GEOLOŠKI ANALI BALKANSKOGA POLUOSTRVA Volume 81 (1), July 2020, 41–66 – https://doi.org/10.2298/GABP191018004S Review Paper Прегледни рад

60 years of the Serbo-Macedonian Unit concept: From Cadomian towards Alpine tectonic frameworks

1 2 ArKO PAHić iVADAr AUDenyi D S & T G Abstract.

The study represents a summary of the hitherto tectonic concepts revolving around a peri-Gondwanan fragment referred to as the Serbo- Macedonian Unit. The Serbo-Macedonian Unit as a -dominated basement segment is positioned in the proximity of the Baltican craton (peri-Moesian realm). This area represents a repository of the transferred broadly similar thus highly complex, elongated polycrystalline vestiges of the Pan-African inheritance. This peculiar far-travelled composite crustal fragment of north Gondwana is amalgamated on top of the Supragetic unit during the late Variscan peri-Moesian amalgamation. However, the original early Pa - leozoic tectonostratigraphic configuration of these three intimate green schist- and medium- to high-grade gneiss-amphibolite basement vestiges (Serbo-Ma - cedonian/Supragetic and Getic) is further perplexed by the presence of poorly documented pre-Variscan (?) lithospheric-scale event. Key words: The Pan-African to Lower subduction/magmatic arc stage led to the Serbo-Macedonian Unit, amalgamation, breakup and dispersal of a cluster of peri-Gondwanan conti- “Lower Complex”, Supragetic nental and oceanic terranes. Breakup and dispersal from the northern shore basement/” Complex”, of the Gondwanan active margin triggered the development of the Paleozoic geotectonic subdivision, deep-marine sedimentary cover (“Kučaj unit” or Getic unit). To make matter Peri-Gondwana Cadomian margin, more complex, prior the Lower Paleozoic terrane agglomeration and sub - Lower Paleozoic tectonic event. sequent dispersal, it appears that a Lower Paleozoic geodynamic linkage is additionally marked by the poorly investigated cross-lithospheric event. This event connects the outboard oceanic Supragetic/“Kučaj” succession with a segment of the former north Gondwanan protobasin (juvenile Serbo-Ma - cedonian Unit).

Апстракт.

Екстерне бејсмент-јединице које се налазе у близини Бал - тичког кратона тј. у домену Мезијског промонторијума представљају колаж, на први поглед, веома сличних, комплексних, издужених поли - кристаластих тела која су махом Пан-Афричког порекла. Пан-Афричко порекло указује да су бејсментски терани настали и нешто касније транспортовани током неопротерозоика и доњег палеозоика на шелфу северне Гондване). Један од најкомплекснијих бејсментских ентитета средњег- до високог степена метаморфизма се налази у оквиру касно - варисцијског сутурног асемблажа, суперпозиционо у алпском стру ктур- ном склопу изнад Супрагетика или некада тзв. “Власинског комплекса“. 1 Geological Survey of , Rovinjska 12, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia. E-mails: [email protected]; [email protected] 2 Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvijić” of the Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Đure Jakšića 9, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia.

41 DARko SPAhIć & TIVADAR GAuDEnyI

Овај сада завршни навлачно-наборни пакет неопротеро зојско-доњo - палеозојске старости је Српско-македонска јединица, тзв. „Доњи комплекс Српско-македонске масе“. Тектонска интеракција изме-ђу ова два ентитета током доњег палеозоика је оверпринтована и прерађена каснијим варисцијским и алпским покретима. Поред високог степена тектонске прерађености овог кристаластог ентитета, студијом се указује на постојање слабо документованог тектонског догађаја преварисцијске Кључне речи тј. доњопалеозојске старости. Овај доњопалеозојски догађај, је могуће Српско-Македонска јединица, био у склопу касно кадомске- до доњопалеозојске тектонске активности „Доњи комплекс“, Супрагетски која је кулминирала амалгамацијом периферних теранских асемблажа, бејсмент/“Власина комплекс“, након чега је уследио латитудинални тектонски дрифт према про - геотектонска: рејонизација, монторијуму Балтичког кратона (Мезијски микрокон тинент). Током Пери-Гондванска кадомска палеозојског тектонског дрифта сукцесија источне Србије („Кучај“/Ге - маргина, доњoпалеозојски тик) је депонована у океанским условима. Сублимација публикованих тектонски догађаj. резултата указује на постојање доњопалеозојских гео динамичких услова који повезују асемблаж океанске коре (бејсмент Супрагетика) са недовољно корелисаним пери-Гондванским издуженим маргиналним басеном (Српско-македонска јединица) и слабо докумен тованог доњo - палеозојског литосферског догађаја.

Introduction

Within the poorly investigated late Paleozoic/Va - sensu Zwi - riscaniéGeOiS context (with AnCUexceptions of contributionseCOUrT of schengebirge intramontane For 60 years now, the polycrystalline neopro - L etnTić al., 1996; i etLiSSArT al., 2005; D et al., terozoic –iMiTrijeVić Lower Paleozoic Serbo-Macedonian Unit 2002; A et al., 2017; P et al., 2018), the ( D , 1959, 1963, 1997)OSSMAT or “… Serbo-Macedonian crystalline inlier belongs to the …” (“… …”; K , 1924) reconfigured southeastern segment of the Central remains to be the most intriguing tectonic unit(s) european Variscan crust (Fig. 1). in the framework of e.g. distributed along the nne–SSW-striking Alpine the pre-Variscan terrane amalgamation and dis persal Carpathian-Balkan fold-and-thrust belt (Fig. 1). stage or in the Pan-African to Lower Pa leo- Despite a significantiMiTrijeVić focus on theiMiTrijeVić Alpine inferences rSTić zoic sense, the scarce recent studies outlined the of local- rUBić( , D , 1997;räUTner D rSTić& K , Serbo-Macedonian Unit as a peri-Gondwanan Cado - e.g., 1999; G etArAMATA al., 1999; K rSTić & K ArA, 1992, MATA mian-type terrane (meaning that the protoliths of c.f. 2002, 2006;AGOrCHeV K & K , 1996; K , these terranes originate from the vicinity of Ca - sensu 2006; Z ArMinATTiet al., 2018) and internationalCHMiD domian orogen formerly accommodated along a community (VAn CinSBerGenet al., 2004; S et al., segment of the distant northerninCHeSTer margin of Gon - 2008, 2020; H et al., 2020) it remains dwana,ArMinATTi chapter 4.5., , W inneMAnnet al., 2002; unclear whether this basement unit belongs to the CCZLOn et al., 2004;iMMerKUS L et al.,einHOLD 2007; Carpatho-Balkanides and/or South Carpathians or O et al., 2007;nTić H et al.,TePHAn 2009; M not. in terms of the Alpine tectonics, to the west, the etBBO al., 2010; A et al., 2016a,b; S et al., 2018; “Lower Complex” of the Serbo-Macedonian Unit A et al., 2020). Current ideas for the neoiLL pro - sensu (hereinafter LC SMU) represents a neotethyan con- terozoicriMMeL supercontinent crustal break-up (W & sensu tinental hinterland (former –Paleogene F , 2018) is thatUrPHy these inherited litho spheric- active margin). However, its easternPAHić realm (towards scale structures (M et al., 2006) were the the Supragetic Unit:räUTner S rSTićet al., 2019/“Lu - predecessors marking the onset of the contrast ing žnica Unit“; K & K , 1992, 2002, Lower Paleozoic interplay. The Lower Paleozoic 2006) remains highly ambiguous, in both, the cross-lithospheric interaction was between the di - Paleo42 zoic- and the Alpine paleogeography and stant subduction/accretionGeol. an. Balk. terra poluos.,nes 2020, microplates 81 (1), 41–66 tectonics (Fig. 1). originating from the north Gondwana and south - 60 years of the Serbo-Macedonian Unit concept: From Cadomian towards Alpine tectonic frameworks

Fig. 1. Tectonic map of the investigated tectonic units (modified after KoUnoV et al., 2010, 2017; Alpidic tectonic concept after SChMid et al., 2008 and BernoULi et al., 2001). Map clearly exhibits the problem of the Serbo- Macedonian Unit to the east of Belgrade or after the Vršac settlement (question mark and rectangle with the question mark). Map includes the positions of the magmatic bodies of Pan-African and Alpine relevance. Jas Jastrebac tectonic window (MAroVić et al., 2007; erAK et al., 2016).

western boundary of the Baltican craton. The Ser - Alpine configuration)? is the LC SMU connected e.g bo-Mace donian Unit as a highly complex cry stalline with the adjoining green schist-facies SuprageticiMi Tri basement inlier documented con trover sies jeVićbase ment/”Vlasina Complex” (concept of D - revolving around its polyphaserUBić tecto no metamorOPOVić- , 1959, 1963, 1995)?; phic evolutionOPOVić ( iLjKOVić., G et al., 1999;erDjiKOV P , (2) What is the exact continuation of the LC SMU 1991; PAGOrCHeV& M , 2000;PAHić G AUDenyiet al., to the north of the Danube river (i.e. is it the Sebeş- c.f. 2014; Z et al., 2015; S & G , Lotru terrane/nappe)?; 2018, 2019). The following issues pending the (3) What was the original depositional-tectonic answers: environment “digesting” suchViGAD a huge volume of (1) is the gneiss-dominating LC SMU also refer - clastic detritus ( A et al., 2017)?; Geol.red toan. asBalk. the poluos., “Serbo-Macedonian 2020, 81 (1), 41–66 Massif” discrete or (4) What is the relationship of the latest ALOGHCam43- the same geotectonic unit (in both, Variscan and brian metamorphic imprint (numeric age by B DARko SPAhIć & TIVADAR GAuDEnyI

ALinTOni et al., 1994) with the poorly documented Ordovician and Cadomian continental AGOrCHeVinheritance (B PAHić et event?; al.,AUDenyi 2010, 2011b, 2014; Z , 2015; S & (5) inAGOrCHeV addition to a documented repeated ana - G , 2018 and references the rein). The men - c.f. texis (Z , 2015 and references therein), tioned peri-Moesian basement systems are po si- during which tectonic event widespread Ordovician tioned at the southwestern edge of the Baltican tectonothermal imprintsnTić were produced (472–456 cratonPAHić reconfigured by the Variscan, eocimmerian Ma, numeric age by A ALinTOniet al., 2016a; Sebeş-Lotru ( S et al., 2019b) and Alpine interference. terrane, ca. 460 Ma; BAGOrCHeVet al., 2010; Ograzh - The westernmost gneiss-dominating basement denACHeVA Unit, 462 Ma; Z et al., 2012, 2015; inlier in Serbia referred to as the LC SMU has an M et al., 2016)?; arcuate contour of a general nnW–SSe strike (Figs. 1, (6) What is the LC SMU and Supragetic basement 2). This inlier outcrops starting from southern Cadomian to Lower Paleozoic tectonic setting, and (romania and Serbia). Crystalline blocks, in cluding e.g. what were the circumstances for such atypical late gneiss-dominated LC SMU are accom mo dated under - imprints? neath the southeastern Banat / southeastern Pan- e.g. (7) What was the role of the LC SMU PAHić in the nonian realm (with the exceptionUKin of the outcrops neotethyan - opening ( , S et exposed at the Vršačke Mts., K et al., 1987). al., 2020), and an PAHićeventual relationship with the Towards Central Serbia and the eastern edge of Paleotethys ( , S et al., 2019b)? and , striking farther through in order to obtain the outline of a Lower Paleo - eastern north , southwestern zoic geodynamic paleoenvironment, the study andAVeZni northern GeOLOšKi Greece ZAVOD (ChalkidikiAHeL peninsula; e.g.,n incor poPAHić rates the AUDenyirecent regional-geologicalPAHić constra - đeLKOVićS LeKSić , 1970; M iMMerKUS’, 1974; A - ints (S & G , 2018, 2019; S et al., , 1982; A et al., 1988; H et al., 2018, 2019 a,b). Study alsoiMMerKUS includes a scarce analy- 2007, 2009; Fig. 1). South of Vršac, the LC SMU ticaleinHOLD data repository OUnOV (H et al.,AGOrCHeV 2009; continues across the Danube (Serbia; Fig. 2), strik - M et al., 2010;nTić K et al., 2012; Z BBO ing towards the Morava river system (Fig. 2), i.e. et al., 2012, 2018; A et al., 2016a, 2017; A et crossing near Crni Vrh (mountain peak), juhor Mt., al., 2020) focusing almost exclusively on the LC SMU. Mojsinjske Mts, Poslonjske Mts, jastrebac Mt., Stalać We tune up the constraints on the regional pre- Hills, Seličevica Mt., Pasjača and farther across Alpine pre-Variscan configuration. By conso- Osogovo Mts. in , reaching the lidating earlier and recent data, we provide a Aegean coast in Greece (Fig. 1. in Bulgaria, it en - rejuvenated data platform, ultimately attempting to copasses the most south western segment of the co- ca outline the im portant Lower Paleozoic cross-litho - untry (Fig. 1), the Kraishte, and Mt. spheric event connecting the pre-Variscan LC SMU Depending on the applied tectonic concept (for Geographic-geologicwith the Supragetic basement. outline review see chapter 4.1 of this paper), the LC SMU Moravsko-Šuma - has . 50 to 100 km in width, with its regional dijska dislo kacija” analog units, reaches the length of over 1000 km. The western bor derline of the LC SMU striking nnW–SSe is re ferrednđeLKOVić to as the “ The westernmostALinTOni edge Moesian microplate (A , 1982). This fault (euxinic craton; B et al., 2011a and referen - sy stemräUTner has therSTić cha racter of a strike-slip fault ces therein) represents the easternmost segment of (K & K , 2002). This western border the orogen agglomeratediéGeOiS with a set of elongated zone of the LC SMU represents a jun ction with the basementeGHeDi units (L et al.,AyDOUTOV 1996 and AneVreferences late Alpine neo tethyan suture referred to therein;ALinTOni S ALiCAet al., 2005;OUnOV H & y ,eGHeDi 1997; as the Vardar Zone. This tectonic lineament can be B AnCU& B eGHeDi, 2012; K et al., 2012; S , traced in Serbia from the river Danube in the north, 442012; i & S , 2017). These ba sement units south wards, near ,Geol. an. Balk. between poluos., 2020, Trstenik 81 (1), 41–66and are of the Avalonian (peri-Amazonian), Ganderian Kruševac, conti nuing between jastrebac and 60 years of the Serbo-Macedonian Unit concept: From Cadomian towards Alpine tectonic frameworks

