811
ANNALS OF GEOPHYSICS, VOL. 47, N. 2/3, April/June 2004
Key words earthquakes – historical seismicity –evaluation of completeness and accuracy of knowl-edge on seismicity
1. Introduction
Understanding of the completeness of mod-ern knowledge on seismic history is essentialfor correct seismic hazard assessment. Seismichistory is carried in earthquake catalogues andevents based on macroseismic data present themost long-term part of it: they have a crucialimportance, even if the number of events in in-strumental catalogues is much more. Tradition-ally, completeness of a catalogue is evaluatedusing magnitude-frequency graphs: it is be-lieved that the data for a given time-period iscomplete in the linear part of graph (for exam-ple, Bune and Gorshkov, 1980). Therefore, thecompleteness of a sample (earthquake cata-logue) is evaluated upon statistics calculated on
this sample (together with some a priori as-sumptions). We suspect certain drawbacks insuch methodology. For example, the assump-tion of magnitude-frequency relationship lin-earity might be wrong for given spatial andtemporal frames of study (even if it is true forthe seismicity in a whole). In this paper, the po-tential duration of historical earthquake studiesin Russia is assessed analysing the geopoliticaland socio-cultural conditions in the country.
History of earthquake study is not simply a se-quence of publications of earthquake catalogues;first of all, it is a development of ideas, generalapproaches and techniques. To understand state-of-the art and future perspectives, the history ofmacroseismic studies in Russia is analysed.
Macroseismic studies are of special impor-tance for seismic hazard assessment of low ac-tive territories, because instrumentally recordedevents are very few or absent. Regional seismo-metric networks usually are far from low activeareas and when the network registers small ormoderate earthquakes, accurate data processingis very difficult. In platforms, especially nearlarge rivers, the problem is complicated by thepresence of active exogenous phenomena(landslides, karsts), which can produce falseevents in earthquake catalogues.
History of earthquake studies in Russia
Ruben TatevossianJoint Institute of Physics of the Earth, Russian Academy of Science, Moscow, Russia
AbstractTo evaluate the completeness of modern knowledge on historical seismicity it is necessary to know the generalgeopolitical and socio-cultural background in the country. It determines the possibility to record the evidence ofan earthquake and conserve the record in original form for a long time-period. The potential duration of histor-ical earthquake study in Russia is assessed based on these considerations. Certain stages of earthquake study inRussia have been detected. Specific problems of seismicity studies of low active areas are discussed as an ex-ample of Russian platform. The value of each (even moderate magnitude) event becomes crucial for seismic haz-ard assessment in such territories. A correct identification of event nature (tectonic earthquake or exogenous phe-nomena – landslides, karsts, etc.) is practically impossible without using primary sources with detailed descrip-tions. Occurrence of modern earthquakes can be used to assess the accuracy of historical seismicity knowledge.
Mailing address: Dr. R. Tatevossian, Joint Institute ofPhysics of the Earth, Russian Academy of Sciences, B.Gruzinskaya 10, 123995 Moscow, Russia; e-mail:[email protected]
812
Ruben Tatevossian
The goals of the paper are: i) to evaluate thepotential historical duration of earthquake stud-ies in Russia independent from catalogue statis-tics; ii) to present history, state-of-the-art andperspectives of macroseismology; iii) to discussspecific problems of earthquake studies in lowactive territories.
2. Potential «duration» of historicalearthquake studies in Russia
To be able today to study an earthquake whichoccurred in the past it is necessary for the infor-mation on its effects to have been recorded, con-served in the original form for a long time-period
and this information has to be accessible now. Ex-istence of the whole informative chain depends ongeopolitical and socio-cultural conditions. For ex-ample, the presence of written language, i.e. thecapability of people of writing and so to leavewritten records, essentially raises the chances ofrecording the earthquake. A high cultural level ofsociety provokes interest in natural phenomena:in such society there is a good chance that evenmoderate earthquakes will be reported as some-thing worth mentioning. Frequent invasions of en-emies and damage caused by invaders, dramati-cally decrease the possibilities of records surviv-ing for a long time.
