e- African promontory, f- Rhodope-Pontide, g- Sakarya, h- Klr.;;ehir, i- North-west Iran, j- Centarl Iranian, k­ Aghdarband arc, 1- Farah, m- Helmand (sensu $engHr 1984), m'- Kohistan arc, n- Western Kuen-Lun Central Meganticlinorium, 0- Qaidam, p- Alxa, q- North China (Sino-Korean) platform, r- North China fold belt, s­ Qangtang (possibly divided into s'- East Qangtan ad s", West Qangtan: Chang Cheng-fa, oral communication, 1985), t- Lhasa (possibly divided into t'- Bongthol Tangla, t"- Nagqu, and t"'- Lhasa proper: A. Gansser, oral communication, 1985), t""- Ladakh arc, u- Shaluli Shan arc, v­ Chola Shan arc, w- Yangtze, x- Annamia, y- Huanan, z- Songpan Massif. E, M, and S are East Anatolian, Makran, and Songpan-Ganzi accretionary complexes, respectively.
14
2000 - 4000 m. I !
1'70
20
Fig. 4: THe Al pine-Himalayan system of mountain ranges in the overall topographic framework of Eurasia.
15
to tectonic usage, as it was originally intended. When used in a palaeogeographic or palaeobiogeographic sense, it includes all equatorial seas of + Mesozoic age and frequently generates confusion (cf. ref .13).
Palaeo-Tethys: The ocean and its continental margins that formed as a by-product of the assembly of the Pangaea at the end of the late Carboniferous as depicted in Fig.2. It is not an exclusively Palaeozoic ocean, but its largest parts survived into the Jurassic. It simply means "old Tethys".
Neo-Tethys: The ocean and its continental margins that formed as a result of the closure of Palaeo-Tethys between the Cimmerian continent and the northern margin of Gondwana-Land.
Tethyan domain: Region affected by deformation that resulted from the closure of the Tethys sensu lato. Like Tethys sensu lato itself, it is a tectonic term and should not be used in palaeogeography or palaeobiogeography.
Tethysides: This term, from and (shape, form, kind; used also to imply family connection in the sense of being of the same kind), signifies the orogenic system that arose from the destruction of the Tethys ensu lato and covers the entire Tethyan domain. It consists of two major elements:
Cimmerides: The orogenic system that resulted from the destruction of the Palaeo-Tethys and her dependencies, such as marginal basins, back-arc basins, etc. It comes from combining and
Both the Cimmerides and the Alpides include alpinotype and germanotype areas of deformation. Alpinotype areas correspond with orogenic belt proper, with deformation and metamorphism penetrative on the scale of mm. to hundred metres. By contrast, the germanotype areas correspond with fore- and hinterland deformation fields consisting of blocky, non-penetrative structures, commonly including much strike-slip and not much metamorphism or magmatism.
All of these terms were defined in refs.(13_ and(14), to which the reader is referred for further details.
EVOLUTION OF THE TETHYS IDES
Fig.5 shows a sequence of maps depicting the evolution of the Tethyan domain it its gross outlines as I conceivenit in 1984. It shows the existence of Palaeo-Tethys in late Palaeozoic time, its progressive closure by the rotation of the Cimmerian continent and by the agglomeration of a number of exotic continental fragments to Asia in the extreme east. The rotation of the Cimmerian continent at the same time
16
Fig.SA: Schematic reconstruction showing the palaeo tectonics of the Tethyan domain in the late Permian (Kazanian). Abbreviations for all reconstructions: A- Afghan blocks, An- Annamia, B- Bitlis/Pottirge fragment, BNJ-Banggong Co-Nu Jiang ocean CI- Central Iranian microcontinent, CS- Chola Shan, d- Dnyepr-Donetz aulacogen, F- Farah block, H- Helmand block(sensu ~engor 1984), IBF- Istanbul-Balkan fragment, IR- Iran block, K- Klr~ehir block, L- Lhasa block, LB- Luochou arc, MVL- Mount Victoria Land block, NC- North China block, nc- North Caspian depression, No- Northern branch of Neo-Tethys, p- Pachelma aulacogen, Q- Qangtang block. Qu-Quetta graben, RRF- Red River fault, S- Serindia. Sa- Sakarya continent, SB- Yangtze block, SECB- Huanan block, SG- Songpan-Ganzi system, ShS- Shaluli Shan arc, SIBUMASU­ China-Burma-Malaya-Sumatra portion of the Cimmerian continent. So­ Southern branch of Neo-Tethys, T- Turkish blocks.
Fig.SB: Early Triassic (Induan) paleotectonics of the Tethyan domain.
