U.S. Department of the Interior 

U.S. Geological Survey

Lithofacies, Depositional Environments, and 

Regional Stratigraphy of the Lower Eocene 

Ghazij Formation, Balochistan, Pakistan

U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1599

Prepared in cooperation with the 

Geological Survey of Pakistan

A
Cover. Exposures of the lower Eocene Ghazij Formation along the northeast flank of the Sor Range, 

Balochistan, Pakistan. Photograph by Stephen B. Roberts.
Lithofacies, Depositional Environments, and 

Regional Stratigraphy of the Lower Eocene 

Ghazij Formation, Balochistan, Pakistan

By Edward A. Johnson, Peter D. Warwick, Stephen B. Roberts, and Intizar H. Khan

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 1599

Prepared in cooperation with the 

Geological Survey of Pakistan

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1999
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Charles G. Groat, Director

For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services

Box 25286, Federal Center

Denver, CO 80225

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and 

does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Lithofacies, depositional environments, and regional stratigraphy of the lower 

Eocene Ghazij Formation, Balochistan, Pakistan / by Edward A. Johnson . . .[et al.].

p. cm.—(U.S. Geological Survey professional paper ; 1599)

"Prepared in cooperation with the Geological Survey of Pakistan."

Includes bibliographical references.

1. Geology, Stratigraphic—Eocene. 2. Geology—Pakistan— 

Balochistan. 3. Coal—Geology—Pakistan—Balochistan. 4. Ghazij Formation 

(Pakistan). I. Johnson, Edward A. (Edward Allison), 1940- . II. Series. 

QE692.2.L58 1999 

553.2'4'0954915—dc21 98-3305

ISBN=0-607-89365-6 CIP
CONTENTS

Abstract........................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1

Location of the Study.............................................................................................. 2

Sponsorship and Purpose of the Report.................................................................. 2

Previous Studies...................................................................................................... 2

Methods of Investigation......................................................................................... 2

Acknowledgments................................................................................................... 3

Geologic Framework of Northeastern Balochistan......................................................... 5

Structural Features.................................................................................................. 5

Areal Distribution of Sedimentary Rocks............................................................... 7

Vertical Distribution of Sedimentary Rocks ........................................................... 8

Pre-Ghazij Geologic History........................................................................................... 8

Pre-Ghazij Plate Tectonics...................................................................................... 8

Pre-Ghazij Deposition............................................................................................. 8

Early Eocene Depositional Setting ................................................................................. 9

Lower Eocene Sedimentary Rocks ................................................................................. 11

History of Stratigraphic Nomenclature ................................................................. 11

Principal Reference Sections........................................................................................... 12

Shin Ghwazha Mine................................................................................................ 14

Abraham Mam Mine.............................................................................................. 15

GishtariNala........................................................................................................... 15

MoghalMine........................................................................................................... 15

Sarawan River......................................................................................................... 15

Vertical Subdivisions and Lithofacies of the Ghazij Formation ..................................... 15

Lower Muddy Marine Part...................................................................................... 15

Lithofacies......................................................................................................... 15

Mudrock.................................................................................................. 15

Sandstone................................................................................................ 17

Lower Contact................................................................................................... 17

Upper Contact.................................................................................................... 19

Middle Coal-Bearing Part....................................................................................... 19

Lithofacies......................................................................................................... 19

Mudrock.................................................................................................. 19

Sandstone................................................................................................ 19

Type I Sandstone Bodies................................................................. 19

Type II Sandstone Bodies................................................................ 21

Type III Sandstone Bodies .............................................................. 21

Carbonaceous Shale................................................................................ 21

Coal......................................................................................................... 22

Limestone................................................................................................ 22

White Claystone...................................................................................... 23

Coquina................................................................................................... 24

Upper Contact................................................................................................... 24

Upper Muddy Nonmarine Part................................................................................ 24

Lithofacies......................................................................................................... 25

Mudrock.................................................................................................. 25

Sandstone................................................................................................ 25

Conglomerate.......................................................................................... 25

Other Lithologies.................................................................................... 26

III
IV CONTENTS

Upper Contact................................................................................................ 26

Discussion........................................................................................................................... 27

Northwestern Sulaiman Lobe......................................................................... 28

Murree Brewery............................................................................................. 30

Sor Range....................................................................................................... 30

PirlsmailZiarat.............................................................................................. 30

Mach............................................................................................................... 33

RodangiNala.................................................................................................. 34

Johan............................................................................................................... 34

The Alternate Nomenclature of Shah..................................................................... 36

Regional Variations of the Ghazij Formation................................................................. 36

Sulaiman Range..................................................................................................... 36

BalaDhaka-Bahlol-KingriBelt...................................................................... 36

Rakhi Nala and Zinda Pir............................................................................... 37

Moghal Kot and Drazinda.............................................................................. 38

Kirthar Range......................................................................................................... 39

Marap Conglomerate...................................................................................... 39

Harboi Hills.......................................................................................... 39

Surab..................................................................................................... 40

Sibi to the Indus River............................................................................................ 41

Petrographic Characteristics of the Ghazij Formation................................................... 42

Sandstone Petrography........................................................................................... 42

Heavy Minerals...................................................................................................... 46

Conglomerate Clast Counts.................................................................................... 48

Provenance............................................................................................................. 48

Sandstone....................................................................................................... 48

Heavy Minerals.............................................................................................. 49

Conglomerate................................................................................................. 50

Biostratigraphy of the Ghazji Formation ....................................................................... 51

Vertical Subdivisions of the Ghazij Formation ...................................................... 51

Lower Part...................................................................................................... 51

Middle Part..................................................................................................... 52

Upper Part...................................................................................................... 52

Age of the Ghazij Formation.................................................................................. 52

Depositional Facies of the Ghazij Formation................................................................. 53

Vertical Subdivisions of the Ghazij Formation ...................................................... 53

Lower Part...................................................................................................... 53

Middle Part..................................................................................................... 54

Upper Part...................................................................................................... 55

Specific Sites.......................................................................................................... 56

Sor Range....................................................................................................... 56

PirlsmailZiarat.............................................................................................. 56

Mach............................................................................................................... 56

Johan............................................................................................................... 56

Conglomerate Facies.............................................................................................. 56

Quetta Region................................................................................................. 57

Kalat Region................................................................................................... 57

Discussion...................................................................................................... 58

Some Questions and Answers........................................................................ 58

Evaporite Facies..................................................................................................... 58

Paleocurrent Indicators from the Ghazij Formation....................................................... 60

Early Eocene Paleogeography........................................................................................ 61

Depositional History of the Ghazij Formation............................................................... 62
CONTENTS V

About the Conglomerate Facies ............................................................................. 63

Correlation of the Ghazij Formation with Eocene Sedimentary Rocks in

Adjacent Regions............................................................................................ 63

Toward the North—North West Frontier Province................................................. 64

Thal-Kohat Area............................................................................................. 64

Surghar Range................................................................................................ 65

Toward the Southeast—Sindh Province................................................................. 66

Hyderabad....................................................................................................... 66

Post-Ghazij Geologic History......................................................................................... 66

Post-Ghazij Plate Tectonics.................................................................................... 66

Post-Ghazij Deposition........................................................................................... 67

Preorogenic Marine Deposits ......................................................................... 67

Preorogenic Nonmarine Deposits................................................................... 67

Synorogenic Deposits..................................................................................... 68

Selected References........................................................................................................ 68

Appendix. Coal Deposits of Northeastern Balochistan.................................................. 74

PLATES

[Plates are in pocket]

1. Principal reference sections of the lower Eocene Ghazij Formation, Balochistan, Pakistan.

2. Stratigraphic sections showing coal beds and associated lithologies in the middle part of the lower Eocene 

Ghazij Formation, Sor Range coal field, Balochistan, Pakistan.

FIGURES

1. Map showing Pakistan and provincial boundaries, and general location of study area......................................... 3

2. Map of north-central Pakistan showing most place names mentioned in text.......................................................4

3. Simplified geologic map of northeastern Balochistan ...........................................................................................6

4. Generalized Stratigraphic section of exposed Phanerozoic rocks in Quetta area...................................................7

5. Schematic cross section of the post-rift, pre-collision passive margin of the Indian subcontinent .......................9

6. Schematic cross section showing conditions just after initial collision and plan view of physiographic

elements of same area.......................................................................................................................................... 10

7. Isopachmap of total Eocene deposits in south-central Pakistan.......................................................................... 12

8. Generalized geologic map showing large exposures of the Ghazij Formation in north-central Pakistan............ 13

9. Generalized geologic map showing exposures of Ghazij Formation and sites of principal reference 

sections...........................................................................................................^

10. Stratigraphic section and photographs showing lithologic character of lower, middle, and upper parts of the 

Ghazij Formation................................................................................................................................................. 16

11. Photograph of typical sandstone sequence in lower part of the Ghazij Formation, Abraham Marri

mine section, Pir IsmailZiarat.............................................................................................................................l8

12. Sketch section showing two consecutive, coarsening-upward sequences containing Type I sandstone bodies, 

basal portion of middle part of the Ghazij Formation, Abraham Marri mine section .........................................20

13-17. Photographs showing:

13. Horizontal and vertical burrows on surface of sandstone bed in Type II sandstone body, middle part

of the Ghazij Formation, Abraham Marri mine section................................................................................21

14. Typical trough cross stratification in a Type III sandstone body, middle part of the Ghazij Formation,

Abraham Marri mine section........................................................................................................................22

15. Interbedded fossiliferous limestone and coal, middle part of the Ghazij Formation, near Shahrig..............23

16. Thin limestone bed typical of middle part of the Ghazij Formation in the Mach area.................................23

17. Abundant fossil hash commonly found in limestones of middle part of the Ghazij Formation in the
VI CONTENTS

18. Composite stratigraphic section showing characteristics typical of conglomerate facies of upper part of the

Ghazij Formation in Sor Range.................................................................................................................................26

19. Photograph showing typical outcrop of conglomerate facies at base of upper part of the Ghazij Formation,

Sor Range ..................................................................................................................................................................27

20. Generalized geologic map of Khost-Shahrig-Harnai segment..................................................................................28

21. Stratigraphic section of a portion of the Ghazij Formation at PMDC mine, southeast of Shahrig........................... 29

22. Generalized geologic map of Sor Range area ...........................................................................................................31

23. Generalized geologic map of Pir Ismail Ziarat-Sherki Kach-Ghate segment...........................................................32

24. Generalized geologic map of greater Mach area....................................................................................................... 33

25. Stratigraphic section showing an interval of the upper Paleocene to lower Eocene(?) Rodangi Formation

containing units of coaly carbonaceous shale ........................................................................................................... 34

26. Generalized geologic map of greater Johan area....................................................................................................... 35

27. Diagram comparing the three-part division of the Ghazij Formation, Quetta region, with lower Eocene

nomenclatures in Sulaiman Range ............................................................................................................................36

28. Stratigraphic columns for lower Eocene deposits at Rakhi Nala and Zinda Pir........................................................ 37

29. Stratigraphic section in Moghal Kot-Drazinda area ................................................................................................. 38

30. Stratigraphic section of the Marap Conglomerate Member of the Ghazij Formation, Harboi Hills......................... 40

31. Photograph showing typical exposure of the Marap Conglomerate Member of the Ghazij Formation, 

Harboi Hills .............................................................................................................................................^

32. Stratigraphic section of lower Eocene rocks encountered in drill hole SuiNo. 1 .....................................................42

33. Map showing areal distribution of some drill holes and possible distribution of Sui Main Limestone, greater

Jacobabad region....................................................................................................................................................... 43

34. Cross section showing isolated character of the Sui Main Limestone ...................................................................... 44

35. Photomicrograph of thin section cut from sandstone sample A-12-90 collected at Abraham Marri mine

stratigraphic section................................................................................................................................................... 46

36. Photomicrograph of thin section cut from sandstone sample A-26-90 collected at Abraham Marri mine

stratigraphic section...................................................................................................................................................47

37. LQR diagram with points representing all sandstone thin sections studied.............................................................. 47

38. Limestone-type diagram with points representing all sandstone thin sections studied............................................. 47

39. Limestone-type diagram showing groupings of data points by area......................................................................... 49

40. Map showing ophiolite complexes in central Pakistan.............................................................................................. 51

41. Trigonal diagrams showing distribution of clast types in conglomerate facies of the Ghazij Formation,

Sor Range and Harboi Hills....................................................................................................................................... 51

42. Generalized cross section of middle part of the Ghazij Formation and its relation to the conglomerate unit, 

Sor Range ............................................................................................................................................................^

43. Map showing present-day distribution of Eocene sedimentary rocks in north-central Pakistan and location of

conglomerate facies of the Ghazij Formation or its equivalent................................................................................. 59

44. Stratigraphic columns showing conglomerate intervals in top 500 m of the Ghazij Formation, Harboi Hills

and Sor Range............................................................................................................................................................ 60

45. Sketch depositional model showing possible distributary stream systems on the late Ghazij coastal plain............. 60

46. Interpretive sketch of northwest edge of the early Eocene Indus Foreland Basin, showing deltas positioned

along a southeast-prograding shoreline.....................................................................................................................62

47. Diagram correlating depositional environment with base-level fluctuations ............................................................ 64

48. Diagram correlating lower Eocene strata in the Quetta region with lower Eocene strata in selected areas of

North West Frontier Province and Sindh Province.................................................................................................... 65

49. Map showing lithostratigraphic units in northern Sulaiman Range and to north that possibly correlate with the

Ghazij Formation in Quetta region............................................................................................................................ 66

50. Map showing lithostratigraphic units in Sindh Province that possibly correlate with the Ghazij Formation in

Quetta region .............................................................................................................................................................67

TABLES

1. Rock-Eval pyrolysis data............................................................................................................................................ 18
Lithofacies, Depositional Environments, and Regional 

Stratigraphy of the Lower Eocene Ghazij Formation,

Balochistan, Pakistan

By Edward A. Johnson, Peter D. Warwick, Stephen B. Roberts, and Intizar H. Khan 1

ABSTRACT

The coal-bearing, lower Eocene Ghazij Formation is 

exposed intermittently over a distance of 750 kilometers 

along the western margin of the Axial Belt in north-central 

Pakistan. Underlying the formation are Jurassic to Paleocene carbonates that were deposited on a marine shelf 

along the pre- and post-rift northern margin of the Indian 

subcontinent. Overlying the formation are middle Eocene to 

Miocene marine and nonmarine deposits capped by Pliocene 

to Pleistocene collision molasse.

The lower part of the Ghazij comprises mostly dark 

gray calcareous mudrock containing foraminifers and rare 

tabular to lenticular bodies of very fine grained to finegrained calcareous sandstone. We interpret the lower portion of this part of the Ghazij as outer-shelf deposits, and the 

upper portion as prodelta deposits. The middle part of the 

formation conformably overlies the lower part. It comprises 

medium-gray calcareous mudrock containing nonmarine 

bivalves, fine- to medium-grained calcareous sandstone, and 

rare intervals of carbonaceous shale and coal. Sandstone 

bodies in the middle part, in ascending stratigraphic order, 

are classified as Type I (coarsening-upward grain size, contain the trace fossil Ophiomorpha, and are commonly overlain by carbonaceous shale or coal), Type II (mixed grain 

size, display wedge-planar cross stratification, and contain 

fossil oyster shells and Ophiomorpha), and Type III (finingupward grain size, lenticular shape, erosional bases, and display trough cross stratification). These three types of bodies 

represent shoreface deposits, tidal channels, and fluvial 

channels, respectively. Mudrock intervals in the lower portion of this part of the formation contain fossil plant debris 

and represent estuarine deposits, and mudrock intervals in 

the upper portion contain fossil root traces and represent 

overbank deposits. We interpret the middle part of the 

Ghazij as a lower delta plain sequence. Overlying the

Geological Survey of Pakistan, P.O. Box 15, Sariab Road, Quetta, 

7300, Pakistan.

middle part of the Ghazij, possibly unconformably, is the 

upper part of the formation, which comprises calcareous, 

nonfossiliferous, light-gray, brown, and red-banded 

mudrock, and rare Type III sandstone bodies. Much of the 

mudrock in this part of the formation represents multiple 

paleosol horizons. Locally, a limestone-pebble conglomerate is present in the upper part of the formation, either at the 

base or occupying most of the sequence. We interpret all but 

the uppermost portion of the upper part of the Ghazij as an 

upper delta plain deposit.

Thin sections of Ghazij sandstones show mostly fragments of limestone, and heavy-liquid separations reveal the 

presence of chromite. Paleocurrent data and other evidence 

indicate a northwestern source area.

During earliest Eocene time, the outer edge of the 

marine shelf off the Indian subcontinent collided with a terrestrial fragment positioned adjacent to, but detached from, 

the Asian mainland. This collision caused distal carbonateplatform deposits to be uplifted, and an intervening intracratonic sea, the Indus Foreland Basin, was created. Thus for 

the first time, the depositional slope switched from northwest 

facing to southeast facing, and a northwestern source for 

detritus was provided. We conclude that the Ghazij was 

deposited as a prograding clastic wedge along the northwestern shore of this sea, and that the formation contains sedimentologic evidence of a collisional event that predates the 

main impact between India and Asia.

INTRODUCTION

The lower Eocene Ghazij Formation is one of the most 

significant lithostratigraphic units in Pakistan. First of all, 

the formation contains a considerable amount of minable 

coal, and this commodity is of particular importance in a 

country whose energy resources are limited. Secondly, the 

Ghazij was deposited during the initial stages of collision 

between India and Asia; thus the formation contains the first 

sedimentologic record of this important event. Of special
LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

interest to geologists is the formation's enigmatic 

depositional setting, which seems to change with every area 

of exposure.

LOCATION OF THE STUDY

The Ghazij Formation is exposed within a sigmoidally 

shaped mountain belt that covers much of northeastern 

Balochistan. As shown in figure 1, Balochistan is the largest province in Pakistan; it contains only 5 percent of the 

country's population, however. Most of the region is arid 

with an average annual rainfall of less than 250 mm. Elevations in the province range from sea level to over 3,500 m. 

We used the provincial capital of Quetta as a base from 

which to conduct our study because of its proximity to good 

exposures of the Ghazij and for logistical reasons. In addition, Quetta is the national headquarters of the Geological 

Survey of Pakistan. In the late 1980's Quetta had a 

population of about 100,000, but this number has increased 

dramatically by an influx of refugees. Figure 2 is a detailed 

map of north-central Pakistan showing the locations of most 

of the place names used in our report.

Although we examined the Ghazij over a broad area of 

Balochistan, we concentrated our efforts in four specific 

areas: Pir Ismail Ziarat, the Sor Range, Mach, and Johan. 

Each of these areas is within a day's travel of Quetta, and 

each exhibits good exposures of the Ghazij; most are the site 

of an existing coal-mining effort.

SPONSORSHIP AND PURPOSE OF 

THE REPORT

This report resulted from a joint effort between the U.S. 

Geological Survey and the Geological Survey of Pakistan. 

The study was sponsored by the Government of Pakistan and 

the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). 

Funding was provided by US AID through Project 391-0478: 

Energy Planning and Development Project, Coal Resource 

Assessment Component 2a; Participating Agency Service 

Agreement (PASA) No. 1PK-0478-P-IC-5068-00.

By mutual decision of the two geologic organizations, 

the Ghazij Formation in Balochistan was selected for study 

because it is known to contain a considerable amount of coal, 

and because a comprehensive investigation of its regional 

geologic character had not previously been undertaken. As a 

result of out study, a better understanding of the depositional 

setting, regional stratigraphic framework, and coal potential 

of the formation can be presented. Moreover, both geologic 

organizations benefited greatly from the interactions 

between participating geologists.

PREVIOUS STUDIES

Short reports discussing the presence of coal-bearing 

strata in Balochistan appeared in the literature as early as 

the 1880's. More detailed reports on the Ghazij Formation 

were published by the pre-partition Geological Survey of 

India during the first half of the 20th century; references to 

this early work appear throughout our report. During the 

1950's geologists working for Hunting Survey Corporation, 

Limited, conducted an extensive geologic reconnaissance of 

a large part of West Pakistan. This work was financed by 

the Government of Canada under a Colombo Plan Co-operative Project. As part of this effort, the Ghazij was examined regionally for the first time, and this accounting of the 

formation remains a major source of information on the unit 

(Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960). During the 1960's 

John Reinemund of the U.S. Geological Survey and geologists from the Geological Survey of Pakistan conducted a 

detailed study of the Ghazij in the Sor Range coal field centered about 17 km southeast of Quetta (fig. 2), and this 

effort resulted in a geologic map of the area (Reinemund 

and others, no date). In addition to the work just listed, the 

Geological Survey of Pakistan has published several important reports on the Ghazij, and these are referenced in our 

report.

METHODS OF INVESTIGATION

Because of time and logistical constraints, the task of 

investigating the Ghazij Formation was divided among the 

authors. Johnson, Khan, and Warwick measured and 

described in detail the Ghazij at five widely spaced locations 

in order to better interpret regional changes in the depositional facies. Warwick took the lead in examining the formation in reconnaissance over a broad area of Balochistan. 

Roberts studied the detailed lateral variations of the formation in the Sor Range by measuring a set of closely spaced 

stratigraphic sections.

Stratigraphic sections were measured using a Jacob's 

staff or tape and compass. Standard lithofacies descriptions 

such as color, grain size, and lithology were recorded, and 

special attention was directed toward describing bedding 

characteristics and sedimentary structures. Lateral changes 

defining the geometry of sandstone bodies were also noted. 

Where available, measurements of paleocurrent indicators 

were taken, and pebble counts were conducted on conglomerates. Rock samples were collected from critical units along 

the line of section for petrographic and paleontologic studies. 

Petrographic studies involved the microscopic examination 

of thin sections, X-ray diffraction analyses, and work with 

the scanning electron microscope (SEM). Some mudrock 

samples were submitted for Rock-Eval analysis, and some 

limestone samples were submitted for insoluble residue
INTRODUCTION

Afghanistan X People's

~S"\y-f-—/^-X Republic 

f jij ^of China

( _/

0 100 200 300 KILOMETERS 

I i I______I______|

Figure 1. Map of Pakistan showing provincial boundaries. Also shown is a general outline of the study area. N.A., Northern Area; 

N.W.F.P., North West Frontier Province; I, Islamabad; Q, Quetta; K, Karachi. j

determinations. Samples collected for paleontologic 

analyses were submitted to paleontologists at the U.S. 

Geological Survey.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors of this report benefited greatly from various contributions from members of the U.S. Geological

Survey and the Geological Survey of Pakistan. This help 

ranged from informative discussions on the geology to actual 

assistance in conducting the field work. Of special mention 

in the U.S. Geological Survey are Elisabeth M. Brouwers, 

Thomas G. Gibson, Edwin R. Landis, Florian Maldonado, 

Joseph T. O'Connor, Leslie F. Ruppert, Jean M. Self-Trail, 

and Bruce R. Wardlaw. Those in the Geological Survey of 

Pakistan who deserve special mention are Mohsin A. Kazim 

and Asif N. Rana. In addition, the authors wish 19 thank
LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

67' 69° E.

1. Abigul

2. Ab-i-Gum

3. Angira

4. Bahlol

5. Baleli

6. Bannu

7. Bela Dhaka

8. Dera Bugti

9. Dera Ghazi Khan

10. Dera Ismail Khan

11. Drazinda

12. Duki

13. Harnai

14. Jacobabad

15.Johan

16. Kach

17. Kalat

18. Karkh

19. Kingri

20. Khost

21. Mach

22. Mirpur Mathelo

23. Moghal Kot

24. Muslim Bagh

25. Narmuk

26. Pir Ismail Ziarat

27. Rakhi Nala

28. Rodangi Nala

29. Sanjawi

30. Saran Tangi

31. Shahrig

32. Sibi

33. Spintangi

34. Sui

35. Surab

36. Tang Na Pusht

37. Umai

38. Urak

39. Wakabi

40. Zinda Pir

Generalized

physiographic

outline of

Axial Belt

SULAIMAN 

LOBE

29°

Figure 2. Map of north-central Pakistan showing major physiographic elements and Balochistan provincial capital of Quetta. 

Most place names mentioned in text are listed and positioned on map by number.
GEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK OF NORTHEASTERN BALOCHISTAN

those officials in the Balochistan provincial government who 

made our field activities possible, and the U.S. Agency for 

International Development staff at Quetta, now disbanded, 

for their logistical support.

GEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK OF 

NORTHEASTERN BALOCHISTAN

Northeastern Balochistan is a land of arid plains, dry 

river beds, and abruptly uplifted mountain ranges. The lack 

of vegetation affords the observer a clear, unobstructed view 

of the structural and sedimentologic complexities of the geologic record contained in the rocks. We can scarcely overstate the high degree of tectonism the region has been 

subjected to. For example, overturned unconformities and 

folded thrust faults are not uncommon, and Zarghun Peak at 

3,580 m, the highest elevation in Balochistan, contains 

folded Pleistocene conglomerate at its summit.

STRUCTURAL FEATURES

As shown in figure 2, a significant mountain belt occupies the central part of northeastern Balochistan. The northern segment of this belt is the Sulaiman Range, which seems 

to swing westward in the Sulaiman lobe, and continue south 

as the Kirthar Range. This mountain belt is part of a classic 

foreland fold-and-thrust belt caused by the ongoing collision 

of the Indian subcontinent with the Asian mainland (hereafter often referred to as simply the collision). That portion of 

the belt present in northeastern Balochistan thus represents a 

part of the southern extension of the Himalayan orogen. 

Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) referred to this feature 

in Balochistan as the Axial Belt, literally, a belt of axes. For 

simplicity of discussion, we will continue this usage. Powell 

(1979) reported that during the early Eocene, just after the 

initial collision, India apparently rotated about 9° counterclockwise, and this action might have set the stage for the 

north-northeast orientation of the belt in north-central Pakistan. The bend in the belt represented by the Sulaiman lobe 

represents a type of orocline, and this particular one is named 

the Quetta syntaxis. Powell (1979) also stated that since the 

early Eocene, India has rotated a total of about 29° counterclockwise. This continuing counterclockwise rotation is 

probably responsible for creating a complicated belt of 

regional, left-lateral shear in the area of north-central Pakistan, and the Quetta syntaxis might then be an expression of 

this transpression (see Abel-Gawad, 1971; Klootwijk and 

others, 1981; Farah and others, 1984).

Figure 3 is a simplified geologic map of the same area 

shown in figure 2. Fold axes (not shown on map) and the 

trends of fault traces generally follow the sigmoidal trend of 

the Axial Belt. The axial planes of folds are usually east vergent in the Sulaiman and Kirthar Ranges, and south vergent

in the Sulaiman lobe. Many individual mountains within the 

belt are anticlinal in structure, and the fold axis in many of 

these cases is doubly plunging. It is common to observe 

steeply dipping strata adjacent to relatively undersized alluvial fans at the mountain-valley break in slope, indicating 

that the mountain had been domed in rapid fashion. Most of 

the faults in the Sulaiman and Kirthar Ranges are low-angle 

thrusts with fault planes dipping less than 45°. Some faults 

in the Sulaiman lobe are high-angle reverse types. Fault 

planes are vergent in the same directions as the folds. From 

the geometry of these compressional structures, it is apparent 

that tectonic transport is in directions away from the orogen 

(see Banks and Warburton, 1986). High-angle normal faults 

are rare and strike-slip faults are uncommon throughout the 

Axial Belt. For more details on the structural geology of 

northeastern Balochistan, consult maps by Bannert (1992) 

and Maldonado and others (1998).

The western swing of the Axial Belt in the Sulaiman 

lobe is only apparent. Actually, the feature is caused by that 

part of the belt being detached at depth, and gliding southward in response to the present oblique convergence of the 

Indian subcontinent and the Asian mainland. The lobe is 

composed of a series of arcuate compressional structures that 

represent a maximum of 378 km of crustal shortening since 

the beginning of the Miocene (Jadoon and others, 1990; 

Humayon and others, 1991; and Jadoon and others, 1994). A 

prominent left-lateral strike-slip fault on the east side of the 

lobe (fig. 3) trending north-northwest supports this model, 

but no corresponding fault has been mapped on the western 

margin of the lobe. However, Shahid H. Khan and Jan M. 

Mengel of the Geological Survey of Pakistan (oral commun., 

1990) reported that subtle changes in structural trends on the 

western margin indicate tectonic movement that fits the 

model (see also Kazmi, 1979). The mechanism involved is 

thought to involve either (1) a single decollement at depth, 

perhaps moving within a layer of ductile Eocambrian salt 

separating higher rocks in the lobe from the crystalline basement, or (2) several relatively smaller thrusts moving within 

thick shale sequences of the Cretaceous Sembar Formation 

or the Ghazij Formation (fig. 4). The front of the lobe is tectonically active, as indicated by seismicity (Quittmeyer and 

others, 1979), but no frontal thrust has broken the surface. 

This same tectonic situation is apparently operating in the 

Salt Range in Punjab Province where the frontal thrust has 

come to the surface (Gee, 1989). However, in the Salt Range 

the cover rocks are known to be gliding across a thin layer of 

Eocambrian salt, and there is no hard evidence of this lithology in the Sulaiman lobe. For more detailed discussions of 

the mechanisms involved in the evolution of the lobe, consult Sarwar and DeJong (1979), Jadoon and others (1990), 

and Humayon and others (1991). In closing this short discussion of the compressional tectonics of the belt, we stress 

that, in general, the folding, faulting, and formation of the 

Quetta syntaxis have, since the Miocene, all occurred 

simultaneously.
LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

67° E. 69° E

EXPLANATION

Tertiary rocks of the Khojak Basin 

Tertiary rocks of the Axial Belt f

Pre-Tertiary rocks of the Axial Belt

Ophiolite complexes

Generalized contact — Dashed

where concealed or approximately 

located

Major faults — Barbs show direction of

relative movement where known ^

s: -.^- ^i;"> /•• ••••••.•^ A /•

:•• •: . • : ._• : \ ^'v . '

41!

29° ^

Figure 3. Simplified geologic map of northeastern Balochistan. Q, Quetta. Modified from Bakr and Jackson (1964) and 

Kazmi and Rana (1982). Fold axes are not shown.
GEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK OF NORTHEASTERN BALOCHISTAN

* X

Le\ Cong, 

Bostan Fm, or 

Dada Cong

Soan Fm 

(UrakFm)

Dhok Pathan Fm 

(Shinmatai Fm)

Nagri Fm 

(Uzdha Pasha Fm}

Gaj Fm —— 

Nari Fm

Kirthar Fm-^

Goru

Shirinab Fm

1000-

2000-

3000-

5000-

Ghazij Fm

Dungan Fm

Ft Munro Fm

Parh Ls

6000-

Sembar Fm

Chiltan Ls

9000-

10,000-

11,000-

Pleistocene

cc<

cc

UJ

< 

a

Pliocene

Miocene

Oligocene

Eocene

Paleocene

EXPLANATION 

Conglomerate 

Carbonate

Sandstone

Mudrock

Figure 4. Generalized stratigraphic section of exposed Phanerozoic rocks in the Quetta area. Arrowheads on right side of column 

represent positions of major unconformities; dashed line, approximate boundary separating Pliocene and Pleistocene. Names in parentheses associated with the Siwalik Group are more applicable in 

middle and southern parts of study area. Gp, Group; Fm, Formation; Ls, Limestone; Cong, Conglomerate. Compiled from Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) and Shah (1977). Thickness, in 

meters, indicated to left of section.

The geologic boundary separating the Axial Belt from 

the Khojak Basin (fig. 3) is significant. Ophiolitic complexes consisting of basic and ultrabasic igneous rocks, and 

tectonic melanges containing ocean-floor sedimentary rocks 

such as radiolarian chert and pelagic limestone, along with 

various thrust faults and unconformities, form a discontinuous zone several tens of kilometers wide. The ophiolitic 

rocks on the east side of the zone indicate that the boundary 

represents a suture zone, and that the sedimentary deposits in 

the Khojak Basin are actually affiliated with another geologic terrain.

The northeast-trending fault shown on the westernmost 

edge of the area of figure 3 is a segment of the Chaman transform fault. This left-lateral strike-slip fault connects the 

northern Himalayan convergence zone to the north with the 

Makran convergence zone to the south. Lawrence and Yeats 

(1979) stated that this intracratonic plate boundary is as wide 

as 1 km and can be traced for over 800 km; total displacement is at least 155 km.

AREAL DISTRIBUTION OF SEDIMENTARY 

ROCKS

Almost all of the rocks exposed in northeastern 

Balochistan are sedimentary. Very small amounts of ultramafic intrusive rocks are present in relatively small ophiolite 

complexes (fig. 3), and basaltic volcanic rocks are present 

but rare in certain Cretaceous carbonate sequences. In figure 

3 one can see that, in general, the eastern portion of the Axial 

Belt contains younger rocks than the western portion. This 

pattern results from tectonism associated with the ongoing 

Himalayan orogeny, which is migrating eastward with time; 

compressional structures in the western portion of the belt 

have been affected by tectonism for a longer period of time, 

thus allowing deeper parts of the crust to be uplifted and 

exposed by erosion. Seismicity associated with this ongoing 

tectonism is well documented. All of the Mesozoic and 

lower Cenozoic sedimentary rocks in the Axial Belt are contained in the Calcareous zone of Hunting Survey Corporation (1960). West of the Axial Belt, the Khojak Basin 

contains Paleogene flysch deposits (Jadoon and others, 

1990) that are depositionally unassociated with any deposits 

in the Axial Belt. These rocks are contained in the Arenaceous zone of Hunting Survey Corporation (1960). To the 

east of the Axial Belt, strata plunge under the Indus Plain, 

and the same sequence of rocks observed in the mountain 

ranges can be identified in drill holes. Southeast of Quetta in 

the Sibi Reentrant (fig. 2) is a thick wedge of mostly Neogene clastic rocks that attains a thickness of perhaps as much 

as 8,500 m (Movshovitch and Malik, 1965). This molasse 

basin, referred to as the Sibi trough (fig. 3), might be a northwestern extension of the northwest-trending Cambay graben 

in India, which contains as much as 5,000 m of similar rocks, 

as suggested by Auden (1974).
LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

VERTICAL DISTRIBUTION OF 

SEDIMENTARY ROCKS

Despite the significant tectonism, rocks older than Permian are not exposed in northeastern Balochistan. Moreover, Permian and Triassic rocks are themselves 

volumetrically insignificant, making Jurassic rocks the 

essential base of the exposed sedimentary pile. Sedimentary 

rocks exposed in this region amount to more than 11,000 m 

(fig. 4), and this sequence can be divided into three parts 

based on general lithology. The lower part consists of 5,000 

m of marine carbonate that was deposited prior to the collision. Except for the Paleocene strata at the top of this interval, these rocks are generally exposed along the west side of 

the Axial Belt (fig. 3). The middle part comprises 3,000 m 

of mostly mudrock and lesser amounts of sandstone and carbonate that were deposited during or just after the initial collision. The Ghazij Formation occupies the lower half of this 

interval. The upper part of the sequence consists of 3,000 m 

of conglomerate deposited in response to radical uplift associated with the Himalayan orogeny. Rocks of both the middle and upper parts of the sequence are generally exposed 

along the east side of the Axial Belt, and within the Sibi 

trough (fig. 3). Significant unconformities in the exposed 

section are present between Jurassic and Cretaceous strata, 

Cretaceous and Paleocene strata, Eocene and Oligocene 

strata, and separating Pleistocene conglomerate of the Siwalik Group from younger conglomerates (fig. 4).