Moravska The eastern contact zone dislokacija” of the Supragetic unit is the tec tonic lineament locally re- ferred to as theeTKOVić “ nđeLKOVić (P 1930; A , 1982) or the Mo- rava fault system. This nappe system crops out near the town of Golubac, Danube ri - ver (east Serbia) (Fig. 2), striking along the Pek and Mlava rivers, east of the sеt - tlements Alek sinac, niška Banja, passing near Modra Stena farther con tinues in Bulgaria. South wards, this fault system sepa rates the rhodope unit, crossing in north Macedonia and north - ern Greece. To the east of the LC SMU is the Supragetic unit. The two latter systems are separated by theräUTner nappe of AlpinerSTić age (K & K , 2002; Fig. 1). in the frame of Alpine i.e tectonics and paleogeo gra - phy, the LC SMU is considered as a marginal entity of the e.g northwestern Tethys . the eastern overridden margin of the MesozoiciMiTrijeVić Vardar ZoneiMi (TrijeVić., D rSTić, 1997; D i- MiTrijeVić& K , 1999;ArMi D - nATTi et al. 2003CHMiD C - et al.,OZár 2004; S et al., Fig. 2. Carpatho-Balkanides of eastern Serbia including the “Lower Complex” of the Serbo- 2008; V , 2010OBerTSOn and re - Macedonian Unit and Supragetic basement) (inlet from diMiTriJeVić et al., 1967, modified). ferences therein;PAHić r AUDenyiet The question mark denotes the eventual uncertain extension of the Serbo-Macedonian Unit („Lower Complex“). al., 2013; S & G , 2019). There is a general ac - ceptance that the Alpine shortening and thrusting o - e.g ccurred during the Late and latest Cretaceous in connection withAnCU the clo - KopaonikGeol. an. Balk. poluos., Mts., 2020, and 81 cros (1), 41–66 sing near Kumanovo in sure of theLiSSArT Severin oceanic basin ( ., i et al,.45 north Ma cedonia. 2005; P et al., 2017). From the east to the DARko SPAhIć & TIVADAR GAuDEnyI

Historical overview

west, predominantly basement nappes are re - configured duringrAüTner the AlpinerSTić rearrangement and nappe stacking (K & K , 2002, 2006): the The Se european tectonics have been more than s.s. s.l. Lower Danubian, the Upper Danubian, the Severin 150 years in the focus of several generations of (Mid-jurassic ophiolitic rocks), the Getic and the geologists, whereas each generation introduced a Supragetic. The westernmost crustalArAMATA sliver referredrSTić different interpretation. The ideas about the struc- to as the LC SMU (or SMU , K & K , tural positioning of the rhodope (or Thracian rhodopocentrism 1996) is outlinednDjeLKOVić towards the SuprageticiMiTrijeVić basement Massif) аrе in a function of considering the nature ., inrAüTner Serbia (ArSTić , 1982; DPAHić , 1997; and the evolution of the Tethys and subsequent K & K , 2002, 2006; S AyDOUTOVet al., 2019a) Alpine orogenic belt. Many ideas have been intu- andAyDOUTOV Morava nappeAneV in BulgariaOnCHeVA (H , 1989; itively derived from a “ ” or the firstOUe HOUnOV & y , 1997; B et al 2010; research eTerSperformed in OjSiSOViCSthe 19th century by BUeSS K et al., 2012). The (tentative) continuation of (1840), P Vijić(1863), M et al. (1880), S the Getic Unit from romania (Bulgaria–north Ma - (1895) and C (1900). The earliest authors assu - rodopska masa cedonia–Serbia)AGOrCHeV also referredAyDOUTOV to as the StrumaAneV Unit med that the central parts of the Balkan PeninsulaVijić the (ZOUnOV , 1984, 2001; H & y , 1997; are composed of the oldest (crystalline) mass. C great old core or the oldest mountain around which K et al., 2012; Fig. 1). The (Crnook-) Osogovo- (1901, 1903) designates this geologic entity as the were formed the smaller mountains later connect to Lisets Complex has recently been under con sideration rhodope Mass (in Serbian: Vijić ). The it to represent the core-complex exhumed underneathOUnOV rhodope Mass is described by C (1924) as “ Central Crystalline Core the StrumanTić and Supragetic basements (K et al., 2010; A et al., 2017; position of the Fig. 1b and Vijić Centralno kristalasto jezgro DefinitionFig. 2). of the Serbo-Macedonian Unit “. C (1901, 1903) was the first explorer who recognized that the “ ” should chessboard be a discrete unit relative to the rhodope Mass (in Serbian:Vijić ; see Table 1). Vijić C , moreover, formulated a generic tectonic chart, horst-type initially, C (1901, 1902) attributed the crustal describing it as a “ “, composediHAiLOVić of cry - fragment representing a modern-day Serbo-Ma - stalline blocks displaced by the faults. M cedonian Unit as a segment of the “rhodopean (1955) pointed out that this crystalline entityUrATOV has Mass”. After the definition of the Serbo-Macedonian “ ” structural fabric. According to M anticlinorium Unit, during last 60 years a plethora of local and (1949), the Macedonian Massif represents the core international geoscientists attempt to describe this ofeTKOVić a single large, but destroyed anticline, whereas crystalline basement. The LC SMU represents a P (1957, 1960) the SMU landform still member of essential Alpine- and pre-Alpine rele - interprets asiKOšeK the “ ” orOnCHeV a large-scale vance exposed within the hitherto Carpa- anticline. S (1971) and B (1971) s.l. thian-Balkan regional geotectonic charts. With a few independently from each other stated thatnDjeLKOVić this mass exceptions, the published studies discussing the has featuresrUBić of a single mega anticline (A , s.s Alpine configuration in the frame of Tethyan 1977; G , 1999) (Table 1). tectonics describing the South Carpathian/Car - The VijićThracian Massif (rhodope Mass accord - pathian-Balkan nappe stack (including LC SMU, ing to C , 1901) had often been used for a tectonic so-called “Lower Complex”). The recent studies of entity that occupies the rhodope Massif . of the LC SMU segment in Serbia, though scarce, Bulgaria and Greece andth the parts of the north attempt to integrate the knowledge on the Pan- Macedonia and Serbia (“Serbo-MacedonianAGOrCHeV Mass”) African and Variscan geodynamic evolution of the (at the beginning of the 20 century, after Z , cluster of displaced basementnTić inliers of oceanic and 1998).OSSMAT 46continentalPAHić AUDenyi affinity (e.g., PAHićA et al., 2016, 2017; K (1924 p. 122,Geol. an.125) Balk. concludespoluos., 2020, 81that (1), 41–66 the S & G , 2018; S et al., 2019a). rhodope Mass for the Balkan Peninsula is the same 60 years of the Serbo-Macedonian Unit concept: From Cadomian towards Alpine tectonic frameworks

Srpsko makedonska masa jeVić The marbles, a regular member of the Bulga - geologic entity asOCH it is the Central Zone for the (1959) emphasized in order to uncouple the rian rhodope Mass, is absent in the “Serbian eastern Alps. K (1930 OSSMAT p. 3) S supported this “Serbian Macedonian Mass” ( the youngest Macedonian Mass” complex with an exception of the opinion. ne vertheless, the K ’ conclusion was ) from rhodope: orogenic system on the Balkan Peninsula that is “Vidojevica Series” not further developedOnCHeV by other authors of that time a) accommodated obliquely to South Carpathians and Feldspar mica-schists and mica-rich (Table 1). B (1936) in his most detailed re - Balkanides, further associating these systems in a which are a constituent of the “Lower Complex” port introduce the Kraishtides “ form of a Balkan arc (lowermost metamorphic unit) of the “Serbian Ma - . cedonian Mass”, in the rhodope Mass have rather b) escaped poor mica content The “Serbian Macedonian Mass” can be cha - ” (the tec to nic unit accommo - thrust land decken - racterized by the often interchange of lithofacies, as datedOnCHeV in the southwest Bul garia). According to land the rocks are horizontally, but also stratigraphically (vertically) B (1936), the Kraish tides “ ” from the . considerably folded, having the fold axes trending whereas the rhodopean Mass has a prominent con - Balkanides. The Kraishtides were depicted as an c) nnW–SSe, i.e. perpendicular to the principal stress sistency of the rock formations allochotonous system or as a „ “ (“ trend... The “Serbian Macedonian Mass” can be chara - “). According to the author, “ “...only in Paleo gene and cterized by the linear folds with gentle b axis rotation, neoge ne times, the Strouma (Kraishtid) lineament whilst the rhodope Mass is abundant with, so-called AGOrCHeV . played the role of a fault belt with con siderable “brachi-form structures”. Additionally, linear features “. Z (2006) in the review of the d) dextral strike-slip movements, and repeated rifting in are restricted to a few structurally unstable zones Kraishtides concludes transtensional conditions ) Another essential argument of diMiTriJeVić (1959) was that the Bulgarian structures of the rhodope Mass do not continue westwards directly ArA nOFF . into the “Serbian Macedonian Mass” ” (Table 1). j (1938) e rhodope Mass has own points that rhodope Mass entity in the western continuity in the Macedonian Massif (and the eastern) parts have ownUrATOV shortening fold and thrust episodes, whereas M (1949 p. 18– . 19) indicat ed that the „ The crystalline base has asymmetric structures eTKOVić AKSiMOVić “. A similar which are composed of numerous ratheriMiTrijeVić complex opinion had P & M (1976; p. 165). A synformsArOVić and antiforms (according to D , considerablyOnCHeV different perspective on this subject 1995; M , 2001). After that time, the “Serbian Macedonian-Pannonian Mass Makedonsko-pa - e.g. the crystalline belt exhibited B (1940, 1943) pointing out that Macedonian Mass” was established and accepted nonska masa between the Carpatho-Balkanides and the Vardar Zone the area between the Kra ištides and Vardar Zone within a scientific community as a tectonic unit does not represent any kind of “mass“ even is not an represents an uniform old massif designating as the crosscutting SoutheastOBer europe (Table 1). Some early “old“ and a “middle“ mass “ “ ( rese archers, K (1952), “ Moravides thrust over the Carpatho-Balkanides iHAiLOVić ). Later, similariMiTrijeVić opinions exhibited M (1955) and D (1959, 1963) (Table 1). . Kober this unit entitled to For an extended period of time, the prevailing “ ODArCeA “. hypothesis between geologists was that the rho - Later,nDjeLKOVić a similar perspective had C nDjeLKOVić(1964), dope Mass is an uniform tectonic unit. The results AUPU (1963, 1965,rUBić 1976) and A & of systematic, decades-long field-geological sur - L (1967) (after G et al., 1999) (Table 1). With veying for the purpose of the Basic Geological Map the acceptance of the plate tectonics, the mobilistic of in scale 1: 100,000 exhibited that the concepts have exhibited broadly different stand - crystalline rocks of Serbia and Macedonia (north pointseWey relative to the “Serbian Macedonian Mass”. Macedonia) differ in comparison with those in D et al (1974) described the “SerbianHAneLL Mace - Geol.Bulgaria an. Balk. (with poluos., an 2020, exception 81 (1), 41–66 of its SW parts).iMiTri The donian Mass” as the rhodope Mass, C et al.47 following key features and discrepancies, D - (1976) pointed out that the “Serbian Macedonian DARko SPAhIć & TIVADAR GAuDEnyI

Table. 1. historical overview of the SMU and associated tectonic hypotheses.