The summary of territorial changes of theRussian state starting from the time of its foun-
Fig. 1. Territorial expansion of the Russian state: a – the first Russian state formed in the 9th century (Kiev Russia);b – independent Russian princedoms established in the next 300 years (Moscow princedom was founded in 1147); c– Russia after forming the centralised state (beginning of the 17th century); d – territories included in Russia in 17thcentury (up to 1689); e – Russia before the World War I; f – regions under strong influence of Russia at the beginning20th century. Dates of two events discussed in this paper are shown: 1839 – a falsequake from Volga River basin; 2001– a moderate magnitude event on the southern part of Russian platform. Verniy (modern Alma-Ata) is indicated in re-lation with the earthquake of 1887 presented as example of preinstrumental stage of earthquake studies in Russia.Numbers on map stand for: 1 – Eastern Carpathia; 2 – Crimea; 3 – Eastern Anatolia and Caucasus.
History of earthquake studies in Russia
dation up to 20th century is compiled based oninformation from Schmidt (1998), Volodikhin(1995), Volodikhin (1997) and Zalesskiy et al.(2001) (fig. 1). The first Russian state wasformed (Kiev Russia, 9th century) on practical-ly aseismic areas of the East-European plat-form: region of Kiev - Chernigov - Pereslavl.During the following 300 years several inde-pendent princedoms appeared on the Russianplatform (Smolensk, Novgorod, Vladimir-Suz-dal, Ryazan, Murom, Moscow): so the develop-ment was toward practically aseismic regions.To the end of this period Russia lost its inde-pendence and underwent Mongol-Tatar rule.The next step of its territorial expansion oc-curred after regaining independence and form-ing a centralised state (15th-16th centuries). Forthe first time, Russia occupied some seismoac-tive lands. As a result of the next expansionseismoactive territories compose its consider-able part (Baikal, Kamchatka, Far East), thoughthese areas were very poorly populated. Sincethat time, Russia permanently expanded its ter-ritory and before World War I it became one ofthe most seismoactive countries in the World.The Russian Empire included such seismoac-tive regions as Eastern Carpathia, Caucasus,Crimea, Eastern Anatolia, Central Asia, Baikal,Altai, Sayans, Kuril Islands, and Kamchatka;under its influence were Northern Iran and alarge part of Mongolia and Northern China.From consideration of spatial changes in Russiamore or less regular occurrence of earthquakeson its territory could be expected starting from1700s. Before that time these territories mightalso be active, as later on, but they were out ofRussia, which gives little chance to have arecord of this activity in Russian sources. Spa-tial changes are not the only important ones.Favourable conditions for recording earthquakemacroseismic effects and conserving the recordare necessary. Some socio-cultural events inRussia affecting these conditions are listed intable I. The information is extracted fromSchmidt (1998), Volodikhin (1995), Volodikhin(1997) and Zalesskiy et al. (2001). Compilationof table I stopped at 1862 because of the foun-dation of the Rumyantsev public library, whichwas later transformed into the Russian State Li-brary. The library subscribted to all the newspa-
pers and bought a copy of each book publishedin Russia. Since that time we have a reliableplace where written sources are stored.
Table II presents the information directly re-lated to the safety of historical materials. Data onall 14 Federal State Archives of Russia is given:date of archive foundation, time period for whichit contains documents and amount of documentsis indicated. Information is taken from the web-site: http://www.rusarchives.ru/federal/list.shtml.
Tables I and II display that starting from1700s conditions were favourable for regularrecording of earthquake reports. At the sametime, some events (table I) give evidence thateven a century later omissions in catalogues arenot excluded because of unrecoverable lossesof information, particularly because of fires.
3. Main stages of earthquake studies
History of earthquake study has never beena permanent progressive flow of ideas, methodsand achievements. To make the presentation ofhistory of earthquake studies in Russia betterstructured certain stages are marked out.
3.1. Preinstrumental / geographical stage(1850-1902)
In the second half of the 19th century a num-ber of destructive earthquakes occurred in the ter-ritory of the Russian Empire and in the vicinity ofits borders: Ararat, 1840; Shemakha, 1859;Erzrum, 1859. They attracted professional andpublic attention, first of all by numerous victimsand destruction (Abich, 1862). As an example ofearthquake study of this stage we present the pub-lication of Mushketov (1890) on Verniy earth-quake, June 9 (May 28 – old style), 1887. Theearthquake was so destructive that special plans tomove the regional capital city of Verniy (modernAlma-Ata) elsewhere have been prepared. Hardlyany modern publication can be compared with theaccuracy with which Mushketov collected andpresented the materials on the earthquake. Map ofVerniy city and a complete list of all buildings (in-cluding construction type) with detailed descrip-tion of damage are presented in the publication.