PRE-GHAZIJ GEOLOGIC HISTORY

Nowhere is the history of the Ghazij Formation adequately described in a single publication. Rather, it is scattered about as small bits and pieces in numerous 

publications, either stated or implied, and in the heads of 

many geologists. Because of the incredible amount of tectonism this region has been subjected to, one never knows 

how much structural rotation and (or) transport has affected 

the rocks studied. This is especially true of rocks in the 

Sulaiman lobe. Because of this fact, assigning compass 

directions for source areas and paleoslopes is an educated 

guess, at best.

PRE-GHAZIJ PLATE TECTONICS

The geologic history of this region cannot be told without first describing the significant role that plate tectonics has 

played. At about 130 Ma, during the Early Cretaceous, the 

Indian subcontinent separated from Gondwana (Scotese and 

others, 1988), and proceeded northward toward the Asian 

mainland. Oceanic crust at the leading edge of the Indian 

plate was probably subducted either (1) beneath oceanic 

crust positioned in front of the Asian mainland with an

associated island arc, or (2) directly under the continental 

crust of the Asian mainland. From about 130 to 80 Ma (Early 

Cretaceous to Late Cretaceous) the Indian subcontinent continued to move northward at a rate of 3-5 cm/yr (Powell, 

1979) as the southern Tethys Sea began to close. From 80 to 

53 Ma (Late Cretaceous to early Eocene) the Indian subcontinent's progress accelerated to perhaps 20 cm/yr (Powell, 

1979). Sometime during Late Cretaceous to Paleocene time, 

the leading edge of the marine shelf that was positioned off 

the Indian subcontinent approached the subduction zone, and 

sea-floor material in the form of submarine volcanic rocks 

and deep-water sediments were obducted onto carbonateplatform deposits (McCormick, 1989). Many workers (Powell, 1979; Besse and others, 1984; Patriat and Achache, 1984; 

Searle and others, 1987; Scotese and others, 1988; Ricou, 

1994) have placed the initial collision between 55 and 50 Ma 

(early Eocene). Klootwijk and Peirce (1979) placed the 

event generally within this range based on polar wandering 

paths, and Powell (1979) reported that the rate of northward 

movement of the Indian subcontinent decreased to 4-6 cm/yr 

at about 53 Ma, which fits this timing. Evidence from the 

Ghazij Formation contained in our report favors 55 Ma for 

the initial collision. The initial collision was probably 

between the Indian subcontinent and a terrestrial fragment, 

such as a microcontinent or island arc, positioned just off the 

Asian mainland (see Powell, 1979; Klootwijk and others, 

1981; Waheed and Wells, 1990; Bannert and others, 1992; 

Kemal and others, 1992). A variation of this scenario was 

proposed by Garanti and others (1996). These workers proposed that the initial collision was with the leading edge of 

the Asian mainland. In either case, it was probably during 

this time that the northward subduction of oceanic crust 

ceased, and what remained of the southern Tethys Sea 

closed. An important question is, "What became of the terrestrial fragment?" Perhaps the eastern part of this mysterious terrain lies under the Eocene to Miocene flysch deposits 

of the Khojak Basin, and the west side of the terrain was 

transported out of the region by the Chaman fault. (See 

Wells, 1984; Waheed and Wells, 1990.)

PRE-GHAZIJ DEPOSITION

A shallow-marine shelf supporting a carbonate platform 

existed along a portion of coastal Gondwana from at least the 

Permian, and when the Indian subcontinent separated from 

the supercontinent in the Early Cretaceous, this environment 

accompanied the subcontinent northward. As the Indian 

plate proceeded north during the remainder of Cretaceous 

and Paleocene time, this carbonate platform continued to 

accumulate carbonate sediments on the passive continental 

margin of the Indian subcontinent. Toward the north lay the 

open ocean of the southern Tethys Sea and toward the south 

lay the nonmarine environments of the subcontinent (fig. 5). 

It was on this platform that the pre- and post-rift, Jurassic
EARLY EOCENE DEPOSITIONAL SETTING

through Paleocene carbonates that dominate the lower part 

of the stratigraphic column (fig. 4) were deposited. Of volumetric importance in the Quetta area are the Jurassic 

Shirinab Formation and Chilian Limestone, the Cretaceous 

Parh Limestone, and the Paleocene Dungan Formation. This 

sequence also contains some limited amounts of clastic rocks 

such as the mudrock in the Cretaceous Sembar Formation 

and the sandstone in the Cretaceous Pab Sandstone (a unit at 

the top of the Cretaceous strata that is present in some areas 

of the Sulaiman and Kirthar Ranges; not shown in fig. 4). 

According to Kemal and others (1992), the carbonate rocks 

were deposited during long periods of marine highstand, and 

the clastic rocks were deposited during periods of marine 

lowstand. Two significant periods of erosion, or nondeposition, are evident in this sequence: one between Jurassic and 

Cretaceous strata, and another between Cretaceous and Paleocene strata (fig. 4). These two surfaces define a major 

transgressive-regressive event during the Cretaceous that 

culminated locally with the progradational Pab Sandstone. 

Another period of erosion is indicated by the local presence 

of an unconformity between Paleocene and Eocene strata. 

The presence of this surface indicates that another 

transgressive-regressive event probably occurred during the 

Paleocene.

In the southern part of the Kirthar Range, volcanic 

material is present in association with post-rift carbonate 

rocks. This thick sequence, known as the Bela Volcanic 

Group, contains basaltic pillow lava, tuff, and agglomerate 

interbedded with mudrock, carbonate, conglomerate, and 

radiolarian chert (Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960). 

Auden (1974) reported the rocks to be Early to middle Cretaceous in age, and therefore older than the latest Cretaceous 

to earliest Paleocene Deccan Basalt of India and southern 

Pakistan. The history of the Bela volcanics is poorly understood, but they might have been emplaced when the carbonate platform passed over a hot spot in the mantle as the 

Indian plate moved northward. McCormick (1989) supported this idea, and referred to the rocks as within-plate 

alkali basalts associated with volcanic islands.

Any clastic material entering the pre- and post-rift depositional system probably did so from the south, southeast, 

or east. Waheed and Wells (1990) reported that paleocurrent 

data from the Pab Sandstone in the southern part of the 

Sulaiman Range indicate paleoflow toward the northwest, 

and in the northern part of the range, toward the southwest. 

Moreover, they reported that these same sandstones are 

quartz arenites, which might have been derived from 

exposed Precambrian shield rocks on the Indian subcontinent. Meissner and Rahman (1973) studied Paleocene rocks 

from exposures in the Axial Belt and from information 

obtained from drill holes under the Indus Plain. They 

reported that Paleocene rocks contain more sandstone 

toward the east, suggesting a clastic source in that direction.

Toward the southeast and east, the thick sequence of 

pre-Ghazij Formation carbonates apparently thins, and the

NORTHWEST 

SOUTHERN TETHYS SEA

SOUTHEAST

CARBONATE PLATFORM

INDIAN

SUBCONTINENT 

INDIAN PLATE

Figure 5. Schematic cross section of post-rift, pre-collision passive margin of the Indian subcontinent. No scale implied.

rocks in the sequence were probably deposited in shallower 

water settings in these directions. In discussing the more 

than 8,000 m of Mesozoic rocks in the Sulaiman Range, 

Humayon and others (1991) reported that the carbonates 

were deposited in relatively shallow water, and at least some 

of the mudrocks were deposited in deeper water. They went 

on to report that toward the east on the east side of the Indus 

Plain, information from a drill hole documents that these 

same Mesozoic rocks have thinned to 750 m, and evidence 

from this hole suggests that some of the sandstones and 

mudrocks contained in the sequence were deposited in a 

nearshore setting. The eastward thinning of the pre-Ghazij 

carbonates is also supported by Kemal and others (1992). 

Meissner and Rahman (1973) reported that carbonates in the 

Paleocene deposits increase toward the west, indicating 

deeper water conditions in that direction. In addition, toward 

the southeast in Sindh Province, Paleocene strata include fluvial deposits and a considerable amount of coal. Sediments 

now contained in these units might well have prograded in a 

westerly direction, to be deposited on the northwest edge of 

the Indian subcontinent. (See also Sahni and Kumar, 1974.)

EARLY EOCENE DEPOSITIONAL 

SETTING

Sometime just before or just after the beginning of the 

Eocene, the depositional setting in what is now northeastern 

Balochistan changed dramatically. As discussed previously, 

apparently the leading edge of the marine shelf that extended 

off the Indian subcontinent came in contact with some type 

of terrestrial fragment that was close to, but separated from, 

the Asian mainland. The compass direction of the long axes 

of these physiographic elements might never be known with 

any certainty, but we favor a simple northeast trend as a first 

approximation. As a result of tectonism associated with this 

event, a topographically positive area developed just northwest of the main part of the marine shelf. This uplifted area 

consisted of carbonate-platform deposits that had accumulated on the distal part of the platform. This feature was 

referred to by Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) as the 

Central and Las Bela geanticlines. Thus for the first time, a 

northwestern source area for clastic sediments was created, 

and the depositional slope changed from northwest facing to 

southeast facing (fig. 6 A). Evidence supporting this paleogeography is presented herein.
10 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

SE

Asian 

mainland

Asian plate

Terrestrial 

fragment

Tectonic highland consisting 

of the uplifted pre-Eocene 

marine shelf of the 

Indian subcontinent

Indian 

subcontinent

NW

SE

Figure 6. Conditions just after the initial collision of Indian subcontinent and Asian mainland. A, Schematic cross section. 

B, Generalized plan view of physiographic elements of area depicted in A. No scale implied.
LOWER EOCENE SEDIMENTARY ROCKS 11

The sudden presence of elevated topography northwest 

of the main part of the marine shelf created a generally northeast trending foreland basin with a tectonic highland to the 

northwest and the exposed Indian craton to the southeast. 

Thus, the embryonic Indus Foreland Basin was formed. The 

relatively shallow intracratonic sea that occupied the basin 

was undoubtedly somewhat connected with the open seaway, at least toward the south. During early Eocene, the 

Ghazij Formation was deposited on the west side of the 

basin. The lower part of the Ghazij was probably deposited 

offshore, but the middle and upper parts of the formation 

were apparently deposited higher on the depositional slope, 

near the shoreline and on the coastal plain, respectively (fig. 

65).

Lower Eocene deposits in Sindh Province are mostly 

marine carbonates suggesting that the pre-Eocene carbonate 

platform persisted on the east side of the basin. Clastic material interbedded with the carbonates in this area was probably derived from the east off the Indian shield.

The Indus Foreland Basin was divided by the northwest-trending Sargodha high into a northern part and a 

southern part. An isopach map (fig. 7) of Eocene deposits in 

south-central Pakistan shows that basin-floor irregularities 

existed. Of particular importance is the northwest-trending 

Jacobabad high that separated the southern part of the basin 

into two subbasins now known as the Kirthar and Sulaiman 

provinces. The Ghazij was deposited in both of these provinces. Small ephemeral irregularities north of the Jacobabad 

high might have resulted in areas of restricted marine circulation, which could explain the presence of rare evaporites in 

the upper part of the Ghazij in the southern Sulaiman Range.

According to Powell (1979), India has migrated from 

about lat 30° S. to about lat 30° N. since the Late Cretaceous. 

Powell further calculated that during the formation of Pakistan's Paleocene and Eocene coal deposits, the region was 

approximately at the equator. Klootwijk and others (1981) 

placed this region slightly north of this position.

LOWER EOCENE SEDIMENTARY 

ROCKS

Lower Eocene sedimentary rocks in north-central Pakistan are contained within the Ghazij Formation. The Ghazij 

is intermittently exposed throughout the Axial Belt (fig. 8) 

from the vicinity of Bannu 440 km northeast of Quetta in the 

northern Sulaiman Range, to the vicinity of Karkh about 350 

km south of Quetta in the central Kirthar Range. North of 

Bannu, lower Eocene strata are included in other formations, 

and south of Karkh the formation is no longer recognized, 

probably because of a facies change. In the Quetta region, 

exposures of the formation are limited on the west by a significant north-trending fault, the Ghazaband fault (Bannert, 

1992). East of the Axial Belt, the formation is recognized in

the subsurface of the Indus Plain as far east as Mirpur 

Mathelo (fig. 2), 340 km southeast of Quetta.

Regionally, the Ghazij Formation is mainly an argillaceous deposit that contains increasing amounts of sandstone 

toward the west, and increasing amounts of carbonate 

toward the east. Based on this generality, Hunting Survey 

Corporation (1960) divided the Ghazij into two major lithologic groups: the complex assemblage on the west and the 

simple assemblage on the east. These workers also subdivided the complex assemblage into lower, middle, and upper 

zones (parts).

The Ghazij Formation comprises a crudely shaped clastic wedge that, in general, thins toward the east. Hunting 

Survey Corporation (1960) reported the thickness of the 

Ghazij to range from 305 to 3,353 m, and Shah (1977) 

reported the range to be from 160 to 3,330 m. These differences in thickness range are difficult to interpret. They 

might reflect differential subsidence in the depositional 

basin, or they might simply be the measurements of incomplete stratigraphic sections. Complete sections of the formation are rarely exposed, and because of compressional 

tectonics and the great amount of soft mudrock in the formation, thickness measurements of even so-called complete 

sections are questionable. Williams (1959) reported the 

Ghazij to be almost 600 m thick at its type locality near 

Spintangi, about 110 km southeast of Quetta.

HISTORY OF STRATIGRAPHIC 

NOMENCLATURE

The first mention of the term Ghazij was by R.D. Oldham (Oldham, 1890a). In a short note, he first mentioned 

that at least 600 m of shale overlies the "Dungan limestone" 

just northwest of Spintangi (about 110 km southeast of 

Quetta). Later in the same note, he described an anticlinal 

structure in the Kipar Valley where "Ghazij shales" are 

exposed. His accompanying sketch map shows this structure 

on the north side of the northwest-trending Kipar Valley, 11 

km southeast of Spintangi, and "Ghazij Group," as listed in 

his index (explanation), is shown exposed in the core. 

Ghazij N., a northwest-flowing tributary to Kipar Valley, is 

shown on his sketch map just north of the anticline. Later in 

that year, Oldham more closely defined his usage of the term 

Ghazij in a slightly longer note (Oldham, 1890b). In this 

note, Oldham described the "Ghazij group" as a great thickness of gray and olive-green shale with subsidiary beds of 

lime (sic), sandstone, and, locally, coal, all sandwiched 

between the "Dungan limestone" and the "Spintangi group." 

He stated that the unit is named after the valley that runs 

down from near Dungan Mountain to Spintangi. Maps of 

this area show this drainage as either Ghazij Nala or Ghazij 

Rud.

In the Kirthar Range, Vredenburg (1909) described a 

shaly sequence underlying the upper and middle "Kirthar
12 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

64° E. 70° E.

150 300 KILOMETERS

Figure 7. Isopach map of total Eocene deposits in south-central Pakistan. Axis of Sargodha high approximate. Contours in meters. Modified from Ahmad (1982).

limestone," and he divided the sequence into "lower Kirthar 

shales" in the upper part and "Ghazij beds" in the lower part. 

Eames (1952a) and Nagappa (1959) presented detailed 

nomenclature for lower Eocene rocks in the Sulaiman Range 

that included and limited the term "Ghazij Shales." Williams (1959) was the first to use the word "formation" in association with the Ghazij. Following Oldham's work, he 

redescribed the unit as the Ghazij Formation and redesignated Spintangi as the type locality. Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) preferred the term "Ghazij Shale," and 

included in the unit the "lower Kirthar shales" of Vredenburg 

(1909). Shah (1977) and Iqbal and Shah (1980) returned to 

the term Ghazij Formation and tightened the definition of the 

formation by accounting for the terms introduced by Eames 

(1952a), Nagappa (1959), and Hunting Survey Corporation 

(1960).

PRINCIPAL REFERENCE SECTIONS

During the course of our study, we measured and 

described in detail five stratigraphic sections of the Ghazij 

Formation in four widely spaced areas to serve as stratigraphic anchor points: one in the Sor Range, one near Pir 

Ismail Ziarat, two in the vicinity of Mach, and one near Johan 

(fig. 9). The first three of these four areas are the sites of 

ongoing coal mining activity, and the fourth area has the 

potential, although low, for such activity. Measuring sections of the Ghazij can be quite difficult. Because of the high 

percentage of mudrock in the formation, the unit commonly 

forms valleys where the rocks are poorly exposed. Moreover, faults and the axial planes of folds are often parallel to 

bedding, making their presence difficult to detect. Therefore, in each of these areas, we selected exposures where the
PRINCIPAL REFERENCE SECTIONS 13

67° E

32°

29°

w

r9%&

50 100 KILOMETERS

i Bannu

/ \

/ INDIA

o Karkh

Figure 8. Large exposures of the Ghazij Formation (patterned) in north-central Pakistan. Modified from Bakr and 

Jackson (1964).
14 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

67° E.

Figure 9. Exposures of Ghazij Formation 

(patterned) and sites of principal reference 

sections. Modified from Hunting Survey Corporation (1960).

most complete section could be measured, and where the 

strata seemed relatively undeformed. It is from these five 

sections that much of our understanding of the Ghazij stems. 

Plate 1 shows small-scale versions of these five sections. On 

this plate, in some of the figures, and in the text, we often use 

the term mudrock, which as defined by Lundegard and Samuels (1980) includes siltstone, shale, mudstone, and claystone. Each of our five sections has been published 

separately at a much larger scale as a U.S. Geological Survey 

Miscellaneous Field Studies Map, and the reader is

encouraged to consult these publications for a more detailed 

display of the sections. In addition to these reference sections, numerous shorter sections and outcrop observations 

are discussed in this report.

SHIN GHWAZHA MINE

The Shin Ghwazha mine section was measured near an 

active coal mine of the same name located in the central part
VERTICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND LITHOFACIES OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 15

of the Sor Range coal field, about 20 km east of Quetta. This 

coal field is the most active of the four fields we visited. The 

483 m of strata in our section dip southwest, and make up 

part of the northeastern limb of a regional, doubly plunging 

syncline. All of the upper and middle parts of the Ghazij 

Formation were measured, but only a few meters of the 

lower part were measured. See Johnson and Khan, 1994a.

ABRAHAM MARRI MINE

We measured the Abraham Marri mine section about 2 

km northwest of the village of Pir Ismail Ziarat near an active 

coal mine of the same name. The Pir Ismail Ziarat coal field, 

located about 45 km southeast of Quetta, is the most recently 

developed of the four fields we visited. Strata in this section 

dip northeast. The section totals 536 m, and contains portions of the lower and upper parts of the Ghazij, and all of the 

middle part. See Johnson and Khan, 1994b.

GISHTARINALA

The Gishtari Nala section was measured about 2.9 km 

west-southwest of the town of Mach. Coal mining in the 

Mach area, 48 km southeast of Quetta. predates mining in all 

of the other areas visited. Our section contains 385 m of 

northeast-dipping strata. Portions of the middle and upper 

parts of the Ghazij were measured. See Warwick and others, 

1994.

MOGHAL MINE

The Moghal mine section was measured about 2.9 km 

south of Mach near an active coal mine of the same name. 

Rocks in this 463-m thick section dip northeast. Portions of 

the middle and upper parts of the Ghazij were measured. See 

Johnson, Warwick, Khan, and Kazim, 1994.

SARA WAN RIVER

Our farthest south section, Sarawan River, was measured on the south side of the river of the same name, several 

kilometers west of the village of Johan, 93 km south of 

Quetta. Coal mining in the Johan area has been small scale 

and unprofitable, and at the time of our visit no mining activity was apparent. This southeast-dipping, 674 m of strata is 

our thickest section. All of the upper part of the Ghazij, and 

a portion of the main body of the formation were measured. 

See Johnson, Warwick, Khan, and others, 1994.

VERTICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND

LITHOFACIES OF THE GHAZIJ

FORMATION

In the Sulaiman lobe and northern Kirthar Range, the 

Ghazij Formation can be easily divided into three parts: 

lower, middle, and upper (fig. 10). In general, the lower part 

(more than 1,000 m thick) consists of greenish-gray 

mudrock with uncommon isolated sandstone bodies. The 

middle part (about 30-300 m thick) consists of gray 

mudrock with subordinate sandstone bodies, and locally 

present carbonaceous shale, coal, and limestone. The upper 

part (as thick as 533 m) consists of multicolored mudrock 

with uncommon isolated sandstone bodies, and locally, a 

conglomerate unit at the base. In most places the lower part 

of the formation is the thickest followed by the upper part 

and then the middle part. Hunting Survey Corporation 

(1960) recognized these three natural subdivisions but 

referred to them as zones. Basically, the Ghazij is a regressive unit going from marine in the lower part, to paralic in the 

middle part, to nonmarine in most of the upper part. Officially, these three parts of the formation have never been 

designated as members, but we believe that their regional 

predictability qualifies them for formal recognition.

LOWER MUDDY MARINE PART

The lower part of the Ghazij Formation is the thickest 

subdivision of the formation. According to Hunting Survey 

Corporation (1960), this part of the Ghazij ranges in thickness from 914 m near Duki to 2,134 m near Johan. The 

lower part is not exposed in its entirety at any of our measured section localities, but 166 m is included in the lower 

part of our Abraham Marri mine section (pi. 15), and a minimum of 1,000 m was measured, but not included in, our 

Shin Ghwazha mine section. The lower part of the formation 

is particularly susceptible to regional compressional tectonics, and as a result, bedding-plane faults and isoclinal folds 

are very common and difficult to detect. In general, the 

lower part consists of a thick sequence of mudrock with a 

few isolated sandstone bodies (fig. 10).

LITHOFACIES

MUDROCK

The mudrock in the lower part of the Ghazij Formation 

consists mostly of calcareous mudstone and shale. Some 

mudrock is sandy, and very fine grained sandstone is present 

as laminae or, locally, in very thin beds in the mudrock. Both 

fresh and weathered surfaces are medium to light gray. Bedding planes and joint surfaces are often stained very dark
o

£W(* 

UJ

ou 

w z w a 

N£2

Uo

o03<

ou 

2;" a,

<

2 

on

t;;,*v:^ ^'^4Bi> 

lJ$&%ft
VERTICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND LITHOFACffiS OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 17

gray, probably by films of carbonaceous material or manganese-bearing minerals. From a distance, this part of the 

Ghazij in many places appears to have a green tinge. Fossil 

plant debris is common as isolated fragments or concentrated 

on lamina surfaces. Coaly carbonaceous material is very 

rare as very thin laminae; however, one lamina several millimeters thick was observed in the Sor Range. Body fossils 

were not observed. Ahmed and others (1985) X-rayed samples of this mudrock collected near Chappar Rift, about 16 

km northwest of Khost. They reported that clays from the 

rocks consist of 50-60 percent illite, 26 percent mixed layered, and 14 percent magnesium-rich chlorite. Samples of 

the mudrock were collected at three locations and analyzed 

for Rock-Eval pyrolysis to determine the characteristics of 

the hydrocarbon content and source-rock potential. Two of 

the locations are in the Sor Range, one below our Shin 

Ghwazha mine section and the other near Sinjidi several 

kilometers southeast of our section, and the third is in the Pir 

Ismail Ziarat area. At each site, we collected a sample from 

the lower, middle, and upper thirds of the sequence. The 

results of these analyses appear in table 1. Because of the 

low total organic carbon values (< 0.50 weight percent), the 

lower part of the formation is not a very likely source rock 

for hydrocarbons. Moreover, the low total organic carbon 

values of all of the samples make the other Rock-Eval indices unreliable, and this precludes using these data for interpreting source-rock quality and depositional environments.

SANDSTONE

Sandstone is a relatively rare lithology in the lower part 

of the Ghazij Formation. This lithology is present in either 

laterally extensive, single-bedded tabular bodies, mostly less 

than 0.5 m thick, or as larger, very broad lenticular bodies, 

mostly less than 2.5 m thick. The rocks are calcareous and 

mostly very fine to fine grained; medium-grained sandstone 

is present locally in the Sor Range. In most cases, grain size 

is evenly distributed within the bodies, but coarseningupward or, less frequently, fining-upward bodies of the 

larger type are known (see pi. IB). Fresh surfaces are light 

gray; weathered surfaces are mostly light brown to light 

orangish brown. From a distance, some of these rocks 

appear green tinged. The sandstones consist primarily of 

subangular to subrounded grains of light-colored carbonate 

rock fragments and lesser amounts of green lithic fragments. 

Mudrock chips, as impressions or actual fragments, are also

Figure 10 (facing page). Composite stratigraphic column of the 

Ghazij Formation showing lithologic character of lower, middle, 

and upper parts of the formation. Thicknesses shown (in meters) 

are averaged from stratigraphic sections studied in this report. 

Top photograph, upper part near Pir Ismail Ziarat; middle photograph, middle part at Abraham Marri section, Pir Ismail Ziarat; 

lower photograph, lower part in the Sor Range.

common. Fossil plant debris is abundant, but whole leaf or 

stem impressions are extremely rare. Vertical and horizontal 

fossil burrows, most about pencil size in diameter, are common. Almost all are simple in structure, but in some very 

rare cases, larger burrows are pellet packed and resemble 

Ophiomorpha. Body fossils were not observed. The thin, 

single-bedded tabular bodies are usually structureless or parallel laminated, and both the upper and lower contacts are 

sharp; sole marks are common on basal surfaces. The larger 

bodies have sharp bases, commonly exhibiting sole marks or 

subtle erosional relief, and the upper contacts are sharp, or 

less frequently, gradational. Bedding is mostly very thin to 

thin, but medium to thick bedding is present, locally. Upper 

and lower surfaces of individual beds are sharp. Many of 

these bodies exhibit partings of mudrock, some of which are 

carbonaceous (in extremely rare instances, even coaly); 

other partings comprise poorly cemented, very fine grained 

sandstone. Small-scale, low-angle, wedge-planar cross 

stratification is common; small-scale trough cross stratification is rare. Ripple marks, commonly interference type, are 

common, especially on the top surface of the bodies. In 

some cases, partings in these bodies are thick enough that 

"sandstone interval" might be a more appropriate term (fig. 

11).

LOWER CONTACT

In our study area, the Ghazij Formation overlies carbonate rocks of the Paleocene Dungan Formation, or its 

stratigraphic equivalents. The contact is commonly sharp, 

but Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) reported it to be 

transitional at Mach and Narmuk, and Shah (1990) reported 

it as gradational at Khost, Shahrig, Harnai, and Duki (see 

also Qureshi and others, 1987). Near Chappar Rift, we 

examined this contact, and found that, locally, mudrock of 

the Ghazij interfingers with carbonate rocks of the Dungan 

through a stratigraphic distance of several tens of meters. 

Some workers, such as Williams (1959) and Kassi and others 

(1987), stated or implied that the contact is always conformable. However, this contact can be locally unconformable 

(Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960; Shah, 1977).

Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) described the contact as conformable near Angira, Bahlol, Duki, Harnai, Kingri, Mach, Moghal Kot, Narmuk, Sanjawi, Spintangi, and 

Tang Na Pusht.

Unconformable contacts have been reported at the following localities. At Rakhi Nala and near Zinda Pir, Eames 

(1952a) reported the contact to be unconformable based on 

field evidence and sudden faunal changes. Hunting Survey 

Corporation (1960) described the contact as unconformable 

with underlying Paleocene rocks in the Sor Range, and stated 

that the base of the Ghazij contains rusty (sic) grit and Paleocene foraminifers. Near Wakabi and 6 km northeast of 

Baleli, these workers reported that the Ghazij is
18 LOWER EOCENE GHAZU FORMATION, BALOCfflSTAN, PAKISTAN 

Table 1. Rock-Eval pyrolysis data.

[Tmax, temperature at which maximum yield of hydrocarbons occurs during pyrolysis; S1, integral of first peak (existing 

hydrocarbons volatilized at 250°C for 5 minutes); S2, integral of second peak (hydrocarbons produced by pyrolysis of 

solid organic matter between 250° and 550°C); S3, integral of third peak (CO2 produced by pyrolysis of kerogen between 

250° and 390°C); PI, production index (S1/S1+S2); TOC, total organic carbon; HI, hydrogen index (S2/TOC); OI, oxygen index (S3/TOC)]

Sample No.

SR-U1/3-91

SR-M1/3-91

SR-L1/3-91

SIN-U1/3-91

SIN-M1/3-91

SIN-L1/3-91

PIZ-U1/3-91

PIZ-M1/3-91

PIZ-L1/3-91

Locality

Shin Ghwazha

Shin Ghwazha

Shin Ghwazha

Sinjidi

Sinjidi

Sinjidi

Pir Ismail Ziarat

Pir Ismail Ziarat

Pir Ismail Ziarat

Tmax

0

0

444

442

450

454

430

433

443

SI 

mg/g

0.

0.

0.01

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

S2 

mg/g

0.08

0.07

0.17

0.07

0.11

0.12

0.18

0.14

0.04

S3 

mg/g

0.66

0.58

0.58

1.27

0.9

0.59

0.41

0.3

0.47

PI

0.

0.

0.06

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

0.

TOC

wt.%

0.42

0.43

0.4

0.26

0.38

0.38

0.41

0.43

0.32

HI

19

16

42

26

28

31

43

32

12

OI

157

134

145

488

236

155

100

69

146

Figure 11. Typical sandstone sequence in lower part of the Ghazij Formation, 

Abraham Marri mine section, Pir Ismail Ziarat

unconforrnable on the Cretaceous Parh Limestone, and near 

Abigul they reported that the Ghazij is unconforrnable on the 

Jurassic Chilian Limestone. Iqbal (1969) reported that near 

Murree Brewery, located on the western outskirts of Quetta, 

not only is the contact unconforrnable, but some angularity is 

locally apparent. The most striking unconforrnable contact is 

present just west of the village of Umai where the Ghazij is 

reported to rest with angularity on older rocks (Blanford, 

1883; Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960; Khan, Abbas, and 

others, 1986). According to Hunting Survey Corporation 

(1960), the underlying rocks, Paleocene, Cretaceous, and 

Jurassic carbonates, are folded and are discordant (as much

as 90°) with the overlying Ghazij. The basal Ghazij at this 

locality consists of green, cross-stratified, pebbly sandstone 

and white, quartz-rich sandstone containing fragments of 

older limestone. Other lithologies present include nodules, 

irregular patches and layers of red and yellow ochre 

(pedogenic?), rusty brown grit containing Paleocene foraminifers, and mottled and burrowed lateritic shale. The carbonate rocks directly below the unconformity are also 

commonly burrowed.

Another type of contact is present in some areas of the 

northern Sulaiman Range. Shah (1990) reported that in these 

areas the Dungan can be absent apparently because of
VERTICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND LITHOFACIES OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 19

depositional pinch-out, and where this happens the Ghazij 

rests conformably on rocks older than the Dungan.

According to Florian Maldonado (U.S. Geological Survey, oral commun., 1995), many Ghazij-Dungan contacts 

that appear sedimentary are actually tectonic.

UPPER CONTACT

The top of the lower part of the Ghazij Formation can 

be in either sharp or gradational contact with the overlying 

middle part of the Ghazij. We placed this contact at the base 

of the lowest significant sandstone body or sandy interval of 

the middle part of the formation. Some workers have drawn 

the contact at the base of the lowest coal bed in the middle 

part of the formation, but this placement is problematic in 

areas where the coal is poorly exposed or where there is no 

coal in the middle part. Moreover, our placement of the contact facilitates the field mapping of the contact.

MIDDLE COAL-BEARING PART

The middle part of the Ghazij Formation has the most 

variable thickness of the three parts of the formation. The 

thinnest we can confirm is 16 m at the north end of the Sor 

Range, and the thickest is 291 m near Pir Ismail Ziarat. 

Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) reported a maximum 

thickness of 2,438 m near Bahlol, but this seems unreasonably thick considering our findings. In general, the middle 

part of the Ghazij consists of thick sequences of mudrock 

and thinner tabular to lenticular bodies of sandstone. The 

middle part also commonly contains carbonaceous shale and 

coal, and, locally, thin beds of limestone. In some areas, 

such as Pir Ismail Ziarat, the middle part appears greenish 

when viewed from a distance (fig. 10).

LITHOFACIES

study area contains carbonaceous material ranging from isolated specks to very thin layers on laminae and bedding 

planes. Some of this material is clearly identifiable as fossil 

plant debris. In addition, thin carbonaceous shale layers and, 

rarely, thin coaly layers are present. Fossil root traces are 

common. Locally, the mudrock can be quite fossiliferous, 

even to the point of forming a thin coquina. Most common 

are small bivalves and snails, but oysters and other large 

clams, and large high-spiral gastropods are present in some 

units. Ostracodes are also abundant locally.

Units of mudrock range in thickness from 8 cm to 54 m. 

Some mudrock units, such as in the lower part of the Gishtari 

Nala section, coarsen upward with an increase in silt content. 

The upper part of some units contains numerous fossil-roottrace horizons, particularly just below the top surface. In 

some areas, such as at the Moghal mine section, the topmost 

layer is commonly carbonaceous shale. The lowermost part 

of some units contains increased amounts of fossils, silt, or 

sand. Coquina or fossil plant debris forms a thin basal layer 

of some units.

SANDSTONE

Sandstones in the middle part of the Ghazij Formation 

are mostly very fine to fine grained, with lesser amounts of 

medium-grained varieties. Exceptions to this are at the Gishtari Nala and Sarawan River sections where the sandstones 

are mostly fine to medium grained. The rocks are calcareous 

and very frequently contain fossil plant debris. Fresh surfaces of the sandstone are light gray, and weathered surfaces 

are most commonly light yellowish gray. Exceptions to this 

color are two unique sandstone bodies at the Abraham Marri 

mine section, and two bodies at the Moghal mine section; 

these sandstones weather greenish gray. Because sandstone 

bodies form such an important component of the middle part 

of the Ghazij, we have subdivided them into three primary 

types, which we call Type I, Type II, and Type III.

MUDROCK

Calcareous mudrock is the most common lithology in 

the middle part of the Ghazij Formation. Mudstone is the 

usual variety of mudrock, with lesser amounts of shale and 

siltstone. Very thin sandstone or limestone beds are present 

locally. Fresh surfaces of the mudrock are typically medium 

gray, and weathered surfaces are most commonly light to 

medium gray or greenish gray; in addition, some weathered 

surfaces have a yellow or brown tinge. Secondary gypsum 

is very common, and orange-sized tan-weathering limy concretions are present in the Johan area. Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) reported that in the Khost-Shahrig-Harnai 

area, mudrock of the middle part in the Ghazij locally contains large concretions. Almost all of the mudrock in our

TYPE I SANDSTONE BODIES

Type I sandstone bodies are the least common, and, if 

present, they tend to occur stratigraphically low in the middle part of the Ghazij Formation. They can be single bodies, 

or can be part of a mudrock sequence containing several such 

bodies (fig. 12). In the areas that we examined, most bodies 

range in thickness from about 1.25 to 7.25 m, but one 

sequence of three bodies at the Abraham Marri mine section 

is 22.5 m thick (pi. IB). All Type I sandstone bodies are laterally extensive. Although each of these bodies is unique, 

some characteristics are common to many. In most cases, 

these bodies coarsen upward in grain size: from very fine to 

fine at the Shin Ghwazha mine and Abraham Marri mine 

sections, and fine to medium at the Gishtari Nala section.
20 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

Figure 12. Two consecutive, 

coarsening-upward sequences (indicated by sloping arrows) containing Type 

I sandstone bodies in basal portion of 

the middle part of the Ghazij Formation, Abraham Marri mine section. 

Scale in meters above base of 

measured section.