48 Geol. an. Balk. poluos., 2020, 81 (1), 41–66 60 years of the Serbo-Macedonian Unit concept: From Cadomian towards Alpine tectonic frameworks

Table. 1. Continued.

Geol. an. Balk. poluos., 2020, 81 (1), 41–66 49 DARko SPAhIć & TIVADAR GAuDEnyI

„ranovac–Vlasina–osogovo terrane”

s.s. i MiTrijeVićMass” is an individual part of rUBićthe rhodope Mass, D - . The west com - (1974, 1995) and G (1980) described posite terrane kept its original name (“Serbian the “Serbian MacedonianAGOrCHeV Mass” as an independent Macedonian Massif” ), whereas the “ranovac–Vla - tectonic unit. Z (1976) introduced the poly - sina–Osogovo terrane” was assigned to the Car- cyclic Ograzhden complex in a SW Bulgarian part ofA patho-Balkanides.LeKSić Similar OGDAnOVićattempts were in the past GOrCHeVthe “Serbian Macedonian Mass”. Later in 1996 (Z - A et al. (1974) and B (1976) pointing e.g., , 1996) gives more details about the Og- out that the eastern parts of the “Serbian Macedonian razhdean Supergroup (Table 1). Massif” belong to a system of the inner napes of the e.g. s.s. iMiTrijeVićThe term “SerbianiMiTrijeVić Macedonian Mass” coined by Carpatho-Balkanides. FollowingArAMATA the “Serbian Mace- both units derived from the same D ( D 1959, 1963), describes a donian Massif”räUTner conceptrSTić of K (1997), in the Bucovino-Getic microplate, the western, Serbo-Ma - discrete unit in the classical subdivisionACOBSHAGen of the paper of K & K (2002) for the “Serbian cedonian part overthrust towards the west the geology of northern Greece ( , j , 1986). Macedonian Massif” and Supragetic units has ophiolitic Vardar zone, whereas the eastern, Supragetic Later it was recognized as Pirgadikia-, Kerdilion- and been introduced: ” part obviously belongs to the east-vergent Carpathian Vertiskos Units that belongiMMerKUS to the “Serbian Mace - nappe system donianAyDOUTOV Massif” (afterAyDOUTOV H et al., 2006)Ay DOUTOV (Table 1).AneV H (H , 1989, 1991; H & y , 1997) from the Thracian Massif (“Serbian Macedonian Massif” and rhodopean Mass) diffe - ”. The two units are dif ferentiated by a rentiate the Balkan Terrane or its westernmost parts prominent (probably dextral) shear zone, extending as a segmentiMiTrijeVić of the “Serbian Macedonian Massif” a few hundreds of meters in width. The zone is of (def. after D , 1959). The easternmost parts post-Upper Cretaceous age being mostly covered by in Serbia are later referred to as theOPOVić “ranovac-Vla - younger sediments. The shear zone is exposed at sina-Osogovo Terrane” (Table 1). P (1991) use Vršac, between Veliki- and Mali-jastrebac, north of lithostratigraphical and metallogenic reasons to Leskovac (Dušanovo mylonite zone). The aforemen - subdivide the “Serbian Macedonian Massif” into the tioned report introduced a new structural framework e.g., two units: Morava Massif inirić the north and of the Carpatho-Balkanides (Oraviţa, niš, and Sofia), rhodope on the south. ć (1996 p. 17) in his whereas the Serbo-Macedonian Unit and the Vardar monography, criti cized the “Serbian Macedonian Zone were introduced as a segment ofOZárOVá Carpatho- Massif” as a „mass“ because „it can be characterized Balkanides. A few recent authors ( V et al., by a series of different mophostructures, horsts and 2009) mentioned that the “ranovac-Vlasina-Osogovo faults, having differentiated geological formations”, Terrane” and the Supragetic are synonymous (Table The author underlines that the “Serbian Macedonian 1). The authors published in the colored tectonic s.l. Massif” cannotrSTić be describedArAMATA as a “uniform mass“ sketch of the Carpatho-Balkanides withinräUTner the s.s. (Table 1). K & K iMiTrijeVić(1992) subdivided the geologicalrSTić map of Carpatho–Balkanides (K & harta geneto-tectonicâ SMU (defined by D , 1959 of “Serbian K , 2006). However, this new map is more-less a europei Alpine central şi de sud-est” Macedonian Mass” ) into “Serbian Macedonian theräUTner same as itrSTić is the version published previously by Massif” and “ranovac–Vlasina Terrane”. The “ra - K & K (2002). The aforementioned map s.l. s.s. The major tectonic units novac-Vlasina Terrane” was incorporated intoArAMATA the along with the earlier map (“ Alps, Car pathians and dinarides Carpatho-Balkanides.rSTić Same year, similarly, K An DULeSCU ) introduced by &K (1996) subdivided the Serbian Macedonian S (1984) seems to be a groundwork for the Massif” into „Serbian Macedonian Massif” and paper and associated map “ the south, in Serbia and western “Vlasina Unit”, according to the mentioned subdi - CHMiD “ introduced a bit the west Bulgaria, we also included the structurally highest visi on the “Vlasina Unit” belongsArAMATA to the Car- later by S et al. (2008). This paper contains composite terrane of “Serbian Macedonian Massif” and unit, referred to as Serbo-Macedonian “Massif” (e.g. patho-Balkanides. One year later, K (1997) rather ambiguous observations of the “Serbian Ma - subdivided the “Serbian Macedonian Massif” (coined cedonian Massif”: “… by50 Dimitrijević, 1959) into the two subunits: ” Geol. an. Balk. poluos., 2020, 81 (1), 41–66 60 years of the Serbo-Macedonian Unit concept: From Cadomian towards Alpine tectonic frameworks

diMiTriJeVić 1959, 1997), into this nappe sequence. however, we do not imply that this also applies to a unit that carries the same name in Greece and which AnCU experienced a severe Alpine metamorphic overprint peri-Gondwanan fragment (Table 1). i et al. (Kilias et al., 1999) (2005) recognized the tectonic similarities in the BanatnTić Mts. (Suprageticum) and the SMU (Table 1). s.s. A et al. (2016a,b) defined a Paleozoic “Galatian ”. The authors am biguously supra-terrane“ whereas the author incorporated the proposed that the northern parts of the same ‘eastern Veles Series’ and the “SerbianiMiTrijeVić Macedonian tectonic unit (“Serbian Macedonian Massif”) are Massif” OBerTSOnsuggested earlier by D BBO(1995, incorporated into the Carpatho-Balkanides as the 1997), r et al., (2013) (Table 1). A et al. part of the “Dacia Mega-Unit”, whereas for its (2020) just recently indicated an orthobasic origin southern limb authors provide no comment con - of the Greek segment indicating a pre- age sidering the tectonicCHMiD configuration. OnVeTKOVić the basis of instead SilurianiMMerKUS that was pointed out by some earlier this paper of S et al. (2008), C et al. authorsDiscussion (H et al., 2009). (2015) introduced the Serbo–Macedonian Massif as the structural up permost part of “Dacia terrane” and Overview of the hitherto geodynamic a more internal unit relative to the above-described concepts neither unique, nor old nor Carpatho–Balkanides (compa rable to the Supragetic middle unit napperUBić of romania). G et al. (1999) stated that the “Serbian Ma - cedonian Massif” is “ ”. This system, according to the authors, The LC SMU and Supragetic basement as the is comprised of the two tectonic layers: the “Upper metamorphic inliers have been considered within Complex” – Moravicum, and the “Lower Complex” – several, rather contrasting tectonic concepts with an jastrebicum (jastrebac tectonic window, western abundancePAHić of discrepancies (see also discussion in margin of the LC SMU). The Moravicum is consisting S et al., 2019a): iMiTrijeVić of the juhor– composite terrane and the (1) The tectonic concept of D (1959, “ranovac–Vlasina–OsogovoArAMATA rSTić terrane” (terranes de - 1963, 1992, 1997, 1999) which configured the SMU fined after rUBićK & K , 1996). The most recent (LC SMU and Supragetic/“Upper Complex”) as a paper of G et al. (1999, 2005) suggests that the discrete first-order tectonic unit. SMU is comprised Moravides Moravicum and jastrebicum should be a part of the of the two subunits: the low- grade metamorphic Carpatho-Balkanides denominated as the “inner complex (“Upper Complex”), and the medium- to Carpatho-Balkanides” (Table 1). high-grade metamorphic complex (LC SMU); With regards to the southern extension of the LC (2) The tectonic concept of the which SMU in Bulgaria, north Macedonia andiCOU Greece, there explains a set of the four nappes within the first- is a separate ongoing discussion. r et al. (1998) order entity (interpreting also as the southern according to the analysis of the metamorphism and extensionnđeLKOVić of the romanian Supragetic) introduced sensu some rather unclear observations classified the by A (1982); “Serbian Macedonian Massif”AGOrCHeV as a partArMinATi of the rho - (3) Milestone of the Alpine concept in the dope Massif (Table 1). Z (in C et al., Southern Carpathians portrayed the SMUAnDULeSCU as a seg - 2004) concluded that the “Serbian Macedonian ment of the Getic/Supragetic Unit ( S , Massif” was initially a discrete entity – a peri-GonAGOrCHeV - 1984). This configuration is comprised of several s.s. dwananiLOVAnOVić fragment “Dardania“. A bit later (Z basement terranes interfingered by a networkAnCU of & M , 2006) still kept the “Serbian Mace - Variscan and Alpine thrusts (see also i et al., donian Massif” as an open question because the 2005 and references therein); “Serbian Macedonian Massif” is a peri-Gondwanan (4) The concept of the SMU which is exclu - fragment or the relict of theeyTCHeVA pre-Cadomian continent. sively the LC SMU which means a discrete first-order TheGeol. an.latest Balk. poluos.,analytics 2020, 81of (1), P 41–66 et al. (2015) cor - terrane, accommodated to the west of the contem 51 - roborates that the “Serbian Macedonian Massif” is a porary “ranovac-Vlasina-Osogovo Terrane” or the DARko SPAhIć & TIVADAR GAuDEnyI

sensu

rSTić ArAMATA SuprageticArAMATA in SerbiarSTić ( KräUTner& K rSTić , 1992; Mesozoic configuration favoring the interpretation K & K , 1996; K & K , 2002; of the Alpine–Carpathian–Balkan fold-and-thrust Fig. 3a). The authors divided the Supragetic basement belt as an aggregation of the lithotectonic units into the “Upper Supragetic” (“Bosca– Vlasina referred to as of MesozoicCHMiD aggregated “terranes” – nappe”) and the “Lower Supragetic” (“Locva–ra novac– “Major tectonic units” (S et al., 2008). Ac - Poružnica nappe”) excluding a non-differentiated cordingly, to the Alpine basement “terranes” (Su- Serbo-Macedonian Unit or the LC SMU. Despite a pragetic basement and LC SMU) are the members of significanträUTner contributionrSTić to the Alpine configuration the “Dacia Mega-Unit”. This terrane represents an (K & K , 2002, 2006), it remains unclear ag glomerated terrane (probably depicted by the which unit or terrane makes the northern extension similar exhumation times) connecting the pre- of the LC SMU in romania; Mesozoic exotic- and local Alpine allochthones; (5) The recent tectonic synthesis enclosing the (6) The pioneering pre-Alpine or the Variscan- central part of See (including the LC SMU and Su - based reconstructionAyDOUTOV explaining the Variscan or pragetic), excludes the correlation with its basementCHMiD “Thracian suture” (H , 1989) of Southern analogs in north Macedonia and Greece (S et Carpathians, e Serbia, nW Bulgaria. The definition of al., 2008, 2020). This attempt synthesizes a regional the Balkan terrane (includes the Supragetic base -

Fig. 3. a. Terranes of eastern Serbia (inlet from KrSTić et al., 2005; position on Fig.1b): VČM, “Vrška Čuka – Miroč” (Lower danubian), SPP, “Stara Planina - Poreč” (Upper danubian), KU, “Kučaj” (Getic), RV, “ranovac – Vlasina” (Supragetic), LU, “Lužnica Unit” (West Kraishte), SM, Serbo-Macedonian Unit. Question mark denotes the correlation problem between segments in Serbia and those in ro- mania; b. Map of lithospheric thickness (km) for Serbia and north Macedonia. 1, isolines of lithospheric thickness, 2, zone of neogene magmatic activation (modified after MiLiVoJeVić, 1993). The map of the crustal thickness indicated the areas experienced the (upper) crustal extension. The minimum crustal thickness of ca. 20 km is associated with the surface SMU slivers.