17
PACIFIC
OCEAN
PACIFIC
OCEAN
18
------..SANTARCTICA
Fig.SF: Late Miocene (Vindobonian) paleotectonics of the Tethyan domain.
opened Neo-Tethys in its wake, which, during the Mesozoic and the Cainozoic closed by the disintegration of Gondwana-Land, and the collision of its various pieces with Eurasia.
Ongoing research since 1984 has shown that although the gross outlines of this evolutionary scheme may be correct, its details are wrong on the scale of loS km. mainly because of extensive strike-slip motion. Fig.6 and Table I show the main ones of the strike-slip faults that disrupted the Tethyside orogenic collage during and after its construction.
The concept of allochthonous terranes, as used in North America, has not been applied to the Tethysides by any of the speakers in this ASI. This is not the place to criticise the terrane concept, but in many parts of the Tethysides, and most notably in the European parts of the system, the identification of "fault-bounded terranes with geological histories differing from one terrane to the other" has been largely accomplished by the thirties and since concepts involving genetic considerations have superceded them. The importance of strike slip faulting has been recognised too on the scale of nappes(e.g. refs.IS and 16) as well as on the scale of mountain ranges (ref.17). The workers in the Tethyan realm would find it hard and perhaps retrogressive to go back to purely descriptive concepts, whose sole contribution would be simple cataloging. That the Tethyan workers have missed the significance of strike-slip in orogenic processes is amply negated by such thoughtful papers as that of TrUmpy(18).
EPILOGUE: PROSPECTS
Tethyan research has entered an exciting new phase since the advent of the theory of plate tectonics. One of the most important tasks now awaiting Tethyan geologists is the identification of suture zones and
A
~:~~ke~s~~n/-h'YPol'hesiZ'dl ~D + +++ .?+++ ++ 1 ~~~ Post-suturing strike-sl I ;1 ............ Pre- syn- & post I I - - - suturing strike-slip b .. - Tethyside sutures o """""--- Subduction zone -"'- Suture zone.
-+- -+- + Arc magmatism 0000 Collisional magmatism
Strike.-slip re.late.d magmatism
19
Fig.6: (A) Map showing pre-, syn-, and postcollisional strike-slip motion along the Tethyside sutures. For numbers and sources, see Table 2. (B, D) Diagrams showing possible complications introduced by strike-slip faulting during and after continental collision. (C) Sketch map of the geology of the Chorchana-Utslevi sheared suture in the Dzirula Massif. (E) Map showing the present-day tectonic settings of pre- and syncollisional strike-slip faults in eastern and southeastern Asia. Key to numbers: 1- subduction zone (teeth on upper plate), 2-young zone of collision, 3- strike-slip fault, 4- normal fault (ticks on hanging wall), 5- spreading centre, 6- arc magmatism, 7- aseismic ridge, 8-oceanic area. Abbreviations: BA- Banda arc, CBR- Central Basin Ridge. MTL- median tectonic line. OT- Okinawa trough, PaT- Palau "Trench", PF­ Philippine fault, PKR- Palau-Kyushyu Ridge.
20
Table I: Sense, amount, and timing of strike-slip motion on some Tethy­ side suturesa
Suture b Sense Amount Time (km)
l(XI) Left ? ePale ecX+XI) Left ? ?C-P 3(II) Right 1000 C-?eTr 4(XIV) Left 4000 P 5(XVIII-XXXI) Left 4300 1200 P-eJ 6(25) Right 1000 ITr-IK
7(V' ) ? ? P-ITr 8(8) Left 1500 eJ-eK
9(4-5) Left 10-20 e-mJ Right 10-20 IJ-eK
10(7 south) ? ? eJ
1l(7north) ? ? m-IJ l2(XXII ) Left 500 IJ-eK 13(XIV) Left ? IJ-eK 14(1) Left 150-200 e-IK 15(14) ? ? IK 16(23) Left 350-700 IK-Pal 17(17,21) Right 1000 IK-eE 18 (2) Right 300 IE-1M (3) Left 19 (XXXVI) Right 460 IOI-present 20(27) Left 200 u-mT
21(7 south) (north)Left 50 T (south)Right
22(XXVII) Left 500 OI-M Right A few tens Q
23(XXV) Left 300 OI-M 24(VIII) Right ? end E-?M 25(25) Right ? post eM 26(VII) Right ? end E 27(14) Right 100 M-Pli 28(13,16) Right 100 1M-present
29(X,XI) Left 500-600 M-present 30(30) Right 200 IT
31(24) Right 60- Pli-present 32(20,21) Left 20 Pli-present 33(XXI,XXI') Left ? IT
34(XVIII) Left ? IT
aAbbreviations: Pale-Paleozoic, C- Carboniferous, Triassic, J- Jurassic, K- Cretaceous, T- Tertiary, Eocene, 01- Oligocene, M- Miocene, Pli- Pliocene, early, m- middle, 1- late
bIn the enumeration of sutures, left-hand numerals Figure 5A and right-hand numerals (in parentheses) Figure 1.