230-

220-

Sharp or gradational contact separating 

lithologic units

Small- to medium-scale, planar crossstratification

Secondary gypsum

Wood

Plant fragments as scattered debris or in laminae

Simple vertical or horizontal burrows

Ophiomorpha-type vertical or horizontal burrows

Blocky weathering

erosion profile scale

1 I I I I T o> a)

mudst mudstone

clayst claystone

carb sh carbonaceous shale

siltst siltstone

vfg very fine grained sandstone

fg fine-grained sandstone

mg medium-grained sandstone

eg coarse-grained sandstone

vcg very coarse grained sandstone

fest ironstone

cong conglomerate

Is limestone

Mudrock interbeds are common, and where present, they 

tend to decrease in thickness and in number upward. Bed 

thickness is quite variable, ranging from very thin to thick or 

massive, but several bodies exhibit an upward increase in bed 

thickness. The upper and lower contacts of the bodies are

almost everywhere sharp. Sandstones in the uppermost part 

of some bodies are ripple laminated, stained orange, or contain fossil root traces. Coal or carbonaceous shale rests 

directly on top of some bodies, and interbedded sequences of 

sandstone and mudrock directly underlie some bodies.
VERTICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND LITHOFACIES OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 21

Medium-scale, low-angle, wedge-planar cross stratification 

is very common. Also very common are horizontal and vertical fossil burrows; some of these are simple in structure and 

resemble Thalassinoides, whereas others are pellet packed 

and resemble Ophiomorpha. Body fossils are generally 

absent.

TYPE II SANDSTONE BODIES

Type II sandstone bodies are more difficult than Type I 

bodies to define. Where Type I bodies are present, Type II 

bodies are found either (1) within a mudrock sequence stratigraphically above the Type I bodies, such as at the Shin 

Ghwazha mine and Abraham Marri mine sections, or (2) 

commingled with the Type I bodies in a mudrock sequence 

such as at the Gishtari Nala section. Type II sandstone bodies range in thickness from 0.50 to 3 m; rarer bodies, especially at the Sarawan River section, can range from 3 to 5 m. 

The sandstones are very fine to fine grained, but some at the 

Gishtari Nala and Sarawan River sections are medium 

grained. Most bodies are of uniform grain size, but about 25 

percent fine upward. Bedding thickness ranges from very 

thin to medium, and mudrock partings are common. Many 

bodies display small-scale, low-angle, wedge-planar cross 

stratification; trough cross stratification is less common. 

Vertical and horizontal fossil burrows are abundant. Burrows with simple structures resemble Thalassinoides (fig. 

13), and pellet-packed varieties resemble Ophiomorpha. 

Other features typical of Type II sandstones bodies are fossil 

plant debris, mudrock chips, oyster shells, and, especially in 

the upper part of the bodies, ripple laminations. Lower contacts are almost always sharp, and upper contacts are sharp 

or, less frequently, gradational.

TYPE m SANDSTONE BODIES

Type III sandstone bodies, where present, are found 

stratigraphically high in the middle part of the Ghazij Formation. These bodies range in thickness from 0.5 to 12 m and 

can be either laterally continuous sandstone sheets, or laterally discontinuous lenticular bodies. Grain size ranges from 

very fine to medium, and bodies are of uniform grain size or 

fine upward. Internally, the bodies are very thin to medium 

bedded, with bed thickness often decreasing upward. Smallto medium-scale, trough cross stratification is common (fig. 

14), but low-angle, wedge-planar cross stratification was 

also noted. In addition, some bodies also display numerous 

internal erosion surfaces. Most bodies contain carbonaceous 

material ranging from fossil plant debris to fossil logs. 

Locally, the upper parts of bodies contain mudrock partings, 

ripple laminations, and ripple marks. Body and trace fossils 

are in most places absent. The upper surfaces of these bodies 

are sharp or gradational, but all lower surfaces are sharp, and

&ZL*/ • ' *, r** «fc**^^ : ; £1 , 1& < -- -JUSM? ^ ""•' * & •r~<>"t --' v ' •'•'-*!<«# '

Figure 13. Simple-structured horizontal and vertical burrows, resembling Thalassinoides, on top surface of a sandstone bed in a 

Type II sandstone body, middle part of the Ghazij Formation, Abraham Marri mine section. U.S. penny for scale (arrow).

some display erosional relief of as much as 60 cm. Mudrock 

chips and fossil wood fragments are present just above some 

lower surfaces.

Many of the mudrock sequences that contain Type III 

sandstone bodies contain a few thin tabular sandstone bodies, typically 0.5 m thick. These bodies are commonly thin 

bedded, and locally are ripple laminated, display fossil root 

traces, and contain abundant fossil plant debris.

CARBONACEOUS SHALE

Carbonaceous shale is present in all exposures of the 

middle part of the Ghazij Formation. Units of this lithology 

range in thickness from 10 cm to 2 m. These rocks are dark 

brown on fresh surfaces and weather medium to light brown. 

Where observed in active mine dumps, these rocks are 

greenish gray and display parallel laminations and pyrite
22 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

Figure 14. Typical trough cross 

stratification in a Type III sandstone body in middle part of the 

Ghazij Formation, Abraham 

Marri mine section. Hammer for 

scale.

fc-J

globules. Secondary gypsum, fossiliferous horizons, and 

coaly streaks are common. In some cases, such as at the Shin 

Ghwazha mine and Gishtari Nala sections, some carbonaceous shale units are at a stratigraphic level that can be correlated laterally with a coal bed that is being extracted at a 

nearby mine.

COAL

Coal beds are present in the middle part of the Ghazij 

Formation in the Shin Ghwazha mine, Abraham Marri mine, 

and Moghal mine measured sections. The beds range in 

thickness from 7 cm to almost 1 m. Coal miners report that 

beds can thicken considerably over short distances because 

of tectonic squeezing (see Hunting Survey Corporation, 

1960). Mudrock or carbonaceous shale typically overlies 

and underlies coal beds, but at the Abraham Marri mine section, beds of white claystone or coquina are present above or 

below some coal beds, and in two places at the Abraham 

Marri mine section, some coal rests directly on sandstone. 

Locally, some freshly mined coal contains pyrite as coatings 

on cleat surfaces, or as concretions ranging in diameter from 

a few millimeters to several centimeters. The only evidence 

of naturally burned coal that we observed was several large 

patches of reddish-stained mudrock along a known coal horizon near the Abraham Marri mine stratigraphic section.

Two interesting coal localities merit special mention. 

The first is coal from the Gishtari mine just north of the Gishtari Nala section. Here, we observed coal in active stockpiles 

that contained common, whole specimens of fossil bivalves 

and snails disseminated randomly throughout hand samples. 

The second locality is a coal outcrop at Sharan Tangi several

kilometers southeast of Shahrig in the northwestern 

Sulaiman lobe. Here, coal is rhythmically interbedded with 

very fossiliferous limestone over a stratigraphic interval of 

about 1 m (fig. 15). The limestone weathers very light gray 

and is present in beds that range from about 2 to 10 cm thick. 

Coal units are about 3-15 cm thick, and can contain very thin 

partings of limestone or fossil shell hash. (See Appendix for 

a more detailed account of coal in the Ghazij.)

LIMESTONE

The middle part of the Ghazij Formation contains a significant amount of limestone in the Mach and, to a lesser 

degree, Johan areas. Fresh surfaces of the limestone are light 

gray, and weathered surfaces are usually orangish gray or 

orangish brown. Most of the limestones appear very muddy, 

and it is tempting to refer to them as limy mudrocks. However, laboratory tests reveal that they contain less than 5 percent insoluble residue. The limestones are present as single 

units (fig. 16) isolated within thick mudrock sequences, 

which also contain Type II sandstone bodies. The limestone 

units range in thickness from 5 cm to 2.33 m, and they can be 

traced laterally for considerable distances. Internally, the 

units are very thin bedded to medium bedded, and can contain mudrock or carbonaceous shale partings. Simple-structured vertical and horizontal fossil burrows are locally rare to 

abundant.

The most striking feature of these rocks is their fossil 

content (fig. 17). Ranging from fossiliferous to coquinas, the 

units contain abundant small bivalves and larger clams, small 

snails and larger, high-spiral gastropods, and ostracodes and 

foraminifers. Oysters are rare. At the Moghal mine section,
VERTICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND LITHOFACIES OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 23

Figure 15. Interbedded fossiliferous limestone and coal, middle 

part of the Ghazij Formation 

near Shahrig.

Figure 16. Thin limestone bed 

typical of middle part of the 

Ghazij Formation in Mach area. 

Photograph taken at the Gishtari 

Nala section. Penny for scale.

horizons of closely packed yellowish-brown-weathering, 

limy concretions are also present. These elliptical bodies 

range in thickness from 15 to 70 cm and can be as long as 1 

m. Locally, the concretions have fossils sprinkled on their 

top surfaces, and can have centers of brecciated fragments 

separated by calcite crystals.

Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) reported that limestone beds are present in the middle part of the Ghazij Formation in the Khost-Shahrig-Harnai area in the northwestern 

Sulaiman lobe. In addition, limestone is also known to be 

present in the middle part of the formation at Rakhi Nala and 

near Kingri in the southern Sulaiman Range.

WHITE CLAYSTONE

At the Abraham Marri mine section, units of white claystone are present either directly over or under some coal beds. 

The units range in thickness from 7 to 87 cm. Fresh surfaces 

are very light gray, and weathered surfaces are light brownish 

gray or light yellowish brown. The claystone is noncalcareous and contains abundant fossil plant debris and, less commonly, very thin beds of carbonaceous shale. Most exposures 

display patches of boxlike weathering structure with associated yellow mineralization. Rarer features are secondary gypsum, fossil root traces, and possible fossil burrows.
24 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

Figure 17. Abundant fossil hash 

(bivalves) commonly found in 

limestones of middle part of the 

Ghazij Formation in Mach area. 

Photograph taken at the Moghal 

mine section.

COQUINA

Also present at the Abraham Marri mine section are 

units of coquina. These rocks are a very light pink on fresh 

and weathered surfaces, and the unit thicknesses range from 

2 to 16 cm. Most of the larger fossil material has been 

abraded to hash, but ostracodes and small bivalves and gastropods can be recognized.

UPPER CONTACT

We place the contact between the middle and upper 

parts of the Ghazij Formation at the stratigraphic level that 

separates gray mudrock of the middle part from lighter, variegated mudrock of the upper part. In most areas, this color 

difference is quite distinct, and the contact can usually be 

placed within a meter. Some workers place the contact on 

the top of the highest coal bed, but we know of examples, 

such as the Pir Ismail Ziarat and Mach areas, where coal is 

present in the upper part of the formation. Where conglomerate is present in the base of the upper part of the formation, 

we place the contact at its lower surface. In areas where the 

conglomerate is usually present but is locally represented by 

a sandstone unit that is clearly a lateral facies of the conglomerate, such as in the southern Sor Range, the contact is placed 

at the base of the sandstone.

In some areas the boundary between the middle and 

upper parts of the Ghazij Formation might be an unconformity. The erosional surface underlying the conglomerate 

that is present in the base of the upper part of the formation 

at some localities is a good candidate for such a boundary. 

(See also Kazim and others, 1991.) Where the conglomerate 

is not present, evidence for an unconformity is generally 

lacking. However, at the Moghal mine section, a mudrock

bed, 15 cm thick, directly below the mudrock color change 

weathers white and contains what appears to be pedogenic 

structures; this unit might represent a significant paleosol 

horizon, and possibly a subtle unconformity.

In contrast to a relatively sharp boundary between the 

middle and upper parts of the Ghazij Formation based on 

mudrock color, we know of two sites where gray and variegated mudrocks appear to interfinger, forming a transitional 

boundary. At the Moghal mine section this transition covers 

59 m, and at the Sarawan River section it covers 20 m. We 

placed the contact at these two sites at the top of the transitional sequence. We also suspect that the boundary separating these two parts of the Ghazij at the Abraham Marri mine 

section might also be transitional in a similar manner.

Placing the contact between the middle and upper parts 

of the Ghazij Formation at the Gishtari Nala section is problematic. We placed the contact at a stratigraphic level separating gray mudrock below from light-brownish-gray 

mudrock, most of which is claystone, above. However, just 

above this level several minable coal beds are present and carbonaceous shale is fairly common to the top of the section. 

Moreover, fossiliferous mudrock and, near the top of the section, thin, fossiliferous limestone is also present. Despite the 

fact that the above-mentioned lithologies are usually not associated with the upper part of the formation, and that possibly 

only the middle part of the formation is represented in this section, we believe that our contact placement is justified.

UPPER MUDDY NONMARINE PART

The upper part of the Ghazij Formation is perhaps the 

most interesting subdivision of the formation. Both the thinnest and thickest measurements of the upper part of the
VERTICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND LITHOFACIES OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 25

formation that we know of are in the Sor Range. In the 

northwestern part of the range, the upper part is about 215m 

thick, and in the southeastern part of the range it is about 533 

m thick; we measured 407 m at the Shin Ghwazha mine section. The upper part of the formation is 25 ] m thick at the 

Sarawan River section near Johan. Two problems complicate measuring the thickness of this part of the Ghazij. (1) 

At many localities the uppermost part of the formation is 

incomplete because of Neogene erosion and subsequent 

molasse deposition; this is the case at the Gishtari Nala section. (2) At many localities large limestone slide blocks of 

the overlying Kirthar Formation are observed floundering in 

the relatively soft mudrock at the top of the upper part of the 

Ghazij, making a correct measurement impossible; this is the 

case at the Moghal mine section. In general, the upper part 

of the formation consists of light, variegated mudrock and 

less common sandstone bodies. Other limologies are rare. 

Body and trace fossils as well as fossil plant debris are generally not observed in this part of the formation.

LITHOFACIES

MUDROCK

As with other parts of the Ghazij Formation, calcareous 

mudrock is the most common rock type in the upper part of 

the Ghazij. Locally, the mudrock is sandy. Fresh colors are 

medium gray or medium brown, and weathered colors are 

light gray or light brown, with significant local tinges of 

green, yellow, red, and maroon. The rocks are commonly 

mottled, and many exposures are color banded in units 1-2 

m thick (fig. 10). Mudrock sequences range in thickness 

from 15 cm to as much as 61 m. Most of the rock is clay rich, 

resulting in case hardening and a distinctive popcornlike 

weathering surface. Gene Whitney (U.S. Geological Survey, oral commun., 1994) analyzed the clays from a sample 

of mudrock collected from this part of the formation near 

Harnai, and reported the presence of detrital illite. Very fine 

grained sandstone in very thin beds is locally present, and in 

some mudrock sequences the silt content increases upward. 

Carbonaceous material is very rare. At the Shin Ghwazha 

mine section, one sequence of mudrock contains disseminated granule- to pebble-sized masses of white clay material 

that increase upward within several intervals. Mudrock at 

the Gishtari Nala section is quite unique for this part of the 

formation. Here, fossil plant debris is very abundant, and 

fossil root traces, especially in the upper part of individual 

sequences, are common. Fossil shell debris and fossil burrows are locally common.

SANDSTONE

Sandstone is present in the upper part of the Ghazij Formation as lenticular bodies or, less commonly, as laterally 

continuous sheets, bounded by mudrock. The sandstones are

calcareous, and usually fine to medium grained; some sandstones are very fine grained at the Abraham Marri mine section, and most sandstones at the Moghal mine section are 

coarse grained to very coarse grained. Most fresh surfaces 

are light gray, and weathered surfaces vary among light yellowish gray, light brownish gray, and very light brown. 

With two exceptions, all sandstone bodies in the upper part 

of the Ghazij in the Quetta region resemble the Type III bodies described in the middle part of the formation, and this terminology will be continued. Most of the bodies in the upper 

part of the formation are between 1 and 3 m thick. The largest single body we measured was 6.51 m thick at the Shin 

Ghwazha mine section. Also present in this section are several sandstone complexes as thick as 13.85 m consisting of 

amalgamated Type III bodies. Common features of Type III 

bodies are lenticular shape, fining-upward grain size, an 

increase in mudrock partings in the upper part, and a 

decrease in bed thickness in the upper part. Upper contacts 

are mostly sharp, and lower contacts are sharp and commonly display erosional relief. Mudrock chips are commonly observed just above the basal surface. Small- to 

medium-scale, trough and planar-tabular cross stratification 

is common in the lower part of bodies, and ripple laminations are common in the uppermost part. At least one Type 

III body, stratigraphically above the Abraham Marri mine 

section, and another such body in the Sarawan River section, 

contain pellet-packed fossil burrows that resemble Ophiomorpha. Less common, much thinner, tabular sandstone 

bodies are also present in the upper part of the formation. 

These bodies average less than 1 m thick, and most are very 

thin to thin bedded. Upper and lower contacts can be either 

sharp or gradational. Ripple lamination and simple, horizontal and vertical fossil burrows are common.

CONGLOMERATE

In the Sor Range a conglomerate unit occupies the lowermost portion of the upper part of the Ghazij Formation (pi. 

2; fig. 18). The rock consists of poorly sorted pebbles and 

cobbles of limestone and subordinate chert (fig. 19). In general, the conglomerate is clast supported, but matrix-supported intervals are common. The matrix is calcareous and 

consists of poorly sorted, subangular, medium-grained sandstone of a composition similar to that of the clasts. The unit 

can be traced laterally for 12 km, and according to Hunting 

Survey Corporation (1960) the unit's thickness commonly 

ranges from 9 to 60 m. The unit has a sharp top and an erosional base with as much as 22 m of relief over a distance of 

0.5 km. Mudrock of the middle part of the Ghazij nearly 

everywhere underlies the conglomerate. Many outcrops of 

the conglomerate appear massive, but, locally, faint horizontal stratification and trough cross stratification, normal grading, and clast imbrication are observed. Internal erosion 

surfaces are locally present. Some outcrops display discrete 

lenticular bodies of conglomerate averaging 1 m in
26 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

thickness. The unit also contains lenses of pebbly, mediumgrained, trough and wedge-planar cross stratified sandstone 

of the same composition as the matrix. At several locations 

in the Sor Range, a medium- to coarse-grained sandstone unit 

lies directly on top of the conglomerate (fig. 18). This sandstone unit typically fines upward in grain size, is trough cross 

stratified, and contains horizontal bedding near the top.

The conglomerate is absent in the southeastern part of 

the Sor Range, and in some nearby areas, such as Pir Ismail 

Ziarat, where the conglomerate is not present, a coarsegrained sandstone occupies this stratigraphic position.

North of the Sor Range in the Sulaiman lobe from Shahrig to Harnai, a similar conglomerate is present at the base of 

the upper part of the Ghazij Formation. West of Shahrig near 

Khost, a sandstone occupies this stratigraphic position (Khan 

and others, 1972). Along the outcrop belt from Shahrig to 

Harnai, the unit averages 6 m in thickness (Shah, 1990). 

Kazi (1968) reported the unit to be 11 m thick at Harnai. 

Near Shahrig the unit is 4 m thick, and the conglomerate 

appears to have a higher percentage of chert relative to the 

Sor Range conglomerate. Far to the north near Moghal Kot, 

conglomerate is reported to be present in small amounts in 

the upper part of the lower Eocene interval (Hemphill and 

Kidwai, 1973). South of the Sor Range, conglomerate is 

absent from the formation near Mach and Johan. However, 

south of Johan conglomerate again becomes an important 

component of the upper part of the formation. These rocks 

will be discussed in a forthcoming section of this report.

Traditionally, the conglomerate has been placed in the 

top of the middle part of the Ghazij Formation. The unit, 

however, is more closely associated with the upper part of the 

formation, where we have placed it. For example, in the Sor 

Range the sandstone unit that locally rests directly on top of 

the conglomerate (fig. 18) has traditionally been placed in the 

upper part of the Ghazij, but this sandstone appears to be part 

of the same depositional package as the conglomerate and 

should be included with that unit. Moreover, thinner, less 

spectacular conglomerate beds are present stratigraphically 

higher in the lower portion of the upper part of the formation. 

A further reason to place the conglomerate in the upper part 

of the formation is that in certain areas near Shahrig multicolored mudrock, usually associated with the upper part of the 

formation, is present just below the conglomerate.

Thin bedded, horizontally laminated

Medium to coarse grained 

Trough crossbedded

Sharp contact

Graded bedding; randomly oriented clasts

Lenticular lenses of sandstone and granule 

conglomerate

Interbedded granule conglomerate layers

Graded bedding with minor horizontal 

bedding and rare crossbedding

Alternating layers of matrix-supported 

and clast-supported conglomerate

Mostly matrix supported

Clast supported with rare imbrication to SE. 

Erosional contact

OTHER LITHOLOGIES

Carbonaceous shale is present in small amounts in the 

upper part of the Ghazij Formation at the Abraham Marri 

mine and Moghal mine sections. However, at the Gishtari 

Nala section, this lithology is common. Here, the carbonaceous shale is present in beds 3-70 cm thick, and coaly partings are common. One thin coal bed is present at the 

Abraham Marri mine section, and at the Gishtari Nala section 

two coal intervals are present, and one 37-cm-thick bed is 

being mined nearby. A few thin fossiliferous limestone units 

are present at the Gishtari Nala section.

Figure 18. Composite stratigraphic section showing characteristics typical of conglomerate facies of upper part of the Ghazij 

Formation in Sor Range.

UPPER CONTACT

The contact between the Ghazij Formation and the 

overlying Kirthar Formation, or its stratigraphic equivalents, is covered in many places by large blocks of limestone shed from the topographically higher cliffs of Kirthar.
VERTICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND LITHOFACIES OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 27

Figure 19. Typical outcrop 

of conglomerate fades at base 

of upper part of the Ghazij Formation in Sor Range. U.S. penny for scale (arrow, lower right 

side of view).

The contact is generally conformable, but locally can be 

disconformable. Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) 

reported it to be conformable, and some places transitional, 

near Moghal Kot, Kingri, Harnai, Umai, Quetta, Tang Na 

Pusht, Wakabi, and Karkh.

At the Shin Ghwazha mine section (pi. 1A), the two formations appear to interfinger within a stratigraphic interval 

of 32 m. Here, overlying an extensive covered interval near 

the top of the upper part of the Ghazij Formation, a unique 

limestone unit 5.86 m thick appears to be lithologically associated with the Kirthar, yet has certain characteristics not 

found in that formation. The lower 3.56 m of the limestone 

is thin to medium bedded, and the rock weathers light yellowish gray; some exposures appear pinkish white from a 

distance. The upper 2.30 m is very thin to thin bedded, and 

is fissile in the uppermost part. This somewhat silty rock 

weathers light orangish brown. Above this limestone unit is 

a sequence of calcareous mudrock 15.31m thick. The lower 

4.60 m of the sequence is silty, very thin bedded, and weathers orangish brown. Fresh surfaces appear brick red. The 

upper 10.71 m is similar to the lower part but weathers yellowish green and appears to contain foraminifers. None of 

this mudrock resembles any of the mudrock elsewhere in the 

upper part of the Ghazij. Above the mudrock is a covered 

interval about llm thick overlain by the base of the Kirthar 

cliff. A similar situation is present along the road to Quetta 

just west of the village of Pir Ismail Ziarat, where a 4-mthick bed of limestone identical to that in the overlying 

Kirthar is present near the top of the upper part of the Ghazij 

separated from the Kirthar by 6 m of mudrock. In both of 

these cases, we placed the contact between the two formations at the base of the main body of Kirthar limestone.

The Ghazij-Kirthar contact was reported by the Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) to be locally disconformable

near Mach, Narmuk, and Angira. These workers went on to 

say that where a lateritic unit at the very top of the Ghazij 

directly underlies the Kirthar, the contact is certainly disconformable. This is apparently the case in the Shahrig area 

where a red-weathering, very fine grained sandstone unit 1.5 

m thick near the top of the Ghazij has the appearance of a laterite. Above this red-tinged sandstone is a unit of blackweathering shale 2.30 m thick, which is overlain by a spectacular layer of large simple horizontal burrows on the basal 

surface of the Kirthar. Just west of Harnai, the GhazijKirthar contact takes on yet another appearance. Here, a 

sequence several meters thick near the top of the Ghazij consists of quartz-rich sandstone with a chert-rich, limonitic 

conglomerate bed near the middle of the sequence. Above 

these rocks is a sequence several meters thick consisting of 

marl overlain by nodular, thin-bedded limestone, all of 

which has been assigned to the Kirthar. Above this is the 

main body of the Kirthar.

DISCUSSION

The vertical arrangement of lithofacies and contact 

relations just described is typical for the Ghazij Formation in 

those areas of the Axial Belt that are marginal to the Sibi 

trough. From south to north, this part of the belt defines a 

regional strip that extends north from Johan through Mach 

and the Sor Range to the vicinity of Kach and then turns east 

along the Sulaiman lobe to as far east as Duki (fig. 2). All of 

the Ghazij exposed along this trend falls within the complex 

assemblage as defined by Hunting Survey Corporation 

(1960). The overall characteristics of the formation are similar throughout this area, but subtle vertical and lateral differences are apparent, and these variations are described in this
28 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

67°45' E.

Figure 20. Generalized geology of KhostShahrig-Harnai segment. X, coal mine. 

Quaternary alluvial 

deposits not shown. 

Modified from Hunting Survey Corporation (1960).

30°15' -

20 KILOMETERS

EXPLANATION 

Neogene elastics 

Eocene limestone 

Ghazij Formation

Paleocene limestone and minor 

Cretaceous rocks

Jurassic limestone

Contact 

Fault

• —I— — Anticline

—I— — Syncline

section of our report. Although we might not have measured 

a stratigraphic section at some of the sites mentioned, one or 

more of us have knowledge of the formation in the area 

discussed.

NORTHWESTERN SULAIMAN LOBE

In the northwestern part of the Sulaiman lobe, the 

Ghazij Formation is exposed near Umai, Saran Tangi, Kach, 

Khost, Shahrig, Harnai, Sanjawi, and Duki, a total distance 

of about L30 km. Thanks to the narrow-gauge railroad that 

once ran parallel to this trend, the Ghazij and its coal 

resources have been reported on since the latter part of the

19th century (Blanford, 1882, 1883; King, 1889; Oldham, 

1890a, 1890b, 1892; Griesbach, 1893). Shah (1977) stated 

that along this outcrop belt, the formation thickens toward 

the east, and within the formation, limestone increases 

toward the east and conglomerate increases toward the west. 

Also, the amount of quartz grains in sandstones increases 

eastward, and dramatically so from Harnai to Duki.

Of the localities just listed, the Khost-Shahrig-Harnai 

segment (fig. 20), about 40 km long, has been the most thoroughly studied. Here, the Ghazij Formation is exposed along 

the southern limb of a regional, northwest-trending anticlinorium. According to Shah (1965), the Ghazij ranges in thickness from 700 to 800 m along the segment, and beyond the 

east end of the segment in the area just southeast of Harnai,
VERTICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND LITHOFACIES OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 29

Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) reported the formation 

to range from 900 to 1,500 m thick. The lower part of the 

formation is about 600 m thick just northwest of Khost. The 

upper portion of the lower part of the formation along the 

segment is commonly characterized by a relatively thin 

sequence containing green-weathering sandstone overlying 

yellow-weathering, sandy limestone. Sandstones below this 

interval weather a lighter shade of green, but all of the sandstones in the lower part of the formation appear greener than 

sandstones in the lower part to the south, in the Pir Ismail 

Ziarat and Sor Range areas. The middle part of the formation is reported to average about 150 m thick along the segment (Ahmad and others, 1986), but near Shahrig it is about 

203 m thick (fig. 21A). As compared to the Pir Ismail Ziarat 

and Sor Range areas, the middle part of the formation along 

the segment contains more limestone units and the mudrocks 

are more calcareous (Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960). 

Sandstones in the middle part of the formation contain more 

quartz grains than sandstones in the middle part anywhere to 

the south. In general, the amount of sandstone in the middle 

part of the formation along the segment increases westward 

toward Khost (Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960). East of 

the segment toward Duki, sandstone bodies increase significantly in number and thickness, and consequently, the middle part of the formation thickens in this direction. The 

upper part of the formation is about 140 m thick near Shahrig 

(fig. 215). Southeast of Harnai, the upper part of the formation contains some white, primary gypsum, and, in the 

uppermost portion, some gypsiferous limestone.

West of the Khost-Shahrig-Harnai segment, Hunting 

Survey Corporation (1960) reported the Ghazij Formation to 

be at least 900 m thick in the Saran Tangi area, and to consist 

of green-weathering mudrock with a few green-weathering 

sandstone bodies and minor pebbly conglomerate. The 

green coloration of the sandstones in this region results from 

an increased percentage of green rock fragments (Kassi, 

1986), and the significance of this will be discussed later in 

this report.

East of the Khost-Shahrig-Harnai segment, the Ghazij 

Formation is well exposed in the area of Duki. Here, the 

lower and middle parts of the Ghazij occupy the center of the 

east-trending Duki syncline. The upper part of the formation 

in this area has been eroded. According to Hunting Survey 

Corporation (1960), the Ghazij near Duki contains more 

sandstone and fossiliferous limestone in its middle part than 

do exposures of this part to the west. They also mentioned 

that a curious maroon-weathering mudrock unit is present at 

the base of the lower part of the formation. Sandstones in the 

middle part of the formation are quartz rich, and Shah (1990) 

reported them to contain 70-80 percent quartz grains. The 

rocks are fine to medium grained, but locally they are coarse 

grained to pebbly. Sandstone bodies are often cross stratified, and the limestone units are sandy and contain abundant 

foraminifers. The lower and middle parts of the formation 

are thicker in this area than in areas to the west. Khan,

B

EXPLANATION

Conglomerate 

Sandstone and siltstone

Mudrock 

(excluding siltstone)

Coal 

Limestone

Figure 21. Stratigraphic section of a portion of the Ghazij Formation at PMDC (Pakistan Mineral Development Corporation) mine, 

several kilometers southeast of Shahrig. A, middle part of the formation; B, upper part of the formation. Modified from a section 

provided by the Geological Survey of Pakistan. Scale in 10 m 

increments.

Abbas, and others (1986) reported that at Jar Manda near 

Duki, the lower part is 960 m thick, and the middle part is 

more than 1,080 m thick. Moreover, the number of individual coal beds in the middle part of the formation near Duki is 

greater than in areas to the west.
30 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

MURREE BREWERY

Just west of the western suburbs of Quetta, a northeasttrending sliver of Ghazij Formation extends for 9 km along 

the eastern margin of the Chilian Mountains (Khan, Younas, 

and others, 1986; Kazim and others, 1987). This is the westernmost exposure of the Ghazij in the Quetta region. Here, 

about 640 m of the lower part of the formation is present 

above the Dungan Formation. The stratigraphic top of the 

exposure is in thrust fault contact with the Chilian Limestone. Carbonaceous shale is rumored to be present somewhere along this exposure, and if this is true, then perhaps 

some of the middle part of the formation is also represented. 

That part of the formation that is present consists of mudrock 

and lesser amounts of sandstone; both lithologies weather 

green. The sandstone is coarse grained, but locally it is 

gritty, or in rare cases, conglomeratic. Kassi (1986) reported 

that the sandstone is particularly rich in basic igneous rock 

fragments.

SOR RANGE

Just east of Quetta, a large expanse of the Ghazij Formation is exposed in the core of the northwest-trending Obashtaki anticline (fig. 22). Because the Ghazij is relatively soft, 

the structure has been breached, and the formation now occupies a northwest-trending valley. To the south, the doubly 

plunging Sor Range syncline forms the next fold in the series. 

Here, thick limestone of the Kirthar Formation protects the 

syncline from erosion, and the structure is maintained as a 

small mountain range. All three parts of the formation are 

present in this area, but because the lower part rolls over 

along the axial trace of the anticline, the lower portion of this 

part of the formation is not exposed. The middle and upper 

parts of the formation are well exposed along the northern 

slope of the Sor Range tucked under the Kirthar cliff, and it 

is along this trend that coal mining is most intense.

The Ghazij Formation has been studied in detail in the 

Sor Range because of its good exposures, economic significance, and close proximity to Quetta. The lithology of the 

Ghazij here fits the general description presented in previous 

sections of this report. Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) 

reported the formation ranges from about 900 to 1,200 m 

thick, but Khan and others (1972) thought it might be as thick 

as 1,800 m. Kazim and others (1991) reported that the middle part of the formation ranges in thickness from 30 to 75 m, 

and, in general, thickens toward the south. The reader should 

keep in mind that all of the above workers included the conglomerate unit in the middle part, so these values are thicker 

than we would report. The thinnest middle part that we measured was 16 m at the north end of the range (pi. 2). Our 

thickest value, measured in the central part of the range, was 

75 m (pi. 2). At the Shin Ghwazha mine section (pi. IA) the 

middle part is 54 m thick. These values confirm that the

middle part of the formation is quite thin in the Sor Range 

when compared to regional thicknesses. It is tempting to 

relate this thinness to the presence of the conglomerate facies 

at the base of the upper part of the formation, and indeed erosion at the base of the conglomerate might have removed 

considerable amounts of the middle part of the formation. 

However, in the southern part of the range, south of Sinjidi, 

where the conglomerate is not represented, the middle part of 

the formation is also thin. The question here is, does the erosional surface observed under the conglomerate in the main 

part of the range extend to the south, into areas where the 

conglomerate is not present, and become so subtle that it goes 

undetected?

Kazim and others (1991) reported that the upper part of 

the Ghazij Formation ranges in thickness from 127 m near 

the north end of the range to 375 m in the central part of the 

range. Again, these workers placed the conglomerate unit in 

the middle part of the formation, so these values are thinner 

than we would report. We measured 419 m at the Shin 

Ghwazha mine section, and this part might be as thick as 533 

m in the southern part of the range near Daghari.

PIRISMAIL ZIARAT

About 24 km east of the Sor Range, the Ghazij Formation is exposed in the core of a generally north trending anticline that extends for about 40 km (fig. 23). The largest 

exposure of Ghazij is present in the southern part of the structure in the Pir Ismail Ziarat area. Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) referred to this area as the Narwari Valley, but 

they provided very little geologic data. At the Abraham 

Marri mine section (pi. 15), only 166 m of the lower part of 

the formation is measurable, and we included only 79 m of 

the upper part of the formation. However, all of the middle 

part of the formation is represented, and we recorded a thickness of 291 m.

The lithologic character of the Ghazij Formation in the 

Pir Ismail Ziarat area generally fits the regional description. 

The total thickness of the lower part of the Ghazij is probably 

unmeasurable, but it appears to be about half as thick as it is 

in the Sor Range. Type I sandstone bodies in the lower portion of the middle part of the formation are better developed 

in the Pir Ismail Ziarat area than anywhere else in 

Balochistan. At the Abraham Marri mine section, two greenweathering sandstone bodies are present in the middle part of 

the formation, and at least two more can be observed in the 

upper part of the formation, stratigraphically higher than the 

top of our measured section. This is a unique color for Ghazij 

sandstones south of the northwestern Sulaiman lobe. The 

contact between the middle and upper parts of the formation 

at the Abraham Marri mine section is interesting. Based on 

a general color change between mudrock units in the two 

parts, a sharp contact can easily be placed. But a problem 

arises when one views the upper part of the formation from a
VERTICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND LITHOFACIES OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 31

67°15'E.

30°15'

, Quetta

10 20 KILOMETERS

EXPLANATION

Neogene elastics 

Eocene limestone 

Ghazij Formation

Paleocene limestone and minor 

Cretaceous rocks

Jurassic limestone

Contact

Fault — Dashed where inferred

— —I— — Anticline

— Syncline 

Coal mines

Approximate location of Shin Ghwazha 

stratigraphic section

Figure 22. Generalized geology of Sor Range area. X, coal mines. Quaternary alluvial deposits not shown. 