52 Geol. an. Balk. poluos., 2020, 81 (1), 41–66 60 years of the Serbo-Macedonian Unit concept: From Cadomian towards Alpine tectonic frameworks

e.g

ment) and Thracian terrane (includesAyDOUTOV the LC SMU) east-vergent nappe (Serbia; Fig. 3a). The LC SMU is i.e. ofAyDOUTOV Pan-AfricanAneV inheritance (AneV., H , 1989;in positioned to the west, on top of the documented CHeSTerH & y , 1997; y et al., 2005; W - MesozoicPAHić sutureAUDenyi referred to as the (east) Vardar Zone et al., 2002, 2006); (S & G , 2019 and references therein; Fig. (7) A recent attempt of the reconstruction of 1). Towards the eastern boundary towards the early Paleozoic tectonics based on the detrital Supragetic Unit, the interface is re presented by an zircon analysesnTić of the LC SMU and Supragetic east-verging nappe (Fig. 3a). nevertheless, the very basement (A et al., 2016b) was driven by a character of the boundary varies along the strike. in Paleozoic paleogeographic reconstructionTAMPFLi favoring the vicinity of Mali jastrebac Mt. (see Fig. 1 for the “Galatian Superterrane” proposed by S et position)rAK interface is PAHićin the formAUDenyi of the shear zone al. (2013 and referenced therein). A set of samples (e et al., 2016; S & G , 2019). The (with sedimentary protolith) collected from the apatite fission track ages derived from the samples Supragetic basement, LC SMU and its regional collected across the central-southern LC SMU (Serbia) analogs (Ograzhden unit). The diagrams exhibited point to the nTić Late Cretaceous cooling (97±21 and the two main source systems of the recycled grains. 73±13 Ma; A et al., 2016a). Similar age and the The dominant ages are: (i) Supragetic basement has low-tem perature thermochronology (zircon and distinctive peak of 540 Ma (lowermost Cambrian), apatite fission-track from gneisses and mica schists (ii) within the LC SMU there are two peaks – 560 Ma of the “Morava unit” or the LC SMU (chlorite-sericite and the distinctive peak of 460 Ma. schists of the “Boljevac–Vukanja sub-unit”) indicated AnCUDespite a significanträUTner effort ofrSTić regional authorsALin the late early to earlyrAK late Cretaceous exhumation (iTOni et al., 2005; K & KnTić , 2002; B - times (~110–90Ma; e et al., 2016). Similar eocene et al.,AGOrCHeV 2010, 2012, 2014; A et al., 2016b, to the Oligocene exten sional core-complex event 2017;yDOnAKiS Z , 2015AnCU and referenceseGHeDi therein;PAHić exhumednTić the Osogovo–Lisets Metamorphic Complex K AUDenyiet al., 2016;PAHić i & S , 2017; S (A et al., 2016a; Fig. 4). However, the Alpine & G , 2018; S et al., 2019a), it is still criteria (nappe stacking architecture and its ver - difficult to even infer the complete Alpine archi - gence), does not provide a satisfactory correlation tecture and displaced Variscan imprints. Thus, a level between these basement units tectonically proper definition and outlining the original LC SMU displaced within the region. One of the prominent in cludes the con nection with the Supragetic Unit examples isAnCU the greenshist-facies Miniş unit in and its basement is of vital importance (Fig. 1, 3a). romania (i et al., 2005). At the first glance, this To make matters more complex, the southern unit which requires further correlation with the continuation of the LC SMU (north Mace donia, Serbo-Macedonian“Lužnica Unit” in eastern Unit Serbia within (Fig. 3a).the pre-Alpine context Greece) has indeed another set of peculiarities:iMiTrijeVić a presencenTić of the “eastern Veles PAHićSeries” (D , 1997; A et al., 2016b; S et al., 2019b; position in Fig. 1); the Vertiskos unit of northern Greece (southerniMMerKUS extension of the LC SMU) is of Silurian- (H BBO et al., 2009) or still of pre- The LC SMU is comprised of the metamorphic Silurian age (A et al., 2020), whereas the rocks ofeLeOn the neoproterozoic to Cambro–Ordovician Supragetic basement is absent in Greece. age (D et al., 1972)nTić of late Cadomian paleo - The modern ultra-thin slivered crustal configu - continental inheritance (A et al., 2016b). The wes- ration of the LC SMU is largely depicted by the tern segment of the LC SMU is comprised of medium- deep-crustal geophysical dataiLiVOjeVić beneath the inve - to high-grade predominantly gneiss, mica-schist, stigated basement inlier (M , 1993; Fig. 3b). quartzite, amphibolite-facies system with theALenić sporadic With regards, the Alpine structural configuration or occurrencenđeL of KOVić mar bles andiMiTrijeVić (K et PAal., Geol.boundaries an. Balk. poluos., of the 2020, inlier, 81 (1), 41–66the overprinted interface Hić1975; A ArOVić, 1982; D rAK, 1995, 1997; S 53- between the Supragetic and Getic is in the form of the , 2006; M et al., 2007; e et al., 2016). DARko SPAhIć & TIVADAR GAuDEnyI

480 Ma to 550 Ma. The age of the Ograzhden Unit is re - ported as ~462–451 Ma (ortho- and para metamor ph - ic rocks are dated with a combination of LA-iCP-MS and iD-TiMSAGOrCHeV U/Pb zircon methods, Z ACHeVA et al., 2012, 2015; M eyTCHeVAet al., in-situ 2016) whereas P et al. (2015) in the Ograzhden and Belasitsa Mountains use iD- TiMS with the LA-iCP-MS U-Pb zircon dating suggesting the 450–455 Ma age of the Ograzhden ortho - gneisses. A segment with the Silurian age of LC SMU is documented within the au - Fig. 4. The sketch representing the eastern Supragetic contact zone towards the Carpatho- gengneisses (orthogneisses) Balkanides and rhodope Unit – Serbia, Bulgaria and republic of north Macedonia (simplified of theiMMerKUS Vertiskos Unit in Greece after hAydoUToV & yAneV, 1997; KoUnoV et al., 2012 and references therein).The geotectonic (H et al., 2009). inheritance of the greenschist-facies rocks remains unclear: Supragetic (Morava nappe) or The peculiar medium- “Kučaj Unit”/Getic? Segment of the “Thracian suture”, and its tentative continuation in Serbia. grade Variscan metamor- phism of the LC SMU was recently dated according to the overprint of thenTić Silurian igneous rocks (A et al., 2016b). The earlier results in the outcrops of juhor–Stalać Mts., the age of indicatedALOGH the early PaleozoicAGOrCHeV or lateiLOVAnOVić Cambrian event granite dated by the rb–Sr yields the lowermost (B et al., 1994; Z & M , 2006), CambrianeLeOn to Lo wer Ordovician age (541 to 475 Ma; whereas the am phibolite facies overprintiMiTrijeVić is D et al., 1972). Gneisses of the Mojsinje Mt. have attributed to aeDAriS Variscan orogenic event (D theeLeOn neoproterozoic (ediacarian) age (547 Ma; et al., 1967; M et al., 2003). However, as the LC D et al., 1972). The post-meta morphic granite SMU is positioned far from the Variscan Carpathian- plutonsiLOVAnOVić are dated at ~450iLOVAnOVić and 347 Ma, respectively BalkanPAHić front (location of the late Paleozoic suture at (M , 1989; M et al., 1998 and re fe - S et al., 2019), it remains unclear in which rences therein). The presence of the Vučje granitoid manner the LC SMU was overprinted reaching the of magmatic protolith marks the late Cadomian po- medium- to high-grade level (similar to some of the sition of the LC SMU, as well as the rocks of basement units of the Getic basement; Fig. 3a) juhor-Stalać system (central part of the LC SMU). in whereas the more internal pro ximate Supragetic sensu general, clastic pro tolith (psephites-psaiMiTrijeVić mmites) domi - basement has a greenschist-facies imprint. Thus, the nates the entire LC SMU (D , 1997). original tecto nostratigraphic relationship between The LCAGOrCHeV SMU and the OUnOV ana log Ograzhden Unit the LC SMU and the Supragetic basement is the vital ( Z , 1967; K et al. 2012; Fig. 4) criterion for successful de ciphering of the modern 54have the two prominent synoptic density peaking of tectonic framework. Geol. an. Balk. poluos., 2020, 81 (1), 41–66 the ma gmatic and metamorphic zircon spectra of 60 years of the Serbo-Macedonian Unit concept: From Cadomian towards Alpine tectonic frameworks

Scarce Variscan and pre-Variscan early Paleozoic imprints several deformational events. More precisely, exactly in the case of the LC SMU and the Supragetic basement (exhumed) crustal contact or the shear- zone of the Mali jastrebacrAK Mt. (Central Serbia, see As a segment of , it is obvious that Pan-AfricanFig. 1 for position) to Lower (e etPaleozoic al., 2016). the Variscan, pre-Variscan imprints or original tec- paleocontinental inferences and a peculiar tono-stratigraphic relationship between the LC SMU Ordovician imprint and SuprageticLeKSić suffered from the repeatediMiTrijeVić tectonic reworking (A et al., 1988; also in D , 1997). However, the pre-Alpine kinematic markers or tectonic indicators of the neoproterozoic–LowernTić sensu Paleozoic magmatic episodes (A et al., 2016b) A typifying Cadomian section include the asso - imprinted into the Carpatho-Balkanides/South Car - ciated basementAnCe units of ca UrHy2.0–2.2 Ga West African pathian “terrane” assemblage are: crust (n et al., 2008; M et al., 2012; Fig. 5): AyDOUTOVLate Paleozoic sutureLiSSArT (“Thracian suture”; (i) the oldest segments are of the Palaeoproterozoic H , 1989; P et al., 2018). The late age (icartian gneisses, ca. 2 Ga), followed by (ii) the Paleozoic suture connecting the “Protomoesian”, Cryogenian plutonic complex of ca. 750 Ma. (iii) The “Balkan Terrane” and the “Thracian microconti - ediacaran turbidites with the presence of mafic nents” (the “Thracian suture”) placing the obducted volcanics, conglomerates, inclusions of acid vol- -bearing volcanic arc (Struma Diorite/FroAyDOUTOV - canics (ca. 650) (iv) the Cambrian redbeds (ca. 542 losh assembly of the neoproterozoic age; H , Ma), (v) the Cambro-Ordovician clastic series with 1989) (Fig. 4). The zone is later characterized as a involve ment of acidic volcanics (granites). The early pre-Mesozoic west-verging thrust, positioningrSTić the Paleozoic clastic rocks in Cadomian segments yield SuprageticArAMATA basement over the LC SMU (K & age clustersUrPHy of ca. 0.60–0.65 Ga, 2.0–2.2 Ga, 2.4 Ga and K ., 1996). in terms of paleogeography, the 2.6 Ga (M et al., 2012 and references therein). presence of the major Carpathian-Balkan Paleozoic The evident cluster of ca. 550 Ma within the Su - suture just recently wasOnCHeVA proposed at the expensePAHić of pragetic basement indicates minimum depositio nal closing rheic Ocean (B et al., 2010; S et age with the abundancenTić of 2.2 to 2.4 Ga old grains sensu al., 2019). Moreover, the back-arc of the (zircon spectra from A et al., 2016b). The LC SMU age accommodatedAKAriADZe within the opposedLiSSArT distinguished in the vicinity of the Paleoproterozoic Danubian basement (Z et al., 2012; P West African basement source is AMSOnfitting with the Ava- et al., 2017). it includes the cluster of the Variscan lonian minimum zone ( S et al., 2005). ca andOVAnOVić late Variscan granitoids within the Getic40 unit39 Low number of late Mesoproterozoic zircons (j et al., 2019 and references therein). The (1.6–1.0 Ga)nTić determined in the Ograzhden Unit to Permian age by the Ar/ Ar (samples by A et al., 2016b) does not exclude the plateau results ( . 351 Ma to 284 Ma, in mica- nTićand influ ence by an Avalonian source. chlorite schists, respectively; numeric age by A it appears that juvenile LC SMU was a kind of et al., 2017) for the Vrvi Kobila shear zone (south- neoproterozoic marginal basin associated with the east Serbia; LC SMU) identified a late Variscan north Gondwanan foredeep (includingnTić the Ava lonian- in vol vement of the LC SMU. Cadomian magmatic arc stage; A et al., 2016). The recently, in a more external position (near the neoproterozoic relationship with the Supragetic interface of the LC SMU, Sebeş-Lotru terrane and basement is still ambiguous, despite a widespreadnTić Supragetic basement) anotherAnCU still enigmaticeGHeDi pre- neoproterozoic to early Cambrian magmatism (A Variscan suture is depicted (i & S , 2017). et al., 2016) connecting these two basement units. in this context, as pointed in the previous chapters, The perplexing relationship is further markedAVLOVić by the there is a high likelihood that the majority of the presence of Lower Ordo vician brachiopods (P , Geol.neo proterozoican. Balk. poluos., – 2020, Lower 81 (1), Cambrian 41–66 to Lower Ordovi- 1977). To make mat ters more complex, the presence55 cian depositional or tectonic structures underwent of a wi despread Middle Ordovician magmatic event DARko SPAhIć & TIVADAR GAuDEnyI

sedimentary cover belonging to the “Kučaj/GeticrSTić Unit” (latestPAHić Ordovician – Silurian; sensu K et al., 2005;Conclusions c.f. S et al., 2019a and references therein).

