TlHiriAJV FVCfKti )V TilK HIMALAYAN TttlAS. 
139 
corresponding deposits in the Himalayan region. Those which are 
equivalent to the Dachsteinkalk of the Himalayan series are developed 
in a facies of white, dolomitic limestone. Their thickness and horizon- 
tal distribution is considerable, but the complete absence of fossils 
lessens their interest. 
All the remaining exotic blocks agree in their mode of development 
with the red limestones and marbles of the Hallstatt facies in the Aljjine 
region. Those of Lower Triassic and Muschelkalk age exhibit close 
faunistic affinities with the corresponding beds of the Himalayan facies 
from which they differ only lithologically. But in the carnic stage 
there is both a faunistic and lithological contrast with the Himalayan 
series, and a very close affinity with the middle and upper carnic faunae 
of the Mediterranean zoo -geographical province. 
Among the liassic fossils of the Tibetan facies the Mediterranean 
affinities are marked still more strongly than in the Trias, the differ- 
ence between the liassic faunae of England or Wurtemberg and those o£ 
the Alps being even more conspicuous than between the latter and the 
lower liassic ammonites of the Tibetan facies found in the exotic blocks. 
If no other Mesozoic fauna; in the Himalayas were known than those 
of the carnic stage from the exotic block No. 2, and of the Lower Lias 
from the blocks Nos. 16 and 17, their knowledge would not justify the 
establishment of an Indian zoo-geographical province. 
Whereas an independent development of the Mesozoic faunae is 
noticed in the Eastern basin of the Tethys, which corresponds to the 
main belt of the Himalayas compared with th j development in the 
Mediterranean region, the contrast between them is almost obliterated 
in the area of the Tibetan facies. To the north of the main belt 
of the Himalayas sediments were deposited of a nearly uniform 
lithologica' character, agreeing with the Hallstatt facies of the 
Mediterranean province, and the sea was inhabited by a fauna with in- 
significant local peculiarities during carnic and liassic times. 
This striking lithological and faunistic agreement, which exists 
between a considerable part of the Mesozoic sediments of the Tibetan 
facies and the homotaxial beds of the Mediterranean region, is one of 
the most interesting facts in Himalayan stratigraphy. It cannot be 
explained satisfactorily by the hypothesis that the "xotic blocks in 
.\Ialla Johar are not found in situ but have been carried there from a 
territory lying much further to the north. This hypothesis which has 
( 340 ) 