Modified from Hunting Survey Corporation (1960). See Kazim and others (1987) and Reinemund and others (no 

date) for smaller scale geologic maps of the Sor Range area.
32 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

67°30'E

30°15'

30°00'

EXPLANATION 

Neogene elastics 

Eocene limestone 

Ghazij Formation

Paleocene limestone and minor

Cretaceous rocks 

Jurassic limestone

Contact

Fault

Anticline

Approximate location of Abraham Marri 

stratigraphic section

1 Pir Ismail Ziarat

2 SherkiKach

3 Ghate

10 KILOMETERS

Figure 23. Generalized geology of Pir Ismail Ziarat-Sherki Kach-Ghate segment. Quaternary alluvial deposits not shown. Modified from 

Hunting Survey Corporation (1960).

distance. Several significant units of dark-gray mudstone, 

carbonaceous shale, and green sandstone are seen to be interbedded with the light-colored mudrock typical of the upper 

part. We suspect that either the contact in this area is highly 

transitional, or compressional tectonics has shuffled units

from the middle part of the formation into the upper part of 

the formation.

North of the Pir Ismail Ziarat area, along the axial trace 

of the anticline, several large exposures of Ghazij Formation 

surrounded by limestone of the Kirthar Formation are present
VERTICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND LITHOFACIES OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 33

(fig. 23). The southernmost exposure, known as Sherki 

Kach, is about 13 km north of Pir Ismail Ziarat, and the 

northernmost exposure, known as Ghate, lies about 10 km 

farther to the north. Both of these exposures contain coal. At 

Ghate, the coal beds appear to be stratigraphically higher in 

the section than the coal beds near Pir Ismail Ziarat. Also, 

two or three green-weathering sandstone bodies are present, 

and these could correlate roughly with the green sandstone 

bodies in the upper part of the Ghazij at our Abraham Marri 

mine section, assuming that these latter bodies are in place. 

However, the Ghazij at Ghate also looks similar to the middle part of the formation to the northwest, near Kach.

MACH

The Ghazij Formation in the Mach area has been 

reported on since the late I880's because of its coal content 

and the importance of this resource to the railroad that passes 

through the region (Griesbach, 1881; Blanford, 1882, 1883). 

The Ghazij in this area occupies the axial portion of a broad, 

ill-defined syncline that generally strikes north-northwest 

(fig. 24). Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) reported the 

formation to be 1,500-2,700 m thick. They also thought that 

the middle part of the formation was thick by regional standards, and Ahmad and others (1986) reported it to be more 

than 300 m thick. At our two measured sections, Gishtari 

Nala and Moghal mine (pi. 1 C and ID), we recorded a minimum of 241 m and 334 m for the middle part, and a minimum of 129 m and 114m for the upper part, respectively.

In general, the lithology of the Ghazij Formation in the 

Mach area fits the regional description, but some features 

warrant mentioning. The lower part of the Ghazij has been 

deformed by compressional tectonics and is poorly exposed; 

its total thickness is probably unmeasurable. However, if the 

formation is as thick as Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) 

estimated, then the lower part of the formation must be 

abnormally thick. One of the truly unique features of the 

Ghazij in this area is the abundance of thin limestone beds in 

the middle part of the formation. These beds are quite common at the Moghal mine section. At this same section, two 

sandstone bodies in the middle part of the formation weather 

a unique green color. It is tempting to think of these two 

bodies as perhaps distal representatives of two similar sandstone bodies in the middle part of the formation in the Pir 

Ismail Ziarat area, 22 km to the northwest. As discussed in 

a previous section of this report, locally the upper part of the 

formation in the Mach area seems to have some sedimentary 

features that are more typical of the middle part of the formation. Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) came close to recognizing this fact in stating that the upper part of the 

formation was in many places either missing or 

unrecognizable.

67°15'E.

10 KILOMETERS

EXPLANATION 

Quaternary alluvial deposits 

Eocene limestone 

Ghazij Formation 

Pre-Ghazij rocks

Contact 

Fault 

Syncline 

Coal mine

Approximate location of 

stratigraphic section

1 Gishtari Nala

2 Moghal mine

Figure 24. Generalized geology of greater Mach area. Modified 

from Hunting Survey Corporation (1960).
34 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

RODANGI NALA

A curious lithostratigraphic unit is present about 75 km 

southwest of Quetta. Vredenburg (1909) mentioned that coal 

had been reported in the area, and while falling short of confirming its presence, he did state that "Ghazij shales" were 

present. Actually, the Ghazij Formation is not present in this 

area, but what is present is a structurally complicated 

sequence of limestone and minor mudrock that contains at 

least three beds of coaly carbonaceous shale. Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) named these rocks the Rodangi Formation, and stated that the limestone looked like the 

Cretaceous Parh Limestone, and that the mudrock looked 

like the Ghazij; no mention was made of any coal. The limestone is dense (sublithographic) and medium bedded, weathers a cream color, and contains black-weathering chert lenses 

and rusty-weathering lenses and pods of foraminiferal limestone. The mudrock is calcareous, weathers greenish gray, 

and is present in sequences as thick as 6 m. Sandstone associated with the mudrock also weathers greenish gray. Rocks 

of the Jurassic Shirinab Formation unconformably underlie 

the Rodangi, and Eocene limestone, probably equivalent to 

the Kirthar Formation, unconformably overlies the Rodangi. 

Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) estimated the Rodangi 

Formation to be about 150-250 m thick, and they thought the 

unit might be late Paleocene to early Eocene in age.

We visited this area and measured a short stratigraphic 

section that includes three coaly carbonaceous shale horizons 

(fig. 25). The limestone in the section weathers yellowish 

light gray, is medium bedded with mostly flat bedding surfaces, and contains horizontal, pencil-sized, simple fossil 

burrows. Partings in the limestone units are as much as 13 

cm thick, and consist of light-greenish-gray- weathering, very 

thin bedded limestone or limy mudrock. The mudrock in the 

section weathers light greenish gray, is calcareous, and contains ostracodes. The coaly carbonaceous shale units contain 

gray-weathering calcareous mudrock partings, and the units 

vary in thickness along strike. Exactly how the Rodangi correlates with the Ghazij is unclear, but the presence of coaly 

rocks intimately associated with relatively thick sequences of 

limestone is quite interesting from both a depositional environment and a paleogeographic aspect.

JOHAN

In the Johan area the Ghazij Formation crops out as an 

irregular, arcuate belt wrapping around the north end of the 

Kalat Plateau (fig. 26). South of this area, coal ceases to be 

a mentionable component of the Ghazij. Moreover, the 

three-fold division of the formation that is easily recognized 

in the Quetta region is less distinct in the Johan area. The 

upper part of the formation is clearly identifiable, and the 

base of the upper part is easily placed. But rocks below this 

stratigraphic level are poorly exposed and appear to have a 

nearly uniform lithology, so assigning a stratigraphic level

EXPLANATION 

Limestone

Mudrock (excluding 

carbonaceous shale*)

Coaly carbonaceous shale

I I T

Figure 25. Stratigraphic section showing an interval of the upper 

Paleocene to lower Eocene(?) Rodangi Formation containing units 

of coaly carbonaceous shale. Scale in 1 m increments.
VERTICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND LITHOFACffiS OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 35

67°00' E.

29°15'

0 10 KILOMETERS

_J

EXPLANATION

Quaternary alluvial deposits ——————— Contact 

Eocene limestone 

Ghazij Formation 

Pre-Ghazij rocks _ _J_ _ Syncline

——————— Fault

— —1— — Anticline

= Approximate location of Sarawan River 

stratigraphic section

Figure 26. Generalized geology of the greater Johan area. Modified from Hunting Survey Corporation (1960).

that would separate a middle and lower part of the formation 

is difficult. Thus, we propose that in the Johan area, those 

rocks below the upper part of the formation be referred to as 

the main body of the Ghazij Formation. The upper part of 

the Ghazij in the Johan area appears similar to the upper part 

in areas to the north. The main body of the formation consists of a thick section of greenish-gray, calcareous mudrock 

with locally abundant fossil plant debris and secondary gypsum, and isolated tabular bodies of brown-weathering sandstone that display sharp upper and lower contacts and 

contain local, pellet-packed fossil burrows that resemble

Ophiomorpha. The upper portion of the main body of the 

formation contains rare thin units of carbonaceous shale 

(generally less than 20 cm), very rare coal beds (generally 

less than 3 cm), and some fossil oyster shell fragments. This 

interval most likely corresponds to the middle part of the 

Ghazij in areas to the north. The total thickness of the formation in the Johan area might never be known with certainty, but past workers have estimated it to exceed 1,000 m 

(Shah, 1965; Ghaznavi, 1990). At the Sarawan River section 

(pi. 1£), we measured all 251 m of the upper part of the formation, and the top 4 1 3 m of the main body of the formation.
36 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

THE ALTERNATE NOMENCLATURE OF 

SHAH

Shah (1990) proposed a different nomenclature for 

lower Eocene rocks in northeastern Balochistan. He raised 

the term Ghazij to group status and subdivided it into three 

formations. In ascending order these are the Shaheed Ghat 

Formation, the Drug Formation, and the Toi Formation. 

Although Shah applied his scheme to rocks from Moghal Kot 

to Mach, all three of his type sections are in the Sulaiman 

Range, and his scheme has the most usefulness in certain 

areas of this region. Shah's Shaheed Ghat Formation is 

roughly equivalent to the lower part of the Ghazij Formation. 

The Drug Formation appears to be restricted to certain areas 

of the Sulaiman Range, and probably has no lithostratigraphic equivalent in the Ghazij. The Toi Formation is probably equivalent to the middle and upper parts of the Ghazij 

(fig. 27). Combining the middle and upper parts of the 

Ghazij Formation into one single formation might prove to 

be inconvenient if a significant unconformity is eventually 

identified between these two parts of the Ghazij. Shah' s classification has not been widely accepted, and we prefer retaining the traditional subdivisions.

REGIONAL VARIATIONS OF THE 

GHAZIJ FORMATION

Beyond that part of the Axial Belt that borders the Sibi 

Reentrant, the Ghazij Formation begins to undergo facies 

changes that alter the lithologic characteristics of the formation. In some areas, this has led previous workers to propose 

different nomenclature schemes. Although we consider the 

areas described in this section to be within our general study 

area (fig. 1), only a few were visited by Warwick, and most 

of the information discussed was taken from the literature.

SULAIMAN RANGE

BALA DHAKA-BAHLOL-KINGRI BELT

Eighty kilometers east of Duki in the northeastern part 

of the Sulaiman lobe, or the south end of the Sulaiman 

Range, lies a northeast-trending belt of exposures of the 

Ghazij Formation that extends for about 65 km. The Ghazij 

near Bala Dhaka, near the southwest end of the belt, is 

reported by Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) to contain a 

minor amount of coal, and this is probably the southernmost 

locality for Ghazij coal in the Sulaiman Range. Evidently the 

Ghazij is poorly exposed here, for little has been reported 

concerning the characteristics of the formation in this area. 

To the northeast, near Bahlol, all three subdivisions of the 

Ghazij are present, and the middle part of the formation is

Quetta region 

This report

upper part of 

Ghazij 

Formation

middle part of 

Ghazij 

Formation

lower part of 

Ghazij 

Formation

Sulaiman Range 

Shah (1990)

Toi 

Formation

.X Drug 

.s Formation

Shaheed 

Ghat 

Formation

Sulaiman Range 

Eames (1952a)

Shales 

with 

Alabaster

Rubbly 

Limestones

Green and 

Nodular 

Shales

Upper 

Rakhi Gaj 

Shales

Ghazij 

Shales

Figure 27. Comparison of three-part division of the Ghazij Formation in Quetta region with lower Eocene nomenclatures of Shah 

(1990) and Eames (1952a) in Sulaiman Range. No scale implied.

probably thicker here than anywhere else in northeastern 

Balochistan (Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960). Shah 

(1990) reported that the Ghazij in this area looks similar to 

the formation's appearance near Duki. The middle part of 

the formation contains coal, and although the Ghazij is 

present in areas to the east, Bahlol represents the easternmost 

locality for coal in the formation. According to Hunting Survey Corporation (1960), a 150-m-thick unit of brown-weathering, cross-stratified, coarse-grained sandstone is present at 

the top of the formation. This sandstone unit is thus in the 

same stratigraphic position as the sandstone observed at the 

top of the formation just west of Harnai. Hunting Survey 

Corporation (1960) reported that the Ghazij ranges from 

about 1,500 to 2,900 m thick in the Bahlol area. All three 

subdivisions of the Ghazij are present at Kingri near the 

northeast end of the belt, but the lithologic details are different. The lower part of the formation is similar to that in areas 

to the west. The middle part of the formation is more than 

300 m thick, and contains mudrock in the upper portion and 

abundant Type I and Type III sandstone bodies in the lower 

portion. The upper part of the formation is about 300 m thick 

and contains abundant Type III sandstone bodies, most of 

which are 12-18 m thick and medium to coarse grained. 

According to Hunting Survey Corporation (1960), the Ghazij 

is about 1,200 m thick in this area.

South of the Bala Dhaka-Bahlol-Kingri belt, in the Marri 

Bugti Hills near Dera Bugti, Hunting Survey Corporation
REGIONAL VARIATIONS OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 37

(1960) reported that the Ghazij Formation contains rocks 

consistent with their simple assemblage, that is, a shale-dominated sequence that contains some limestone units that 

increase in number upward, and minor sandstone. These 

workers also reported that the formation is thin in this area as 

compared to its thickness in areas to the west. The formation 

in the Marri Bugti Hills is also reported to contain some gypsum in its uppermost part (Hemphill and Kidwai, 1973).

RAKHI NALA AND ZINDA PIR

East and north of the Bala Dhaka-Bahlol-Kingri belt, 

the Ghazij Formation loses its three-fold divisional characteristic, and other subdivisions have been applied to lower 

Eocene strata. Eames (1952a) measured a 1,106-m-thick 

stratigraphic section of lower Eocene strata near Rakhi Nala 

about 67 km east of Bala Dhaka, and another 1,240-m-thick 

section of these rocks near Zinda Pir about 69 km east of 

Kingri. In ascending order, Eames divided the lower Eocene 

section at Rakhi Nala into Upper Rakhi Gaj Shales (he also 

included the very uppermost part of the Lower Rakhi Gaj 

Shales), Green and Nodular Shales, Rubbly Limestones, and 

Shales with Alabaster (fig. 28). At Zinda Pir, about 68 km 

to the northeast, he divided the lower Eocene section into 

Zinda Pir Limestones (upper part), Ghazij Shales, Green and 

Nodular Shales, Rubbly Limestones, and Shales with Alabaster.

Eames' descriptions of the upper three formations for 

both localities are as follows. The Green and Nodular Shales 

unit is a sequence of gray calcareous shale interbedded with 

layers of green nodular sandy shale, which becomes more 

common toward the top of the unit. The Rubbly Limestones 

unit is a sequence of interbedded calcareous gray shale and 

white-weathering nodular limestone. Some of the rocks contain foraminifers. Locally, the ratio of shale to limestone 

varies, as do the bed thickness and silt content of the limestone. The Shales with Alabaster unit consists mostly of 

green, gray, and brown calcareous shale with abundant thin 

limestone beds containing numerous fossil mollusks. At 

least two horizons of gypsum are present, one about 6 m 

thick near the top of the unit, and a thinner horizon about 61 

m below that. In the Rakhi Nala area, the Upper Rakhi Gaj 

Shales are composed of green- and gray-weathering shale 

with very rare thin beds of limestone in the lower 18m. Foraminifers are locally common. In the Zinda Pir area, the 

Ghazij Shales are also composed of green- and gray-weathering shale but lack the limestone beds in the basal part. In 

descending order, the Zinda Pir Limestones (upper part) consist of a discontinuous white-weathering limestone, a brownweathering dense limestone, and 6-14 m of shale similar to 

the overlying Ghazij Shales.

The Zinda Pir Limestones (upper and lower parts) are 

possibly equivalent to the Paleocene Dungan Formation. 

Nagappa (1959) reported that the Rakhi Gaj Shales and

Rakhi Nala Zinda Pir

X X X X 

y y y y y y y

G=»=

^.XWW

•J^TZCS.

o^y^xj:

r-$:^r-r-

——

en

03 J

CD •''

.Cc/>

J2 

J2

CC.

1 

,

•a

c

CD

C. 

0} 

<D

a

^

0

<D

..V' 1"T NodularShales Limestones 

Alabas

n

u

D 

0

GRakhi Upper — 

^x

PLc 

C

wer Rakhi 

5aj Shales

(uppermost part)

EXPLANATION 

Shale 

Shale, nodular

.

V/Zinda Pir 

^Limestones 

(upper part)

Limestone, nodular 

Alabaster

Figure 28. Stratigraphic columns for lower Eocene deposits at 

Rakhi Nala and Zinda Pir. Generalized from Eames (1952a). 

Vertical scale in 500-ft (approx. 150 m) intervals.
38 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

Ghazij Shales as described by Eames are equivalent. The 

Upper Rakhi Gaj Shales and Ghazij Shales, and the overlying 

Green and Nodular Shales are probably equivalent to the 

lower part of the Ghazij Formation to the west (fig. 27); the 

Rubbly Limestones probably has no lithostratigraphic equivalent in the Ghazij; and the Shales with Alabaster is probably 

equivalent to the upper part of the Ghazij. The coal-bearing 

middle part of the Ghazij Formation in the Quetta region is 

evidently not present in the Rakhi Nala and Zinda Pir areas. 

If an unconformity exists between the middle and upper parts 

of the Ghazij Formation, then the boundary between the 

Shales with Alabaster and the Rubbly Limestones in the 

Zinda Pir and Rakhi Nala areas might also be unconformable. Correlating the subdivisions of Shah (1990) with those 

of Eames (1952a) is difficult. Perhaps Shah's Shaheed Ghat 

Formation is equivalent to the Upper Rakhi Gaj Shales and 

Ghazij Shales, and the Green and Nodular Shales (fig. 27), 

the Drug Formation is equivalent to the Rubbly Limestones, 

and the upper part of the Toi Formation is equivalent to the 

Shales with Alabaster.

Qureshi and others (1987), in their study of the stratigraphy of the Sulaiman Range in the general vicinity of Rakhi 

Nala and Zinda Pir, presented yet another nomenclature for 

lower Eocene rocks in this area. They proposed including all 

of the lower Eocene strata in the Ghazij Formation, and 

divided it into three members. In ascending order these are: 

Rakhi Gaj Shale, Drug Limestone, and Baska Shale. This 

nomenclature was also used by Akhtar and Masood (1991).

MOGHAL KOT AND DRAZINDA

About 130 km north of Zinda Pir, in the Moghal Kot and 

Drazinda area, Hemphill and Kidwai (1973) divided the 

lower Eocene section, in ascending order, into Ghazij Shale 

and Baska Shale (fig. 29). They reported the Ghazij Shale to 

be about 2,740 m thick and divided it into two parts. The 

lower part consists of green- and dark-gray-weathering, 

locally carbonaceous mudrock and subordinate sandstone. 

The upper part consists of red- and maroon-weathering 

mudrock, with coarse-grained sandstone and conglomerate 

near the top. Foraminifers are locally common throughout 

the Ghazij Shale. The Baska Shale consists of 49-189 m of 

green- to greenish-gray-weathering mudrock that contains 

alabaster both as nodules and in beds as thick as 9 m. Near 

the base of the formation, the mudrock is sandy and weathers 

red and maroon, and the contact with the underlying Ghazij 

Shale is sharp where sandstone occupies the upper part of the 

Ghazij Shale. Locally, gypsiferous limestone containing 

large foraminifers is present near the top of the Baska Shale. 

Hemphill and Kidwai (1973) stated that the formation thins 

toward the north, and extends south along the east edge of the 

Sulaiman Range perhaps as far as Dera Bugti. Although 

Hemphill and Kidwai intended the Baska Shale to replace the 

Shales with Alabaster of Eames (1952a), the two type areas

Moghal Kot 

Drazinda

Baska 

Shale

EXPLANATION

Shale

Sandstone

Sandstone, conglomeratic

Limestone

Alabaster

Figure 29. Lower Eocene stratigraphy in Moghal Kot and 

Drazinda areas. Modified from Hemphill and Kidwai (1973). 

Vertical scale in 500-m intervals.

are separated by about 150 km. The reddish upper part of 

their Ghazij Shale might actually be equivalent to Eames'
REGIONAL VARIATIONS OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 39

Shales with Alabaster, and the Baska Shale could be a completely different unit. If this is the case, then the lower part 

of the Ghazij Shale of Hemphill and Kidwai would be equivalent to all of the lower Eocene strata below the Shales with 

Alabaster, as described by Eames.

KIRTHAR RANGE

Exposures of the Ghazij Formation are common in the 

northern Kirthar Range from Johan south to Karkh. Twentytwo kilometers south of Karkh, the southernmost exposure 

of Ghazij is truncated by a fault. South of this location rocks 

equivalent to the Ghazij were included in the Jamburo Group 

(Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960), but Fritz and Khan 

(1966) identified early Eocene foraminifers from well cuttings near Karachi and extended the term Ghazij into this 

area. On the west side of the Kirthar Range south of Surab, 

the Ghazij grades into the Upper Cretaceous to lower Eocene 

Gidar Dhor Group (Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960). In 

most of the Kirthar Range the Ghazij is underlain by the 

Dungan Formation and overlain by the Kirthar Formation, or 

their stratigraphic equivalents (Hunting Survey Corporation, 

1960). However, in the vicinity of Surab, the Ghazij is 

underlain by the Gidar Dhor Group, or by formations older 

than this group.

The Ghazij in the Kirthar Range lacks a distinctive middle part such as it has in the Quetta region. In the Johan area 

we have divided the formation into a main body and an upper 

part, but south and east of this area the formation is dominated by dark-colored mudrock and is apparently indivisible. 

Although the Ghazij is usually dominated by mudrock in the 

Kirthar Range, a west-to-east decrease in grain size of the 

subordinate lithologies is apparent. Exposures in the western part of the range are more likely to include some conglomerate and sandstone, whereas exposures in the eastern 

part are usually limited to mudrock and limestone, or to just 

mudrock. For example, Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) 

described the Ghazij near Angira on the west side of the 

range as comprising shale with minor conglomerate, limestone, and sandstone—their complex assemblage. On the 

east side of the range between just south of Karkh and an 

area just north of Tang Na Pusht, they described the formation as containing mostly shale—their simple assemblage. 

Coal is not reported in the Ghazij south of the Johan area. In 

general, the thickness of the Ghazij increases from west to 

east. For example, the formation is reported by Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) to be 457 m thick near Angira and 

762 m thick near Karkh. Thirty-five kilometers northeast of 

Karkh, on the east edge of the Kirthar Range, unpublished 

company data on file with the Geological Survey of Pakistan 

in Quetta cite the formation to have a minimum thickness of 

more than 1,200 m.

One of the most significant lithologic features of the 

Ghazij in the Kirthar Range is the conglomerate facies that

locally dominates the formation in the Kalat-Surab area. 

This lithofacies is so distinctive that it has been assigned its 

own name, the Marap Conglomerate.

MARAP CONGLOMERATE

The name Marap Conglomerate was introduced by 

Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) to designate a thick 

sequence of conglomerate in the district of Marap, about 19 

km northwest of Surab. They intended the Marap to have 

formational status, and defined the reference locality as the 

northwest edge of the Marap Valley. Shah (1977) later redefined the Marap Conglomerate as a member of the Ghazij 

Formation. According to Hunting Survey Corporation 

(1960) and Shah (1977), the Marap is about 910 m thick at 

the reference locality and is composed almost entirely of 

conglomerate. The rock weathers reddish brown and is 

poorly sorted. Clasts are well rounded, and consist of pebbles to boulders of gray, white, and pink limestone, and 

lesser amounts of maroon and green marl, green shale, and 

sandstone. Locally, the conglomerate is interbedded with 

shale, sandstone, and limestone that appear similar to rocks 

in other parts of the Ghazij Formation. Toward the east, the 

unit pinches out or grades into finer grained rocks of the 

Ghazij. In some areas, the Marap occupies the entire Ghazij 

interval; where it occupies less of the interval, it is found at 

various stratigraphic levels in the upper part of the Ghazij. 

Where the Marap occurs at the top of the Ghazij, it is overlain by the Kirthar Formation or its stratigraphic equivalent. 

Where the Marap takes up the entire Ghazij interval, it is 

underlain by a variety of units including the Shirinab Formation, the Parh Limestone, and the Gidar Dhor Group. The 

Marap is not present north of an area just south of Johan. No 

fossils have been recovered from the Marap, but it is 

assumed to be early Eocene age because of its association 

with the Ghazij.

HARBOI HILLS

The Marap Conglomerate Member is well exposed and 

easily accessible on the west side of the Harboi Hills, 16 km 

east of Kalat. Here, the unit occupies the upper part of the 

Ghazij interval and crops out on the west side of a breached, 

northeast-trending anticline. We measured a stratigraphic 

section of the Marap in this area and found the main mass of 

the unit to be 286 m thick (fig. 30). However, the conglomerate is interbedded with finer grained rocks of the Ghazij 49 

m below and 28 m above the main mass. The top of the main 

mass lies 56 m below the base of the Kirthar Formation, and 

a sequence of green- and red-weathering mudrock, 29 m 

thick, is present at the top of the Ghazij. On the east side of 

the anticline, several kilometers away, no conglomerate is
40 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

present in the Ghazij, so the Marap must pinch out or grade 

into finer grained rocks over this distance.

Exposures of the Marap weather light to dark brown, 

and where thick intervals are well exposed, the unit is composed of amalgamated sequences of tabular to lenticular bodies averaging 2 m thick, separated by finer grained rocks (fig. 

31). Some inclined surfaces are present. The conglomerate 

is poorly sorted, but a few exposures display crude horizontal 

stratification and normal grading. Most of the conglomerate 

is clast supported, but intervals of matrix-supported rock are 

common. Pebbles are the most common size clasts, but cobbles are present and boulders are rare. The clasts are composed mostly of medium- to light-gray-weathering 

limestone, with lesser amounts of yellow- or brown-weathering chert. Limestone clasts are mostly well rounded; chert 

clasts are usually subrounded to subangular. Matrix material 

is poorly sorted, fine- to coarse-grained sandstone composed 

of limestone and chert grains. Locally, pebbly sandstone 

beds are interbedded with the conglomerate. These rocks are 

medium to very coarse grained, have a composition similar 

to that of the conglomerate matrix, and are commonly small 

scale, trough cross stratified.

The conglomerate in the Harboi Hills appears very similar to the conglomerate in the Sor Range, 137 km to the 

north. However, the stratigraphic position and depositional 

architecture of the conglomerates are different. In the Harboi 

Hills, the Marap is wedge shaped and occupies much of the 

upper part of the Ghazij, whereas in the Sor Range the conglomerate is more tabular in shape and restricted to the base 

of the upper part of the formation.

SURAB

Another well-exposed sequence of Marap Conglomerate Member is located in a south-facing slope near a microwave station about 8 km south of Surab. The unit appears 

similar to that in the Harboi Hills but subtle differences can 

be observed. Overall, the conglomerate near Surab is somewhat coarser grained than that in the Harboi Hills, and boulder-size clasts are more common. Clasts of red chert and 

quartzite, both of which are rare in the Harboi Hills, are common near Surab. In addition, finer grained intervals separating amalgamated sequences of conglomerate are less 

common near Surab than in the Harboi Hills, and where 

present, they are thinner.

The top of the Ghazij interval near Surab is mostly 

covered by limestone debris from the overlying cliff of 

Kirthar Formation, but red-weathering mudrock can be 

observed in the uppermost few meters of the formation; 

locally, the Kirthar is reported to rest directly on the Marap. 

The Surab site is located at the west end of a sinuous, generally east trending escarpment that is held up by the Kirthar. 

When the escarpment is viewed from a distance, the Marap

Kirthar Formation 

(part)

Q. CU CU

£ E £

•=• 5 —

N m t

EXPLANATION 

Mudrock 

Sandstone 

Conglomerate 

Limestone

C/3 0)

Figure 30. Stratigraphic section of the Marap Conglomerate 

Member of the Ghazij Formation in the Harboi Hills 16 km east 

of Kalat. Vertical scale in 100-m intervals.
REGIONAL VARIATIONS OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 41

Figure 31. Typical exposure of Marap Conglomerate Member of the Ghazij Formation in the 

Harboi Hills. Architectural elements include amalgamated tabular sandstone bodies and accretion 

surfaces. Total conglomerate package shown in photograph is about 12 m thick.

is seen to thin toward the east over a distance of several 

kilometers.

The Geological Survey of Pakistan has measured a 

stratigraphic section of the Ghazij in this area and reported it 

to be 426 m thick (oral commun., 1991). Although conglomerate is present throughout most of the interval, this lithology 

decreases downward and only the top 183 m of the formation 

is composed more or less totally of conglomerate, and warrants the name Marap.

SIBI TO THE INDUS RIVER

All the information on the Ghazij Formation east of the 

Axial Belt comes from subsurface data. In 1952 gas was discovered in lower Eocene strata in the vicinity of Jacobabad, 

and since that time electric logs and cutting records from 

numerous exploration wells have provided data that characterize this part of the stratigraphic section. From these data 

two important observations can be made: (1) almost no detrital rocks coarser grained than siltstone are present, and (2) a 

significant amount of limestone is locally present in the 

lower part of the sequence. Figure 32 shows the lower 

Eocene section as interpreted from subsurface data in the Sui 

No. 1 well. This sequence is typical for the area, and the 

lithostratigraphic terms assigned by petroleum geologists 

working in the area are shown. Lower Eocene strata are

overlain by the Kirthar Formation, and are underlain by 

rocks of the Paleocene Ranikot Group, a term correlated into 

the area from Sindh Province to the south. In ascending 

order, the lower Eocene sequence comprises "Sui Main 

Limestone" (this is the major gas reservoir in the area), 

Ghazij Shale (uncharacteristically thin), "Shale with Nodular Limestone" (the lower part of which locally contains the 

"Sui Upper Limestone"), and the "Lower Alabaster Shale" 

(despite the fact that gypsum is rarely present). Figure 33 

shows the areal distribution of drill-hole data in the vicinity 

of Jacobabad that was available to us. Three oil and gas 

wells northwest of the village of Sui (Sui No. I, Uch No. 1, 

and Zin) encountered the Sui Main Limestone; other wells in 

the region did not. This pattern, supported by a simple northsouth cross section (fig. 34), demonstrates that the presence 

of the Sui Main Limestone is restricted to a specific area. 

This isolated patch of limestone surrounded by shale would 

undoubtedly provide a nearly perfect stratigraphic trap for 

hydrocarbon accumulation. Another well, Pak Pet Ltd and 

Hunt No. 1, 150 km to the southwest, encountered limestone 

at the same stratigraphic level as the Sui Main Limestone. 

The limestone in this well is probably part of a patch similar 

to that of the Sui Main Limestone. The Sui Main Limestone 

was probably deposited on a carbonate platform that was isolated in the middle of the early Eocene Indus Foreland Basin. 

Perhaps the position of this feature was somehow controlled 

by differential movement associated with an ancestral
42 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

EXPLANATION

Shale

Limestone

Figure 32. Stratigraphic section of lower Eocene rocks encountered in drill hole Sui No. 1. See figure 33 for location. Data provided by the Geological Survey of Pakistan. Vertical scale in 

meters.

version of the Jacobabad high, a subsurface structural element that is now prominent in the area (fig. 7).

The lithologies represented in the lower Eocene 

sequence in the Sui area seem to reflect an interfingering of 

eastern and western depositional influences within the Indus 

Foreland Basin. For example, the Sui Main Limestone is 

probably related to depositional conditions that were present 

along the east side of the basin, whereas the Ghazij Shale is 

more closely associated with depositional conditions that 

existed along the west side of the basin.

PETROGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS 

OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION

Petrographic information concerning the Ghazij Formation in this report comes from three sources: (1) observations 

recorded from the viewing of thin sections of sandstone samples, (2) analysis of heavy-mineral separations obtained from 

sandstone samples, and (3) clast counts of conglomerate 

units. More generalized petrographic information based on 

hand-sample observations are available in Hunting Survey 

Corporation (1960).

SANDSTONE PETROGRAPHY

Only two petrographic studies of sandstones from the 

Ghazij Formation have been published to 1997. Kazi (1968) 

reported on 10 sandstone samples from the middle and upper 

parts of the formation near Harnai. To study the components 

of these rocks, Kazi disaggregated each of them with hydrochloric acid, passed the resulting fragments through a series 

of sieves, and mounted a selected fraction on glass slides. 

With the use of a binocular microscope, he reported that 

quartz made up 60 percent of the detrital grains from the middle part of the formation and 55 percent of the grains from the 

upper part of the formation. Rock fragments, the next most 

abundant component, made up 15 percent of the grains from 

the middle part and 30 percent from the upper part. These 

latter components represent mostly extrusive igneous rocks. 

The fact that carbonate grains were not reported is probably 

the result of their solution by the acid that Kazi used to break 

down his samples. With the use of a petrographic microscope, Kassi (1986) studied thin sections of 10 sandstones 

collected at several sites in the general vicinity of Quetta, and 

reported that in the sections he examined, rock fragments 

were the most common detrital grains. Limestone made up 

from 12 to 98 percent of the grains. Chert made up 3-60 percent of the grains and appeared red or gray in plane light. 

Some chert grains contained spherical structures (radiolarian?). Subordinate amounts of basic volcanic rock grains 

were also present. In addition to the rock fragments, quartz 

grains made up 0.4-14 percent of the grains and feldspar
PETROGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION

68° E. 69° E

43

70° E.

29°

26°

0Sibi

EXPLANATION 

Possible extent of Sui Main Limestone

- — — — Inferred contact of Sui Main Limestone

-(•> Oil and gas well with Sui Main Limestone

•^ Oil and gas well without Sui Main Limestone

X Measured stratigraphic section

Gianda No. 1

ii i

A' 

"^StanVacNo.1

10 50 KILOMETERS

Figure 33. Areal distribution of some drill holes and possible distribution of Sui Main Limestone, greater Jacobabad region. Map 

modified from Kemal (1964) and Shah (1965).

(mostly plagioclase) made up less than 2.6 percent of the 

grains. Rarely present were reddish-brown biotite, and blue, 

yellow, or green chlorite. Calcite cement accounted for 7-35 

percent of the rocks.

As part of our study of the Ghazij, we made thin sections of 31 sandstone samples collected at Kingri (one from 

the middle part of the formation and two from the upper 

part), Duki (two from the middle part), Pir Ismail Ziarat (four 

from the lower part, nine from the middle part, and one from 

the upper part), Sor Range (one from the middle part and 

three from the upper part), Mach (four from the middle part 

and one from the upper part), and Johan (three from the main

body of the formation). The samples collected from the last 

four areas listed were taken from stratigraphic sections that 

we measured in those areas, and the exact geographic and 

stratigraphic positions of these samples appear in the appropriate publications cited previously in this report in the section on principal reference sections. Clearly, 31 samples 

collected over an area of thousands of square kilometers do 

not constitute an adequate petrographic study of Ghazij 

sandstones. However, this "quick look" does confirm what 

is already reported about Ghazij sandstones from hand-sample observations, and it does reveal some important petrographic trends.
44 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, B ALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

Tatra 

Section

1000

(Kemal, 1964) (Geological 

Survey

of 

Pakistan)

25

Stan Vac No. 1

1200-;

(Shah, 1965)

50 KILOMETERS

Figure 34. Cross section showing isolated character of the Sui Main Limestone. See figure 33 for line of section. Vertical 

scale in meters.