A short summary after 60 years of working in the complex Serbo-Macedonian basement entity is as follows: – The LC SMU represents a segment of wider continental margin of neoproterozoic–Lower Ordo - vician age imprinted with a set of Cadomian and early Paleozoic isotopic characteristics. This setting reflects a protracted Pan-African to Lower Paleozoic setting of peri-Gondwanan nappes; – LC SMU is a highly complex crustal amalga - mation (no evidence of cratonic crust; Fig.AGOrCHeV 5) with the documented repeated anatexis (Z , 2015). The Supragetic basementnTić is an ocean floor assemblyPAHić of the similar age (A et al., 2016b; S et al., 2019 and references therein); – in a broader tectonic context, we suggest that Fig. 5. Synoptic stratigraphic chart of the Cadomian continent these peri-Gondwanan systems (in the configura - (after MUrPhy et al,. 2012, simplified).The comparison with the tion of Alpine nappes) with distinctly different LC SMU: LC SMU is fitting with the uppermost Cadomian events, basements were under direct control of the south - a segment of Cadomian continental platform i.e. margin basin. ward sub duction of an early Paleozoic ocean. This terrane assembly LC SMU-Supragetic initially amalgamated along the north Gondwanan – Ca - domian continental margin involving an unknown event that occurred sometime during post-Cam - nTić brian. in paleogeogra phical terms, both peri-Gon- (472–456 Ma, emplacement of mafic dykes; A et dwanan systems (the LC SMU and the Supra- al., 2016) with almost identical age is docuALin mented TOni getic/Getic) were situated in an outer flank of the within the Sebeş-Lotru terrane,AGOrCHeV ca. 460 Ma; B Pan-African margin; et al., 2010;ACHeVA Ograzhden unit; Z et al., 2012, – Post-Lower Paleozoic events significantly dis - 2015; M et al., 2016). Such early Paleozoic rupted the original configuration of the two imprint pattern suggests a more complex “intra-TePHAn ad joining systems: LC SMU and Supragetic base - Ordovician” lithospheric-scale episode (see S ment. Despite significant tectonodepositional et al., 2019, for a discussion). extension and the onset discrepancies, both systems can be regarded as of the Paleozoic latitudinal drift of these peri- Acknowledgementsdiscrete entities inArAMATA the Alpine rSTić structural plan as Gondwanan terranes begun after this peculiar stage. suggested by the K & K (1996). This stage can tentatively be marked by the contact between latter terranes (Fig.4). The separation from the northern Gondwana mainland enabled the This research did not receive any specific grant from oceanic56 spreading and drift that produced deep- Geol. an. Balk. poluos., 2020, 81 (1), 41–66 marine conditions and the formation of the funding agencies in the public, commercial or not-for- 60 years of the Serbo-Macedonian Unit concept: From Cadomian towards Alpine tectonic frameworks

nTić OUnOV riVić eTZeL eyTCHeVA profit sectors. The paperVAn benefitedAGOrCHeV from the constructive international Journal of earth A , M.,VOn K UADT, A., T , B., W , A., P , Sciences, review of Prof. Dr i Z from Bulgarian i. & Q , A. 2016a. Alpine thermal events in ReferencesAcademy of Sciences. the central Serbo-Macedonian Massif (south - eastern Serbia). nTić 105eyTCHeVA (5):1485–1505.VOn UADT OUnOV A riVić, M., P erAFiMOVSKi, i., QASeV , A., erDjiKOV K , A., BBO ViGAD erDeS T eTZeL, B., S , T., T , G., G , i. & Lithos Gondwana A , A., A , D. & G , A. 2020. Crustal W , A. 2016b. Pre-Alpine evolution of a seg - research, evolution of peri-Gondwana crust into present ment of the north-Gondwanan margin: Geo- day europe: The 527 Serbo-Macedonian and chronological and geochemical evidence from rhodope massifs as a case study. . 356-357: the central Serbo-Macedonian Massif. LeKSić105295. iMiTriADiS ALenić TOjAnOV nTić 36:OUnOV 523–544.riVić PiKinGS in younger Fold Belts A AGOrčeV, V., D , S., K , M., S , r., & A , M.D., K , A., T , B. & S , r. 2017. international Journal of earth Sciences, ZOUBeK , i. 1988.OGné Serbo-MacedonianOZHOUKHArOV Massif.rAUTner in: evidence of Variscan and Alpine tectonics in the Z , V., C , j., K , D. & K , structural and thermochronological record of the H. (eds.). . central Serbo-Macedonian Massif (south-eastern LeKSićWiley & Sons,ALenić 779–820.AnTić ADži Serbia). A , V., K , M., P , n. & H , e. 1974. ViGAD106 (5): 1665–1692.OrAG BBO erDeS Gondwana istorijsko-geološka evolucija kontinentalne, pre- A , D., M , n., A , A. & G , A. 2017. research, lazne i okeanske litosfere u Srbiji i susednim Detrital rutile U-Pb perspective on the origin of Zbornik „Metalogenija i koncepcije oblastima. [Historical geology of the evolution of the great Cambro-Ordovician sandstone of north geotektonskog razvoja Jugoslavije” continental, transitional-oceanic and oeanic li - Gondwana and its linkage to orogeny. thospere in Serbia and the surrounding areas – ALinTOni 51:ALiCA 17–29. Mineralogy and in Serbian]. B , i. & B , C. 2012. Avalonian, Ganderian Petrology, , Faculty of and east Cadomian terranes in South Car - nđeLKOVićMining and Geology, Belgrade, 229–274. pathians, romania, and Pan-African events A , M. 1963. rasporstranjenje šumadijske recorded in their basement. Zapisnici SGd zone prema severu i jugu i njena geotektonska ALinTOni 107:ALiCA 709–725.LiVeţi i Ann Geologica Car - pripadnost. [The area of šumadija zone in the B Hen , i., B CHULLer, C., C , M., L L.-Q., H , H.P., pathica, north and south direction and its geotectonic C , F. & S , V. 2009. The emplacement Proceeedings of the Vii nđeLKOVićaffinity – in Serbian]. , 143–150. age of the Muntele Mare Variscan granite CBGA A , M. 1965. Position of the Morava and (Apuseni Mountains, romania). šumadija zones in the geotectonic structure of ALinTOni 60:ALiCA 495–504.UCeA AHAriA Hen Geološki anali Balkanskoga the Balkan Peninsula. B LiVeTi, i., B , AnnC., D , M.n.,i Z HerGAri, L., C , poluostrva Journal of the nđeLKOVić, 1: 243–249. F., C , M., H , H.P., L L.-Q. & G , L. Geological Society of London, A , M. 1967. šumadijska zona [šumadija 2010. Late Cambrian–Ordovician northeastern Zone – in Serbian]. Gondwanan terranes in the basement of the Terminologie et nomenclatures nđeLKOVić , 33: 1–39. Apuseni Mountains, romania. Geologiques V – Tectonique. A , M. 1977. Srpsko-kristalasto jezgro [TheeT ALinTOni ALiCA UCeA 167: 1131–1145.Ann Geo- KOVićSerbian crystalline core – in Serbian]. in: P - B , i., B , C., D , M.n. & H , H.-P. science Frontiers, , K. (ed.). 2014. Peri-Gondwanan terranes in the romanian Geologija Jugoslavije – Tekto- institute de Geologe Carpathians: A review of their spatial distri - nika regionale et la Paleontologie – Universite de bution, origin, provenance, and evolution. nđeLKOVićBelgrade, 230 pp. ALinTOni ALiCA 5: 395–411.eGHeDi UCeA A , M., 1982. B , i., B , C., S , A. & D , M. 2011a. Geol. an. Balk.[Geology poluos., 2020, of 81 yugoslavia (1), 41–66 – Tectonics – in Peri-Amazonian provenance of the Central57 Serbian]. University of Belgrade, 692 pp. Dobrogea terrane (romania) attested by U/Pb DARko SPAhIć & TIVADAR GAuDEnyI

Geologica Carpa - thica, The Transmed Atlas Part Two

detrital zircon age patterns. AlbanidesAVAZZA – BalkansOUre –PAKMAn Moesian Platform.TAMPFLi in: ALinTOni62 (4):ALiCA 299–307.UCeA TreMţAn CieGLer , W., r , F., S , W., S , G. & B , i., B , C., D , M.n. & S , C. Z , P. (eds.). . – Gondwana research, 2011b. Peri-Amazonian, Avalonian-type and HAneLLCD-rOM. Springer,OrVATH Berlin. Tectonophysics Ganderian-type terranes in the South Carpa thians, C , j.e. & H , F. 1976. The African Adriatic romania: The Danubian domain basement. Promontory as Paleogeographical Premise for Geologija Srbije ALinTOni ALiCA 19: 945–957.UCeA Ann A Al pine orogeny and Plate Movements in the B BLiOVSCHi, i., B , C., D , H , H.P. & Ş - Carpatho-Balkan region. , 35: Gondwa - , V. 2010. The anatomy of a Gondwanan irić71–101. na research, Moskovskoe obshchestvo ispytateleĭ terrane: The neoproterozoic–Ordovician base - ć , B. 1996. . Geokarta, Beograd, prirody, ser. geologiya, ment of the pre-Alpine Sebeş–Lotru composite ODArCeA271 pp. terrane (South Carpathians, romania). C , A., 1964. Geological evolution of the South Acta Mi - ALOGH VinGOr17: 561–572.VeTKOVić Carpathians. Mineralogica-Petrographica, neral and Thermal Waters of Southeastern B , K., S , é. & C , V. 1994. Ages and VeTKOVić reLeVić 39CHMiD (2): 2–23 (in russian). europe. intensities of metamorphic processes in the C , V., P , D. & S , S.APić 2015. Geology Batočina area, Serbo-Macedonian massif. of South-eastern europe. in: P P. (ed.). OGDAnOVić 35: 81–94. B , P. 1976. Tumačenje geološko-tekton skog environmental earth Sciences, Springer, Glasnik Pri rodnjačkog razvoja Srbije sa stanovišta nove globalne tekto - VijićCham, 1-29. muzeja u Beogradu. Glas Srpske kraljevske nike. [interpretation of geological and teconic C , j. 1900. Struktura i podela planina Bal - akademije, evolution of Serbia by using a model of new global kanskoga poluostrva [The structure and the Geology of Bulgaria tectonics – in Serbian]. subdivision of the mountains of the Balkan Akademie der Wissenschaften in OnCHeV A, 31: 53–71. Peninsula – in Serbian]. Wien Mathematisch-naturwissenschaftliche B , e., 1936. experience for tectonic synthesis Vijić 63: 1–72. review of the Bulgarian Geological Society, of Western Bulgaria. , 2: 5–48 C , j. 1901. Die tektonischen Vorgänge in der OnCHeV(in Bulgarian). rhodopemasse. B , e. 1940. Alpine tectonic events in Bulgaria. , Klas - Geologija na Balkanite 12 (3): Vijićse i, 110: 409–436. Comptes OnCHeV155–247 (in Bugarian). C , j. 1903. Die Tektonik der Balkanhalbinsel: mit Problems of Bulgarian tectonics rendus iX. Congres geol. internat. de Vienne B , e. 1943. Geologic structures of the Bu - besonderer Bercksichtigung der neueren For t - garian land. , 3: 89–106 (in schritte in der Kenntnis der Geologie von La Turquie d’europe; observations sur OnCHeVBugarian). Bulgarien, Serbien und Makedonien. la geographie, la géologie, l’histoire naturelle, la Compte rendu B , e. 1971. . , statistique, les moeurs, les coutumes, l’achéologie, de la iX. Session de Vienne 1903 OUéTehnika, Sofia, 204 pp. (in Bulgarian). Vijić347–370. l’agriculture, l’industrie, le commerce, les gou - Geomorfologija i. B , A. 1840. C , j. 1904. Die Tektonik der Balkanhalbinsel. vernements divers, le clergé, l’histoire et l’etat de Congrès géologique international. cet empire Vijić , 347–370. C , j. 1924. [Geomorphology i – in Serbian]. Državna štamparija Kraljevine SHS, ArMinATi , i, OGLiOniParis: ArthusrGnAni Bertrand, 539ArrArA pp. eLeOnBeograd, 588rOMnjAK pp. OVrić C ABOVSKi, e., D UMUrDZHAnOV, C., A ,AeTAni A., C eOr, G., D , G., D , M. & L , A. 1972. Stron - Vii Kongres geologa SFrJ: DGieV , AUFFreTC., D AZAi , n., GArTOri , M., CiOnTiG - cijumova starost stena juhorsko-Stalaćkog me- Predavanja održana u sekciji mineralogija i ,CrOCCA G., M erAnne, A., n , S.,OreLLi S , r.,AGOrCHeV S , tamorfnog kompleksa [Strontium numeric age petrologija V., S , D., S , M., T , L. & Z , dating of the juhor-Stalać metamorphic complex i. 2004. Transect iii: Massif Central – Provence, – in Serbo-Croatian]. 58 Gulf of Lion – Provencal Basin – Tyrrhenian Basin Geol. an. Balk. poluos., 2020, 81 (1), 41–66 – Southern Apennines – Apulia – Adriatic Sea – , 2: 97–112. 60 years of the Serbo-Macedonian Unit concept: From Cadomian towards Alpine tectonic frameworks

