Pseudosection modelling is rapidly becoming an essential part of a petrologist's toolkit and often forms the basis of interpreting the tectonothermal evolution of a rock sample, outcrop, or geological region. Of the several factors that can affect the accuracy and precision of such calculated phase diagrams, “geological” uncertainty related to natural petrographic variation at the hand sample- and/or thin section-scale is rarely considered. Such uncertainty influences the sample's bulk composition, which is the primary control on its equilibrium phase relationships and thus the interpreted pressure–temperature (P–T) conditions of formation. Two case study examples—a garnet–cordierite granofels and a garnet–staurolite–kyanite schist—are used to compare the relative importance that geological uncertainty has on bulk compositions determined via (1) X-ray fluorescence (XRF) or (2) point counting techniques. We show that only minor mineralogical variation at the thin-section scale propagates through the phase equilibria modelling procedure and affects the absolute P–T conditions at which key assemblages are stable. Absolute displacements of equilibria can approach ±1 kbar for only a moderate degree of modal proportion uncertainty, thus being essentially similar to the magnitudes reported for analytical uncertainties in conventional thermobarometry. Bulk compositions determined from multiple thin sections of a heterogeneous garnet–staurolite–kyanite schist show a wide range in major-element oxides, owing to notable variation in mineral proportions. Pseudosections constructed for individual point count-derived bulks accurately reproduce this variability on a case-by-case basis, though averaged proportions do not correlate with those calculated at equivalent peak P–T conditions for a whole-rock XRF-derived bulk composition. The main discrepancies relate to varying proportions of matrix phases (primarily mica) relative to porphyroblasts (primarily staurolite and kyanite), indicating that point counting preserves small-scale petrographic features that are otherwise averaged out in XRF analysis of a larger sample. Careful consideration of the size of the equilibration volume, the constituents that comprise the effective bulk composition, and the best technique to employ for its determination based on rock type and petrographic character, offer the best chance to produce trustworthy data from pseudosection analysis

The Mogok metamorphic belt (MMB) extends for over 1500 km along the western margin of the Shan‐Thai block, from the Andaman Sea north to the eastern Himalayan syntaxis. Previous geochronology has suggested that a long‐lasting Jurassic–early Cretaceous subduction‐related event resulted in emplacement of granodiorites and orthogneisses (171–120 Ma) and a poorly constrained Tertiary metamorphic event. On the basis of new U‐Pb isotope dilution thermal ionization mass spectrometry and U‐Th‐Pb laser ablation–multicollector–inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer geochronology presented here, we propose two Tertiary metamorphic events affected the MMB in Burma. The first was a Paleocene event that ended with intrusion of crosscutting postkinematic biotite granite dikes at ∼59 Ma. A second metamorphic event spanned late Eocene to Oligocene (at least from 37, possibly 47, to 29 Ma). This resulted in the growth of metamorphic monazite at sillimanite grade, growth of zircon rims at 47–43 Ma, sillimanite + muscovite replacing older andalusite, and synmetamorphic melting producing garnet and tourmaline bearing leucogranites at 45.5 ± 0.6 Ma and 24.5 ± 0.7 Ma. These data imply high‐temperature sillimanite + muscovite metamorphism peaking at 680°C and 4.9 kbar between 45 and 33 Ma, to around 606–656°C and 4.4–4.8 kbar at 29.3 ± 0.5 Ma. The later metamorphic event is older than 24.5 ± 0.3 Ma, the age of leucogranites that crosscut all earlier fabrics. Our structural and geochronological data suggest that the MMB links north to the unexposed middle or lower crust rocks of the Lhasa terrane, south Tibet, and east to high‐grade metamorphic core complexes in northwest Thailand.

This paper presents a new geological map together with cross-sections and lateral sections of the Everest massif. We combine field relations, structural geology, petrology, thermobarometry and geochronology to interpret the tectonic evolution of the Everest Himalaya. Lithospheric convergence of India and Asia since collision at c. 50 Ma. resulted in horizontal shortening, crustal thickening and regional metamorphism in the Himalaya and beneath southern Tibet. High temperatures (>620 °C) during sillimanite grade metamorphism were maintained for 15 million years from 32 to 16.9 ± 0.5 Ma along the top of the Greater Himalayan slab. This implies that crustal thickening must also have been active during this time, which in turn suggests high topography during the Oligocene–early Miocene. Two low-angle normal faults cut the Everest massif at the top of the Greater Himalayan slab. The earlier, lower Lhotse detachment bounds the upper limit of massive leucogranite sills and sillimanite–cordierite gneisses, and has been locally folded. Ductile motion along the top of the Greater Himalayan slab was active from 18 to 16.9 Ma. The upper Qomolangma detachment is exposed in the summit pyramid of Everest and dips north at angles of less than 15°. Brittle faulting along the Qomolangma detachment, which cuts all leucogranites in the footwall, was post-16 Ma. Footwall sillimanite gneisses and leucogranites are exposed along the Kharta valley up to 57 km north of the Qomolangma detachment exposure near the summit of Everest. The amount of extrusion of footwall gneisses and leucogranites must have been around 200 km southwards, from an origin at shallow levels (12–18 km depth) beneath Tibet, supporting models of ductile extrusion of the Greater Himalayan slab. The Everest–Lhotse–Nuptse massif contains a massive ballooning sill of garnet + muscovite + tourmaline leucogranite up to 3000 m thick, which reaches 7800 m on the Kangshung face of Everest and on the south face of Nuptse, and is mainly responsible for the extreme altitude of both mountains. The middle crust beneath southern Tibet is inferred to be a weak, ductile-deforming zone of high heat and low friction separating a brittle deforming upper crust above from a strong (?granulite facies) lower crust with a rheologically strong upper mantle. Field evidence, thermobarometry and U–Pb geochronological data from the Everest Himalaya support the general shear extrusive flow of a mid-crustal channel from beneath the Tibetan plateau. The ending of high temperature metamorphism in the Himalaya and of ductile shearing along both the Main Central Thrust and the South Tibetan Detachment normal faults roughly coincides with initiation of strike-slip faulting and east–west extension in south Tibet (<18 Ma).