The rocks were impregnated with blue-dyed epoxy, 

and the sections were stained for calcite, potassium feldspar, and iron. The red stain for calcite did not take well, 

making the distinction between calcite and dolomite difficult. However, X-ray analysis of selected samples did not 

indicate the presence of dolomite, so we assume that all of 

the carbonate is limestone. The yellow stain for potassium 

feldspar was never observed, nor were any other types of 

feldspar identified. Moreover, X-ray analysis did not indicate the presence of any feldspar. The blue stain for ironbearing carbonate was useful in identifying ferron calcite, 

which was present as detrital grains and as a cementing 

agent in some thin sections.

Examination of the sections revealed that all the 

components could fit into one of 10 categories:

cryptocrystalline limestone

microcrystalline limestone

sparite

chert (non-green)

chert (green)

quartz

rock fragments (non-green)

rock fragments (green)

other

cement
PETROGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 45

At least 300 framework grains were identified and 

counted on each thin section, and the following information 

is based on these observations.

Cryptocrystalline limestone.—These well-rounded, 

dark, cloudy grains are the most common component of the 

rocks. Although crystallinity is difficult to detect, some 

areas of the grains do show interference colors typical of carbonates. Outlines of microfossils, especially foraminifers, 

are commonly observed within the grains. These grains are 

interpreted as fragments of lime mudstone or micrite.

Microcrystalline limestone.—These subrounded grains 

probably represent fragments of finely crystalline limestone.

Sparite.— This material is often difficult to distinguish 

from sparry cement but appears as subrounded grains optically separate from the cement. We interpret these grains to 

be fragments of coarsely crystalline limestone.

Chert (non-green).—Almost all the subangular to subrounded chert grains appear transparent in plane light.

Chert (green).—These grains are extremely rare and 

are present only in those few sandstones that appear green in 

hand specimens.

Quartz.—Almost all the subangular quartz grains are 

monocrystalline, but rare grains are polycrystalline; all the 

grains display undulatory extinction.

Rock fragments (non-green).—Most of these subangular to subrounded grains are probably fragments of basic 

extrusive rock, but some are undoubtedly fragments of 

argillaceous sedimentary rock.

Rock fragments (green) .— These grains are less abundant than the non-green varieties and are most common in 

rocks that appear green in hand specimens. Almost all of 

these grains are assumed to be fragments of basic extrusive 

rock.

Other.—Included in this category are (1) detrital microfossils filled with microcrystalline calcite, (2) green detrital 

chlorite, and (3) translucent to opaque fragments of brown 

unidentifiable material. None of these grains are common. 

Some microfossils are present in almost all of the rocks; the 

chlorite was only observed in rocks that appeared green in 

hand specimens; and the dark-colored unidentifiable material is rare but is more common in the finer grained sandstones. An exception to this latter statement is a mediumgrained sandstone from the Johan area that contains an abundance of such material.

Cement.—All the rocks are cemented with coarsely 

crystalline calcite, and some of this is ferron calcite. Matrix 

material with a green cast, present in very small amounts and 

thus too rare to warrant a separate category, was counted 

with the cement.

Figures 35 and 36 are photomicrographs showing the 

grains in some of our thin sections.

Plotting the results of our observations on a traditional 

quartz-feldspar-rock (QFR) triangular diagram is inappropriate because we identified no feldspars in our thin sections.

Therefore, we chose to plot our data on a limestone-quartzrock (LQR) diagram (fig. 37). Because we believe that the 

non-green chert grains came from the same rock source as 

the limestone grains, we included the relatively small number of these chert grains (most rocks averaging about 8 percent) with the limestone grains when constructing our LQR 

diagrams.

As hand-specimen observations indicate and the previous study by Kassi (1986) confirms, most of the grains in 

Ghazij sandstones are limestone (fig. 37). Except for the 

Duki and Kingri samples, and two green sandstone samples 

from Pir Ismail Ziarat, limestone grains in the sandstones 

range from 51 to 98 percent with an average of nearly 80 percent. These values are for framework grains; when the calcite cement is also considered, the amount of calcium 

carbonate contained in these rocks is quite high. Because 

limestones are usually defined as containing greater than 50 

percent calcium carbonate, these rocks are actually clastic 

limestones or limy sandstones rather than just sandstones 

(unqualified) as we traditionally think of them. At first we 

considered using the term calcarenite, but this term allows 

for the inclusion of limestone fragments that formed within 

the environment of accumulation (intraclasts). Because we 

believe that these grains originated outside of the environment of accumulation (extraclasts) as a result of erosion of 

older limestone units, we prefer the term calclithite, which 

limits the grains to this origin. Another term that could be 

applied to these rocks is lime grainstone. As shown on a triangular diagram of limestone types (fig. 38) with cryptocrystalline limestone, microcrystalline limestone, and sparite on 

the corners, micrite is the most common limestone grain, followed by finely crystalline limestone and coarsely crystalline limestone.

The Duki and Kingri samples contain a surprising 

amount of quartz (fig. 37). Samples from Duki and Kingri 

average 69 and 88 percent quartz, respectively. Our findings 

support the high percentage of quartz in the middle part of 

the Ghazij at Duki as reported by Shah (1990). The samples 

from these two areas are best classified as litharenites and 

sublitharenites, respectively.

The two samples of green sandstone collected from two 

separate sandstone bodies in the middle part of the Ghazij at 

the Abraham Marri mine section near Pir Ismail Ziarat are 

interesting. Thin sections reveal a high percentage of rock 

fragments when compared to other Ghazij sandstones (fig. 

37). Rock fragments average 40 percent and limestone 

grains average 36 percent. Of the rock fragments, non-green 

varieties average 59 percent and green varieties average 41 

percent. One of the sandstones contains 8 percent chert, all 

of which is non-green; the other sample contains 18 percent 

chert, and 85 percent of this is green. Also present are about 

3 percent detrital chlorite grains. The green color of the samples results from the high percentage of green rock fragments, green chlorite, and green chert.
46 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

Figure 35. Photomicrograph of thin section cut from sandstone sample A-12-90 collected at Abraham Marri mine strati graphic section 

near Pir Ismail Ziarat (Johnson and Khan, 1994b) showing typical limestone grains. A. plane light; B, crossed nicols; field length 0.87 mm. 

Specific grains are 1, sparite (twinned); 2, cryptocrystalline limestone; 3, microcrystalline limestone; 4, ferron calcite cement stained blue. 

Note the many microfossils in the cryptocrystalline limestone.

HEAVY MINERALS

We submitted 30 sandstone samples for heavy-mineral 

separation. These samples were taken from the same rocks 

that were thin sectioned for petrographic examination. The 

samples were crushed and sized using standard methods, and 

the 50- to 200-mesh fraction added to heavy liquids, either 

sodium polytungstate or lithium polytungstate. Prior to 

mounting the recovered material on glass slides (without 

cover slips), some samples were X-rayed.

Based on microscopic observations and X-ray analysis, 

the following minerals were identified:

amphibole (?)

apatite

barite

calcite

chlorite

dolomite

ilmenite

magnetite

olivine (?)

pyroxene

spinel group

quartz

zircon (trace)

Of particular interest is the presence of a specific 

mineral within the spinel group. Using a scanning electron 

microscope (SEM), we were able to confirm the presence of 

chromite in samples from the Sor Range, Pir Ismail Ziarat, 

and Mach (L.F. Ruppert, oral commun., 1994). Chromite 

was particularly abundant in the samples from Pir Ismail 

Ziarat, and both high aluminum and high aluminum and 

magnesium types were detected. Samples from Duki and 

Kingri did not contain chromite, and the samples from Johan 

were not studied with the SEM. The SEM work also 

revealed that some of the calcite and quartz grains have framboids of iron-bearing minerals (hematite?) on their surfaces, 

which might explain why these two minerals ended up 

among the more traditional heavy minerals.

Kassi (1986) also detected heavy minerals in the sandstones he studied, and he reported the presence of chromite, 

tourmaline, and apatite.
PETROGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 47

Figure 36. Photomicrograph of thin section cut from sandstone sample A-26-90 collected at Abraham Marri mine stratigraphic section 

near Pir Ismail Ziarat (Johnson and Khan. 1994b) showing typical green lithic grains. A, plane light; 6, crossed nicols; field length 1.08 mm. 

Specific grains are 1, green rock fragment; 2, non-green rock fragment; 3, green rock fragment (chert?); 4. non-green rock fragment; 5, ferron 

calcite cement stained blue.

Limestone and non-green 

chert

Cryptocrystalline limestone 

(micrite)

Quartz Rock

Figure 37. Limestone and non-green chert, quartz, and rock 

(LQR) diagram with points representing all sandstone thin sections studied. A, Sor Range, Pir Ismail Ziarat (non-green sandstones), Mach, and Johan; B, Duki; C, Kingri; D, Pir Ismail 

Ziarat (green sandstones).

Microcrystalline 

limestone

(finely crystalline 

limestone)

Sparite

(coarsely crystalline 

limestone)

Figure 38. Limestone-type diagram with points representing all 

sandstone thin sections studied.
48 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

CONGLOMERATE CLAST COUNTS

In order to better understand the specifics of the conglomeratic fades of the Ghazij Formation, we conducted 

clast-count studies at two localities, the Sor Range and the 

Harboi Hills. As discussed in a previous section of this 

report, conglomerate is locally present in the Ghazij either as 

a single, tabular body at the base of the upper part of the formation, or as a much thicker mass that takes up most of the 

upper part of the formation, the Marap Conglomerate Member. We chose the Sor Range and Harboi Hills because they 

best represent these two depositional modes, respectively. 

At each of these two localities, we selected three equally 

spaced sites, thus providing a broad sampling of the facies. 

At each of these sites we counted 300 clasts, and recorded 

such characteristics as clast size, rock type, and color.

In the Sor Range, where the conglomerate is present as 

a tabular body, we spaced our three sites along depositional 

strike in order to better sample the facies. We selected a site 

on the nose of the Sor Range syncline near the Surab Jee 

mine, a middle site, several kilometers to the east near the 

Amin mine, and a third site several kilometers to the south of 

that. The conglomerate is composed of 84 percent limestone 

clasts and 16 percent chert clasts. Pebbles accounted for 85 

percent of the clasts, and cobbles the other 15 percent.

Limestone clasts are mostly well rounded and distributed as follows:

55 percent light gray

21 percent off white

12 percent brown

8 percent medium gray

I percent dark gray 

3 percent other

Chert clasts are mostly subangular and distributed as 

follows:

55 percent yellow 

16 percent brown

II percent light gray

8 percent off white

5 percent dark gray

4 percent green

1 percent other

In the Harboi Hills, where the conglomerate is present 

as a thick wedge, we selected the three sites in a vertical manner so as to better sample the lower, middle, and upper thirds 

of the facies. We conducted our study in the same area that 

we measured our stratigraphic section of the Marap Conglomerate Member (fig. 30), on the west side of the Harboi 

Hills, 16 km east of Kalat. The conglomerate is composed of 

93 percent limestone clasts and 6 percent chert clasts; sandstone clasts make up less than 1 percent. Pebbles accounted 

for 86 percent of the clasts, and cobbles the other 14 percent. 

This is remarkably close to the sizes recorded in the Sor 

Range.

Limestone clasts are mostly well rounded and distributed as follows:

29 percent light gray

49 percent medium gray

15 percent brown

5 percent dark gray

2 percent other

Chert clast are mostly subangular and distributed as follows:

48 percent yellow

38 percent brown

14 percent red

In summation, limestone clasts in the Sor Range tend to 

be lighter in color than those in the Harboi Hills. Sor Range 

conglomerates contain more chert than those in the Harboi 

Hills, the variety of chert colors is greater in Sor Range as 

compared to the Harboi Hills, and sandstone clasts and red 

chert are rare in the Sor Range, but are slightly more common 

in the Harboi Hills.

PROVENANCE

SANDSTONE

The high percentage of limestone grains in Ghazij Formation sandstones indicates that extensive limestone terranes 

were present in the source area. As shown in figure 4, the 

pre-Ghazij stratigraphic section contains thousands of meters 

of carbonate, and a process of uplift, weathering, and erosion 

of these rocks provides the simplest explanation for the abundant limestone grains contained in Ghazij sandstones. We 

make no attempt at assigning specific limestone types to specific pre-Ghazij limestone formations, but Kassi (1986) suggested that, based on physical similarities, the 

cryptocrystalline limestone might be derived from the Cretaceous Parh Limestone, and the sparite might be derived from 

the Paleocene Dungan Formation. Because the pre-Ghazij 

carbonates are known to contain varying amounts of primary 

chert (Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960), we believe that 

the non-green chert grains observed in our thin sections were 

also derived from these rocks. When samples are grouped by 

area on a LQR diagram, no meaningful conclusions concerning differing source areas can be drawn, except, of course, for 

Duki and Kingri. and for the two green sandstones from Pir 

[smail Ziarat (see section on sandstone petrography). However, when the same samples are grouped on a limestonetype diagram (fig. 39) four main groups can be recognized: 

(1) the Sor Range, Mach, and Johan, (2) Pir Ismail Ziarat, (3) 

Duki, and (4) Kingri. We believe these groupings are significant enough to indicate subtle differences in the rocks 

exposed in the source areas. LQR and limestone-type diagrams were constructed that grouped samples from the 

lower, middle, and upper parts of the Ghazij to see if any differences in source areas could be detected. Possibly because 

of the limited number of samples, no meaningful trends were
PETROGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 49

identified. The same set of diagrams were constructed for 

the Pir Ismail Ziarat samples, less the two green sandstones. 

On these diagrams we grouped the samples by their depositional environments, and, as would be expected, differences 

were noted. However, these differences probably reflect the 

energy of deposition rather than differences in source areas. 

Because, in general, the grain size of Ghazij rocks decreases 

in an easterly direction (Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960), 

we believe that the detrital grains now contained in Ghazij 

sandstones entered the depositional system from a westerly 

direction.

The high percentage of quartz grains in the Duki and 

Kingri samples indicates a source area rich in that mineral, 

and the percentage increase from Duki to Kingri might indicate that the source area was located toward the east. We can 

think of two possible sources of the quartz. The Upper Cretaceous Pab Sandstone is known to be present in the 

Sulaiman Range (Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960), and 

uplift and erosion of this unit might have provided the 

quartz. Uplift and erosion of Precambrian acidic crystalline 

rocks could also have provided the quartz, but no such rocks 

are known to have been present to the west during the 

Eocene. The eastward increase in quartz from Duki to Kingri makes the Indian Precambrian shield a tempting candidate, but paleocurrent data collected from Duki and Kingri 

do not support an easterly source. Lacking any definitive 

proof, we must assume that the quartz entered the system 

from the same direction as the limestone grains, that is, from 

a general westerly direction. Whether the source area for the 

Duki and Kingri quartz and the less common quartz present 

in other Ghazij sandstones was the same remains an unanswered question.

The source of the green sandstones in the middle part of 

the Ghazij at Pir Ismail Ziarat is intriguing. Northwest of Pir 

Ismail Ziarat, the amount of green sandstone in this part of 

the formation is known to increase toward Kach. To the 

southeast at the Moghal mine stratigraphic section near 

Mach, two bodies of green sandstone are present at about the 

same stratigraphic level as those at Pir Ismail Ziarat. The 

similar stratigraphic position coupled with the fact that the 

bodies near Mach are thinner than those at Pir Ismail Ziarat 

suggests that the bodies near Mach could represent a more 

distal position of the same depositional system that deposited 

the bodies near Pir Ismail Ziarat. In any case, the regional 

increase in green sandstone toward the northwest indicates a 

source area in that general direction. The rock fragments 

contained in the sandstones are probably fragments of basic 

extrusive rocks, as reported by Kassi (1986) for sandstones 

in the Kach area, and the grains of green chert might be of 

deep marine origin. Both of these possible parent materials 

are commonly present in ophiolite complexes. An alternate 

source of the basic extrusive fragments could be the Bela 

Volcanic Group, a local unit consisting mostly of basaltic 

rocks that is generally considered to be a part of the Parh 

Limestone (Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960). In

Cryptocrystalline limestone

Microcrystalline 

limestone

Sparite

Figure 39. Limestone-type diagram showing groupings of data 

points by area. A, Sor Range, Mach, and Johan; B, Pir Ismail Ziarat; 

C, Duki; D, Kingri.

addition, the Parh is known to include local accumulations of 

conglomerate containing high percentages of basic igneous 

clasts. At one such locality in the vicinity of Kach, 30 km 

northwest of Pir Ismail Ziarat, the conglomerate is as thick 

as 762 m (Blanford, 1883; Williams, 1959; Hunting Survey 

Corporation, 1960). We believe that the rock fragments of 

the green sandstones and the much less common rock fragments found in other Ghazij sandstones had a similar source. 

What remains unanswered is what kind of unique conditions 

resulted in the deposition of the two bodies of green sandstone at Pir Ismail Ziarat within a stratigraphic sequence 

dominated by carbonate-rich sandstone.

Another question about the sandstones is a more concrete one: where are the feldspar grains? Perhaps the rocks 

in the source area simply did not contain any such minerals. 

More likely, though, detrital feldspars were initially deposited but subsequently altered to other minerals. It is known 

that feldspars, especially the calcium-rich varieties, that are 

subjected to either deep burial or high tectonic stress are 

quite susceptible to diagenetic process. Because these rocks 

have experienced extreme amounts of tectonism associated 

with continental collision, the original feldspars could have 

converted in place to calcite, or, if altered to calcium carbonate and mobilized, could be present as a contributor to 

the calcite cement. Conversely, the original feldspars could 

have gone into solution and simply left the system. We 

note that many of the sparite crystals display strong calcite 

twinning that could be mistaken for plagioclase twinning. 

This might explain the feldspars reported by Kassi (1986).

HEAVY MINERALS

The presence of chromite in some of the sandstones has 

a profound implication on source area. With little doubt,
50 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

these grains were originally contained in ultrabasic rocks. 

The most likely source of the chromite, and the basic extrusive rock and green chert fragments observed in thin section, 

is one or more ophiolite complexes similar to those now 

exposed sporadically along the western margin of the Axial 

Belt (fig. 40). Ophiolite complexes contain an admixture of 

former sea-floor sediments, basic oceanic lavas, and ultrabasic upper-mantle rocks that were "scraped off the upper part 

of an oceanic plate as it was being subducted beneath an adjacent plate. When continental masses riding on these two 

plates collided, the ophiolitic material was obducted onto the 

continent riding the plate being subducted. Thus, an ophiolite complex represents a suture zone between welded continental masses. In the case of the Eocene collision between 

the terrestrial fragment and the Indian subcontinent, the ophiolitic material was thrust southeastward over platform carbonates that were present off the northwestern coast of the 

Indian subcontinent.

As shown in figure 40, a large ophiolite complex is presently exposed north of Quetta in the south end of the Zhob 

Valley near Muslim Bagh. Rocks contained in this complex 

include dunite, gabbro, harzburgite, peridotite, pyroxenite, 

basic volcanic rocks (pillow lavas), red siliceous limestone, 

and red and green radiolarian chert (DeJohn and Farah, 1976; 

Ahmad and Abbas, 1979; Gansser, 1979). Chromite is a 

common component of the dunite and harzburgite, and many 

mines in the area extract this mineral (Rossman and others, 

1971; Ahmad and Abbas, 1979). The complex overlies a tectonic melange that includes garnet amphibolite, green schist, 

serpentinite, and autochthonous platform carbonates in a 

matrix of highly sheared shale (Ahmad and Abbas, 1979). 

According to Rossman and others (1971), Allemann (1979), 

and Ahmad and Abbas (1979), the youngest rocks included 

in this melange are latest Late Cretaceous (Maastrichtian) in 

age. Locally, the top surface of the ophiolites shows evidence of erosion, dissection, and laterization (Rossman and 

others, 1971; Allemann, 1979; Powell, 1979). The oldest 

rocks to be deposited over this unconformity are limestones 

of the middle Eocene Kirthar Formation (implied by Rossman and others, 1971; Ahmad and Abbas, 1979; Allemann, 

1979; and Powell, 1979). In addition, a local unit in the Zhob 

Valley, the lower Eocene to lower Oligocene Nisai Group, 

overlies the ophiolites at some localities and contains pebbles 

of peridotite (Auden, 1974). Thus, the ophiolites must have 

been emplaced between Late Cretaceous and early Eocene 

time. Although the present-day Muslim Bagh ophiolite complex might not have been exposed and shedding sediments 

into the Ghazij depositional area during early Eocene, a similar complex likely was present during this time, and did provide the chromite and basic igneous rock fragments to the 

Ghazij depositional system. Subsequently, such a complex 

could have been eroded away or transported out of the area 

by tectonism.

CONGLOMERATE

By considering only the major limestone and chert colors, and adjusting their totals to 100 percent, we constructed 

trigonal diagrams showing the distributions of clast colors 

for conglomerates in the Sor Range and in the Harboi Hills 

(fig. 41). As shown in this figure, the colors of limestone 

clasts from the Harboi Hills are about equally distributed, 

whereas those from the Sor Range show a high percentage of 

light-gray and off-white colors. Chert clasts from the Sor 

Range come in a variety of colors, including light gray and 

off white, whereas those from the Harboi Hills come in fewer 

colors and lack light-gray or off-white varieties. These data 

demonstrate that differences exist between the types of clasts 

present in the Sor Range and in the Harboi Hills (fig. 41; 

Johnson and others, 1993). Considering that these two areas 

are separated by 137 km, this is not unexpected. All of the 

limestone and chert clast colors can be accounted for as coming from pre-Ghazij carbonate units (fig. 4). Determining the 

particular pre-Ghazij unit that might have provided the clasts 

is more difficult because all the colors represented in the 

limestone clasts are common in many pre-Ghazij units. The 

high percentage of light-gray and off-white limestone clasts 

in the Sor Range probably came from exposures of the Parh 

Limestone, a unit particularly rich in those colors. The presence of Parh clasts in the Sor Range is supported by Iqbal 

(1969), who reported the presence of Cretaceous limestone 

clasts in this area.

Oldham (1890b) observed the conglomerate at the base 

of the upper part of the Ghazij near Shahrig and Harnai, and 

reported the presence of clasts of Cretaceous limestones. 

Kazi (1968) also examined the conglomerate near Harnai and 

recognized clasts from Jurassic units and from the Paleocene 

Dungan Formation. The conglomerate in the Ghazij near 

Urak was reported by Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) to 

contain clasts from the Jurassic Chilian Limestone, the Parh 

Limestone, and the Paleocene Brewery Limestone (a local 

equivalent of the Paleocene Dungan). To the south, Shah 

(1977) confirmed the presence of clasts as old as the Jurassic 

Shirinab Formation in the Marap Conglomerate Member.

Geologists with the Geological Survey of Pakistan 

stated that in the conglomerate facies of the Ghazij in the Sor 

Range, clasts of Parh Limestone are common but limestone 

clasts of Dungan Formation are rare or absent. This seems 

supported by Fritz and Khan (1975), who reported that 

among the foraminifers recovered from the Ghazij in the Sor 

Range, reworked Late Cretaceous varieties are common but 

reworked Paleocene foraminifers are absent. This implies 

that in the Sor Range's source area Upper Cretaceous rocks 

were exposed but Paleocene rocks were not. Hunting Survey 

Corporation (1960) reported evidence of inverse order of 

deposition in the Marap Conglomerate by noting that 

Shirinab clasts are more common in the upper part of the 

deposit and Parh clasts are more common in the lower part of 

the deposit. For more details on the types of chert available
BIOSTRATIGRAPHY OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 51

66° E. 70° E.

26 C

Medium gray

100 200 KILOMETERS

Figure 40. Map showing ophiolite complexes (black pattern) in 

central Pakistan. From north to south, Waziristan, Zhob, Muslim 

Bagh, and Bela. Curved lines are structural trends, dashed where inferred (in Afghanistan). Dot pattern. Axial Belt. Modified from 

Asarullah and others (1979).

from pre-Ghazij formations, consult Aubry and others 

(1988).

Sandstone clasts are rare in the Sor Range conglomerate, but Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) thought that 

some of those observed might have come from sandstone 

bodies in the lower part of the Ghazij.

BIOSTRATIGRAPHY OF THE 

GHAZIJ FORMATION

Locally, the Ghazij Formation is rich in gastropods, 

pelecypods, foraminifers, corals, echinoids, algae, and nannofossils. Fossil plant impressions and trace fossils are also 

locally abundant. Vertebrate fossils have not been described 

from the Ghazij, but workers at a coal mine in the Pir Ismail

EXPLANATION 

Harboi Hills (n=836) 

Sor Range (n=753)

Dark gray 

and brown

Lt gray and 

off white

Yellow, red, green

EXPLANATION 

Harboi Hills (n=54) 

Sor Range (n=143)

Dark gray 

and brown

B

Lt gray and 

off white

Figure 41. Trigonal diagrams showing distribution of clast types 

in conglomeratic facies of the Ghazij Formation in the Sor Range 

and in the Harboi Hills; n, number of clasts counted. A, limestone 

clasts; B, chert clasts.

Ziarat area reported the finding of a lower jaw with a tooth 

in a coal bed. Many of the earlier workers who studied the 

Ghazij collected and identified numerous fossils from the 

formation, and lists of their findings can be found in the literature. See Eames (1951, 1952a, 1952b, 1952c), Haque 

(1959), Hunting Survey Corporation (1960), Latif (1962, 

1964), Fritz and Khan (1975), and Iqbal (1969). The reader 

should be aware that although most of the fossil names listed 

in these reports are still valid, many names have been superseded by newer names. Furthermore, more recent studies 

have placed many of these fossils into time stratigraphic 

units that differ from those originally published.

VERTICAL SUBDIVISIONS OF THE 

GHAZIJ FORMATION

LOWER PART

We did not observe any body fossils in the lower part of 

the Ghazij Formation. However, based on published studies
52 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

of microfossils, especially foraminifers, microfossils are 

quite common in this part of the Ghazij. Many of the sandstone bodies contain trace fossils, including simple vertical 

and horizontal burrows, and a variety of tracks and trails on 

bedding surfaces. Almost every hand sample contains carbonized fragments of fossil plant debris, including stem fragments, leaf parts, and rare fruiting bodies. At Pir Ismail 

Ziarat we observed impressions of whole leaves in a sandstone body more than 166 m below the top of this part of the 

formation. In addition, whole leaves are reported to be 

present in the upper portion of the lower part of the formation 

near Kach, and we observed their presence at this same stratigraphic interval in the Sor Range.

Fritz and Khan (1975) identified 37 genera and about 

100 species of foraminifers in the lower part of the Ghazij in 

the Sor Range. Both benthonic (large and small types) and 

planktonic varieties were observed. These workers reported 

that reworked Cretaceous foraminifers are quite common in 

this part of the section, and that horizons rich in the reworked 

foraminifers contain very few Eocene foraminifers, and vice 

versa. That is, horizons rich in Eocene ones contain very few 

reworked ones. They attributed this to the fact that during 

intense erosion of Cretaceous rocks in the source area, 

increased amounts of sediment, including foraminifer tests, 

clouded the Ghazij depositional environment. Because foraminifers require clear water to thrive, live Eocene varieties 

could not exist. As erosion in the source area slowed, water 

in the environment cleared. Eocene foraminifers thrived, and 

their tests could again dominate the deposited foraminifer 

assemblage. Gibson and others (1992) have reported on foraminifers in the lower portion of this part of the formation, 

and their work is discussed in an upcoming section of this 

report.

MIDDLE PART

Body fossils are quite common in the middle part of the 

Ghazij Formation. In almost all the areas we examined, this 

part of the section contains layers of fossiliferous sandstone 

or mudrock, and the fossils locally reach such density that 

some layers qualify as coquinas. Gastropods and pelecypods 

are the most common fossils. We also found a few foraminifers and ostracodes in some units. Trace fossils are locally 

common in sandstone bodies toward the base of this part of 

the Ghazij in some areas, and at least one variety closely 

resembles Ophiomorpha. Thalassinoides is also probably 

present. Much of the mudrock in this part of the formation 

contains fossil root traces, and most of the mudrock and finer 

grained sandstones contain fossil plant debris in the form of 

stem fragments, leaf parts, and rare fruiting bodies.

Despite the abundance of fossils in this part of the 

Ghazij, few studies of them have been published. Iqbal 

(1969) studied fossils from the middle part of the formation 

in the Sor Range and near Shahrig. He reported 17 species

of foraminifers, 5 species of coral, and 27 species of mollusks.

UPPER PART

For the most part, fossils are very rare to absent in the 

upper part of the Ghazij Formation. In all the areas that we 

examined, we did not observe a single body fossil in this part 

of the Ghazij. Of particular interest is the fact that almost all 

the mudrock is barren of any fossil plant debris. Fritz and 

Khan (1975) reported that all types of foraminifers are rare in 

the upper part of the formation in the Sor Range. However, 

Haque (1959) recovered foraminifers from several beds 

stratigraphically high in the upper part of the formation in the 

Sor Range. And, we collected samples of mudrock high in 

the Shin Ghwazha mine stratigraphic section in the Sor 

Range from which nannofossils were recovered. Both 

Haque's work and the results of our sample analyses are discussed in the next section of this report.

AGE OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION

Based on fossil evidence, the Ghazij Formation is 

mostly early Eocene (Ypresian) in age. This age has been 

established or confirmed by such workers as Eames (1951, 

1952a, 1952b, 1952c), Haque (1959), Williams (1959), 

Hunting Survey Corporation (1960), Latif (1962, 1964), 

Fritz and Khan (1966), Iqbal (1969); Shah (1977), Iqbal and 

Shah (1980), and Kassi and others (1987).

Paleocene fossils have been collected from the lowermost portion of the Ghazij in the area of Umai (Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960). T.G. Gibson (U.S. Geological 

Survey, oral commun., 1992) identified late Paleocene foraminifers from shale samples collected from the lowermost 

portion of the formation just above the Paleocene Dungan 

Formation near Chappar Rift, 16 km northwest of Khost (see 

also Gibson and others, 1992). However, in another set of 

samples collected by us at the same locality, Gibson identified only early Eocene foraminifers. J.M. Self-Trail (U.S. 

Geological Survey, written commun., 1994) examined both 

sets of samples and was able to identify late Paleocene and 

early Eocene nannofossils, respectively. All this implies that 

at this locality the Dungan-Ghazij contact is very close to the 

Paleocene-Eocene boundary. The fact that the lower contact 

of the Ghazij might transgress a time boundary was first 

mentioned by Oldham (1890b). This fact was also recognized by Hunting Survey Corporation (1960), and they presented evidence that the base of the formation became 

younger toward the east. Moreover, stratigraphic relations 

shown on one of their geologic maps (Geologic Map No. 15) 

imply that the base of the Ghazij might also become younger 

toward the south.
DEPOSITIONAL FACIES OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 53

On several diagrams in Williams (1959), the upper contact of the Ghazij is shown to transgress the early-middle 

Eocene time line, and this was also reported by Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) and implied by Gingerich and others 

(1979). In the Sor Range at the Shin Ghwazha mine stratigraphic section, the Ghazij and the overlying Kirthar Formation seem to interfinger over a stratigraphic interval of about 

32 m. As shown on plate 1A, a limestone unit about 6 m 

thick is present near the top of the upper part of the Ghazij. 

This is the only limestone in the Ghazij in this section, and it 

appears different from any limestone observed in the Ghazij 

elsewhere. Although the limestone is also unlike any limestone observed in the overlying Kirthar, it appears more 

closely associated with this formation than with the Ghazij. 

Overlying this limestone unit is a partly covered mudrock 

sequence about 26 m thick tucked under the Kirthar cliff. 

This circumstance poses a question: should the contact 

between the two formations be drawn at the base of the 6-mthick limestone unit, or at the base of the cliff? Because formations are defined as mappable units, we would place the 

contact at the base of the cliff. We collected two samples 

(SG-18-91 and SG-19-91; Johnson and Khan, 1994a) from 

the mudrock interval between the 6-m-thick limestone unit 

and the Kirthar cliff, and according to J.M. Self-Trail (written commun., 1994) they contain late Eocene nannofossils. 

Haque (1959) recovered 108 species of foraminifers from 

five samples collected within a 25-m-thick shale interval just 

below the Kirthar cliff several kilometers northwest of our 

stratigraphic section. Although he did not mention a lower 

limestone unit, such a unit might be covered or missing in the 

area he sampled. Haque reported the age of these foraminifers to be middle to late Eocene, and stated that some of the 

foraminifers were also present in the "White Marl Band" and 

"Upper Chocolate Clays" of the Kirthar Formation in the 

Rakhi Nala area as described by Eames (1952a). L.M. 

Bybell (U.S. Geological Survey, oral commun., 1994) 

reported that late-middle Eocene nannofossils have also 

been identified from the upper part of the Ghazij near Shahrig. Thus, evidence indicates that at least the uppermost part 

of the Ghazij is middle to late Eocene in age. The question 

is, where within the Ghazij is the lower-middle Eocene 

boundary?

DEPOSITIONAL FACIES OF THE 

GHAZIJ FORMATION

Overall, the Ghazij Formation comprises a shallowingupward sequence. This was also the understanding of Hunting Survey Corporation (1960), as indicated by their statement that the depositional environments of the Ghazij 

progressed from marine to brackish to fresh in an upward 

direction. In detail, the formation, especially the middle 

part, probably records deposition under complex conditions

of repeated minor marine transgression and regression. Distant views of the Ghazij in areas where all three subdivisions 

are exposed are reminiscent of views of the Upper Cretaceous Mancos Shale and Mesaverde Group in the Western 

United States, which contains rocks deposited under similar 

depositional conditions.

VERTICAL SUBDIVISIONS OF THE 

GHAZIJ FORMATION

In the following text, we discuss the depositional facies 

of each of the three subdivisions of the Ghazij Formation. 

We discuss the conglomerate and evaporite facies of the formation in separate sections, because of their complex nature.

LOWER PART

An overwhelming body of evidence supports a marine 

depositional setting for the lower part of the Ghazij. Almost 

all of this part of the formation consists of mudrock, probably greater than 1,000 m in thickness, and an environment 

other than marine where this much mud could accumulate is 

difficult to imagine. Sandstone bodies in the lower part of 

the formation can be divided into two broad categories: (1) 

thin, laterally extensive, tabular bodies, and (2) thicker, 

broad, lenticular bodies. The tabular bodies with their sharp 

upper and lower contacts and sole marks are interpreted as 

having been deposited as wave base lowered during periods 

of storm activity. This resulted in sand being transported 

down slope into environments of finer grained sediments. 

The origin of the larger sandstone bodies is problematic. 

Most likely they represent submarine-channel or submarinefan deposits. Curiously, some of these bodies, especially in 

the Sor Range, are as coarse as medium grained, and a submarine channel moving nearshore sediments into deeper 

water might explain the presence of this grain size. Some 

bodies, especially in the Pir Ismail Ziarat area, coarsen 

upward, and these could conceivably represent minor shoreface deposits developed during short periods of lower sea 

level.

The presence of abundant foraminifers in the mudrock 

of this part of the formation is ample evidence of deposition 

in a marine environment. In addition, marine ostracodes 

have been identified from this part of the formation (E.M. 

Brouwers, U.S. Geological Survey, oral commun., 1992). 

Gibson and others (1992) collected mudrock samples from 

the lowermost beds of the lower part of the formation near 

Chappar Rift, 16 km northwest of Khost. From these samples they extracted certain benthonic foraminifers that suggest deposition in middle-bathyal waters 300-550 m deep. 

Fritz and Khan (1966) collected planktonic and benthonic 

foraminifers from the lower part of the formation in the Sor 

Range and concluded that the presence of the planktonic
54 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

varieties indicated an open-ocean environment. These workers also noted the presence of a zone containing the large 

benthonic foraminifer Nummulites in the uppermost 

mudrock just below the base of the middle part of the formation. They interpreted the present of this fauna as evidence 

of warm, shallow-water deposition, perhaps in water as shallow as 30 m or less. In addition, samples we collected (A-4- 

90 and A-9-90, Johnson and Khan, 1994b) from the upper 

portion of the lower part of the formation at the Abraham 

Marri mine stratigraphic section near Pir Ismail Ziarat contained marine ostracodes characteristic of deposition in shallow-water environments (E.M. Brouwers, oral commun., 

1992). Thus, there is evidence for shoaling depositional conditions in the upper portion of this part of the formation just 

prior to the deposition of the middle part of the formation.