Atlas of Peri-Tethys Pala - erCOUrT AeTAni rieLynCK Arrier ijU eogeographical Maps D UVAL, j., G rUneT, M., V ADeT, B., B rASQUin, e., B - tumačenje tektonike severna grane Alpida Zapisnici SGd za 1974 godinu DAnDULeSCU, B., B , M.F., C , j.P., C , S. & [eastern Serbian in the context of the new global S , M. 2002. tectonics and the explanation according to the Livret Guide no 15, 20th inter - , Commission for the model of the northern branch of Alpides – in Bulletin Geological Society of national Geolological Congress eWeyGeologicaliTMAnn Map of the World,yAn Paris, France.Onin rUBićSerbian]. , 61–68. America D , j.F., P , W.C., r , W.B.F. & B , j. G , A. 1980. yugoslavia. An outline of the geology 1974. Plate Tectonics and the evolution of the of yugoslavia. Alpine System. rUBić , Paris, 49 pp. iMiTrijeVić, 85: 3137–3180. G , A. 1994. Geological features of the Carpatho- First Symposium of Serbian Geological Carpa- D , M. 1959. Osnovne karakteristike stuba Balkanides Moutain System. Ground waters in Society thian-Balkan mt range. Special edition of the Srpsko-makedonske mase [Geological column of carbonate rocksTeVAnOVić of the Carpatho-BalkaniLiPOVić Moun - Carpathian-Balkan Geologic Association, the Serbo-Macedonian Mass, basic features – in tain range. in: S , Z. & F , B. (eds.). Serbian]. Groundwaters in tcarbonate rocks of the Bulletin de l’Association Géologique iMiTrijeVić. Belgrade (copy without pagination). Carpatho-Balkanique, D , M.D. 1963. Sur l’âge du métamorphisme Alloston, rudarstvo, geologija i et des plissements dans la masse Serbo-macé - rUBićnew jersey, USA, 9–34. metalurgija (Tehnika), donienne. G , A. 1999. Tektonika jastrepca i njen opštiji Tectonics of the Carpathian Balkan iMiTrijeVić 21: 45–48. značaj [Tectonics of the jastrebac and its general regions Geological institute dyoniz Stur., Bra - D , M. 1974. yugoslavian Carpathians and importance – in Serbian]. tislava Serbo-Macedonian Massif – The Serbo-Macedo - rUBić OKOVić ArOVić54 (1–2): 12–17.rAnKOVić eology of yugoslavia Vesnik Geozavoda, nian Massif. G , A., đ , i., M , M. & B , M. . 1999. Srpsko-Makedonska masa ne postoji iMiTrijeVić, 291–296. [Serbo-Macedonian Massif does not exist – in D , M. 1997. G . institute rUBićSerbian]. OKOVić ArOVić A, 49: 1–14.rAnKOVić iMiTrijeVićGemini, Belgrade,rUBić 187 pp.eTrOVić LeKSić G , A. đ , i., M , M. & B , M. Acta Geologica Zapisnici SGd za D ABOVić , D., G iVLjAn, A., P ALenić, B., A , V., 2005. Problem tektonskog položaja kristalina Academiae Scientiarurn hungaricae godine 1998-2003. B , M., D , S. & K , M. 1967. Srpsko-makedonske mase [The problem of the Metamorphic complexes of the Carpatho-Bal - tectonic position of Moravicum crystalline – in Geo- kanic arch and adjacent areas. Serbian, abstract in english]. logical Atlas of Serbia 1:2,000,000 Geology iMiTrijeVić rSTić , 11: 23–34. AyDOUTOV , 35–40. origin and evolution of the D , M.D. & K iMiTrijeVić, B.P. 1999. n 3 - Geo - H , i. 1989. Precambrian ophiolites, Cam - Precambrian Balkano-Carpathian ophiolite seg- tectonic Map. in: D , M.D. (ed.). brian island arc, and Variscan suture in the South ment . Serbian Mi - AyDOUTOVCarpathian-Balkan region. , 17: 905–908. nistry for Mining and energetics & Geomagnetics H , i. 1991. rAKinstitut, Belgrade.ATenCO OLjić TOjADinOVić e nDrieSSen, D., M , L., TiLinGSHOFer, M., S UCeA , U., . Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, 179 Tectonophysics A , P.A.M., W e. & D , M.n. AyDOUTOVpp. (in Bulgarian,AneV with english summary) Tectonophysics, 2016. From nappe stacking to extensional de - H , i. & y , S. 1997. The Protomoesian tachments at the contact between the Carpathians microcontinent of the Balkan Peninsula peri- and Dinarides – The jastrebac Mountains of Gondwanaland piece. , 272: Conference ab stracts erDjiKOVCentral Serbia.OUnOV AnGeLOV710: 162–183. iMMerKUS303–313. eiSCHMAnn OSTOPOULOS “Geosciences 2014” G , i., K , A. & V , D. 2014. The H , F., r , T. & K , D. 2006. Paleozoic Balkan terrane: a re-evaluation. Bul - Late and Silurian basement units Tectonic development of the garian Geological Society. within the Serbo-Macedonian Massif, northern rUBić , 43–44. Greece: the significanceOBerSTOn of terrane accretionOUn in Geol.G an. ,Balk. A. poluos., 1974. 2020, istočna 81 (1), 41–66 Srbija u svetlosti nove theTrAKiS Hellenides. in: r , A. H. F. & M 59- globalne tektonike i odraz takvog modela na , D. (eds.). DARko SPAhIć & TIVADAR GAuDEnyI

eastern Mediterranean region eastern Mediterranean region

. Geological Soci - . Geological Society iMMerKUSety, London, eiSCHMAnnSpecial Publications,OSTOPOULOS 260: 35–50. iLiASof LondonALALAKiS Special Publications,OUnTrAKiS 260: 155–178. Tectonophysics H , F., r , T. & K , D. 2009. K , A., F , G. & M , D. 1999. international Serbo-Macedonian revisited: A Silurian base - Cretaceous–Tertiary structures and kinematics Journal of earth Sciences ment terrane from northern Gondwana in the of the Serbomacedonian metamorphic rocks and Leitlinien der Tektonik Jugoslawiens internal Hellenides, Greece. , 473: their relation to the exhumation of the Hellenic AnCU20–35. erZA eGHeDi ărUnțiU hinterland (Macedonia, Greece). Geologica Belgica i , V., B , T., S , A. & M , M. 2005. OBer , 88: 513–53. Palaeozoic rock assemblages incorporated in the K , L. 1952. . South Carpathian Alpine thrust belt (romania Serbian Academy of Sciences, Special edition, Kraljevina Jugoslavija iii Kongres slovenskih and Serbia): a review. , 8: OCHCLXXXiX. Geological institute, 3, Belgrade, 82 pp. Geo-eco-Marina geografa i etnologa AnCU48–68. eGHeDi K , F. 1930. Pregled geologije i tektonike [Over - i , V. & S , A. 2017. The South Carpathians: view of the geology and tectonics – in Serbian]. Kriegsschauplaetze 1914-1918, geolo- Tectono-Metamorphic Units related to Variscan gisch dargestellt and Pan-African inheritance. , OSSMAT , 15–26. ACKOBSHAGen2017: 245–262. K , F. 1924. Geologie der zentralen Bal kan - j , n, V. 1986. Geologie von Griechenland. kalbinsel. révue de Géographie Phy - ArAnOFFGebrüder Borntraeger, Berlin – Stuttgart. OUnOV eWArD , 12:UrG 1–198. ernOULLi VAnOV sique et de Géologie dynamique j , D. 1938. La géologie du massif des rhodopes K , A., AnDLerS , D., B , j.-P., B , D., i , La tectonique de la Bulgarie Tectonics et son importance – propos de la tectonique de la Z. & H , r. 2010. Geochronological and Péninsule Balkanique. structural constraints on the Cretaceous thermo - ArAnOFF , 11 (2): 131–143. tectonic evolution of the Kraishte zone, western j , D. 1960. [in OUnOVBulgaria, rAF VOn, 29:UADT TC2002.ernOULLi UrG Precambrian Bulgarian, with French summary]. Tehnika, Sofia, K , A.,eWArDe G , j., VAnOVQ , A., B AnninG , D., B , research, OVAnOVić282 pp. VeTKOVić rić OSTić ey j.-P., S , D., i , Z. & F , M. 2012. j TCHeVA, D., C Arić , V., e , S., K , B., P - evidence for a “Cadomian” ophiolite and mag - Swiss Journal of Geosciences, , i. & š , K. 2019. Variscan granitoids of matic-arc complex in SW Bulgaria. Proceedings the east Serbian Carpatho-Balkanides: new räUTner 212–213:rSTić 275–295. of XVii Congress of Carpathian-Balkan Geological insight infer red from U–Pb zircon ages and K , H.G. & K , B. 2002. Alpine and pre- Association, Bratislava, September 1-4 2002 geochemical data. Alpine structural units within the southern Geologica Carpathica, ALenić112 (1): 121–142.ArKOVić AnTić ADži UKOVić Carpathians and eastern Balkanides. K , M., M , V., P , V. & H -V , M. 1975. Gornji proterozoik i stariji paleozoik u , , profile – resavski Visovi – Batočinska Straževica 53, Special issue CD-r Zapisnici SGd za 1974 godinu, Proceedings of XViii Congress – selo Botunje [Upper Protoreozoik and the older räUTner(without pagination,rSTić 6 pages length). of the Carpathian-Balkan Geological Association Paleozoic in sections: resavki Visovi – Bato - K , H.G. & K , B. 2006. Geological map of Belgra de, September 3-6 2006 činska Straževica – village Botunje – in Serbian].. the Carpatho-Balkanides between Mehadia, Ora - Terranes of Serbia ArAMATA rSTić 3–39. vita, niš and Sofia. K , S. & K , B. 1996. TerranesnežeVić of SerbiarSTić , and neighbouring areas. in: K , V. & K , , , CD-r (without B. (eds.). . Faculty of Mining rSTićpagination).ArAMATA Zapisnici SGd jubilarna knjiga 1891–1991 ArAMATAand Geology, University of Belgrade, 25–40. K , n. & K , S. 1992. Terani u Karpato-Bal - K , S. 2006. The geological development of kanidima istočne Srbije [Terranes in the Car- Tectonic development of the the Balkan Peninsula related to the approach, patho-Balkanides of eastern Serbia – in Serbian]. collision and compressionOBerTSOn of Gondwanan OUnand rSTić ArAMATA iLićeVić , 57–69. 60 TrAKiSeurasian units. in: r , A.H.F. & M - K , B., K , Geol. S. & an. M Balk. poluos.,, V. 2020, 1996. 81 (1), 41–66 The , D. (eds.). Carpatho-Balkanide terranes – a correlation. in: 60 years of the Serbo-Macedonian Unit concept: From Cadomian towards Alpine tectonic frameworks