813
814
Ruben Tatevossian
Today this information could be used for micro-zoning of Alma-Ata. Descriptions are proved by anumber of photos of rather high quality (fig. 2).Data on all localities are summarised in the con-cluding table, which is reproduced here in tableIII. This table contains data, which let us to stepfrom seismic hazard to seismic risk assessment.
The description of macroseismic effects in fullscale (and not only maximal effects extracted fromthe general context) makes it possible today to ap-ply modern statistical methods of data processing.
With the same accuracy and completeness aredocumented manifestations of the earthquake innatural environment (fig. 3).
Data
10th century Slavonic written language entered Russia (988-Christening of Russia).
1037 Compilation of first Russian chronicle in Kiev. Total number of known Russianchronicles: 1500; only 35 of them have survived, they are published in the CompleteCollection of Russian Chronicles (1841-1982).
1147 Moscow founded; in 1177 fire practically completely destroyed the town. Later on, this happened several times. For example, even 30 years after the fire in1571, the territory of Moscow was at least two times less and the population was 8times less than before that. This lasted up to 1820s, when stone/brick buildings start-ed to be built instead of wooden ones.
1408 First All-Russian Chronicle was compiled. It burnt down in fire in 1812 together withthe whole collection of manuscripts of Moscow Society of History and Russian An-tiquity.
1460 ca. Moscow becomes the capital of Russia. Since that time historical documents andarchives have been accumulated there up to the time when new capital was built in1703.
1 March 1564 First Russian printed book was published.
1621 First hand-written newspaper was published (only a few issues appeared in onecopy).
1626 The largest Kremlin archive in Moscow burnt down.
1681 First Russian high educational institution was established.
15 Dec 1702 First issue of a regularly printed newspaper appeared.
16 May 1703 St. Petersburg was founded - future «capital» of Russian Academy of Science, Russ-ian Geographical Society, Permanent Central Seismological Commission.
1714 First public library in St. Petersburg was opened.
1724 First «professional» Russian archive - Archive of Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
27 Dec 1725 Russian Academy of Sciences was founded in St. Petersburg.
1728 First scientific Russian archive - Archive of Academy of Sciences.
1755 University of Moscow was founded; its public library opened in 1756.
1812 Napoleon’s occupation of Moscow, which leads to great damage to written sources.From 20.5 thousands of books and manuscripts of the Moscow University library on-ly 51 books and 12 manuscripts survived.
1862 Rumyantsev public library founded in Moscow (today Russian State Library). In1995 it retained 39 000 000 items.
Table I. Social and cultural events in Russia affecting the historical earthquake studies.
Event
815
History of earthquake studies in Russia
Table II. Federal archives of Russia (sorted by date of reported materials).
Place Archive Foundation year/Period covered
Amount ofdocuments
Moscow Russian State Archive of Ancient Acts 191811th cent.-1917
3313000
Russian State Archive of Military History 19251520-1918
3428676
Russian State Archive of Literature and Arts 194118th cent.-1994
1101400
Russian State Archive of Social and Political History
19191760-1993
1649647
State Archive of Russian Federation 19201800-2000
5447137
Russian State Archive of Audio Documents 19321898-2001
200000
Russian State Military Archive 19201917-1991
3393110
Russian State Archive of Economics 19611917-1994
4098718
Russian State Archive of Film and Photo Documents
1918 863569
Russian State Archive of Modern History 19211922-1991
1232000
Russian State Archive of Science and Technology 1995 ?