We believe that the lower part of the Ghazij can be 

divided into a lower portion, representing relatively deep 

water deposition on the outer shelf, and an upper portion, 

representing shallower deposition on the inner shelf. The 

time of shallowest marine deposition occurred during the 

final stage of lower Ghazij accumulation.

MIDDLE PART

The middle part of the Ghazij Formation contains rocks 

that show characteristics of marine, paralic, and fluvial depositional environments. Sandstone bodies in the middle part 

of the formation can be divided into three types. Type I sandstone bodies, most of which coarsen upward in grain size, 

display an upward decrease in mudrock interbeds, and contain trace fossils resembling Ophiomorpha, are interpreted to 

be shoreface deposits. This assignment is supported by the 

fact that some of these bodies also display orange stain and 

fossil root traces in their uppermost few centimeters, and the 

fact that coal or carbonaceous shale is present directly on or 

just above many of them. In addition, Type I bodies, where 

present, are always positioned stratigraphic ally at or near the 

base of the middle part of the formation. Assuming that the 

lower part of the formation has a marine origin, this position 

of Type I bodies is consistent with a prograding shoreface 

setting.

In areas where Type I sandstone bodies are particularly 

common in the middle part of the formation, the presence of 

a nearby point source for sand entering the depositional system is suspected. Therefore, in these sand-rich areas, Type I 

sandstone bodies could represent delta-front deposits. If this 

is correct, then the upper portion of the lower part of the formation is a prodelta deposit.

Type II sandstone bodies are more difficult to interpret. In areas where Type I bodies are present near the base 

of the middle part of the formation, Type II bodies tend to 

be positioned stratigraphic ally above them. Where Type I 

bodies are absent, Type II bodies occupy the lower part of 

the sequence. Characteristics of Type II bodies vary 

considerably, but the common presence of wedge-planar

cross stratification, trace fossils resembling Ophiomorpha, 

and local concentrations of fossil oyster shells suggests 

that these bodies are some type of paralic deposit associated with tidal processes and brackish conditions. Some 

Type II bodies might represent tidal channels cutting 

through older deposits; others might represent bay-head 

deltas or crevasse splays debouching sand into brackish 

bays or estuaries.

Type III sandstone bodies were most certainly deposited under fluvial conditions. Evidence pointing to this environment includes the common presence of (1) erosional 

bases typically underlying a layer of mudrock chips and 

wood impressions, (2) fining-upward grain size, (3) upward 

decrease in bed thickness, (4) trough cross stratification and 

internal erosion surfaces, especially in the lower part of the 

bodies, and (5) mudrock partings and ripple laminations in 

the upper part of the bodies. Some bodies appear laterally 

continuous and are interpreted to be sheet-flood deposits, 

whereas other bodies are lenticular and interpreted to be 

channel-fill deposits. Almost all Type III bodies are positioned stratigraphic ally in the upper portion of the middle 

part of the formation. Thinner, laterally continuous sandstone bodies in the upper portion of the middle part probably 

represent crevasse-splay deposits.

Mudrock intervals stratigraphic ally above the shoreface 

sandstones probably represent lagoonal deposits, whereas 

mudrock intervals associated with the paralic sandstones are 

interpreted to be bay-fill or estuarine deposits. Mudrock 

intervals associated with the fluvial sandstones higher in the 

section are interpreted to be overbank accumulations such as 

levee and flood plain deposits.

Coal in the middle part of the formation indicates the 

past presence of peat swamps in areas where the water table 

was at or very close to the ground surface. Moreover, the 

presence of coal implies a fresh-water environment, no matter how close the swamp was to the shoreline, and a climate 

where precipitation exceeded evaporation. As noted by 

Hunting Survey Corporation (1960), those areas where the 

middle part of the formation is the thinnest, such as in the Sor 

Range and at Khost and Harnai, have the thickest coal deposits. They believed that the thinness of the middle part in these 

areas resulted from their depositional position near the heads 

of deltas where clastic accumulation was less because of sediment bypass. And, because these areas were the first environments to form on the deltas, peat had the most time to 

accumulate. In contrast to this idea, we suggest that coal 

associated with Type I sandstone bodies most certainly represents peat accumulation low on the coastal plain, and the 

coal beds in the Mach area seem to represent peat accumulation near the very front of the coastal plain. Most likely peat 

accumulated under a variety of conditions throughout the 

coastal area.

Some of the coals in the middle part of the formation are 

relatively high in sulfur. A high sulfur content is believed by 

many to indicate a marine influence, and this feature might
DEPOSITIONAL FACIES OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 55

further support the interpretation of peat accumulation adjacent to the shoreline. Ghaznavi (1990) used the relation of 

high sulfur and marine influence to create a depositional 

model for the middle part of the Ghazij in the Khost-ShahrigHarnai area. He suggested that the high sulfur content in his 

middle coal bed near Shahrig indicated a close proximity of 

the sea. The high sulfur content in his top coal bed near Harnai was interpreted as evidence that the marine influence had 

shifted east into this area by the time this coal bed was 

deposited.

Numerous reports of marine fossils in certain stratigraphic horizons in the middle part of the formation indicate 

a depositional environment influenced by frequent incursions of sea water. Iqbal (1969) studied fossils collected 

from the middle part of the formation near Sinjidi in the Sor 

Range and from near Shahrig. Iqbal identified numerous 

foraminifers, gastropods, and pelecypods, and concluded 

that they were all marine. In addition, he observed an interesting limestone bed in the middle part of the formation near 

Sinjidi. From this bed he identified five species of corals, 

and speculated that they probably lived in warm, clear 

marine water of the sublittoral zone between 46 and 61 m 

deep. E.M. Brouwers (oral commun., 1992) reported the 

presence of shallow-marine ostracodes in samples we collected (A-11-90 and A-13-90, Johnson and Khan, 1994b) 

from the lower portion of the middle part of the formation at 

the Abraham Marri mine stratigraphic section near Pir Ismail 

Ziarat. A close proximity of the sea is also supported by the 

presence of trace fossils resembling Ophiomorpha in sandstone bodies in the lower portion of the middle part of the 

formation. Oyster shells are a common fossil in the middle 

part of the formation, and these fauna are good indicators of 

brackish conditions. Nonmarine environments are evident 

higher in the middle part of the formation as reported by 

E.M. Brouwers (oral commun., 1992), who recovered nonmarine ostracodes from samples of mudrock we collected 

(A-23-90, A-34-90, and A-41-90, Johnson and Khan, 1994b) 

high in the middle part of the formation.

We conclude that most of the middle part of the Ghazij 

was deposited in the lower reaches of a coastal plain of very 

low relief that experienced frequent marine incursions. In 

detail, the middle part of the formation probably contains a 

complex mixture of marine, brackish, and fluvial depositional facies. In areas such as Pir Ismail Ziarat where the 

middle part of the formation is especially well developed, it 

is apparent that this part contains the deposits of a prograding 

coastal package as evidenced by the upward succession of 

shoreface, brackish, and fluvial facies. In other areas, however, such clear evidence of depositional history is lacking.

UPPER PART

In regard to depositional setting, the upper part of the 

Ghazij Formation is the most enigmatic. Taking no chances,

Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) stated that it was of 

"semiterrestrial, paludal, fluvial, or marine origin." The first 

thing one notices about the upper part of the Ghazij is its 

color. Although gray is still the primary color of the 

mudrock, such tones as maroon, red, orange, and yellow are 

very common. These colors along with their banded appearance suggest sequences dominated by multiple paleosol 

horizons. This association was also noted by Hunting Survey Corporation (1960) in their occasional use of the term 

"lateritic" when describing this part of the formation.

Almost all the sandstone bodies in the upper part of the 

formation appear to be Type III. These bodies contain the 

same features that identify Type III bodies in the middle part 

of the formation as fluvial deposits, but in the upper part of 

the formation these bodies tend to contain a larger number of 

fluvial characteristics than do the bodies below. Most of the 

fluvial sandstones seem to be channel-fill deposits; sheetflood deposits are rare. Although sandstone is not a common 

lithology in the upper part of the formation, those channelfill deposits that are present can be quite spectacular. At the 

Shin Ghwazha mine stratigraphic section in the Sor Range 

(pi. 1A), sandstone units in the upper part of the formation 

are thicker than any other sandstone units in the section. The 

same situation exists at the Moghal mine section near Mach 

(pi. 1C and ID).

The upper part of the formation is practically devoid of 

fossil animal or plant remains. This phenomenon is probably 

the result of post-deposition oxidation rather than an original 

absence of life forms in the depositional setting. An exception to this is the presence of foraminifers and nannofossils 

in the uppermost portion of the upper part at several localities in the Sor Range. Haque (1959) reported planktonic foraminifers in this stratigraphic interval and interpreted a 

warm-water environment that might have been as deep as 

730 m. In addition, E.M. Brouwers (oral commun., 1994) 

identified marine ostracodes from this part of the section 

near Shahrig. We observed trace fossils resembling Ophiomorpha in the upper part of the formation in a sandstone 

body stratigraphically above the Abraham Marri mine stratigraphic section near Pir Ismail Ziarat, and in a sandstone 

body high in the Sarawan River section near Johan (pi. ID). 

The presence of this trace fossil indicates at least brackish 

conditions, if not totally marine, and implies that at least 

some marine transgression followed deposition of the middle part of the formation.

Most of the upper part of the Ghazij was probably 

deposited under fluvial conditions high on a coastal plain. 

The apparent interfingering of the middle and upper parts of 

the formation near Pir Ismail Ziarat and Mach probably represents a transition zone between lower and upper depositional settings on the coastal plain. The presence of 

relatively deep water foraminifers in the uppermost part of 

the sequence in the Sor Range and at Shahrig seems to indicate that a major marine flooding event occurred sometime 

prior to the deposition of the overlying Kirthar Formation. If
56 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

such an event did occur late in Ghazij time, then the 

sandstone and conglomerate present at the very top of the 

formation near Harnai could represent a subsequent localized 

regression prior to the Kirthar transgression. Finally, we note 

that the middle and upper parts of the Ghazij contain the first 

nonmarine sediments to be deposited in this area of the Indus 

Foreland Basin.

SPECIFIC SITES

SOR RANGE

As mentioned before, the middle part of the Ghazij Formation in the Sor Range (pi. 1A) is abnormally thin, probably 

because the upper portion was removed by erosion prior to 

the deposition of the conglomerate facies, which now occupies the basal portion of the upper part of the formation. 

Most of the sandstone bodies present in the middle part of the 

formation appear to be of paralic origin. Shoreface sandstones are present at the base of the middle part, but only 

locally (fig. 42).

Geological Survey, oral commun., 1993) are intercalated in 

the same sequence (pi. 1C and ID). Moreover, some of the 

coal beds contain concentrations of isolated fossil mollusks 

of probable marine or brackish affinity. We interpret the 

close association of coal and marine limestone to deposition 

on a very flat surface where peat was accumulating directly 

adjacent to the shoreline. As a result of relatively frequent 

but minor fluctuations in sea level, a mixing of marine and 

nonmarine environments caused these two lithofacies to be 

closely deposited. This general interpretation was also 

expressed by Hunting Survey Corporation (1960), who noted 

that the thin coal beds in this area probably resulted from the 

relatively short periods of peat accumulation between frequent shifts in the shoreline (see also Ahmad and others, 

1986). Conversely, the association of these two lithologies 

could represent changes in climate. Although well displayed 

in the Mach area, the best example of the intercalation of 

these two lithologies is in the middle part of the Ghazij near 

Shahrig (fig. 15).

We believe that the fossiliferous coal is the result of 

storm activity that washed marine or brackish shell material 

landward into the peat swamps.

PIRISMAIL ZIARAT

The best developed shoreface sandstone at the base of 

the middle part of the Ghazij Formation is present in the Pir 

Ismail Ziarat area. In fact, as shown on plate IB, two such 

deposits, each overlain by a coal-bearing interval, are present 

at the Abraham Marri stratigraphic section. This implies an 

initial regression and subsequent progradation, a short-lived 

transgression, followed by another regression and progradation. We believe that the lower portion of the middle part of 

the formation, just above the stratigraphically highest shoreface sandstone, might have been deposited in a broad tidally 

dominated delta, which would explain the close association 

of marine and nonmarine rocks observed in this part of the 

section. By this depositional model, the mudrock intervals 

would represent bay-fill or estuarine deposits, and the paralic 

sandstone bodies would represent bay-head deltas or large 

crevasse splays. If this model is correct, then where were the 

rivers that fed the delta? Most likely they existed to the 

northwest beyond the western limit of present-day Ghazij 

outcrops. The upper portion of the middle part of the formation at this site contains fluvial sandstone bodies, and these 

could indicate that with time, the river systems that fed the 

delta eventually prograded across the top of the paralic 

deposits.

MACH

In the middle part of the Ghazij Formation, near Mach, 

relatively thin coal beds and thin limestone beds containing 

high-spiral marine gastropods (R.M. Forester, U.S.

JOHAN

The fact that the middle part of the Ghazij Formation is 

less recognizable in the Johan area probably results from the 

fact that this area was farther away from the deltaic source of 

sand-size sediments than areas to the north (see also Ahmad 

and others, 1986). As a result, sandstone bodies are generally 

absent in the upper portion of the main body of the formation 

in this area. Because the area lacked a sand-supported depositional platform during middle Ghazij time, peat swamps 

were more ephemeral and as a result, coal beds are few and 

thin in the Johan area.

CONGLOMERATE FACIES

The abrupt appearance of a conglomerate facies in the 

otherwise finer grained Ghazij Formation is perhaps the most 

intriguing feature of the formation. This facies is limited to 

the westernmost margin of the early Eocene Indus Foreland 

Basin, an area perhaps best described as a mountain-front 

foreland basin. As previously discussed, conglomerate is 

found in the Ghazij (1) locally, at the base of the upper part 

of the formation in the greater Quetta region, and (2) taking 

up much of the upper part of the formation in the greater 

Kalat region—the Marap Conglomerate Member of the 

Ghazij.

It is our opinion that all the conglomerates in the Ghazij 

represent the bed-load deposits of gravel-dominated, lowsinuosity (braided) streams flowing, in general, from
DEPOSITIONAL FACIES OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION 57

NORTHWEST 

Upper part

SINJIDI DAGHARI SOUTHEAST 

Upper part

Lower part

EXPLANATION 

Conglomerate 

Sandstone 

Mudrock 

Coal

Measured section 

Drill hole

Figure 42. Generalized cross section of middle part of the Ghazij Formation and its relation to the conglomerate unit in basal portion 

of the upper part of the formation along the length of the Sor Range. Also shown are interpreted geometries of sandstone bodies in 

middle part of the formation and their relation to major coal beds. Datum is top of conglomerate unit. Dots representing measured 

sections and drill holes are named and located on plate 2. Length of cross section approximately 23 km.

northwest to southeast (Johnson and others, 1993). The riverine conclusion is supported by the following observations:

1. The widespread presence of amalgamated lenticular 

bodies with erosional bases, representing deposition in individual channels.

2. The clast-supported fabric, indicating hydrologic 

segregation of gravel and sand in a bed-load stream.

3. The weakly developed, horizontal stratification 

resulting from traction processes in a bed-load stream.

4. The presence of imbricated clasts resulting from saltation processes in a bed-load stream.

5. The presence of inclined surfaces representing 

accretion associated with migrating bar forms.

6. The presence of isolated lenses of small-scale, 

trough cross stratified sandstone.

7. The commonly observed normal grading, or finingupward grain size, indicative of a decrease in flow velocity 

as vertical accretion culminated.

The low-sinuosity conclusion seems to be the only possibility considering the stream velocity needed to transport 

the size of clasts in the deposit.

margins, rather than because of a simple pinchout or gradation into finer grained rocks in that direction. The relative 

thinness of the conglomerate in the Quetta region seems to 

indicate a single, relatively ephemeral riverine stage early in 

the history of upper Ghazij deposition in this area. Because 

the conglomerate is not present everywhere, the riverine system (or systems) must have been somewhat fixed in position 

although individual streams probably exhibited considerable 

lateral mobility. Post-depositional tectonic transport in conjunction with the present-day limited exposures of the Ghazij 

makes it difficult to tell just how interconnected these 

patches of conglomerate were, but subtle differences in overall lithology indicate that at least the Sor Range and ShahrigHarnai deposits had different source areas. In the Sor Range, 

a sandstone unit overlies the conglomerate at several localities, and based on the sedimentologic characteristics of the 

sandstone it appears to have accumulated during the final 

stage of the same depositional event that deposited the 

underlying conglomerate. This depositional association of 

sand following gravel fits nicely with the decrease in flow 

velocity that occurs during the waning stage of riverine deposition.

QUETTA REGION

Where present in the Quetta region, in the Sor Range 

and in the Shahrig-Harnai area, the conglomerate occupies a 

series of channels, the lowest of which have cut into the top 

of the middle part of the formation. The absence of the conglomerate in the southeastern part of the Sor Range more 

likely occurred because the area was beyond channel

KALAT REGION

In the Kalat region, conglomerate constitutes a much 

higher percentage of the upper part of the Ghazij and can be 

present at any stratigraphic level in the interval. In some 

areas, the conglomerate makes up all of the upper part of the 

formation, and at the type area of the Marap Conglomerate
58 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

Member, conglomerate makes up most of the formation. 

This implies that riverine conditions were more common and 

more intense in the Kalat region. Regionally, the lithofacies 

is more wedge shaped in this area compared with the broad 

sheetlike deposits in the Quetta region.

DISCUSSION

It is tempting to assume that the relatively thin conglomerates in the Quetta region are simply the distal edge of 

the more massive conglomerates of the Marap in the Kalat 

region. However, the northernmost exposure of Marap and 

the southernmost exposure of the Quetta conglomerates are 

about 80 km apart creating a broad belt where similar conglomerate is not present in the upper part of the Ghazij (fig. 

43). This fact leads to the realization that instead of one 

regional package of conglomerate, at least four depocenters 

or lobes of conglomerate can be identified: from south to 

north, the Kalat lobe, the Sor Range lobe, the Shahrig-Harnai 

lobe, and, far to the north, the Moghal Kot lobe (fig. 43). Of 

course, some of these lobes might have been connected at 

some distance to the west, in an area now unavailable for 

inspection because of erosion or tectonic transport. The Sor 

Range, Shahrig-Harnai, and Moghal Kot lobes, with their 

relatively thin, blanketlike geometry, probably represent 

simple coarse deposition in minor paleovalleys incised into 

the early late Ghazij coastal plain. The Kalat lobe, however, 

with its thick amalgamated channel deposits, probably represents a complex system of one or more stream-dominated 

alluvial fans. Each of these lobes represents a separate depositional system, but the basic depositional process was the 

same—riverine. The differences in stratigraphic position 

and total clast volume between the Kalat lobe and the three 

lobes to the north probably reflect more proximal versus 

more distal depositional positions, respectively, on different 

depositional systems. For example, the Kalat lobe might represent midfan deposition, the three lobes to the north distal 

deposition. The coarse-grained sandstone bodies observed at 

the stratigraphic level of the conglomerate east of the Sor 

Range would thus have been deposited in even more distal 

areas of the fans. We found it interesting that the conglomerate in the Sor Range and the lowest conglomerate in the Harboi Hills are at about the same stratigraphic level (fig. 44), 

suggesting that the depositional episode that emplaced the 

conglomerate began at about the same time in both areas.

SOME QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

How did gravel come to be deposited in an environment 

of finer grained sediment? We believe that most of the upper 

part of the Ghazij Formation was deposited on a coastal plain

of very low relief. Apparently limestone terranes of significant height developed directly adjacent to this depositional 

setting (fig. 45). High-velocity streams originating in these 

highlands had enough hydrologic head to move coarsegrained detritus out into the low-energy environment near the 

base of the uplift. As these streams quickly lost their gradient 

and dispersed radially, hydrologic energy decreased and 

gravel accumulated as a basin-margin deposit.

How and where did the clasts get so well rounded? 

Because calcite is relatively soft, clasts of limestone can 

become well rounded during one sedimentary cycle. Thus, 

these clasts could have obtained their roundness over a relatively short distance of fluvial transport while moving along 

a system of tributary and trunk streams within the highlands. 

It is possible, of course, that some of these clasts were stored 

during their transport history in river terraces within catchment basins, and then remobilized, perhaps during a period 

of high discharge associated with intense precipitation and 

runoff, and dumped suddenly onto the edge of the coastal 

plain.

If stream transportation is responsible for rounding the 

clasts, then why are the rocks so poorly sorted? The poor 

sorting observed in the conglomerates is probably a function 

of flash-flood discharge that moved the coarse detritus out 

beyond the topographic front.

EVAPORITE FACIES

Of major importance to our discussion is the depositional setting of the evaporite facies that is present, but poorly 

described, in the upper part of the lower Eocene interval in 

the Sulaiman Range. The rocks could have been deposited in 

a coastal setting in areas where circulation of marine water 

was somehow restricted. Evaporation exceeding the influx 

of normal sea water could have caused hypersaline conditions and led to the establishment of a sabkha environment. 

Conversely, the rocks could have been deposited in a 

separate closed basin where evaporation coupled with the 

lack of incoming normal sea water resulted in hypersaline 

conditions. Some gypsiferous limestones in the Baska Shale 

are reported to contain foraminifers (Hemphill and Kidwai, 

1973), and this is evidence of some marine influence.

Figure 43 (facing page). Present-day distribution of Eocene sedimentary rocks in north-central Pakistan and location of conglomerate facies of the Ghazij Formation or its equivalent. 1, Kalat lobe; 

2, Sor Range lobe; 3, Shahrig-Harnai lobe; 4, Moghal Kot lobe. 

Outlines of conglomerate facies are approximate and in some cases 

drawn larger than their actual distribution for emphasis. Outlines 

of individual lobes (solid and dashed lines) are entirely hypothetical. Geology modified from Bakr and Jackson, 1964.
DEPOSITIONAL FACIES OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION

67° E. 69° E.

59

32°

28°

DIK

DGK

INDIA

50 100 KILOMETERS

EXPLANATION

B

DIK 

DGK

Q

K

Eocene sedimentary rocks

Conglomerate facies of the 

Ghazij Formation

Bannu

Dera Ismail Khan

Dera Ghazi Khan

Quetta

Kalat
60

Harboi Hills

LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, B ALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN 

Sor Range

400-

> . • o&o .

C" J G

3' .' • . —

400-

EXPLANATION

Conglomerate 

Other lithologies

Figure 44. Stratigraphic columns showing conglomerate intervals in top 500 m of the Ghazij Formation in Harboi Hills and Sor 

Range. Stratigraphic level of conglomerate facies in Sor Range is 

about the same as that of lowest conglomerate in the Harboi Hills.

Because humid conditions probably prevailed during middle 

Ghazij time, as indicated by the presence of coal in this part 

of the section, a climate change must have occurred during 

late Ghazij time to account for the deposition of evaporite 

minerals.

PALEOCURRENT INDICATORS FROM 

THE GHAZIJ FORMATION

Only a few paleocurrent studies have been conducted on 

the Ghazij Formation, and all of these were small parts of 

broader investigations. Thus, too few data points are available to make any definitive statement about early Eocene 

paleoflow in this part of the Indus Foreland Basin.

We took 15 paleocurrent measurements from individual 

sandstone bodies in the middle part of the Ghazij along the 

length of the Sor Range. Almost all of the measurements 

were of cross stratification, and in each case we measured the 

three-dimensional orientation of a foreset surface. Because 

the strata dip at low angles in this area, no correction for 

structure was necessary. Directional data from this effort are 

quite variable, but there is a slight preference for northwest 

and southwest paleoflow. We also collected paleocurrent 

information from the conglomerate facies at the base of the 

upper part of the formation. These data were collected from 

clast imbrication and from cross-stratified foresets in

Figure 45. Depositional model showing possible distributary 

stream systems on the late Ghazij coastal plain, whose gravelly bed 

load is now represented by the conglomerate facies found in the upper part of the Ghazij Formation. No scale implied.

sandstone lenses within the conglomerate facies. The data, 

consisting of 10 measurements, appear random.

As part of our examination of the Ghazij at the Abraham 

Marri mine Stratigraphic section near Pir Ismail Ziarat, we 

collected paleocurrent data from five individual sandstone 

bodies in the middle part of the formation. At each site we 

measured the three-dimensional orientation of foreset surfaces from at least 12 individual trough limbs. Because the 

strata dip at high angles in this area, all values were corrected 

for structure. Rose diagrams displaying these data show 

paleoflow toward the south-southwest, west-northwest, 

north-northeast, southeast, and south-southeast. We also 

recorded the long-axis orientations of symmetrical ripple 

marks from four marine sandstone bodies in the lower part of 

the formation. All four axial values were toward the northeast. In present-day marine settings the axes of symmetrical 

ripple trains are developed subparallel to shoreline. Based on 

this, our paleogeographic model for the early Eocene Indus 

Foreland Basin with its northeast-trending western margin 

seems supported by the data.

We recorded 16 paleocurrent measurements from foreset surfaces in cross-stratified sandstone bodies in the Kingri 

area. Measurements were taken in three dimensions and corrections were made for structure. Most values indicate 

paleoflow toward the east-northeast.
EARLY EOCENE PALEOGEOGRAPHY 61

Kazi (1968) studied the Ghazij near Harnai and 

reported a southeast paleoflow for the middle part of the formation, and a south-southeast paleoflow for the upper part of 

the formation. Kazi determined these orientations from 

measurements of cross stratification, but his report gave no 

details on methodology. Based on the orientations of sole 

marks observed on the bottoms of Ghazij sandstone bodies 

in the Kach area, Kassi and others (1987) determined that 

paleoflow was toward the southwest and, to a lesser extent, 

toward the southeast. These workers also did not mention 

methodology. Ghaznavi (1990) studied the Ghazij in the 

Khost-Shahrig-Harnai area and reported mostly south and 

southeast paleoflow. Again, no mention was made of methodology. In the Sulaiman Range, Waheed and Wells (1990) 

conducted a detailed study of paleoflow indicators in rocks 

ranging in age from Cretaceous to Pliocene. As part of this 

study, they collected data from the Ghazij west of Dera 

Ismail Khan and found that paleoflow was toward the north 

at one site and toward the southeast at another site. They 

attributed this disparity to different depositional positions on 

two separate delta lobes. These workers described their 

methodology in detail.

The wide range in compass directions just cited is not 

surprising considering the variability in stream orientation 

on a relatively flat fluvial setting, and the variability in the 

direction of dune migration within individual stream channels. Moreover, regional and local tectonic disruptions have 

most likely rotated strata from their original orientation. 

Collecting good-quality paleocurrent data is dependent on 

correct procedures, especially observing features in three 

dimensions and correcting for structure where necessary. 

Any carelessness in technique can result in erroneous paleoflow interpretations.

EARLY EOCENE PALEOGEOGRAPHY

Any reconstruction of the paleogeography that existed 

during deposition of the Ghazij Formation is constrained by 

the following two facts, both of which were discussed by 

Hunting Survey Corporation (1960). First, overall grain size 

in the Ghazij decreases in an easterly direction, that is from 

shale, sandstone, and conglomerate to shale and limestone, 

which suggests a westerly source for the detritus. The total 

thickness of the Ghazij thins toward the east, which also supports a westerly source area. Moreover, in the Sulaiman 

Range, Akhtar and Masood (1991) reported that the Ghazij 

onlaps the Paleocene Dungan Formation from west to east, 

and this phenomenon requires a westerly source area. And 

second, the depositional facies of the Ghazij become more 

marine in an easterly direction, which suggests that water 

depth increased in that direction. Fritz and Khan (1966) 

reached the same conclusion from their work with Ghazij 

foraminifers from the Sor Range.

As stated previously, we believe that sometime near the 

beginning of early Eocene time the distal edge of the marine 

shelf that was attached to the leading edge of the Indian subcontinent made contact with a terrestrial fragment that was 

positioned adjacent to, but separated from, the Asian mainland. This timing fits nicely with the emplacement of the 

ophiolites (Humayon and others, 1991). As a first approximation, we assume that the long axes of these colliding physiographic elements were oriented northeast. The collision 

caused a relatively sudden reversal in the depositional slope 

of the marine shelf from northwest facing to southeast facing, and for the first time the region had a clastic source 

toward the northwest (see Waheed and Wells, 1990, for a 

contrasting opinion of the timing of this slope reversal). One 

of the initial effects of this collision was to uplift distal portions of the marine shelf exposing its carbonate-platform 

deposits to weathering and erosion. Evidence for this is contained in the sandstones of the lower part of the Ghazij, 

which are composed almost solely of limestone fragments. 

The topographic depression known as the Indus Foreland 

Basin developed between the Indian subcontinent and the 

tectonic highlands uplifted by the collision, and during the 

time between early Eocene and late Miocene this basin contained an epicontinental sea. The great thickness of lower 

Eocene to upper Miocene strata in the region indicates that 

the depositional basin subsided with time. It is probable that 

the floor of the basin had some amount of topographic relief 

caused by differential structural movements, and such features as the present-day Jacobabad high might have been 

present during the early Eocene, dividing the basin into a 

series of subbasins. (See Auden, 1974.)

We postulate that the rocks now contained in the Ghazij 

were deposited along the northwest side of the Indus Foreland Basin, which is best described as a mountain-front foreland basin. We visualize a series of broad deltas, each 

associated with a major drainage system coming from the 

tectonic highlands (fig. 46). The lower part of the Ghazij 

was deposited seaward of these deltas, the middle part of the 

formation was deposited within the deltas or along interdelta stretches of the coastline, and the upper part of the formation was deposited landward of the deltas.

The broader aspects of the early Eocene paleogeographic model suggested by Hunting Survey Corporation 

(1960) is expectedly similar to our model. However, their 

model was conceived during the late 1950's, a time that predates the understanding of plate tectonics. For example, 

their discussion of the tectonic highlands, or hinterland as 

they called it, as related to sediment source is made complex 

by their lack of understanding of modern tectonic theory. 

Also, not realizing that vast areas could be moved great distances by tectonics, such as with the southern advance of the 

Sulaiman lobe, these workers simply took the present-day 

outcrop belt of the Ghazij and constructed their coastal outline to fit this pattern. Hence, this part of their model has
62 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, B ALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

Figure 46. Interpretive sketch of northwest edge of the early Eocene Indus Foreland Basin showing deltas positioned along a southeastprograding shoreline. Deposition of the three parts of the Ghazij Formation resulted from this progradational process. 1, Mudrock deposited in a prodelta (lower part of the formation). 2, Mudrock, sandstone, and coal deposited on lower delta plain and near shoreline (middle 

part of the formation). 3, Mudrock and conglomerate deposited on upper delta plain (upper part of the formation). No scale implied. Barb 

indicates relative direction of movement on range-front fault.

little merit today. In contrast, we assume, as a first approximation, that the coastline was relatively straight.

Current thinking (Jadoon and others, 1990, 1994; 

Humayon and others, 1991) has the Sulaiman Lobe moving 

southward since the Ghazij was deposited in early Eocene 

time. Therefore, exposures of the formation now located 

within the lobe, such as at Khost, Shahrig, Harnai, and Duki, 

and to a lesser extent, Kingri, Rakhi Nala, and Zinda Pir, 

must have been deposited to the north some unknown distance. In addition to simple southern transport, some 

unknown amount of rotation undoubtedly has occurred. All 

of this makes unraveling the details of early Eocene paleogeography in this area very difficult. Exposures of the Ghazij 

south of the lobe front, such as at Pir Ismail Ziarat, the Sor 

Range, Mach, and Johan, are probably close to their original 

depositional orientation, although they might have been 

transported at high angles away from the Himalayan orogen 

some unknown distance. The same can be said of Ghazij 

exposures along the northern part of the Sulaiman Range, 

such as at Moghal Kot and Drazinda.

We believe that the amount of sandstone and coal contained in the middle part of the Ghazij is directly related to 

proximity to delta complexes. With this in mind, we have 

named these the Kingri delta, the Khost-Duki delta, and the

Pir Ismail Ziarat delta. The original positions of the Kingri 

and Khost-Duki deltas are unknown, but we believe that the 

Pir Ismail Ziarat delta was positioned south of these two. 

The delta complex that we are the most familiar with is Pir 

Ismail Ziarat. As the name implies, we believe that the depocenter of this complex existed somewhere in this area. We 

visualize a broad feature, probably tidally dominated, and 

believe that the Sor Range, Mach, and Johan represent 

increasingly distal areas of this depositional system. Hunting 

Survey Corporation (1960) also considered the Johan area 

distal to a delta setting.

DEPOSITIONAL HISTORY OF THE 

GHAZIJ FORMATION

In general, the vertical lithologic and biologic characteristics of the Ghazij Formation are those of a shallowingupward sequence. We postulate that, overall, the Ghazij represents, in ascending order, marine shelf, beach, estuary, and 

coastal-plain deposition.

As pointed out by Gibson and others (1992), the presence of deep-water foraminifers in the lowest strata of the 

formation just above the shallower water limestones of the
CORRELATION OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION WITH ADJACENT REGIONS 63

Paleocene Dungan Formation indicates a significant 

increase in water depth. This requires a rise in sea level 

(transgression) resulting in a major marine flooding event at 

the beginning of the Eocene.

The general shallowing-upward conditions recorded in 

the upper portion of the lower part and in the middle part of 

the formation must have resulted from a relative lowering of 

sea level (regression) and the gradual withdrawal of marine 

water from the region. Progradation associated with this 

event resulted in the deposition of shoreface deposits in the 

lower portion of the middle part of the formation. In areas 

where the middle part of the formation is particularly well 

developed, such as at Pir Ismail Ziarat, strata in the upper 

portion of the middle part of the formation indicate that the 

progradational event progressed to the point of fluvial 

deposition.

One of the major unknowns concerning the Ghazij is 

whether a regional unconformity exists between the middle 

and upper parts of the formation. Where the conglomerate 

facies is present at the base of the upper part of the formation 

in the Quetta region, an unconformity is suspected at the 

base of the conglomerate. The same tectonism that uplifted 

the source area and provided the gravel could also have 

caused regional erosion. But in areas where the conglomerate is not present at this stratigraphic level, little evidence for 

an unconformity is noted. If an unconformity does exist at 

this level, then a continued lowering of sea level is indicated, 

and the conglomerate represents incised-valley-fill deposits 

occupying depressions that were cut during the fall in base 

level. In contradiction, the conglomerates in the upper part 

of the Ghazij to the south in the Kalat region do not seem to 

fit this model. Here the conglomerates seem less likely to 

represent a single valley-fill event because they make up 

much of the upper part of the formation. Unable to prove the 

presence of a regional unconformity, we accept the assumption that coastal-plain deposition continued into late Ghazij 

time.