Terranes of Serbia

nežeVić rSTić K , V. & K , B. (eds.). . studentima petrologije i geologije [Geology of yu - Faculty of Mining and Geolology, University of goslavia: lectures for the students of petrology rSTićBelgrade, ASLAreVić71–76. j UDAr and geophysics – in Serbian] University of Bel - Geološki anali Balkanskoga poluostrva, Geološki anali K , n., M , L . & S , M. 2005. On the ArOVićgrade – FacultyOKOVić of MiningOLjić and Geology.PAHić 220 pp.iLi Balkanskoga poluostrva, Graptolite Schists Formation (Silurian–Lower M VOjeVić, M., đ , i., T , M., S , D. & M - De vonian) in the Carpatho–Balkanides of eastern , j. 2007. extensional Unroofing of the Serbia. Veliki jastrebac Dome (Serbia). Tectonics renn66: 1–8. AUer rOyer LöTZLi OinKeS eDAriS UCeA HenT68: 21–27.AnCU Geology of Lithos K , K., B , C., P , A., K , U. & H , M , G.j., D , M., G , e. & i , V. 2003. Vršac Mts. Sedimentary rocks of the internal G. 2010. Tectonometamorphic evolution of the Conditions and timing of high-pressure Variscan hellenides, Greece: age, source, and depositional UKinrhodopeeMenCi orogen. AnKOVić, 29: TC4001. metamorphism in the South Carpathians, ro - setting K , A., K , r. & j , P. 1987. einHOLDmania. , 70: 141–161. [in Serbian with english summary]. M , G. 2007. Monografije Vršačkih planina. Matica Srpska, yDOnAKiSnovi Sad, 65pp.rUn OUjOL Onié HATZi . Unpublished PhD Dissertation, johannes Tecto nophysics K THeODOriDiS, K., B , j.-P., P , M., M , P., C - einHOLDGutenberg-Universität,OSTOPOULOS Mainz,rei Germany.iMMerKUS 303 pp. , e. 2016. inferences on the Mesozoic M eiSCHMAnn, G., K , D., F , D., H , F. & evolution of the north Aegean from the isotopic r , T. 2010. U–Pb LA-SF-iCP-MS zircon international Journal of earth Sciences record of the Chalkidiki block. , geochronology of the Serbo-Macedonian Massif, iéGeOiS682: 65–84.erZA ATU UCHeSne Greece: palaeotectonic constraints for Gondwa - Precambrian research L , j.P., B , Т. T , М. & D , j.C. 1996. na-derived terranes in the eastern Medit er- The neoproterozoic Pan-African basement from ranean. , Geološki anali Balkanskoga po - the Alpine Lower Danubian nappe system (South iHAiLOVić99: 813–832. luostrva Carpathians, romania). , M , j. 1955. Geosinklinalna mediteranska ili inneMAnn80: 281–301.erDeS rOST USCHMAnn alpijska [Mediterranean or Alpine geosyncline? L , U., G , A., D , K. & B , B. – in Serbian]. Studia geo - 2007. The continuum between Cadomian oro - iLiVOjeVić , 22: 237–241. phica et geodetica genesis and opening of the rheic Ocean: Con- M , M.G.1993. Geothermal model of earth’s straints from LA-iCP-MS U-Pb zircon dating and crust and lithosphere for the territory of yugo - The evolution of the rheic Proceedings of 28th iGC analysis of plate-tectonic setting (Saxo-Thu- slavia: some tectonic implications. ocean: From Avalonian-Cadomian active margin ringian zone, inneMAnn northeastern AnCe Bohemian Massif,rAFT iLOVAnOVić , 37. to Alleghenian-Variscan collision Germany.ULAUF in: L , U., n , r.D., K , P. M , D. 1989. Metamophism of the Serbo- & Z , G. (eds.). Macedonian Massif. , 2: Slovak Geological iLOVAnOVić439–441. ArCHiG iMiTrijeVić Magazine . Geological M , D., M , V. & D , M.D. 1998. ACHeVASociety of AmericaeyTCHeVA SpecialVOn Paper,UADT 423: 61–96.iDArOV Petrology and chronology of Vučje gneiss, Serbo- M , L., P , i., Q , A. & Z , n. Macedonian Massif, yugoslavia. Proceedings of Conference “Geosciences 2016. Metamorphic evolution of Gondwana- OjSiSOViCS , 4: ieTZe29–33. iTTner 2016” Jahrbuch der Kais. u. Königl. Geologischen derived fragment in Ograzhden and Belasitsa M , e., T , e. & B , A. 1880. Grund - Tectonics of the Carpathian-Balkan reichanstalt Mountains, Serbo-Macedonian Massif, SW Bul - linien der Geologie von Bosnien-Her ce govina. regions: explanations to the tectonic map of the Tectonic and history of the garia. erläuterungen zur geologischen dieser Länder. Carpathian regions and their forelands. evolution of Alpine geosyncline area of the south AHeL , 70–89. of europen part of USSr M ’, M. 1974. UrATOV , 30: 166–462. M , M. 1949. Geo - Geol.ArOVićlogical an. Balk. institutepoluos., 2020, Dyonis 81 (1), 41–66 štur, Bratislava. 453 pp. [in russian]. Part ii.61 M , M. 2001. Geologija jugoslavije: predavanje Academy of Sciences SSSr, Moscow - Leningrad. DARko SPAhIć & TIVADAR GAuDEnyI

UrPHy iSAreVSKy AnCe ePPie international Jahrbuch Geologische Bun - M , j.B., P , S.A., n , r.D. & K , j.D. Geology - in Serbian]. Publisher “Veselin Masle - Journal of earth Sciences desanstalt 2004. neoproterozoic–early Paleozoic evolution eTKOVićša“, Sarajevo, 314 pp. Tektonska karta Fnr Jugoslavije of peri-Gondwanan terranes; implications for P , K.V., 1958. neue erkenntnisse über den 1:2,500,000 Laurentia–Gondwana connections. Bau der Dinariden. UrPHy iSAreVSKy , 93: 659–682.AnCe eTKOVić , 101 (1): 1–24. M , j.B., P , S. & n , r.D. 2012. P , K. 1960. Mineralogy Petro- Potential geodynamic relationships between the [Tectonic map of FPr yugoslavia logy development of peripheral orogens along the 1:2,500,000]. Zavod za geološka i geofizička Geologija Srbije – Tektonika iV northern margin of Gondwana and the amal - eTKOVićistraživanja, Beograd.AKSiMOVić gamation of West Gondwana. P , K. & M , B. 1976. Tektonska skica Struktura kristalastog kompleksa AnCe , 107 (5):UrPHy 635–650.TrACHAn ePPie SreTKOVić Srbije [Tectonic notes of Sr Serbia]. in: Vlasine na širem području Crne Trave n UTiérreZ, r.D., M LOnSO, j.B., SinneMAnn, r.A., KernánDeZ, j.D., P , K. (ed.). . GUáreZ UeSADA-A , G., inneMAnn L , U., FeMOS - eTrOVićUniversity of Belgrade, p. 165. – SiSAreVSKy, Q , C., L , U., D’L , r. & P , B. 1969. P , S.A. 2008. neoproterozoic–early [Structure The Boundaries of Palaeozoic tectonostratigraphy and palaeo - of the Vlasina crstalline complex in the wider the West African Craton geography of the peri-Gondwanan terranes: area of in Serbian]. Unpublished AmazoniannniH iéGeOiS v. West African connections. in: Ph.D. Dissertation. University Belgrade – Faculty e , n. & L , j.-P. (eds.). eyTCHeVAof Mining andACHeVA Geology,VOn 124 pp.UADT iDArOV Austrian Journal of earth Sciences . Geological Society, P , i., M , L., Q , A. & Z , n. eUBAUerLondon, Special Publications, 297: 345–383. 2015. Gondwana-derived units in Ograzhden and Geologica Balcanica, n , F. 2014. Gondwana-Land goes europe. Belasitsa Mountains, Serbo-Macedonian Massif , 107 (1): (SW Bulgaria): Combined geochemical, petro lo - CZLOn147–155. eGHeDi ArriGAn gical and U-Pb zircon-xenotime age constraints. O , M.S., S , A. & C , C.W. 2007. LiSSArT Onnier 44:iOT 51–84.ǎrUnţiU erGer Avalonian and Baltican terranes in the Moesian P , G.,riAnTAFyLLOU M , C., D , H., M , M., B , GSA Special Paper Plate (southern europe, romania, and Bulgaria) j. & T , A. 2017. Petrology, geo che - in the context of Caledonian terranes along the mistry and Sm-nd analyses on the Balkan-Car- Journal of Geodynamics southwestern margin of the east european pathian Ophiolite (BCO − romania, Serbia, AVLOVićcraton. , 423: 375–400. Bulgaria): remnants of a Devonian back-arc basin P , P. 1977. O “Gornjem (Vlasinskom) in the easternmost part of the Variscan domain. kompleksu” i podeli metamorfnih stena Srpsko- LiSSArT iOT Onnier, 105: 27–50.ărUnţiU Zapisnici SGd Makedonskog metamorfnog terena. [The “Upper P , G., D , H., M , C. & M , M. 2018. za 1975. i 1976. godinu Metamorphic Geology: Micro - Vlasina complex” and the subdivision of me - new insights into the building of the Variscan scale to Mountain Belts tamorphic rocks of the Serbo-Macedonian Belt in easternerrerO europe AnAri(romania, OnCALVeSSerbia, Bulga - meta rmophic realm – in Serbian]. ria).rOSCH in: F , S., L , P., G , P. & Sitzungsberichte der Akademie der eTerS , 123–132. G , e.G. (eds.). Wissenschaften mathematisch-naturwissenschaf- P , K.F. 1863. Bemerkungen über die Bedeutung . Geological Society, t liche Klasse der Balkan-Halbinsel als Festland in der Lia - OPOVićLondon, Special Publications, 478: 389–426. Geološki sastav i tektonski sklop radovi Geo instituta speriode. P , r. 1991. Srpsko-Makedonska masa ili Pelagon - Suve Planine sko-rodopski i Moravski masiv [Serbo-Macedonian . eTKOVić . 48: 418–426. Massif or the Pelagonic-rhodope and Morava P , K. 1930. OPOVićMassif – in Serbian].iLijKOVić j , 25: 7–20. istorijska geologija Geographica Pannonica [Geology and tectonics of Suva P , r. & M , L . 2000. Geochemical Planina Mt – in Serbian]. Srpska Kraljevska evolution and distribution of ore deposits in the 62eTKOVićAkademija, 144 pp. Morava massif duringGeol. an. the Balk. pre-Mesozoic poluos., 2020, 81 (1), time. 41–66 P , K. 1957. [Historic , 4: 14–21. 60 years of the Serbo-Macedonian Unit concept: From Cadomian towards Alpine tectonic frameworks

Geological setting of Veliki Jastrebac Mountain iCOU UrG ODFriAUX VAnOV PAHić Geodynamica r , L.-e., B , j.-P., G , i. & i , Z. 1998. S , D. 2006. Geo loška građa istočnog dela Veli - Acta rhodope and Vardar: the metamorphic and the kog jastrepca [ olistostromic paired belts related to the Cre - – in Serbian, with an english taceous subduction under europe. Abstract]. Un published Magister Thesis. Faculty OBerTSOn, 11 (6): 285–309.riVić erić UCUr PAHićof Mining andAUDenyi Geology, University of Belgrade. Tectono - Proceedings of r , A.H.F., T , B., đ , n. & B , i.i. S , D. & G , T. 2018. Primordial Geo - physics Geologists Association, 2013. Tectonic development of the Vardar ocean dynamics of Southern Carpathian-Balkan Ba- and its margins: evidence from the republic of sements (Serbo-Macedonian Mass): Avalonian Macedonia and Greek Macedonia. vs. Cadomian Arc Segments. AMSOn , 595–596:eMOS 25–54.iLLer AMiLTOn PAHić AUDenyi 130: 142–156. Journal of the Geo - S , S.D., D’L , r.S., M , B.V., H , M.A. S , D. & G , T. 2019. intraoceanic sub - logical Society 2005. neoproterozoic palaeogeography of the duction of the northwestern neotethys and Geološki anali Balkanskoga po - Cadomia and Avalon terranes: constraints from geodynamic interaction with Serbo-Macedonian romanian Journal of Tectonics & regional luostrva detrital zircon U-Pb ages. foreland: Descending vs. overriding near-trench Geology ănDULeSCU , 162: 65–71. dynamic constraints (east Vardar Zone, jastrebac S , M. 1984. Overview on romanian Geo - Mts., Serbia). logy. PAHić ,AUDenyi 80 (2): 65–85.LAVAš rBić Geologic Map of SFr yugoslavia, 1:500 000 Acta AVeZni eOLOšKi, 2: 3–16.AVOD eDerAL eOLOGiCAL UrVey S , D., G , T. & G -T , B. 2019а. The Geologica Polonica S G Z (F G S ) neoproterozoic–Paleozoic basement in the 1970. Geološka karta SFr jugoslavije, 1:500000 Alpidic Supragetic/Kučaj units of eastern Serbia: [ ], a continuation of the rheic Ocean? CHMiDBeograd. ernOULLi üGenSCHUH ATenCO PAHić AUDenyi , 69 (4):LAVAš 531–548rBić S , S.M.,CHeFer B CHUSTer, D., F iSCHLer, B., M , S , D., G , T. & G -T , B. 2019b. A Swiss Journal of Proceedings of Geologists’ Asso - L.,STASZeWSKi S , S., S , r., T , M. & hidden suture of the western Palaeotethys: Geosciences ciation U , K. 2008. The Alpine-Car pathian- regional geological constraints on the late Dinaridic orogenic system: correlation and Paleozoic ‘Veles Series’ (Vardar Zone, north evolution of tectonic units. Macedonia). CHMiD üGenSCHUH, 101: 139–183.OUnOV ATenCO PAHić , 130LAVAš (6):rBić 701–718. AUDenyi Marine and Petroleum Geology S ieVerGeLTe, M.S., F BerHänSLi, B., K LeUGerG, A., M CHeFer; L., S , D.,G -T , B. & G , T. 2020. The n CHUSTer, P., O OMLjenOVići, r., P STASZeWSKi, j, S , inception of the Maliac Ocean: regional geolo gical Gondwanan research S.,VAn S inSBerGenD, r., T , B., U , K. & constraints on the western Circum-rhodope belt H , D.j.j. 2020. Tectonic units of the (northern Greece). , Tectonophysics Alpine collision zone between eastern Alps and TAMPFLi113: 104–133.OCHArD érArD iLHeM western Turkey. , 78: S VOn , AUMerG.M., H , C., V , C., W , C. & Turkish Journal of earth Sciences eGHeDi308–374. r , j. 2013. The formation of Pangea. Geological Magazine S , A. 2012. Palaeozoic Formations from TePHAn rOner, 593: 1–19.OMer Dobrogea and Pre-Dobrogea - An Overview. S , T., K , U. & r , r.L. 2018. The pre- eGHeDi erZA AnCU ArUnTiU, 21: 669–721.Aie orogenic detrital zircon record of the Peri- Geologica Belgica S , A., B , T., i , V., M , M. & O , G. Gondwanan crust. , 156 (2): 2005. neoproterozoic terranes in the Moesian TePHAn281–307. rOner OMer earth-Science reviews basement and in the Alpine Danubian nappes of S , T., K , U. & r , r.L. 2019. From a explanatory booklet of the Basic Geological the South Carpathians. , 8: bipartite Gondwanan shelf to an arcuate Variscan Map of SFry 1: 500,000 das Anlitz der erde iKOšeK4–19. belt: The early Paleozoic evolution of northern S , B. 1971. Tumač geološke karte SFrj 1: 500 Peri-Gondwana, , 192: 000 [ UeSS491–512. Geol. an. Balk. poluos., 2020, 81 (1), 41–66– in Serbian]. Savezni S , e. 1885. . Band 1. Wien. 63F. geološki zavod, Beograd. Tempsky, 779 pp. DARko SPAhIć & TIVADAR GAuDEnyI