St. Petersburg Russian State Archive of Navy 18271659-1940
1218103
Russian State Historical Archive 1922late 18th cent.-1920
6576620
Vladivostok Russian State Historical Archive of the Far East 19431722-1998
500635
Specialists who studied contemporary earth-quakes at such high professional level could notaccept that each catastrophic earthquake has tobe investigated as some random natural phe-nomenon. They wanted to find certain regulari-ties in spatial and temporal distribution of earth-quakes: for this, it was necessary to build earth-quake catalogues, which reflect seismic historyfor as long a time as possible. In 1893, the firstcomprehensive catalogue of Russian earth-quakes was published (Mushketov and Orlov,1893); it included events up to 1887. In the In-
troduction, Mushketov and Orlov explained thereasons why such a catalogue is necessary.These reasons show how little things have beenchanged since that time. In principle, they mightbe copied and passed to any applications of seis-mological project today. Here are the first twosentences of their Introduction:
«Destructive earthquakes recurring from timeto time within the Russian boundaries or neigh-bouring countries often arouse the interest ofRussian society and government; each time whensuch cases happen, expeditions were sent to study
816
Ruben Tatevossian
Table III. Summary table of damage and losses report of 1887, Verniy earthquake compiled by Mushketov(1890).
Locality Population Number of buildings before the earthquake
Number ofdestroyed, or
heavily damagedbuildings
Losses in roubles of
Real estate Moveable property
City of Verniy 21000 1799 1798 1136889 476400
Village B. Almatin-skaya together withM. Almatinskaya
6491 972 347 331930 26225
Lubovniy 1293 232 25 25792 8135
Kazansko-Bogorodskoe 959 120 118 21571 387
Sofiyskaya 3568 576 265 10867 298
Nadezhdinskiy 2239 313 52 800 60
Mikhailovskoe 1352 487 55 331 -
Malovodnoe 242 70 15 331 -
Zaitsevskoe 1393 332 46 637 -
Karasuyskoe 21 16 15 897 -
Kutentaiskoe 102 18 18 375 -
Iliyskiy 275 73 15 1313 -
Sazanovskoe 1111 137 22 3495 -
Uital 178 27 1 290 -
Total 40394 5172 2792 1535518 511505
Fig. 2. Example of documentation of damage in Verniy (photos from Mushketov, 1890). We can clearly see the typeof construction and damage.
817
History of earthquake studies in Russia
compiled a table which is reproduced here(table IV). Completeness is evaluated based onanalysis of sources of information. Never afterthat in Russian catalogues of historical seis-micity (including recent ones) has such ananalysis been presented. Very impressive is al-so the size of territory for which informationon earthquakes was presented. Only 80 yearslater in the USSR a large team from all seis-mological institutions all over the countrycould carry out a project in which spatialframes might be compared with the area cov-ered by the catalogue of Mushketov and Orlov.
The catalogue is descriptive. Sources ofeach entry are given. This was the first cata-logue of Russian Empire earthquakes, so theauthors were not able to copy and post entriesfrom other earlier published catalogues (ex-cept for earthquakes in boundary regions). Asa result, the work is based mainly on primarysources (archive materials, newspapers, etc.).
the destructive consequences of earthquakes,with the idea of establishing permanent seismicobservations, even money has been found to alle-viate the results of natural calamity. But, alas, re-gardless of such temporary excitation, earthquakestudy in Russia did not go forward, and interesttoward them gradually subsides, as soon as un-derground shocks calm down». The goal of thecatalogue was formulated by the same authors asfollows: «Protection from earthquakes is impos-sible without knowledge of their geographicaldistribution». (Note that here and elsewhere cita-tions and descriptions in English are translatedfrom Russian by the author).
It is not by chance that the Imperial RussianGeographical Society became the sponsor andorganiser of the seismological studies. So, thisperiod of pre-instrumental stage we can alsocall the period of geographical seismology.
Mushketov and Orlov (1893) discussed theproblem of catalogue completeness. They
Fig. 3. Example of documenting macroseismic effects on natural environment (photo from Mushketov, 1890).Arrows point the edges of the landslide.
818
Ruben Tatevossian
But this was not a special goal of compilers:when it was possible to use information frompublished catalogues (Abich, 1882; Perrey,1843; Mallet and Mallet, 1858) they did.
The milestone achievements of this stageare comprehensive studies of contemporarystrong earthquakes and compilation of the firstdescriptive earthquake catalogue of the Russ-ian Empire. It is natural to put the end of thepreinstrumental stage in 1902, when in St. Pe-tersburg the Permanent Central SeismologicalCommission (PCSC) had been established themain goal of which was organisation of instru-mental observations.