The presence of trace fossils resembling Ophiomorpha 

in sandstone bodies in the middle portion of the upper part 

of the Ghazij near Pir Ismail Ziarat and near Johan indicates 

brackish, if not totally marine conditions. Allowing that the 

upper portion of the middle part of the formation was 

deposited under mostly fluvial conditions and that at least 

the lower portion of the upper part of the formation was 

deposited fluvially, then some amount of sea level rise 

(transgression) and resulting marine flooding is required to 

move brackish or marine environments landward across the 

fluvial deposits. Moreover, based on the presence of deepwater foraminifers recovered from the upper portion of the 

upper part of the formation in the Sor Range, this rise in sea 

level apparently continued into latest Ghazij time. This 

seems supported by the upward progression from brackish 

to marine ostracodes in the upper portion of the upper part 

of the formation near Sharing, as reported by E.M. Brouwers (oral commun., 1994). Because a laterite is locally

present at the very top of the Ghazij, a major lowering of 

sea level (regression) culminating with a withdrawal of 

marine water from the area is suspected. If this was the 

case, then the event is represented by a subtle regional 

unconformity between the Ghazij and the overlying middle 

Eocene Kirthar Formation. The limestones in the lower 

part of the Kirthar formed in relatively shallow marine 

water, which indicates that a rise in sea level (transgression) 

resulted in yet another marine flooding event at the beginning of Kirthar time.

In summary, deposition of the Ghazij seems to have 

been influenced by several major fluctuations in sea level 

(fig. 47). These fluctuations could have occurred in response 

to the nearby tectonism associated with the collision, or they 

could have been part of a worldwide eustatic event. 

Nagappa (1959) used foraminifer data to define four transgressive-regressive cycles affecting the deposition of Upper 

Cretaceous through Eocene strata in the India-PakistanBurma region; our model is somewhat similar to his third 

cycle.

ABOUT THE CONGLOMERATE FACIES

We postulate that during late Ghazij time the early 

Eocene collisional event culminated with intensified uplift 

of the Indian subcontinent's former marine shelf on the 

west side of the Indus Foreland Basin exposing even more 

of the shelf s carbonate-platform deposits to weathering and 

erosion. Significant relief, perhaps the scarps of high-angle 

reverse faults, directly adjacent to the west edge of the late 

Ghazij coastal plain provided coarse sediment to an otherwise low-energy depositional environment (Johnson and 

others, 1993). Geographic irregularities along the collisional front resulted in a unique pattern of uplifts, which 

then provided coarse sediment to a corresponding irregular 

pattern of southeast-prograding alluvial lobes. These various lobes are now represented by the conglomerate facies in 

the Ghazij.

CORRELATION OF THE GHAZIJ

FORMATION WITH EOCENE

SEDIMENTARY ROCKS IN

ADJACENT REGIONS

Much work remains to be done before unequivocal correlations can be made between the Ghazij Formation and 

lower Eocene sedimentary rocks in adjacent regions. This 

work will involve studies on bio stratigraphy and depositional settings that will ultimately lead to a better understanding of the small-scale paleogeographic subtleties that 

existed during this epoch.
64 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

Depositional 

facies

Ghazij 

Formation

Relative baselevel fall

Shelf

Estuarine

Coastal 

plain

Coastal 

plain

Estuarine

Beach

Inner 

shelf

Outer 

shelf

Upper

Middle

Lower

*approximate position

Figure 47. Depositional environment of the lower Eocene Ghazij 

Formation as compared to base-level fluctuations. Scale in 500-m 

increments.

TOWARD THE NORTH—NORTH WEST 

FRONTIER PROVINCE

Along the eastern flank of the northern part of the 

Sulaiman Range between latitudes 3 TOO' and 33°00' N., 

Hemphill and Kidwai (1973) mapped three Eocene units, 

Ghazij Shale, Baska Shale, and Kirthar Formation. The 

Ghazij Shale and the Baska Shale are thought to be equivalent to the Ghazij Formation in the Quetta region (fig. 48). 

On their maps, outcrop patterns of these two units trend 

north, generally between longitudes 70°00' and 70° 15' E. 

The Baska Shale is not shown north of about lat 32°30' N., 

but the Ghazij Shale is shown extending to the north edge of 

the area of their northernmost map. The abrupt termination 

of the outcrop pattern at this edge implies that the unit continues beyond the northern limit of their mapping. However, 

the name Ghazij is not used in publications concerning lower 

Eocene strata in areas beyond lat 33°00' N., which happens 

to be the latitude of Bannu (fig. 49).

THAL-KOHAT AREA

North and northeast of Bannu in the Thal-Kohat area 

(fig. 49), Eocene rocks have been mapped and described by 

Meissner and others (1974) and by Meissner and others 

(1975). The usual ascending sequence is Panoba Shale, 

Mami Khel Clay, and Kohat Formation. By direction of the 

Stratigraphic Committee of Pakistan (Shah, 1977), the Mami 

Khel Clay has been renamed the Kuldana Formation. 

Throughout the region the Panoba and Kuldana are separated 

by an unconformity. The Kuldana and Kohat are separated 

by an unconformity on the west side of the area, but on the 

east side the contact is conformable. In the southeastern part 

of the region, in an apparently more basinward direction, the 

Shekhan Limestone intervenes between the Panoba and the 

Kuldana, and no unconformities are present in the Eocene 

sequence. Farther to the southeast, facies changes have 

resulted in the Bahadur Khel Salt replacing the upper part of 

the Panoba, and the Jatta Gypsum replacing the Shekhan. 

Throughout the Thal-Kohat area the Eocene sequence is 

underlain conformably by the Paleocene Patala Formation, 

and unconformably overlain by the Miocene Murree Formation.

The pattern labeled Ghazij Shale that terminates against 

the northern border of the area of the map by Hemphill and 

Kidwai (1973) at lat 33°00' N. is shown on the southern border of the area of a map by Meissner and others (1975) to 

continue as the Panoba Shale. Both Hemphill and Kidwai, 

and Meissner and others agreed that the two lithostratigraphic units are equivalent. B.R. Wardlaw and others 

observed and measured parts of the lower Tertiary sequence 

in this region in 1991. In an unpublished trip report outlining 

their activities, Wardlaw (written commun., 1991) indicated 

on a figure that the Panoba Shale in this area is equivalent to
CORRELATION OF THE GHAZIJ FORMATION WITH ADJACENT REGIONS 65

i/Vest-Hyderabad Quetta

area region

Tiyon

Fm

Laki

Fm

Upper part

of

Ghazij

Fm

Middle part

of

Ghazij

Fm

Lower part

of

Ghazij

Fm

Outerbridge

and others

(1991)

This report

Northern 

Sulaiman 

Range

Baska 

Shale

Ghazij 

Shale

Hemphill and 

Kidwai (1973) \

Thal-Kohat 

area

Kuldana 

Fm

Panoba 

Shale

—————— ?

B.R. Wardlaw, 

written commun. 

(1991)

Surghar 

Range

(missing) 

Nammal

Marl

Sakesar

Limestone

Danilchik and 

Shah (1987)

Figure 48. Diagram correlating lower Eocene strata in the Quetta region with lower Eocene strata in selected areas of North West Frontier 

Province and Sindh Province. No scale implied.

the lower part of the Ghazij Formation in the Quetta region 

(fig. 48). Moreover, one of his measured sections containing 

the Panoba shows an interval of sandstone and conglomerate 

about 60 m thick at the top of the formation that he interpreted as a deltaic deposit. Although the middle part of the 

Ghazij as it is known in the greater Quetta region pinches out 

at some latitude north of Kingri, the deltaic unit just mentioned probably accumulated in a paleogeographic setting 

similar to that of the middle part of the Ghazij in the Quetta 

region. Also in this trip report, Wardlaw stated his belief that 

the Kuldana Formation, Baska Shale, and the upper part of 

the Ghazij Formation in the greater Quetta region were all 

stratigraphic equivalents. In contrast to this, Hemphill and 

Kidwai (1973) believed that the Baska simply pinched out

toward the north within the area of their mapping. We note 

that Gingerich and others (1979) reported the presence of 

middle Eocene fossil vertebrate remains in the Kuldana Formation near Kohat. If the upper part of the Ghazij and the 

Baska Shale are lower Eocene, as usually cited, then the depositional facies must become younger toward the north for 

the upper Ghazij-Baska-Kuldana correlation to be valid.

SURGHAR RANGE

East of Bannu near Makarwal in the Surghar Range 

(fig. 49), Eocene rocks have been mapped and described by 

Danilchik and Shah (1987). Here, only two units are 

recognized, Nammal Marl and Sakesar Limestone. This
66 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

70° E. 71° E 72° E.

34 C

100 KILOMETERS

Figure 49. Lithostratigraphic units in northern Sulaiman Range 

and to north that possibly correlate with the Ghazij Formation in 

Quetta region. Shaded pattern encloses exposures of Eocene rocks. 

T, Thai; K, Kohat; M, Makarwal. 1, northern Sulaiman Range; 2, 

Thal-Kohat area; 3, Surghar Range. No vertical scale implied. 

Modified from Bakr and others, 1964.

sequence is underlain conformably by the Paleocene Patala 

Shale and overlain unconformably by the Oligocene to 

Miocene Mitha Khatak Formation.

According to Meissner and others (1974) the lower two 

thirds of the Sakesar is equivalent to the Panoba Shale, and 

the upper third is equivalent to the Shekhan Limestone. If 

this is correct then the Sakesar, and probably the Nammal, 

are time-stratigraphic equivalents of the Ghazij Shale near 

Bannu (fig. 48) and, by inference, the lower and middle parts 

of the Ghazij Formation in the greater Quetta region (see also 

Iqbal, 1969; Shah, 1977, 1990). The fact that the Surghar 

units are carbonates indicates a more basinward depositional 

position. Because the Sakesar is overlain by an unconformity in the Surghar Range it is impossible to tell if a timestratigraphic equivalent to the Baska Shale was removed by 

erosion or simply never deposited.

TOWARD THE SOUTHEAST— 

SINDH PROVINCE

South along the Kirthar Range, the Ghazij Formation 

crops out intermittently to a point 23 km south of Karkh at 

about lat 27°30' N., where the farthest-south exposure is terminated by a fault (Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960). In 

this part of the Kirthar Range, the Ghazij is composed almost 

exclusively of mudrock, and the formation is underlain by 

the Paleocene Karkh Group and overlain by the mostly 

Eocene Brahma Limestone; both of these are local units

roughly equivalent to the Paleocene Dungan Formation and 

the middle Eocene Kirthar Formation, respectively.

HYDERABAD

In the southern part of Sindh Province west of Hyderabad, rocks of Eocene age are well exposed over a broad area 

(fig. 50). This area is centered about 240 km south-southeast 

of the southernmost exposure of Ghazij Formation in the central Kirthar Range. The Eocene sequence is composed of the 

following units, in ascending order: Laki Formation, Tiyon 

Formation, and Kirthar Formation (Kazmi and others, 1990; 

Outerbridge and others, 1991). This sequence is underlain 

conformably by the Paleocene Sohnari Formation, and overlain unconformably by the Oligocene Nari Formation.

The time-stratigraphic equivalent of the Ghazij Formation is probably contained in the sub-Kirthar part of the 

sequence, namely the Laki (Shah, 1977; Hunting Survey 

Corporation, 1960) and Tiyon Formations. But because the 

closest exposures are separated by 240 km, a more specific 

correlation based on lithofacies is probably impossible. This 

apparent limitation does not, however, prohibit speculative 

comments. Based on stratigraphic position we postulate that 

the mostly nonmarine Sohnari is perhaps the time-stratigraphic equivalent of at least part of the Paleocene Dungan 

Formation in Balochistan (see also Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960). Outerbridge and others (1991) suggested that the 

Sohnari probably represents a minor regressive event. If this 

is correct, then the associated slight fall in sea level might 

have affected shallower parts of the marine shelf positioned 

close to the India subcontinent, while having only minor 

effects on carbonate deposition farther out on the shelf 

toward the northwest. The marine transgression indicated by 

the deposition of marine rocks of the Meting Limestone 

Member of the Laki Formation, which overlies the Sohnari, 

might be associated with the transgressive event in 

Balochistan that caused deep-water mudrock in the lower 

portion of the lower part of the Ghazij to be deposited over 

shallow-water carbonates in the Dungan. Based on lithology, the Tiyon might possibly represent another minor 

regressive event. Adding this hypothesis to the formation's 

stratigraphic position, one might argue that the Tiyon is 

somehow related to the regressive event that affected the 

deposition of the upper part of the Ghazij in Balochistan (fig. 

48). This leaves the Laki as the most likely candidate for 

equivalence to the lower and middle parts of the Ghazij (see 

also Iqbal, 1969).

POST-GHAZIJ GEOLOGIC HISTORY

POST-GHAZIJ PLATE TECTONICS

By the middle Eocene the effects of the initial collision 

had subsided, and between middle Eocene and earliest
POST-GHAZIJ GEOLOGIC HISTORY 67

Miocene time, the Indian subcontinent made its final 

approach to the Asian mainland. Thus, the distance between 

the terrestrial fragment and the mainland is accounted for. 

Actual docking of the two landmasses must have occurred 

between earliest Miocene and earliest Pliocene time, but the 

full impact of the collision did not occur until later in the 

Pliocene when the ongoing Himalayan orogeny began. Currently, the convergence rate is about 4 cm/yr (Powell, 1979) 

as the Indian subcontinent tries to underthrust, perhaps 

obliquely, the Asian mainland. Estimates of total crustal 

shortening since the beginning of the Himalayan orogeny 

range from 600 km (Butler and Coward, 1989) to 2,000 km 

(Patriat and Achache, 1984).

POST-GHAZIJ DEPOSITION

Following the initial collision and the deposition of the 

Ghazij Formation, the area that is now northeastern 

Balochistan entered a period for which the geologic setting 

is poorly understood. This period is represented by the rocks 

contained in the middle part of the stratigraphic column (fig. 

4) above the Ghazij and below the conglomerates of the collision molasse.

PREOROGENIC MARINE DEPOSITS

Rocks just above the Ghazij Formation are mostly 

marine, and were deposited in a variety of specific environments. The strata probably accumulated on a south- or 

southeast-facing depositional slope that received clastic 

input from the north or northwest. During this period, it is 

possible that several transgressive-regressive events 

occurred (Nagappa, 1959), and by the orientation of the depositional slope we propose, the sea would have approached 

and retreated from the south or southeast, but there is no evidence to support this conclusion. The following brief lithologic descriptions are based primarily on Hunting Survey 

Corporation (1960) and Shah (1977).

Overlying the Ghazij is the middle to upper Eocene 

Kirthar Formation (Spintangi Limestone of Hunting Survey 

Corporation, 1960). This unit contains locally abundant 

marine fossils, and is divided into four members that define 

two depositional cycles, each consisting of shallow-water 

limestone overlain by shale. Bedded gypsum, as thick as 6 

m, is locally present in the lower part of the formation and 

probably represents deposition in areas of restricted-marine 

circulation.

Above the Kirthar is the Oligocene Nari Formation. 

This unit consists mostly of cross-stratified, ripple-laminated, medium- to coarse-grained sandstone interbedded 

with minor amounts of shale. Limestone containing marine 

fossils and interbedded with shale and sandstone is commonly present in the lower part of the formation. The Nari

67° E. B°E.

27 C

26 C

25 C

o Karkh

Hyderabad

ARABIAN 

SEA

50 100 KILOMETERS

Figure 50. Lithostratigraphic units in Sindh Province that 

possibly correlate with the Ghazij Formation in Quetta region. 

Shaded pattern encloses exposures of Eocene rocks west of 

Hyderabad. 1, Central Kirthar Range south of Karkh; 2, WestHyderabad area. No vertical scale implied. Modified from Bakr 

and Jackson, 1964.

signals the end of post-Ghazij carbonate deposition, and the 

large amount of sand in the formation represents the first 

major influx of clastic detritus to enter the depositional environment since Ghazij time; its presence might be a precursor 

to later events.

The last marine unit to be deposited is the Miocene Gaj 

Formation; it is not present in most areas north of Quetta. 

This unit consists of shale with subordinate amounts of sandstone and limestone, all of which contain marine fossils. 

However, in the uppermost part of the formation in the 

northern part of the Kirthar Range, sedimentary features are 

reported that suggest fluvial deposition (Hunting Survey 

Corporation, 1960).

PREOROGENIC NONMARINE DEPOSITS

The first truly nonmarine unit to be deposited in the 

region is the upper Miocene Nagri Formation of the Siwalik 

Group. The Nagri consists of green and blue, medium- to 

coarse-grained sandstone with subordinate amounts of shale 

and conglomerate, the latter containing pebbles of igneous 

rock and limestone. Terrestrial vertebrate fossils are
68 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

abundant, and Waheed and Wells (1990) reported fossil root 

traces and pedogenic features.

The lowest Pliocene Dhok Pathan Formation of the 

Siwalik Group was the last relatively fine grained continental 

unit to be deposited prior to the arrival of the collision 

molasse. This unit consists of multiple cycles of sandstone 

and shale with some layers and lenses of conglomerate in the 

upper part. Terrestrial vertebrate fossils are very common.

SYNOROGENIC DEPOSITS

The beginning of coarse-grained molasse deposition did 

not occur until later in the Tertiary after the full impact of the 

main collision had initiated the Himalayan orogeny. Starting 

in the earliest Pliocene, radical uplift associated with the 

orogeny provided a source of gravelly sediments that were 

transported by braided streams (Waheed and Wells, 1990) 

away from the tectonism and eventually deposited in foredeep basins that developed subparallel to the tectonic front. 

The conglomerates shown in the upper part of the stratigraphic column (fig. 4), the Pliocene-Pleistocene Soan Formation, and Pleistocene Lei Conglomerate, Bostan 

Formation, and Dada Conglomerate, were deposited by this 

process. Waheed and Wells (1990) collected paleocurrent 

data from post-Oligocene deposits at two widely spaced sites 

in the Sulaiman Range. Although data from the northern part 

of the range indicate paleoflow generally toward the southeast, which seems to fit the regional model of molasse deposition, data from the southern part of the range indicate a 

paleoflow toward the southwest, which seems at variance to 

the model.

Since the early Pliocene, tectonism has apparently proceeded toward the south in the Salt Range (fig. 49) and 

Sulaiman lobe, and toward the east in the Sulaiman and 

Kirthar Ranges, away from the main orogen. This tectonic 

progression is evident by the development of small folds 

within the foredeep just off the main tectonic fronts. Good 

examples are the Zinda Pir anticline east of the Sulaiman 

Range, and the Sui and Uch anticlines south of the Sulaiman 

lobe (Jadoon, 1991; Humayon and others, 1991). Accompanying this tectonic migration, depocenters of the associated 

foredeeps have moved in the same direction as sediments 

prograde away from the approaching tectonic fronts. The 

fact that the molasse sequence generally coarsens upward 

seems to support this concept. Raynolds and Johnson (1985) 

reported that a vertical sedimentation rate of 20-30 cm per 

1,000 years, and a horizontal depocenter migration rate of 20 

m per 1,000 years, are typical for these deposits.

Earthquakes are common events in northeastern 

Balochistan, and one such event near Quetta in 1935 registered at least 7 on the Richter Scale. Thus it is clear that the 

Himalayan orogeny continues into the present, and associated seismicity is recognized throughout Pakistan.

SELECTED REFERENCES

Abdel-Gawad, Monem, 1971, Wrench movement in the Baluchistan arc and relation to Himalayan-Indian Ocean tectonics: 

Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 82, no. 5, p. 

1235-1250.

Adams, L.D., and Carter, J.M.L., 1997, Influence of synsedimentary tectonics on hydrocarbon systems; three examples from 

Balochistan Province, Pakistan [abs.]: American Association 

of Petroleum Geologists, 1997 Annual Convention, Official 

Program, p. 1.

Ahmad, Habib, 1982, Isopach map showing thickness and distribution of Cretaceous and Eocene sedimentary rocks in Pakistan, 

in Kazmi, A.H., and Rana, R.A., compilers, Tectonic map of 

Pakistan: Geological Survey of Pakistan, scale 1:2,000,000.

Ahmad, S.A., and Kazim, M.A., 1987, Geology of coal-bearing 

"Ghazij Formation" of Mach area, Baluchistan, Pakistan: Acta 

Mineralogica Pakistanica, v. 3, p. 69.

Ahmad, Waheeduddin, Gauhar, S.H., and Siddiqi, R.A., 1986, Coal 

resources of Pakistan: Geological Survey of Pakistan, Records, 

v. 73(73), 55 p.

Ahmad, Zaki, and Abbas, S.G., 1979, The Muslim Bagh ophiolites, 

in Farah, Abul, and DeJong, K.A., eds., Geodynamics of Pakistan: Geological Survey of Pakistan, p. 243-249.

Ahmed, F., Khan, M.K., and Hamid, I., 1969, Geology of Rodho 

anticline Safed Koh Range, special territory of D. G. Khan District, Multan Division Western Pakistan: Oil and Gas Development Corporation, Report on work carried out by geological 

party no. 1 during the first half field season 1968-69, 16 p. (on 

file with the Geological Survey of Pakistan, Quetta).

Ahmed, Jawed, Moore, D.M., and Ahmed, Zulfiqar, 1985, The 

nature of clay minerals from a section of Ghazij Shale Formation in Chappar Valley near Mangi Kach, Baluchistan: Acta 

Mineralogica Pakistanica, v. 1, p. 74-77.

Ahmed, Riaz, and Ahmad, Jalil, 1991, Petroleum geology and prospects of Sukkur rift zone, Pakistan with special reference to 

Jaisalmer, Cambay and Bombay high basins of India: Pakistan 

Journal of Hydrocarbon Research, v. 3, no. 2, p. 33-41.

Ahmed, Riaz, and Ali, S.M., 1991, Tectonic and structural development of the eastern part of the Kirthar Fold Belt and its hydrocarbon prospects: Pakistan Journal of Hydrocarbon Research, 

v. 3, no. 2, p. 19-31.

Ahmed, W., and Gauhar, S.H., 1986, Plate tectonics, crustal evolution and metallogeny of Pakistan: Lahore, Pakistan, Punjab 

University, Institute of Geology, First Advanced School in 

Geology, Himalayan Research Centre, Khanspur, Volume of 

Abstracts, no. 7, p. 8-9.

Ahmed, W.A., Gauhar, S.H., and Siddiqui, R.A., 1986, Coal 

resources of Pakistan: Records of the Geological Survey of 

Pakistan, v. 73, 55 p.

Akhtar, Muhammad, and Masood, Tariq, 1991, Guide book to geology of Sulaiman Range: Geological Survey of Pakistan, Information Release No. 342, 24 p.

Allemann, Franz, 1979, Time of emplacement of the Zhob Valley 

ophiolites and Bela ophiolites, Baluchistan (preliminary 

report), in Farah, Abul, and DeJong, K.A., eds., Geodynamics 

of Pakistan: Geological Survey of Pakistan, p. 215-242.

Asarullah, Ahmad, Zaki, and Abbas, S.G., 1979, Ophiolites in Pakistan; an introduction, in Farah, Abul, and DeJong, K.A., eds.,
SELECTED REFERENCES 69

Geodynamics of Pakistan: Geological Survey of Pakistan, p. 

181-192.

Aubry, Thierry, Ahmed, Zulfiqar, and Baloch, M.K., 1988, A preliminary study of cherts from Balochistan: Acta Mineralogica 

Pakistanica, v. 4, p. 102-112.

Auden, J.B., 1974, Afghanistan-West Pakistan, in Spencer, A.M., 

ed., Mesozoic-Cenozoic orogenic belts: The Geological Society of London Special Publication 4, p. 235-254.

Bakr, M.A., and Jackson, R.O., compilers, 1964, Geological map of 

Pakistan: Geological Survey of Pakistan, scale 1:2,000,000.

Banks, C.J., and Warburton, J., 1986, Passive-roof duplex geometry in the frontal structures of the Kirthar and Sulaiman mountain belts, Pakistan: Journal of Structural Geology, v. 8, nos. 3/ 

4, p. 229-237.

Bannert, Dietrich, in cooperation with Cheema, Amjed, Ahmed, 

Abrar, and Schaffer, Uwe, 1992, The structural development of 

the western fold belt, Pakistan: Geologisches Jahrbuch Reihe 

B, Heft 80, 60 p.

Beck, R.A., Burbank, D.W., Sercombe, W.J., Riley, G.W., Barndt, 

J.K., Berry, J.R., Afzal, Jamil, Khan, A.M., Jurgen, Hermann, 

Metje, Jogen, Cheeman, Amjed, Shafique, N.A., Lawrence, 

R.D., and Khan, M.A., 1995, Stratigraphic evidence for an early collision between northwest India and Asia: Nature, v. 373, 

p. 55-58.

Bender, F.K., 1995, Palaeogeographic and geodynamic evolution, 

in Bender, F.K., and Raza, H.A., eds., Geology of Pakistan: 

Berlin, Gebruder Borntraeger, p. 162-181.

Besse, J., Courtillot, V., Pozzi, J.P., Westphal, M., and Zhou, Y.X., 

1984, Palaeomagnetic estimates of crustal shorting in the 

Himalayan thrusts and Zangbo suture: Nature, v. 311, no. 

5987, p. 621-626.

Blanford, W.T., 1882, Note on the coal of Mach (Much) in the 

Bolan pass, and of Sharag or Sharigh on the Harnai route 

between Sibi and Quetta: Records of the Geological Survey of 

India, v. 15, pt. 3, p. 149-153.

————1883, Geological notes on the hills in the neighbourhood of 

the Sind and Punjab frontier between Quetta and Der Ghazi 

Khan: Memoirs of the Geological Survey of India, v. 20, pt. 2, 

p. 105-240.

Butler, Rob, 1995, When did India hit Asia?: Nature, v. 373, p. 

20-21.

Butler, R.W.H., and Coward, M.P., 1989, Crustal scale thrusting 

and continental subduction during Himalayan collision tectonics on the NW Indian plate, in Sengor, A.M.C., ed., Tectonic 

evolution of the Tethyan region: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 

p. 387^13.

Crookshank, H., (and Heron, A.M.), 1954, Directory of economic 

minerals of Pakistan: Records of the Geological Survey of 

Pakistan, v. 7, pt. 2, 146 p.

Danilchik, Walter, and Shah, S.M.I, 1987, Stratigraphy and coal 

resources of the Makarwal area, Trans-Indus Mountains, 

Mianwali District, Pakistan: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1341, 3 8 p.

DeJohn, K.A., and Farah, Abul, 1976, Geodynamic significance of 

ophiolites in Baluchistan, Pakistan, in Michot, P., organizer, 

Geology and petrology of the crystalline domains of the earth's 

crust: International Geological Congress, Abstracts, v. 3, Symposium 102.1, p. 701.

Eames, F.E., 1951, A contribution to the study of the Eocene in 

Western Pakistan and western India—B, The descriptions of

the Lamellibranchia from standard sections in the Rakhi Nala 

and Zinda Pir areas of the western Punjab and in the Kohat District: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, Biological Sciences, v. 235, no. 627, p. 

311-482.

——1952a, A contribution to the study of the Eocene in Western 

Pakistan and western India—A, The geology of standard sections in the western Punjab and in the Kohat District: The 

Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, v. 107, 

p. 159-171.

——1952b, A contribution to the study of the Eocene in Western 

Pakistan and western India—C, The descriptions of the 

Scaphopoda and Gastropoda from standard sections in the 

Rakhi Nala and Zinda Pir areas of the western Punjab and in 

the Kohat District: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal 

Society of London, Series B, Biological Sciences, v. 236, no. 

631, p. 1-162.

-1952c, A contribution to the study of the Eocene in Western

Pakistan and western India—D, Discussion of the faunas of 

certain standards, and their bearing on the classification and 

correlation of the Eocene in Western Pakistan and western 

India: The Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, v. 107, p. 173-200.

Farah, Abul, and DeJong, K.A., eds., 1979, Geodynamics of Pakistan: Geological Survey of Pakistan, 361 p.

Farah, Abul, Lawrence, R.D., and DeJong, K.A., 1984, An overview of the tectonics of Pakistan, in Haq, B.U., and Milliman, 

J.D., eds., Marine geology and oceanography of Arabian Sea 

and coastal Pakistan: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, p. 

161-176.

Fritz, E.B., and Khan, M.U., 1966, Stratigraphy and paleontology 

of coal beds in the Ghazij Shale, Sor Range-Daghari coal 

fields, Quetta Division, West Pakistan: U.S. Geological Survey 

Administrative Report PK-15, 16 p.

————1975, Stratigraphy and paleontology of coal beds in the 

Ghazij Shale, Sor Range-Daghari coal fields Quetta Division, 

Pakistan: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 75-274,16

PGansser, Augusto, 1979, Reconnaissance visit to the ophiolites in 

Baluchistan and the Himalaya, in Farah, Abul, and Dejong, 

K.A., eds., Geodynamics of Pakistan: Geological Survey of 

Pakistan, p. 193-213.

Garzanti, E., Salvatore, C., and Ingersoll, R.V., 1996, Paleogeographic and paleotectonic evolution of the Himalayan Range as 

reflected by detrital modes of Tertiary sandstones and modern 

sands: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. a!08, no. 6, 

p. 631-642.

Gee, E.R., 1945, Coal: Records of the Geological Survey of India, 

v. 76, no. 16, 84 p.

————1950, The mineral resources of north western India: 

Records of the Geological Survey of Pakistan, v. 1, pt. 1, 25 p.

————1989, Overview of the geology and structure of the Salt

Range, with observations on related areas of northern Pakistan, 

in Malinconico, L.L., and Lillie, R.J., eds., Tectonics of the 

western Himalayas: Geological Society of America Special 

Publication 232, p. 95-112.

Geological Survey of Pakistan and U.S. Geological Survey, 1988, 

National coal exploration plan: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 88-251, 81 p.
70 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

Ghaznavi, M.I., 1990, Characterization of the coals of Harnai-Shahrig-Khost area, Balochistan, Pakistan: Carbondale, 111., Southern Illinois University Ph. D. thesis, 358 p.

Gibson, Thomas, Khan, Intizar, and Fatmi, Farah, 1992, Paleobathymetric changes in uppermost Paleocene strata in Pakistan: 

First South Asia Geological Congress, Abstracts, Islamabad, 

Pakistan, p. 56.

Gibson, T.G., 1994, Foraminiferal evidence for Paleocene-Eocene 

boundary tectonism in northwestern Pakistan, in Langer, M.R., 

and Harmeet, B., eds., Forams '94, international symposium on 

Foraminifera [abs.]: PaleoBios, v. 16, supplement to no. 2, p. 

32.

Gingerich, P.D., Russell, D.E., Sigogneau-Russell, Denise, and 

Hartenberger, J.L., 1979, Chorlakkia Hassani, a new middle 

Eocene Dichobunid (Mammalia, Artiodactyla) from the Kuldana Formation of Kohat (Pakistan): Ann Arbor, Mich., University of Michigan Contributions from the Museum of 

Paleontology, v. 25, no. 6, p. 117-124:

Griesbach, C.L., 1881, Report on the geology of the section 

between the Bolan Pass in Biluchistan and Girishk in southern 

Afghanistan: Memoirs of the Geological Survey of India, v. 18, 

p. 1-60.

————1893, On the geology of the country between Chappar Rift 

and Harnai in Balochistan: Records of the Geological Survey of 

India, v. 26, pt. 4, p. 113-147.

Haque, A.F.M.M., 1959, Some middle to late Eocene smaller Foraminifera from the Sor Range, Quetta District, West Pakistan: 

Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Pakistan, Palaeontologia 

Pakistanica, v. 2, pt. 2, 79 p.

Hemphill, W.R., and Kidwai, A.H., 1973, Stratigraphy of the Bannu 

and Der Ismail Khan areas, Pakistan: U.S. Geological Survey 

Professional Paper 716-B, 36 p.

Humayon, Mansoor, Lillie, R.J., and Lawrence, R.D., 1991, Structural interpretation of the eastern Sulaiman foldbelt and foredeep, Pakistan: Tectonics, v. 10, no. 2, p. 299-324.

Hunting Survey Corporation, Limited, 1960 [1961], Reconnaissance geology of part of West Pakistan; a Colombo Plan Cooperative Project: Toronto, Canada, Government of Canada; 

Oshawa, Ontario, Maracle Press, 550 p.

Husain, R, Shah, S.M.I., Rauf, M.A., and Bhatti, N.A., 1985, Geologic Map of Daghari: Geological Survey of Pakistan, 

Balochistan Map Series, Sheet 97, scale 1:7,423.

Iqbal, M.W.A., 1969, Mega-fauna from the Ghazij Formation (lower Eocene) Quetta Shahrig area, West Pakistan: Memoirs of the 

Geological Survey of Pakistan, Palaeontologia Pakistanica, v. 

5, 40 p.

Iqbal, M.W.A., and Shah, S.M.I., 1980, A guide to the stratigraphy 

of Pakistan: Records of the Geological Survey of Pakistan, v. 

53, 34 p.

Jadoon, I.A.K., 1991, The style and evolution of foreland structures; 

an example from the Sulaiman Lobe, Pakistan: Pakistan Journal of Hydrocarbon Research, v. 3, no. 2, p. 1-17.

Jadoon, I.A.K., Lawrence, R.D., and Lillie, R.J., 1990, Balanced 

retrodeformed geological cross-section from frontal Sulaiman 

lobe, Pakistan; duplex development in the thick strata along the 

western margin of the Indian Plate, in McClay, K.R., ed., 

Thrust tectonics: London, Chapman and Hall, p. 343-356.

————1994, Seismic data, geometry, evolution, and shorting in the 

active Sulaiman fold-and-thrust belt of Pakistan, southwest of

the Himalayas: American Association of Petroleum Geologists 

Bulletin, v. 78, no. 5, p 758-774.

Johnson, E.A., and Khan, I.H., 1994a, Principal reference section 

for part of the Eocene Ghazij Formation, Shin Ghwazha mine 

area, Sor Range coal field, Balochistan, Pakistan, U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2263-B.

———1994b, Principal reference section for part of the Eocene 

Ghazij Formation, Abraham Marri mine area, Pir Ismail Ziarat 

coal field, Balochistan, Pakistan: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2263-A.

Johnson, E.A., Warwick, P.D., Khan, I.H., and Kazim, M.A., 1994, 

Principal reference section for part of the Eocene Ghazij Formation, Moghal mine area, Mach coal field, Balochistan, Pakistan: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map 

MF-2263-D.

Johnson, E.A., Warwick, P.D., Khan, I.H., Rana, A.N., and Kazim, 

M.A., 1994, Principal reference section for part of the Eocene 

Ghazij Formation, Sarawan River area, Johan coal field, 

Balochistan, Pakistan: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous 

Field Studies Map MF-2263-E.

Johnson, E.A., Warwick, P.D., Roberts, S.B., and Khan, I.H., 1993, 

Limestone-pebble conglomerate facies of the Eocene Ghazij 

Formation, Balochistan, Pakistan; evidence for collision-related tectonism on the northwestern margin of the Indian Plate 

[abs.]: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, 1993 

Annual Convention Program, p. 124.

Kassi, A.M., 1986, Sandstone petrology of Ghazij Formation of 

Degari, Kach, Murree Brewery, and Bib Nani areas, northeast 

Baluchistan: Geological Bulletin, University of Peshawar, v. 

19, p. 77-82.

Kassi, A.M., Qureshi, A.R., and Kakar, D.M., 1987, Sedimentology 

of the Ghazij Formation, Kach area, Baluchistan: Geological 

Bulletin, University of Peshawar, v. 20, p. 53-62.

Kazi, A., 1968, Sedimentology of the Ghazij Formation, Harnai, 

Balochistan, in Bulman, O.M.B., Nockolds, S.R., and Harland, 

W.B., eds., Geological Magazine: Caxton Hill, England, Mimram Books, v. 105, no. 1, p. 35-45.

Kazim, M.A., Rana, A.N., Memon, A.R., Saleem, M., and Khan, 

A.L., 1991, Coal resources of Sor-Range Block, Sor-RangeDaghari coal field, Balochistan, Pakistan: Geological Survey of 

Pakistan, Information Release No. 463, 18 p.