P- Permian, Pal- Paleocene, Q- Quaternary,
refer to those refer to those
Tr- E- e-
21
the characterization of the blocks they separate, including the establishment of the path of drift before these blocks became a part of the Tethyside collage (and in most cases after they became a part of the Tethyside collage, as a result of the formation of the collage). To this end we need a lot more and a lot more detailed geologic mapping coupled with careful biogeographic analysis, palaeomagnetic sampling, and geochemical and isotopic work. Tethyan geologists must familiarize themselves with the active subduction and transform fault systems better than hitherto, in order to understand the past environments they study (this message is amplified by Warren Hamilton in his paper in this book). One of the most important points that emerges in this book is the importance of field research in all parts of the Tethyan chains.
REFERENCES
1. Popper,K.K., 1966. The Open SOCiety and its Enemies, v.1, Princeton University Press, Princeton 361 p.
2. Richthofen,F. Freiherr von,1877. China. Ergebnisse Eigener Reisen und Darauf Gegriindeter Studien, v.1, Dietrich Reimer, Berlin, 758 pp.
3. Anonymous, 1976. One Hundred Twentyfive Years of the Geological Survey of India (1851-1976). A Short History, Dipti Printing and Binding Works, Calcutta 58 pp.
4. Bai1ey,E.B., 1935, Tectonic Essays, Mainly Alpine, Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 200 pp.
5. Suess,E., Are great ocean depths permanent? Nat. Sci., v.2, p.180-187.
6. Neumayr,M., 1885. Die geographische Verbreitung der Juraformation, Denkschr. k. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math.-Naturwiss. C1., v.15, pp.57-114.
7. Suess,E., 1895. Noter sur l'histoire des oceans, C.R.hebd. Acad. Sci. Paris, v.121, pp.1113-1116.
8. $engor,A.M.C., 1982. Eduard Suess' relations to the pre-1950 schools of thought in global tectonics. Geo1. Rundsch., v.71, pp.381-420.
9. Bullard,E.C., Everett,J.E., and Smith,A.G., 1965. The fit of the continents around the Atlantic, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London, v.A258, pp.41-51.
10. Smith,A.G., 1973. The so-called Tethyan ophiolites: in Tar1ing,D.H., and Runcorn,S.K., edts., Implicationsof Continental Drift to the Earth Sciences, v.2, Academic Press, London, pp.977-986.
11. Smith,A.G., and Ha11am,A., 1970. The fit of the southern continents, Nature, v.225, pp.139-144.
12. Ketin,I., 1966. Tectonic units of Anato1ia (Asia Minor), Bull. Miner. Res. Exp1. Inst. Turkey, v.66, pp.23-34.
13. $engor,A.M.C., 1984. The Cimmeride Orogenic System and the Tectonics of Eurasia, Geo1. Soc. America Spec. Pap. 195, xi+82 pp.
14. $engor,A.M.C., 1985. Die A1piden und die Kimmeriden: Die verdoppe1te Geschichte der Tethys, Geo1. Rundsch., v.74, pp.181-213.
22
15. Argand,E., 1920. P1issements precurseurs et p1issements tardifs des chaines de montagnes. Act. Soc. he1vet. Sci. Nat., Neuchate1, pp.1-27.
16. Schwinner,R., 1951. Die Zentra1zone der Ostalpen, in F.X.Schaffer. edt., Geologie von Osterreich, Franz Deuticke, Wien,-Pp.10S-232.
17. Ketin,I., 1948. Uber die tektonisch-mechanischen Fo1gerungen aus den grossen anato1ischen Erdbeben des 1etzten Dezenniums, Geol. Rundsch., v.36, pp.77-83.
18. Triimpy,R., 1976. Du Pelerin aux Pyrenees. Eclog. Geol. Relvet., v.69, pp.249-264.
ONE SOME KEY FEATURES OF THE EVOLUTION OF THE WESTERN ALPS
Jacques DEBELMAS Geology Dept. University, F 38031, Grenoble, France.
ABSTRACT. Some key features control the modern interpretation of the Western Alps.