3.2. Early instrumental stage (1902-1914)
Before the foundation of PCSC, the Tempo-rary Seismological Commission acted for oneyear using as a model the corresponding Britishservice. Since 1902 annual bulletins have beenpublished. The first one included data from fiveseismic stations (Irkutsk, Nikolaev, Tashkent,
Tiflis, Yurev) and from two astronomic obser-vatories where seismological observations werecarried out (Kharkov and Pavlovsk) (Levitski,1902). The instrumental observations werestarted by specialists who had great experiencein macroseismic investigations. Probably be-cause of that, macroseismic and instrumentaldata were put in bulletins together. This reflectsthe assumption of the fact, that the object ofstudy – earthquake – is unique, so for its com-prehensive understanding it is necessary to de-scribe different manifestations of the events, in-cluding macroseismic effects. Alas, such an«integrated» understanding of the problem wassoon lost: seismologists had an impression(partly illusionary) that the instrumental dataare much more accurate and absolutely suffi-cient for comprehensive earthquake investiga-tion. When the changes in PCSC administrationin 1912 macroseismic information had a sup-plementary role.
The most important achievement at thisstage of earthquake study was in putting theinstrumental and macroseismic data collec-
Region / Country Year of first entry
Year from whichregular information
is available
Total event number
Event number in regular part
China 596 B.C. 1485 710 558
Eastern Siberia 1700 1700 549 549
Western Siberia 1734 1761 36 35
Caucasus 715 1801 590 555
Central Asia together with Bukharaand Khiva 1716 1820 202 200
North of European Russia 1670 1742 27 26
Urals 1788 1788 20 20
European Russia 1000 1807 148 111
Turkish and Persian territories adjacent to Caucasus
1843 1843 121 121
Table IV. Evaluation of data completeness of the earthquake catalogue from Mushketov and Orlov (1893).
819
History of earthquake studies in Russia
tion, systematisation, conservation and distri-bution on a regular basis. As an end of thestage, the year 1914 could be pointed whenthe sequence of political and social shocksfollowed: World War I, Revolutions, CivilWar, which practically blocked earthquakestudies in Russia up to mid 1920s. We cancall the period 1914-1925 as an empty one forRussian seismology.
3.3. Regional stage (1925-1961)
Because of hard socio-economic situation(also, probably, because of the absence of aleader) it was impossible to organise large All-Union projects comparable spatially with theMushketov and Orlov catalogue. But interest inseismic history in mid 1920s was very high. Itwas warmed by occurrence of such destructiveearthquakes as Leninakan (1926) and Crimea(1927). The investigations of that time were ona regional scale. A number of catalogues on theseismic history of Armenia (Stepanyan, 1942),Azerbaijan (Malinovskiy, 1935), Lesser Cau-casus (Bius, 1948), Turkmenia (Gorshkov,1947) and many others had been compiled. Asan example of regional catalogue, publicationof Bius (1948) is presented.
Bius (1948) is a descriptive catalogue,though it already contains the very first steptoward parameterisation. Earthquake parame-ters are not determined, but for many cases in-tensities in localities are evaluated in degreesof macroseismic scale. Bius used the MCS in-tensity scale, a description of which he includ-ed in the Introduction. This was the mostwidely used scale in the 1940s. Macroseismicscales are an important part of quantitative de-scription in earthquake studies; their develop-ment is an inherent and essential part of thehistory of earthquake studies. But this is sucha huge and specific problem that requires aspecial analysis in separate paper: here we willonly mention which scales were used in par-ticular studies.
At this stage, investigators met severalproblems, hard for historical seismology alsotoday. Bius put in the introduction to the cat-alogue a table of localities, which had been
renamed for political reasons (first of all –because of the revolution of 1917). This isanother example of how tightly the geopolit-ical and socio-cultural background in thecountry is linked to studies of past earth-quakes. To give an impression of the problema table from Bius (1948) is reproduced here(table V). It has to be stressed that these arerenamings of localities only in Lesser Cauca-sus before 1948 (and, as pointed by Bius, thelist is not complete even for them). Since thattimes at least three waves of renamings havepassed: today only very few localities carrythe same name as is written in column «Mod-ern name» of table V. A lot of names in orig-inal sources cannot be identified today.