Kazim, M.A., Younas, Mohammad, and Hussain, S.A., 1987, 

Urban geologic map of the Quetta valley: Geological Survey of 

Pakistan, Urban Geologic Map of Pakistan Baluchistan Series, 

Map-1, scale approximately 1:62,500.

Kazmi, A.H., 1962, Stratigraphy of the Ghazij shales: Geological 

Society, University of Karachi, The Geologist, v. 1, no. 1, p. 

27-40.

————1979, Active fault systems in Pakistan, in Farah, Abul, and 

DeJong, K.A., eds., Geodynamics of Pakistan: Geological Survey of Pakistan, p. 285-294.

Kazmi, A.H., and Rana, R.A., compilers, 1982, Tectonic map of 

Pakistan: Geological Survey of Pakistan, scale 1:2,000,000.

Kazmi, A.H., and Siddiqi, R.A., eds., 1990, Significance of the coal 

resources of Pakistan: Geological Survey of Pakistan and U.S. 

Geological Survey, 269 p.

Kazmi, A.H., Khan, M.S., Khan, LA., Fatmi, S.F., and Fariduddin, 

M., 1990, Coal resources of Sindh, Pakistan, in Kazmi, A.H., 

and Siddiqi, R.A., eds., Significance of the coal resources of
SELECTED REFERENCES 71

Pakistan: Geological Survey of Pakistan and U.S. Geological 

Survey, p. 27-61.

Kemal, A., 1964, Geology of Pir Koh anticline Marri-Bugti area 

District Sibi West Pakistan: Oil and Gas Development Corporation, Report on work carried out by the geological party no. 

1 field season 1963-64, lip. (on file with the Geological Survey of Pakistan, Quetta).

Kemal, Arif, and Malik, M.A., 1987, Geology and gas resources of 

Mari-Bugti agency, Pakistan: Acta Mineralogica Pakistanica, 

v. 3, p. 72-81.

Kemal, Arif, Balkwill, Hugh, Stokes, Frank, and Campbell, Clarence, 1992, Indus Basin, Pakistan hydrocarbon plays [abs.]: 

American Association of Petroleum Geologists, 1992 Annual 

Convention Official Program, p. 64.

Khan, G.S., 1994, Coal for power in Balochistan: Pakistan Mine 

Owners Association, Quetta, 4 p.

Khan, M.Y., Landis, E.R., and Reinemund, J.A., 1972, Coal 

resources of Pakistan: U.S. Geological Survey Project Report, 

Pakistan Investigations, PK-61, 126 p.

Khan, N.M., 1950, A survey of coal resources of Pakistan: Geological Survey of Pakistan, v. 2, pt. 2, 11 p.

Khan, S.N., Abbas, S.G., Sultan, Muzaffar, Khan, I.H., and Shah, 

S.M.I., 1986, Coal resources of Duki and adjoining regions, 

Loralai District, Baluchistan, Pakistan: Geological Survey of 

Pakistan, Records, v. 74, 22 p.

Khan, S.N., Younas, Muhammad, Kazim, M.A., and Hussain, S.A., 

1986, Environmental geology, mineral, raw materials, and 

aggregate resources of Quetta Valley, Baluchistan, Pakistan: 

Geological Survey of Pakistan, Records, v. 76, 44 p.

King, William, 1889, Abstract report on the coal outcrops in the 

Sharigh Valley, Baluchistan: Records of the Geological Survey 

of India, v. 22, pt. 3, p. 149-153.

Klootwijk, C.T., and Peirce, J.W., 1979, India's and Australia's 

pole path since the late Mesozoic and the India-Asia collision: 

Nature, v. 282, no. 5739, p. 605-607.

Klootwijk, C.T., Nazirullah, Russel, DeJohn, K.A., and Ahmed, H., 

1981, A paleomagnetic reconnaissance of northeastern Baluchistan, Pakistan: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 86, no. 

Bl, p. 289-306.

Knipper, A., Ricou, L.-E., and Dercourt, J., 1986, Ophiolites as 

indicators of the geodynamic evolution of the Tethyan ocean: 

Tectonophysics, v. 123, p. 213-240.

Landis, E.R., ed., 1994, Reconnaissance of coal areas in 

Balochistan Province, Pakistan: Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Resources, Geological Survey 

of Pakistan, Project Report (IR)PK-l 12, 91 p.

Landis, E.R., Reinemund, J.A., Schlick, D.P., and Kebblish, W., 

1971, Analyses of Pakistan Coals: U.S. Geological Survey 

Project Report, Pakistan Investigations, PK-58, 71 p.

Latif, M.A., 1962, The use of pelagic Foraminifera in the subdivisions of the Paleocene-Eocene of the Rakhi Nala, West Pakistan: Punjab University Geology Bulletin, no. 2, p. 31-45.

————1964, Variations in abundance and morphology of Pelagic 

foraminifera in the Paleocene-Eocene of the Rakhi Nala, West 

Pakistan: Punjab University Geology Bulletin, no. 4, p. 

29-109.

LaTouche, T.D., 1893, Geology of the Sherani Hills: Records of the 

Geological Survey of India, v. 26, pt. 3, p. 77-96.

Lawrence, R.D., and Yeats, R.S., 1979, Geological reconnaissance 

of the Chaman fault in Pakistan, in Farah, Abul, and DeJong,

K. A., eds., Geodynamics of Pakistan: Geological Survey of 

Pakistan, p. 351-357.

Lillie, R.J., Lawrence, R.D., Humayon, Mansoor, and Jadoon, 

Istiaq, 1989, The Sulaiman thrust lobe of Pakistan; early-stage 

underthrusting of the Mesozoic rifted margin of the Indian subcontinent: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 21, no. 6, p. 318.

Lundegard, P.D., and Samuels, N.D., 1980, Field classification of 

fine-grained sedimentary rocks: Journal of Sedimentary 

Petrology, v. 50, p. 781-786.

Maldonado, Florian, Khan, S.H., and Mengal, J.M., 1993, Structural elements related to plate convergence of the Quetta-Muslim 

Bagh-Sibi region, Balochistan Province, Pakistan: Geological 

Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 25, no. 6, p. 

482.

————1994, Preliminary geologic map of parts of Loralai, Sibi, 

Quetta, and Khuzar Divisions, Balochistan Province, westcentral Pakistan: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 94- 

689, 29 p., scale 1:250,000.

Maldonado, Florian, Khan, S.H., and Mengal, J.M., and Thomas, 

Jean-Claude, 1998, Geologic map and landsat image of parts of 

Loralai, Sibi, Quetta, and Khuzar Divisions, Balochistan Province, west-central Pakistan: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map 1-2549, scale 1:250,000.

Malik, A., 1968a, Geology of Afiband structure tribal area of Der 

Ghazi Khan District West Pakistan: Oil and Gas Development 

Corporation, Report on work carried out by geological party 

no. 2 during the field season 1967-68, 19 p. (on file with the 

Geological Survey of Pakistan, Quetta).

————1968b, Report on geological party no. 2 on the central part 

of Zinda Pir structure tribal area—Der Ghazi Khan District—West Pakistan field season 1967-68: Oil and Gas Development Corporation, 18 p. (on file with the Geological Survey 

of Pakistan, Quetta).

McCormick, G.R., 1989, Geology of the Baluchistan (Pakistan) 

portion of the southern margin of the Tethys sea, in Sengor, 

A.M.C., ed., Tectonic evolution of the Tethyan region: London, Kluwer Academic Publishers, p. 277-288.

Meissner, C.R., Jr., and Rahman, Habib-ur, 1973, Distribution, 

thickness, and lithology of Paleocene rocks in Pakistan: U.S. 

Geological Survey Professional Paper 716-E, 6 p.

Meissner, C.R., Master, J.M., Rashid, M.A., and Hussain, Muzaffar, 1974, Stratigraphy of the Kohat quadrangle, Pakistan: U.S. 

Geological Survey Professional Paper 716-D, 30 p.

Meissner, C.R., Hussain, Muzaffar, Rashid, M.A., and Sethi, U.B., 

1975, Geology of the Parachinar quadrangle, Pakistan: U.S. 

Geological Survey Professional Paper 716-F, 24 p.

Movshovitch, E.B., and Malik, M.A., 1964, Geology of the Kot 

Anticline, Sibi reentrant region of Kalat Division, West Pakistan: Oil and Gas Development Corporation, Report on work 

carried out by geological party no. 2 during field season 

1963-64,14 p. (on file with the Geological Survey of Pakistan, 

Quetta).

————1965, Thickness and facies variations of molasse sediments 

of the Sibi re-entrant, West Pakistan: Lahore, Pakistan, Punjab 

University, Geological Bulletin, v. 5, p. 31-42.

Nagappa, Yedatore, 1959, Foraminiferal biostratigraphy of the Cretaceous-Eocene succession in the India-Pakistan-Burma 

region: Micropaleontology, v. 5, p. 145-179.
72 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

Oldham, R.D., 1890a, Special report on the most favourable sites 

for petroleum exploration in the Harnai district Baluchistan: 

Records of the Geological Survey of India, v. 23, pt. 2, p. 

57-59.

————1890b, Report on the geology and economic resources of the 

country adjoining the Sind-Pishin railway between Sharigh and 

Spintangi, and of the country between it and Khattan: Records 

of the Geological Survey of India, v. 23, pt. 3, p. 93-110. 

-1892, Report on the geology of Thai Chotiali and part of the

Mari country: Records of the Geological Survey of India, v. 15, 

pt. l,p. 18-29.

Opdyke, N.D., compiler, 1982, The geochronology and biochronology of the Siwalik Group, Pakistan: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 37, p. 1-130.

Otsuki, K., Hoshino, K., Anwar, M, Mengal, J.M., Fatmi, A.N., and 

Okimura, Y., 1989, Breakup of Gondwanaland and emplacement of ophiolitic complex in Muslim Bagh area of 

Balochistan, Pakistan, in Okimura, Y., and Fatmi, A.N., eds., 

Tectonic and sedimentation of the Indo-Eurasian colliding 

plate boundary region and its influence on the mineral deposits 

in Pakistan: Hiroshima, Japan, Hiroshima University, p. 33-57.

Outerbridge, W.F., Frederiksen, N.O., Khan, M.R., Khan, R.A., 

Qureshi, M.J., Khan, M.Z., Niamatullah, and Khan, S.A., 1991, 

The Sohnari Formation in southern Pakistan: U.S. Geological 

Survey Bulletin 1935, p. 27-34.

Patriat, Philippe, and Achache, Jose, 1984, India-Eurasia collision 

chronology has implications for crustal shortening and driving 

mechanism of plates: Nature, v. 311, no. 5987, p. 617-621.

Pinfold, E.S., no date, The Dunghan Limestone and the CretaceousEocene unconformity in north-west India: Records of the Geological Survey of India, v. 74, pt. 2, p. 189-198.

Pivnik, D.A., 1994, Eocene closure of Tethys as recorded in NW 

Pakistan: Geological Survey of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 26, no. 7, p. 181.

Powell, C.McA., 1979, A speculative tectonic history of Pakistan 

and surroundings; some constraints from the Indian Ocean, in 

Farah, Abul, and DeJohn, K.A., eds., Geodynamics of Pakistan: Geological Survey of Pakistan, p. 5-24.

Pryor, W.A., 1978, Cyclic sedimentation in the Cretaceous-Paleocene sequence in west-central Pakistan: Geological Society of 

America Abstracts with Programs, v. 10, no. 7, p. 474.

Quittmeyer, R.C., 1978, The Quetta-Sibi (Pakistan) syntaxis; evidence for its origin from seismicity and plate tectonics: Eos, v. 

59, no. 4, p. 323.

Quittmeyer, R.C., Farah, Abul, and Jocob, K.H., 1979, The seismicity of Pakistan and its relation to surface faults, in Farah, Abul, 

and DeJong, K. A., eds., Geodynamics of Pakistan: Geological 

Survey of Pakistan, p. 271-284.

Qureshi, M.K.A., Abbas, S.Q., andBhatti, M.A., 1987, Stratigraphy 

of part of Sulaiman Range: Punjab University, Institute of 

Geology, Bulletin 22, p. 76-91.

Rana, A.N., and Khan, A.L., 1990, A note on the geological investigation for Ghazij coal in the Kalat-Johan areas, Balochistan, 

Pakistan: Geological Survey of Pakistan, unpublished report, 

20 p. (on file with Geological Survey of Pakistan, Quetta).

Raynolds, G.H., and Johnson, G.D., 1985, Rates of Neogene deposition and deformational processes, north-west Himalayan 

foredeep margin, Pakistan, in Snelling, N.J., ed., The

chronology of the geological record: British Geological Survey 

Memoir 10, p. 297-311.

Reinemund, J.A., Khan, M.Y., Hussain, F., and Usmani, A.H., no 

date, Geologic map of Sor Range-Daghari: Geological Survey 

of Pakistan, scale approximately 1:32,000.

Ricou, Luc-Emmanuel, 1994, Tethys reconstructed; plates, continental fragments and boundaries since 260 Ma from central 

America to south-central Asia: Geodinamica Acta, v. 7, no. 4, 

p. 169-218.

Rossman, D.L., Ahmad, Zaki, and Rahman, Hamidur, 1971, Geology and economic potential for chromite in the Zhob Valley 

ultramafic rock complex, Hindubagh, Quetta Division, West 

Pakistan: U.S. Geological Survey Project Report, Pakistan 

Investigations (IR) PK-50, 63 p.; also published as U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 71-242, 63 p.

Sahni, Ashok, and Kumar, Vilmal, 1974, Palaeogene palaeobiogeography of the Indian Subcontinent: Palaeogeography, 

Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 15, p. 209-226.

Sarwar, Ghulam, and DeJong, K.A., 1979, Arcs, oroclines, and syntaxes; the curvatures of mountain belts in Pakistan, in Farah, 

Abul, and DeJong, K.A., eds., Geodynamics of Pakistan: Geological Survey of Pakistan, p. 341-349.

Scotese, C.R., Gahagan, L.M., and Larson, R.L., 1988, Plate tectonic reconstructions of the Cretaceous and Cenozoic ocean 

basins: Tectonophysics, v. 155, p. 27-48.

Searle, M.P., Windley, B.F., Coward, M.P., Cooper, D.J. W., Rex, 

A.J., Rex, D., Tingdong, Li, Xuchang, Xiao, Jan, M.Q., 

Thakur, V.C., and Kumar, S., 1987, The closing of Tethys and 

the tectonics of the Himalaya: Geological Society of America 

Bulletin, v. 98, no. 6, p. 678-701.

Shah, S.H.A., 1965, Preliminary geological report about structure, 

history, and petroleum prospects of the Sibi reentrant and surrounding regions, western province, Pakistan: Oil and Gas 

Development Corporation, Report on work carried out by geological party no. 2 during the field season 1963-64, 57 p.

————1990, Coal resources of Balochistan, in Kazmi, A.H., and 

Siddiqi, R.A., eds., Significance of the coal resources of Pakistan: Geological Survey of Pakistan and U.S. Geological Survey, p. 63-92.

Shah, S.M.I., ed., 1977, Stratigraphy of Pakistan: Memoirs of the 

Geological Survey of Pakistan, v. 12, 138 p.

Siddiqui, N.K., 1992, Sui Main Limestone, regional geology and 

pressure analysis of a closed system [abs.]: First South Asia 

Geological Congress (GEOSAS), Abstracts, Islamabad, Pakistan, p. 39.

Singh, N.P., 1984, Additions to the Tertiary biostratigraphy of Jaisalmer Basin: Petroleum Asia Journal, p. 106-127'.

Sokolov, B.A., 1964, Geology of the Sor anticline (Sibi reentrant) 

Bolan Pass, District Kalat, West Pakistan: Oil and Gas Development Corporation, Report on work carried out by geological 

party no. 2 during field season 1963-64, 7 p. (on file with the 

Geological Survey of Pakistan, Quetta).

Subhani, A.M., Jaleel, Asad, and Durrazai, M.I., 1986, Suture associated metallogeny in LasBela-Khuzdar-Baluchistan: Lahore, 

Pakistan, Punjab University, Institute of Geology, First 

Advanced School in Geology, Himalayan Research Centre, 

Khanspur, Volume of Abstracts, no. 29, p. 28-89.

Vredenburg, E.W., 1909, Report on the geology of Sara wan, Jhalawan, Mekran and the State of Las Bela, considered principally
SELECTED REFERENCES 73

from the point of view of economic development: Records of 

the Geological Survey of India, v. 38, pt. 3, p. 189-215.

Waheed, Abdul, and Wells, N.A., 1990, Changes in paleocurrents 

during the development of an obliquely convergent plate 

boundary (Sulaiman fold-belt, southwestern Himalayas, westcentral Pakistan): Sedimentary Geology, v. 67, p. 237-261.

Warwick, P.D., and Javed, Shahid, 1990, Quality and character of 

Pakistan coal, in Kazmi, A.H., and Siddiqi, R.A., eds., Significance of the coal resources of Pakistan: Geological Survey of 

Pakistan and U.S. Geological Survey, p. 127-135.

Warwick, P.D., Javed, Shahid, Mashhadi, T.A., Shakoor, Tariq, 

Khan, A.M., and Khan, A.L., 1995, Lithofacies and 

palynostratigraphy of some Cretaceous and Paleocene rocks, 

Surghar and Salt Range coal fields, northern Pakistan: U.S. 

Geological Survey Bulletin 2096, 35 p.

Warwick, P.D., Johnson, E.A., and Khan, I.H., 1993, Paralic and 

marine facies of the Ghazij Formation; evidence for Eocene 

tectonism along the northwestern margin of the Indian Plate: 

Society for Sedimentary Geology, Stratigraphic Record of 

Global Change, Abstracts with Program, p. 60.

Warwick, P.D., Johnson, E.A., and Khan, I.H., 1998, Collisioninduced tectonism along the northwest margin of the Indian 

subcontinent as recorded in the upper Paleocene to middle 

Eocene strata of central Pakistan (Kirthar and Sulaiman

Ranges): Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 

(PALAEO), v. 142, p. 201-216.

Warwick, P.D., Johnson, E.A., Khan, I.H., and Kazim, M.A., 1994, 

Principal reference section for part of the Eocene Ghazij Formation, Gishtari Nala area, Mach coal field, Balochistan, Pakistan: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map 

MF-2263-E.

Warwick, P.D., and Wardlaw, B.R., 1992, Paleocene-Eocene 

stratigraphy in northern Pakistan; depositional and structural 

implications [abs.]: Programme and Abstracts, 7th HimalayaKarakoram-Tibet Workshop, April 6-8, 1992, Department of 

Earth Science, Oxford University, England, p. 97.

Warwick, P.D., and Wardlaw, B.R., eds., in press, Potwar regional 

framework assessment studies, Pakistan: U.S. Geological Survey Project Report (IR)PK-109, and U.S. Geological Survey 

Bulletin 2078.

Wells, N.A., 1984, Marine and continental sedimentation in Early 

Cenozoic Kohat Basin and adjacent northwestern Indo-Pakistan: Ann Arbor, Mich., University of Michigan Ph. D. thesis, 

465 p.

Williams, M.D., 1959, Stratigraphy of the lower Indus Basin, West 

Pakistan: Proceedings of the Fifth World Petroleum Congress, 

Geology and Geophysics, Section I, Paper 19, p. 377-394.

Manuscript approved for publication February 9, 1998 

Published in the Central Region, Denver, Colorado 

Graphics by Norma J. Maes 

Plate cartography by Mike Kirtley 

Photocomposition by L.M. Carter and Norma J. Maes 

Edited by L.M. Carter
74 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, BALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

APPENDIX. COAL DEPOSITS OF 

NORTHEASTERN BALOCHISTAN

Pakistan contains three main coal-mining regions: (1) 

the Surghar Range and Potwar Plateau in the North West 

Frontier and Punjab Provinces, which are typified by the 

activities west of Makarwal and along the Salt Range; (2) 

the Quetta region in Balochistan Province stretching from 

Mach to Duki; and (3) the area west of Hyderabad in Sindh 

Province. In addition to these three regions, coal has 

recently been discovered in the subsurface of the Thar 

Desert in eastern Sindh Province. With the exception of the 

Eocene coal in Balochistan, all the coal currently mined in 

Pakistan is Paleocene in age. Non-economic coal is locally 

present in Permian strata in the Salt Range, and rarely 

present in Miocene strata in the Sulaiman Range.

Coal is present in the middle part of the Ghazij Formation throughout the greater Quetta region. However, in only 

a few areas is the coal of sufficient thickness to warrant commercial extraction. According to Ahmad and others (1986), 

the coal-bearing part of the Ghazij covers about 10,000 km2 . 

Coal rank ranges from subbituminous B to high-volatile B 

bituminous, with averages of ash 13.59 percent, sulfur 4.99 

percent, and heat value 9,816 Btu/lb (Warwick and Javed, 

1990). Most of the place names mentioned in this discussion 

can be found in figure 2.

According to Khan and others (1972), coal was first discovered in Balochistan in 1870 by Sir R. Sandeman in the 

Chamalang River valley near Bahlol. Coal was next discovered in areas adjacent to the valley that connects Khost, 

Sharing, and Harnai, and with the western extension of a narrow-gauge railroad through this area in the 1880's, coal mining became an important commercial endeavor. With the 

exception of the Pir Ismail Ziarat coal field, mining in most 

other areas had commenced by the turn of the century.

Coal from Balochistan is considered the best in Pakistan 

because of its relatively high rank. But why is the rank so 

high in this region? Three processes are generally thought to 

account for increase in coal rank: (1) tectonic squeezing, (2) 

depth of burial, and (3) proximity to an igneous intrusion. In 

support of the first process, Hunting Survey Corporation 

(1960) reported that coal rank in Balochistan increases with 

structural deformation. As mentioned by Ahmad and others 

(1986), compressional forces expel moisture and volatile 

matter, and in so doing might increase the carbon content. 

This process could explain the northwest increase in coal 

rank in the Khost-Shahrig-Harnai area, as discussed by 

Ghaznavi (1990); this area lies in the general direction of 

increased tectonism from the Himalayan orogeny. In regard 

to process 2, Ghaznavi (1990) estimated that the Ghazij Formation in the Khost-Shahrig-Harnai area could have been 

buried under as much as 6,000 m of younger rocks in the 

past, and that even a geothermal gradient as low as 2° C per 

100 m could result in increased maturation. Igneous intrusions (factor 3) are generally absent from Balochistan.

The validity of some reported coal quality values cited 

herein must be viewed with caution. Because of differences 

in sampling techniques, shipping methods, and laboratory 

procedures, it is problematic to compare one set of values 

with another set. Also, only the salient values are mentioned. 

For more details on the analyses, consult the references provided.

SPECIFIC COAL FIELDS

Coal has been extracted from many sites throughout 

Balochistan, but in this report we summarize only the major 

deposits. For a more complete listing refer to Hunting Survey Corporation (1960).

DUKI

The Duki coal field is centered southwest of Duki about 

60 km east northeast of Harnai. The coal field trends northwest and extends for about 16 km. According to Khan 

(1994), the field covers about 100 km2. Although the presence of coal has been known since 1892, coal remained 

unmined as late as Hunting Survey Corporation's work in 

the late 1950's. The coal field has been discussed by Hunting 

Survey Corporation (1960), Khan and others (1972), Ahmed 

and others (1986), Khan and others (1986), Shah (1990), and 

Khan (1994). The most comprehensive study is by Khan and 

others (1986) and Khan (1994), and much of the information 

given herein is from their work.

The coal is exposed in the north-dipping limb of a westplunging syncline. There are reported to be as many as 17 

coal beds, the most beds present in any coal field in Pakistan, 

and these are grouped into four coal zones. Fifteen of the 

beds are minable. Bed thickness ranges from about 15 cm to 

1.15m.

On an as-received basis, Khan and others (1986) cited 

average ranges as follows: moisture 4-8 percent, volatile 

matter 38-50 percent, fixed carbon 28-42 percent, ash 5-24 

percent, and sulfur 4-6 percent. Calorific value ranges from 

7,992 to 11,706 Btu/lb with an average of about 9,739. Most 

of the coal is subbituminous B and C.

KHOST-SHAHRIG-HARNAI

In the northwest corner of the Sulaiman lobe, coal is 

exposed along a northwest-trending belt of interconnecting 

valleys that stretches for about 100 km. Most of the commercial coal is contained in the Khost-Shahrig-Harnai coal field, 

which extends from near Khost on the northwest to near Harnai on the southeast, a distance of about 56 km (fig. 20). 

According to Khan (1994), the field covers about 200 km2. 

Although Khost is only 54 air kilometers east of Quetta, the
APPENDIX. COAL DEPOSITS OF NORTHEASTERN B ALOCHISTAN 75

only approach from this city involves a circuitous road trip 

involving almost a day's travel. A railroad extends from 

Khost southeast to Sibi and beyond. Mining has occurred in 

this area since 1885, and the area contains one of the largest 

concentrations of coal mines in Pakistan. The coal field has 

been discussed by Gee (1945, 1950), Khan (1950), 

Crookshank (1954), Hunting Survey Corporation (1960), 

Kazi (1968), Landis and others (1971), Ahmad and others 

(1986), Shah (1990), Ghaznavi (1990), and Khan (1994). 

The most comprehensive study of the coal in this field was 

conducted by Ghaznavi (1990) as a Ph. D. dissertation at 

Southern Illinois University, and much of the information 

contained in this section comes from his work. The work of 

Khan (1994) was also used in this section.

Coal beds in the Khost-Shahrig-Harnai coal field range 

from about 8 cm to 2.30 m thick. Although as many as seven 

coal beds have been reported, only three are generally 

thought to be of economic significance. These are referred to 

as the bottom, middle, and top beds. Most coal is mined from 

the middle and top beds. As reported by Ghaznavi (1990), 

the top bed is the most laterally extensive, and ranges from 

23 to 67 cm thick. It is best developed near Sharing; 

mudrock partings in the bed increase toward both Khost and 

Harnai. The middle bed ranges from 23 to 69 cm thick. It 

lies from 30 to 50 m below the top bed near Khost, from 75 

to 80 m below the top bed near Shahrig, and from 10 to 15 m 

below the top bed near Harnai. Mudrock partings are present 

near Khost and Harnai, and these increase from both directions toward Shahrig. In general, the partings are thinner 

than those in the top bed, and some partings consist of sandstone.

Coal from this field is relatively high in ash and sulfur. 

Ghaznavi (1990) reported as-received values from 35 samples taken from the middle and upper beds. Ash averages 21 

percent with a maximum of 25 percent, and sulfur averages 

8.8 percent with a maximum of 17 percent. The coal is also 

comparatively high in volatile matter, hydrogen, and nitrogen. Calorific values range from 6,773 to 13,023 Btu/lb with 

an average of 10,114. This coal field contains the highest 

rank coal in Pakistan. In general, the coal is high-volatile C 

bituminous near Harnai, high-volatile B bituminous near 

Shahrig, and high-volatile A bituminous near Khost. Coal 

petrography reveals that vitrinite group macerals are abundant and inertinite macerals are quite rare (Ghaznavi, 1990).

SOR RANGE

The northwest-trending Sor Range is about 21 km long 

and, structurally, consists of a northwest-plunging syncline 

involving the Ghazij and Kirthar Formations in the limbs, 

and Neogene deposits in the core. The southwest side of 

this structure has been cut by a range-parallel fault that is 

partly covered by Quaternary deposits. As viewed from the 

northeast, resistant limestone of the Kirthar forms a

semicontinuous cliff along the top of the range, and softer 

mudrock of the Ghazij makes up the lower slopes. The Sor 

Range coal field is spread along the northeastern flank of 

the range, and is generally thought of as including three 

areas: the northern and central part of the range, Sinjidi, and 

Daghari (fig. 22). According to Khan (1994), the field covers about 50 km". The north end of the coal field lies only 

13 km east of Quetta, and Daghari, at the south end of the 

coal field, lies about 27 km southeast of Quetta. Some coal 

has been mined east of Sinjidi near the village of Margat 

(Khan and others, 1912), but this area is usually not considered part of the Sor Range coal field. The Sor Range coal 

field has been discussed by Gee (1945, 1950), Khan (1950), 

Crookshank (1954), Hunting Survey Corporation (1960), 

Landis and others (1971), Khan and others (1972), Ahmed 

and others (1986), Shah (1990), Kazim and others (1991), 

and Khan (1994). The most recent study of this coal field is 

that by Kazim and others (1991), and much of the information following is from their report.

Plate 2 shows stratigraphic sections of the middle part of 

the Ghazij along the entire length of the Sor Range. In this 

stratigraphic framework, the spatial relations between 

mudrock intervals, sandstone bodies, and coal beds are easily 

seen. Kazim and others (1991) reported the presence of as 

many as five coal beds in the Sor Range ranging from a few 

centimeters to 8.5 m thick. Only two of these are minable, 

and are referred to as the bottom bed and the top bed. 

According to Hunting Survey Corporation (1960), the thickness of these two beds ranges from about 0.6 m to 2.74 m 

with the bottom bed averaging about 1.37 m and the top averaging about 0.76 m. Most coal is extracted from the bottom 

bed.

Coal from the Sor Range is relatively low in sulfur and 

ash. Landis and others (1971) reported on the analyses of 

28 coal samples collected from the Sor Range between 1956 

and 1969. On an as-received basis, ash ranges from 2.7 to 

14.1 percent and sulfur ranges from 0.4 to 5.6 percent. 

Khan and others (1972) reported that averages from 22 of 

these samples are ash 6.7 percent and sulfur 2.6 percent. 

Calorific values as reported by Landis and others (1971) 

range from 8,690 to 10,900 Btu/lb with an average of 

10,098. Most of the coal is subbituminous A. Kazim and 

others (1991) noted that the coal contains from 75 to 85 

percent vitrain, from 5 to 12 percent durain, from 5 to 8 

percent clarain, and from 3 to 8 percent fusain.

PIRISMAIL ZIARAT

The Pir Ismail Ziarat coal field is located about 45 km 

southeast of Quetta in the Narwari Valley (fig. 23), and is the 

newest coal mining area in Pakistan. According to Khan 

(1994), the field covers about 20 km2 . Several small-scale 

enterprises extracted coal for local use during the 1950's, but 

larger mining efforts did not begin until the late 1960's. The
76 LOWER EOCENE GHAZIJ FORMATION, B ALOCHISTAN, PAKISTAN

coal field has been discussed by Ahmed and others (1986), 

Shah (1990), Landis (1994), and Khan (1994). Of these, 

Landis (1994) contains the most useful data, and much of the 

information in this section comes from his report.

Because Pir Ismail Ziarat is a relatively new coal field, 

details of the coal are still quite sketchy. For example, it is 

still uncertain how many coal beds are present. Most workers think the number of minable beds is between two and 

five. Landis (1994) reported that in the southern part of the 

coal field two coal beds are mined. The lower bed averages 

0.75 m in thickness, and the upper bed, 180-300 m higher in 

the stratigraphic section, averages about 0.6m. In the northern part of the coal field near the village of Pir Ismail Ziarat, 

detailed work by Johnson and Khan (1994b) revealed the 

presence of 10 coal horizons, each consisting of one or two 

beds. The stratigraphic separation between the base of the 

lowest bed and the top of the highest bed is 262 m. Bed 

thickness ranges from 6 to 92 cm and at least three beds are 

minable.

Coal is present north of the main part of the coal field at 

two sites, Sherki Kach and Ghate (fig. 23). In the Sherki 

Kach area only one coal bed, about 1 m thick, is mined. In 

the Ghate area two beds are present, but only the upper bed 

is mined. This bed is locally as thick as 2.4 m, but it is usually less than 1 m thick.

According to Landis (1994), as-received analyses of 

13 samples collected from the Pir Ismail Ziarat coal field 

revealed that the coals are medium to high in ash and high 

in sulfur. Ash content ranges from 3.7 to 37.1 percent with 

an average of 13 percent, and sulfur content ranges from 2.2 

to 6.0 percent with an average of 4.3 percent. Calorific 

value ranged from 7,450 to 10,840 Btu/lb with an average 

of 10,100. Coal from the southern part of the field is highvolatile C bituminous, and coal from the northern part, 

including the Sherki Kach and Ghate areas, is subbituminous A.

MACH

The town of Mach is located about 48 km southeast of 

Quetta, and coal is mined to the south, west, and north of this 

community. A railroad connecting Quetta with Sibi runs 

through Mach. Coal is also mined near Ab-i-Gum about 10 

km to the southeast, but this area is not usually considered 

part of the Mach coal field. According to Shah (1990), the 

field covers about 50 km". The coal field has been discussed 

by Gee (1945, 1950), Khan (1950), Hunting Survey Corporation (1960), Khan and others (1972), Ahmad and others 

(1986), Ahmad and Kazim (1987), Shah (1990), and Khan 

(1994).

According to Shah (1990) as many as 17 coal beds 

might be present in this area, ranging in thickness from a few 

centimeters to 1.5 m, but only two or three beds, usually less 

than 1 m thick, are being mined.

The most recent coal quality data appears in Shah 

(1990), but it is unclear who conducted the analyses. On an 

as-received basis, ash content ranges from 9.6 to 20.3 percent, sulfur ranges from 3.2 to 7.4 percent, and calorific 

value ranges from 9,900 to 10, 500 Btu/lb. Coal rank ranges 

from subbituminous C to subbituminous B.

LESS SIGNIFICANT SITES

Coal has been reported in the Ghazij Formation just 

north of Bahlol about 80 km east of Duki (Crookshank, 

1954; Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960; Khan and others, 

1972; Shah, 1990). Only a few beds are present, and their 

thicknesses range from 3 to 76 cm. Minor coal is also 

reported near Bela Dhaka about 30 km northeast of Bahlol 

(Hunting Survey Corporation, 1960).

Northwest of the Khost-Shahrig-Harnai coal field, the 

Ghazij is exposed in the core of an anticline that extends 

northwest almost to Kach before turning southwest and continuing to within 10 km of Quetta. Some minor coal mining 

is conducted along this trend. Landis (1994) reported the 

mining of one bed about 1 m thick near the west end of the 

trend. Near the east end of the trend, two beds are present, 

an upper bed about 1 m thick and a lower bed about 75 cm 

thick. At the time of Landis' visit only the lower bed was 

being mined. As-received analyses of three coal samples 

collected from the western part of the trend are high in ash, 

about 18 percent, and high in sulfur, about 5.6 percent. Calorific value is about 10,320 Btu/lb on an equilibrium moisture basis, and the coal has a rank of high-volatile C 

bituminous. Two samples collected from the eastern part of 

the trend were considered unreliable by Landis, but a rank of 

high-volatile A or B bituminous was suggested for this area.

Vredenburg (1909) and Hunting Survey Corporation 

(1960) mentioned the presence of coal near the small village 

of Abigul about 60 km south of Quetta. Landis (1994) 

reported that a small patch of Ghazij is exposed in the area, 

and that the analyses of two samples revealed one to be coaly 

carbonaceous shale and the other to be lignite A.

Coal is present in the Ghazij near the village of Johan 

about 93 km south of Quetta. Mention of this was made by 

Vredenburg (1909), Crookshank (1954), Khan and others 

(1972), and Hunting Survey Corporation (1960). According 

to the Geological Survey of Pakistan, coal beds in this area 

are strongly lenticular, and the maximum thickness is 26 cm. 

Except for one small entry on a 2.5 cm bed, we observed no 

evidence of mining. Landis (1994) commented that what 

coal is present is too weathered for meaningful chemical 

analysis.

Of special interest is the rumored presence of coal in 

Rodangi Nala about 75 km southwest of Quetta, in the Paleocene and Eocene Rodangi Formation. Landis (1994) 

reported that during a short reconnaissance of the area, only 

three beds of coaly carbonaceous shale could be found.

* U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1999 — 773-051 / 20139 Region No. 8