During the Triassic-Cretaceous distensive phase, two facts are outlined (I) the spreading of the Piemont-Ligurian oceanic realm through a rifting process which is still in discussion, (2) the pattern of the two opposite continental margins in tilted belts or blocks, a few of them being still almost undeformed and showing their primitive NE-SW trend.
During the Tertiary compressive phase, the following points are developped (I) the difficulties about the disparition by subduction of the oceanic Tethyan crust, (2) the interpretation of the belt as the stacking up of basement slabs, progressing to more and more external areas. This process seems to be still active. (3) The analysis of the mechanical and mineralogical effects of the successive phases of deformation.
RESUME. Un certain nombre de caracteres paleogeographiques et structuraux sont evoques, qui commandent l' interpretation actuelle des Alpes occidentales.
Pour la phase de distension Trias-Cretace, on insiste (I) sur l' appari tion de l' ocean liguro-piemontais par un processus de rifting dont les modali tes restent encore conj ecturales, et (2) sur la disposi tion en blocs bascules des deux marges continentales opposees, blocs dont certains ont pratiquement garde leur orientation primitive, NE-SW, qui donne ainsi celIe de l'ocean alpin.
Pour la phase compressive Tertiaire-Actuel, on insiste sur les obscuri tes liees a la subduction de la croute oceanique ligure, sur l'interpretation actuelle de la chaine comme un empilement d'ecailles de socle se faisant progressivement de l' interieur vers l' exterieur et probablement toujours actif enfin sur l'analyse des consequences mecaniques et mineralogiques des phases de deformations successives.
The Western Alps are a classic area of the Mediterranean belts, and numerous synthetic descriptions have been published during the last years for instance, Debelmas & Kerckhove (1980), Debelmas & al. (1983), Trlimpy (1960, 1980).
23
A. M. C. !'Jengor (ed.), Tectonic Evolution of the Tethyan Region, 23-42. © 1989 by Kluwer Academic Publishers.
24
The main outlines of these papers remain valid and do not need to be repeated. More interesting is to present some features of the Alpine evolution related to the current assumptions of Global Tectonics or to new geophysical data supporting our present interpretation of the belt.
Fig.l. Structural scheme of the Western Alps (GR. Grandes Rousses massif) . Grey : External Crystalline massifs ; Wider stippled : Penninic zone Densely stippled Helminthoid flysch nappes and connected slices Vertical hatching: South-Alpine zone, with its crystalline basement.
It is however essential to recall briefly the structural terminology of the Western Alps. They show a succession of structural zones (fig. I), each of which is characterized by its own stratigraphic sequence and tectonic style, and appears as a well-delineated
25
paleogeographic domain, separated from those adjacent by probably distensive breaks that evolved later into thrust faults. Thus, paleogeographic domains and structural zones are parallel.
Moreover, the Alpine belt, like most collision chains, formed along an ophiolitic suture zone, the remains of a disappeared oceanic realm, the so-called Ligurian-Piemont realm. The two continental margins of this oceanic basin came into contact and, as a consequence of their collision, were fragmented and folded, the resulting structures verging to the northwest in Switzerland, to the west in France, or to the southwest in the Italian Maritime Alps. Table I gives the names of the main paleogeographic and structural units, which are not described further.
External zone I n t e r n a I z 0 n e s
Dauphine zone I Pe n n i n i
I South-Alpine zones c z one s I
Helvetic zone Su bb"an~on'ZJB"anconna.s. z. 'Piemont zone,Liguro-Piem.z I Sesla zone Ivrea zone
Continental marg In: submarine slope w.th tilted blocks Oceanic area I Conti nental margin
<II QI Fold. and thrusts ~ U of the French
2 Subalpine ranges
SUbbnanconn.i Bnanconna.s I SChistes lus~res nappes nappes+slices nappes Iw,.hOU.OPhOO.itesl wolh oph,o.ites
/ Prealps Simmenappe w scanty S·Alplne
Nappe of the a: Breche nappe Helmintho.d :l cover Median Prealps ...
Flysch nappe :l cover '" folds
0 (Switzerland) <oJ
~
« Embrunais nappes I z '" « "'. Helminthoid u " sUbbrian~lBrianconna.s I Flysch nappe g -;;
sl ices sl ices .:l
'" :; '" '" >
~.:: I (prob. thrust blocks)
~<III
Dt.BlanchJ ~
~ .Ivrea
St Bernard Mt Rose nappe na~pe r.:; gneiSS 7 Ophiolites and others Lanzo nappe Int.Crystmass. Sesia peridotit.
gneiss
Tab I e I
From the structural point of view, two phases have to be distinguished in the Alpine (post-Variscan) history :
a di