Sources are given for each entry in thecatalogue. Using primary sources was notconsidered something of special importance.Because the time before 1887 is covered bythe Mushketov and Orlov catalogue, it com-prises the basic (and often the single) sourceof information for earthquakes of that time.But for a later time Bius had to work mainlywith primary sources (there were no pub-lished catalogues, except those of Stepanyan(1942) and Malinovskiy (1935) from wheredata on Armenian and Azerbaijan earth-quakes could be copied).
The main achievement of this stage wascompilation of several regional catalogues.They guarantee (as much, as they could) con-tinuity of macroseismic information accumu-lation, which was started by Mushketov andOrlov in the 1850s. The basis for the nextstage of earthquake study was formed. Theproblem appeared in this stage is related tothe scale level of works. In each region, datawas collected, systemised and analysed ac-cording to different procedures. It leads to ac-cumulation of inhomogeneous materials(though, rather homogeneous within the sameregion). The end of this stage is marked bypublication by Shebalin (1961) of the papertitled «Intensity, magnitude and source depthof earthquakes» in the first issue of «Earth-quakes in the USSR» which later on becameannual. From this publication started the eraof parametric macroseismic catalogues inRussia.
820
Ruben Tatevossian
Modern name Old name/names
Agara TanatubaniAlabashly KaraeryAragats AlagezArbat PerekeshkulBogdanovka KhojabekiGavazy Upper BezhanyGashperdy AkhakhibulaGegechkori Martvili; NaogaleviGoris GerusyDmitrovka SalimErevan Erivan’Ijevan KaravansarayKalinino VorontsovkaKaradonly BagramtapaKaryagino Karabukag; SardarKirovabad Gyanja; Elisavetpol’Kirovakan Big KarakilisKrasnye Kolodtsy Tsarskie KolodtsyKrasnoselsk Krasnoe Selo; MikhalovkaKulevi Redut KaleMaylya Kumani (island)Leninakan AleksanropolLikhi VarvatinoBolnisi Luksemburg; EkaterinenfeldMartuni KhonashenMakharadze OzurgetiMayakovskiy Bagdadi
Modern name Old name/names
Mikha Tsakhakaya AkhalsenakiMikuzani DzeganiNazarashen Gaji Nazar KuliOktomber SardarabadPsirtskha Noviy AfonRozenfeld MarienfeldSabirabad PetropavlovkaSevan ElenovkaStalinir TskhinvaliStepanavan JelaloglyStepanakert KhankendyTabatskuri KizilkilisaTbilisi TiflisTejisi MinasaskendKhanlar Elenendorf; EleninoKharagouli BelogoryKhashuri MikhailovoKhilly Bozh’i PromyslaTsalka BarmaksizTsebelda ZalharovkaTsulukidzhe KhoniChaikend MikhailovkaShamkhor Annenfeld; AnninoShorzha NadezhdinoShaumyany ShulaveryShroma Mikel Gabriel
problem is in a reasonable evaluation of ac-curacy of parameterisation. The most com-plete realisation of this principle is found inone of the largest seismological projects inthe USSR – (Kondorskaya and Shebalin,1977). An American version of the cataloguewas published in 1982 (Kondorskaya andShebalin, 1982) which included correctionsand addenda to the Russian edition made bycatalogue editors. This publication is consid-ered a most prominent achievement of thisstage and, at the same time, it marks the endof the stage.
3.4. Parametric stage (1962-1982)
The paper by Shebalin (1961) not onlysuggested a set of formulae (macroseismicfield equations) which can be used to deter-mine earthquake parameters based on initialmacroseismic information but also formulat-ed ideology of parametric catalogue compila-tion. The basic principle of the ideology wasthe following: any communication on anearthquake, regardless to its completenessand reliability, can and must be parame-terised into the catalogue entry. The only
Table V. List of renamed localities in the region of Lesser Caucasus from Bius (1948).
821
History of earthquake studies in Russia
From the previous stage the catalogue in-herited the regional principle of organisation: infact, under one cover page are published 14 cat-alogues, each of them has its own team of com-pilers and editors and separate list of sources.Nevertheless, chief editors were able to estab-lish a high level of standardisation in data pro-cessing and presentation of results. The cata-logue has a general introduction, parametricpart, textual descriptions of the most importantevents, list of sources. As a supporting datasetcompilers prepared an «Atlas of isoseismals»(Shebalin, 1974) also compiled according to theregional principle, and never published because
of financial and organizational problems. Allthe intensities in Kondorskaya and Shebalin(1982) and in Shebalin (1974) are given in theMSK64 scale.