Geologica Bal - VAn inSBerGen OrSViK CHMiD AţenCO AGOrCHeV canica H AFFiOneD.j.j., T einOUD, T.H., S eryA, S.M.,ürer M , Z , i. 1976. Tectonic, metamorphic and L.C.,PAKMAn M , M., r L.M., D G ; W. & magmatic markers in the polycyclic ultrameta - Gondwana research, S , W. 2020. Orogenic archi tecture of the morphic Ograzdenian complex. Problems of the Geology of Mediterranean region and kinematic reconstruc - AGOrCHeV, 6 (2): 17–33. Southwestern Bulgaria tion of its tectonic evolution since the Triassic. Z , i.S. 1984. Pre-AlpineAGOrCHeV structureAnKOV of South- inter - VOn AUMer TAMPFLi81: 79-229.OreL USSy westOZKOV Bulgaria. in: Z , i.S., M , S. & national Journal of earth Sciences, r , j.F., S , G.M., B , G. & B , F. B , i. (eds.). Variscian and Alpine terranes of the Geologica Balkanica, 2002. Organization of the pre-Variscan basement . Tehnika, Sofia, 9–20, (in Circum-Pannonian region areas at the north Gondwanan margin. AGOrCHeVBulgarian with english abstract). OZár 91: 35–52. Z , i. 1995. Pre-Paleogene Alpine tectonics V , j. 2010. in SW Bulgaria. 25 (5–6): Zeitschrift für Geologische Wissenschaften . Slovak Academy of AGOrCHeV91–112. OZárOVáSciences - GeologicalBner institute.OVáCS Bratislava,räUTner 231 pp. Z , i.S. 1996. Complex shear and flow in the episodes V ZeDerKenyi, A., e ,rSTić F., K reMAC, S., K LjinOVić, H.G., Ograzhdenian Supergroup, . Geologica Carpathica S OVAK , T., KABerneK , B., S , j., A , D., , 24: n , M. & S , D. 2002. Late Variscan AGOrCHeV255–271. (Carboniferous to Permian) environments in the Z , i. 1998. rhodope controversies. , Circum Pannonian region. , AGOrCHeV21 (3): 159–168. Geodinamica Acta UjiSić60 (1): 71–104. OnčAreVić ALenić Z , i. 2000. rhodope and Vardar: the Basic Geologic Map of Former V ADžiVUKOVić, T., n , M., LiLićeVić , č., K , M. metamorphic and the olistostromic paired belts yugoslavia 1:100 000. explanatory booklet for the Geologica Balcanica H , M. & M , D. 1978. Osnovna related to the Cretaceous subduction under Sheet geološka karta SFrj 1:100 000. Tumač za list AGOrCHeVeurope. , 13 (1): 55–59. Lapovo L34–139 [ Z , i. 2001. introduction to the geology of SW AGOrCHeVBulgaria. , 31 (1–2): 3–52. “Geosciences 2015” Abstracts – in Serbian]. Savezni geološki Z , i. 2015. Polyphase tectonometamor phism AneVzavod, Beograd.AKOVA OnCHeVA ACHAnSKi in Bulgaria: Some alternative in terpretations and Geologica Belgica y , S., L , i., B , i. & S , V. 2005. ideas. national Conferemce with international The Moesian and Balkan Terranes in Bulgaria: AGOrCHeVParticpationrSTić iLOVAnOVić ACHAnSKi, 99–100. Pa laeozoic basin development, palaeogeography Z OrAnOV, i., K , B., M , D., S , V. and tectonic evolution. , 8: & G , e. 2018. Key stratigraphic and Gondwana research Proceedings of 17th Serbian Geol. Congr., Vrnjačka iLL185–192. riMMeL tectonic problems of the pre-Alpine geology of Banja, May 17-20, 2018 W , T.M. & F , H.e. 2018. Where does a the border area between Bosilegrad and Vlasina continent prefer to break up? Some lessons from (Serbia) and Treklyano and Zemen (Bulgaria). South Atlantic margins. , 53: Geologica Balca - inCHeSTer9–19. HArAOH ernierS AGOrCHeV USeVA , 23–29. nica W , j.A., P , T.C. & V , j. 2002. Z , i.S. & r , M. 1982. nappe structure of Geological Society of London Special Pubications Palaeozoic amalgamation of Central europe: an the southern parts of Osogovo Mts. and the introduction and synthesis of new results from Pijanec region (SW Bulgaria). recent geological and geophysical investigations. AGOrCHeV, 12: 35–57.iLOVAnOVić , Z , i. & M , D. 2006. Deformation Serbian Geo - inCHeSTer201:1–18. HArAOH ernierS OAne and metamorphism in the eastern part of the logical Society, W eGHeDi , j.A., P , T.C., V , j., i , D. & Serbo-Macedonian Massif. Proceedings of the S , A. 2006. Palaeozoic accretion of Gon - 18th Carpathian-Balkan Geological Association Geological Society Memoirs dwana-derived terranes to the east european September 3-6 2006, Belgrade, Craton: recognition of detached terrane frag ments AGOrCHeV ALiCA670–672.OZHOUKHArOVA ALinTOni 64 dispersed after collision with promontories. Z ăBăU, i., B ,eGULeSCU C.,Geol. K an. Balk. poluos.,, 2020,e., B 81 (1), 41–66, , 32: 323–332. i.C., S , G. & n , e. 2015. Cadomian and 60 years of the Serbo-Macedonian Unit concept: From Cadomian towards Alpine tectonic frameworks

erDjiKOV PAHić AUDenyi Geologica Macedonica post-cadomian tectonics west of the rhodope et al., 1999; G et al., 2014; S & G , Massif – the Frolosh greenstone belt and the 2019) отежавају решавање полифазне палео - Ograzhdenian metamorphic supercomplex. географске и тектонске еволуције поменутог AKAriADZe ArAMATA , 29: 101–132.OriKOVSKy riSKin кри сталастог блока: Z DAMiA , G., HKHOTUA K , S.,erGeeV K , OLOV S., AeVA , (1) Суштински, још увек је нејасно коме припада A , S., C , T., S , S. & S ’ , n. у Алпском структурном плану Српско- ма кедонска 2012. The early−Middle Palaeozoic Oceanic јединица („Доњи комплекс Српско-македонска Turkish Journal of earth Sciences events Along the Southern european Margin: The јединица“)? Да ли је то самостални крсталасти Deli jovan Ophiolite Massif (ne Serbia) and блок некадашње европске маргине (геотек тонска Palaeo-oceanic Zones of the Great Caucasus. јединица првог реда), или припада пакету кредно- Резиме , 21(5): 635–668. палеогених навлака које се карактеришу источном вергенцом Алпског навлачења? 60 година концепта Српско- (2) Какав је оригинални доњепалеозојски македонске јединице: Од кадомске однос Српско-ма кедонске јединице са Супра - до алпске тектонске конфигурације гетик јединицом и бејсментом? (3) Која тектонска јединица представља нас - тавак Српско-македонске јединице („Доњег комплекса“) према северу, тј. у румунском делу iMiTrijeVić Јужних Карпата? Након 60 година од када је D (1959) (4) Која је примарна палеодепозициона и тек - указао на разлике између „РодопскеeTKOVić масе“ и тонска средина која је могла да прихвати тако њеног тада „западног дела“ (P , 1958), још значајнуViGAD количину кластичног детритуса (e.g., увек постоје недоумице око самог настанка као и A et al., 2017)?; готово целе фанерозојске еволуције, тада ново- (5) Који литосферни догађај је узроковао на - ca издвојене „Српско-македонске масе“ („Доњи станак недовољно истраженог ордовицијумског комплекс“ и „Горњи комплекс“/Супраге тик/“Вла - термалног оверпринтаnTić (472–456 Ma, нумерички сина комплекс“). Овај кристаласти блок (Срп- подаци старости од A et al.,ALinTOni 2016a ,b; „Себеш- ско-македонска јединица) неопроALenić теро зој ско- Лотру теран“, . 460 Ma; B AGOrCHeVet al., 2010; доњопалеозојскеnTić старости (K et al., 1975; ОгражденACHeVA јединица, 462 Ma; Z et al., 2012, A et al., 2016b) на западу се граничи са 2015; M et al., 2016)? Вардарском зоном, а према истоку са Супрагетик (6) Која је била улога Српско-македонске је - јединицом (некада „Власински комплекс“) и динице („Доњег комплекса“) у пермо-тријаском њеним мезозојским седиментима. отварању Неотетиса, и који је био однос са та - У горњопалеозојском смислу, оно што се за дашњим западним Палеотетисом? сада може закључити јесте да је овај кри сталасти Овај рад представљаPAHić наставакAUDenyi регионално- теран некада био део варисцијске европске коре геолошкихPAHić студија (S PAHić& G , 2018, 2019; којаnTić је накнадно прерађена алпском тектоником S et al., 2019 а,b; S et al., 2020) и заснива (A et al., 2017). Ме ђутим, у доњoпалеозојском се на подацима везаним за Српско-македонскуiMMerKUS палеогеографском и палеотектонском смислу је јединицуeinHOLD („Доњи комплекс“) nTić (H et al., документовано присуство пери-Гондванског те - 2009; MBBO et al., 2010; A et al., 2016a, рана кадомске старости који потиче са удаљене 2017, A et al., 2020). Кроз покушај да укажемо севернеLeKSić континенталнеArMinATi маргине ГондванеiMMerKUS (e.g., на неке од могућих решења на горе-поменуте A et al., 1988;einHOLD C et al., nTić2004; H про блеме, рад се фокусира на Српско-маке - etBBO al., 2009; M et al., 2010; A et al., 2016b; донску јединицу („Доњи комплекс“). У раду су A et al., 2020). разли чити раније публиковани подаци ставље - Geol.Поред an. Balk. poluos., обновљеног 2020, 81 (1), 41–66 интереса за ову криrUBić - ни у модеран палеогеографски и тектонски65 сталасту јединицу, бројне недоумице (e.g., G кон текст. Као закључак обимног литературног DARko SPAhIć & TIVADAR GAuDEnyI

истражи вања, као и кроз анализу аналитичких биће омогућено решавање проблема како ва - Manuscript received october 18, 2019 података, указано је на постојање пре-Варис - рисцијске конфигурације тако алпске и ко ре- revised manuscript accepted April 27, 2020 цијског литосферног догађаја највероватније лације ових бејсментских јединица. ордовицијумске старости. Искључиво када се буде утврдио директан оригинални однос из - међу Српско-македонске јединице и упра гетика

66 Geol. an. Balk. poluos., 2020, 81 (1), 41–66