Catalogue format and structure are shownfor the case of the 31 December 1899 Akhal-kalak earthquake. It is the largest seismicevent of Javakhet Highland. Information onthe Akhalkalak earthquake is presented in themost complete form: its parametric entry andtextual description are shown in fig. 4a,b, anisoseismal map is plotted in the above men-tioned, unpublished Atlas (fig. 5). Such cata-logue format and structure present complete
Fig. 4a,b. Information on 31 December 1899, Akhalkalak earthquake in Kondorskaya and Shebalin (1982):a) parametric entry with remarks and b) description of macroseismic effects, referring to Bius (1948) as its source.
a
b
822
Ruben Tatevossian
information on earthquake and support para-meterisation at least for the major events inthe given seismotectonic region. The most re-markable achievement of the «total parame-terisation principle» was in transformation ofmacroseismology from a descriptive supple-mentary seismological discipline into one ofthe basic methods for quantitative seismichazard assessment.
3.5. Modern stage (1982-2002)
During the modern stage, earthquakestudies in the USSR developed in two maindirections: extensive (compilation of cata-logues for large areas without giving much
importance to the study of single entries) andintensive (detailed comprehensive analysisof the major earthquakes). Extensive studiesrelated to large international and Russianprojects (Global Seismic Hazard AssessmentProgram – Shebalin and Tatevossian, 1997;Seismic Zoning of Northern Eurasia – Ulo-mov, 1993). Any essentially new ideas andmethods of catalogue compilation were notdeveloped within the extensive approach.Some corrections of parameters were made;false events excluded and omitted onesadded in earlier published catalogues. Usual-ly this was done without referring to newlyfound original sources of information, so, of-ten it is impossible to guess the reasons forcorrections (or, rather, changes). Intensive
Fig. 5. Isoseismal map of 31 December 1899, Akhalkalak earthquake from unpublished Atlas prepared in1974 as supporting dataset for Kondorskaya and Shebalin (1982). According to the legend it is based on datafrom Bius (1948).
823
History of earthquake studies in Russia
Fig. 6. Chronological scheme (reference-tree) of sources from Kondorskaya and Shebalin (1982) on 31 De-cember 1899, Akhalkalak earthquake compiled in Tatevossian et al. (1997). The catalogue of Bius (1948), whichwas the basic source for isoseismal map compilation, is shown in a bold rectangle; in a dashed rectangle is She-balin (1974), which is a ghost root for the catalogue entry; EQ indicates the earthquake origin time; in oval areenclosed sources, which represent primary materials.
studies were based on understanding of thecrucial importance of quality and reliabilityof information sources on historical earth-quakes. Most remarkably these ideas wereformulated within the frames of the interna-tional project Basic European EarthquakeCatalogue and Database (Stucchi et al.,2001). According to them the procedure ofearthquake parameterisation has to startfrom analysis of sources of information donefollowing rigorous historical methods. Pro-cedure of parameterisation itself must be ab-solutely clear and transparent. Cited sourcesin the reference list have to be the ones real-ly used for parameter determination and notjust copied and passed from other publica-tions. As an example of study in Russia doneaccording to these standards we will present
the paper on the Akhalkalak earthquake (Tat-evossian et al., 1997). This demonstrates theproblems which can arise from a too activeimplementation of the total parameterisationprinciple.
Figure 6 from Tatevossian et al. (1997) il-lustrates the chronology of sources given inKondorskaya and Shebalin (1982) for theAkhalkalak earthquake. The list of sourcesincludes publications based on field expedi-tions organised immediately after the earth-quake in its epicentral area and several latercompilations, many of which do not containreferences at all. The list even points tosources published before (!) the occurrenceof the Akhalkalak earthquake (obvious mis-prints). Isoseismal map plotted based on datafrom primary sources is given in fig. 7 (Tat-
824
Ruben Tatevossian
evossian et al., 1997). Comparison with themap in fig. 5 demonstrates that only a smallportion of data accessible for this earthquakewas used in Kondorskaya and Shebalin(1982), which decreases the accuracy and re-liability of parameter assessment.
4. Specific problems of earthquake studiesin the Russian platform
In case of low seismic activity, the role ofeach event in the catalogue becomes crucial forseismic hazard evaluation. This is also true forthe Russian platform. The question arises ofhow accurate and complete is our knowledge onseismicity of this large area where the majorityof the Russian population live today.
The Salsk earthquake occurred on 22 May2001, in the southern part of the Russian plat-form (MS = 4.6): it was felt over a relatively largearea. The earthquake had the maximum observedmagnitude in the region throughout the wholeperiod of historical and instrumental recordings.The seismicity of the epicentral zone before 22May 2001 was represented only by two shockswith magnitudes 2.7 and 3.2 in 1984 and 1996correspondingly. A macroseismic survey of theepicentral area of this earthquake was done andits results are published in Tatevossian et al.(2002). Instrumental and macroseismic epicen-tres are in good agreement; the location error isless than 3-5 km. The position of the Salsk earth-quake is shown in corresponding seismic (fig. 8)and geotectonic (fig. 9) settings. Usually, earth-quake effects in large cities and administrative
Fig. 7. Isoseismal map of 31 December 1899, Akhalkalak earthquake compiled by N.V. Shebalin and N.G. Mokrushina based on materials from primary sources - see the scheme in fig. 5 (from Tatevossian et al., 1997).
825
History of earthquake studies in Russia
Fig. 8. Seismic setting of the 22 May 2001 Salsk earthquake from Tatevossian et al. (2002). Earthquake epi-centres are plotted according to the Earthquake catalogue of Northern Eurasia (Ulomov, 1993) (circle size is pro-portional to earthquake magnitude).
Fig. 9. Tectonic setting of the 22 May 2001 Salsk earthquake from Tatevossian et al. (2002). Tectonic schemefrom Rebai et al. (1993) with simplifications: 1 – reverse faults (triangles point to upthrown wing); 2 – strike-slip faults (arrows show direction of motion); 3 – plate motion direction.
826
Ruben Tatevossian
Fig. 10. «Administrative» data filtering. Hypothetical event, which can appear in the regional catalogue after100 years on the 22 May 2001 Salsk earthquake, if the only information which would survive on that event willbe the one collected by Geophysical Service of RAS (Tatevossian et al., 2002). Intensities at the sites are givenaccording to the Geophysical Service, RAS.
centres attract attention in historical sources,though they might be well away from the epi-centre and zone of maximum effects. This dis-torts the figure of spatial distribution of macro-seismic effects. Such a distortion because ofswitching on the «administrative» filter can befound even when we are dealing with modernearthquakes studied by an official seismologicalbody. Immediately after the Salsk earthquakeGeophysical Service of RAS rapidly collectedinformation on its felt effects (Geophysical Ser-vice of RAS, 2001). The data was acquired fromadministrative centres. The localities and intensi-ties assessed by the Geophysical Service areshown in fig. 10.
Let us make a mental experiment and as-sume that the only information which will sur-vive a hundred years after the Salsk earthquake,will be these rapidly collected communications.If the future seismologist processes these dataaccording to the modern standard procedures hewill locate the epicentre location 100 km awayfrom its actual site, deeper source (15, insteadof 9 km) and magnitude 5.6, which is 1 unitmore than it really was! And he will be satisfied
with the results obtained because the epicentrewill move toward the Stavropol Highland whereearthquakes of similar moderate magnitudes areknown (fig. 8). The location of a false event isalso in better agreement with the general geot-ectonic scheme (fig. 9). And he will be veryhappy, because only in a few cases do we havetoday such a lot of information for historicalearthquakes of this area: intensities are reportedin seven localities (fig. 10).
Those are the measure of distortions associ-ated with «administrative» filter. Another mentalexperiment can illustrate the effect of a poorlypopulated area. Imagine that the Salsk earth-quake occurred 200 years before its actual time,in 1801: which localities in this region couldhave felt this earthquake? Only one – Stavropol,which was founded in 1777! So, this event eitherwill be omitted in the catalogues, or located as amoderate event somewhere near Stavropol.
Another problem complicating historicalearthquake studies in Russia can be illustratedin relation to the Salsk earthquake – a problemof toponymy. During field observations of theSalsk earthquake the macroseismic group visit-
827
History of earthquake studies in Russia
Tabl
e V
I.
Dif
fere
nt v
ersi
ons
of i
nter
pret
atio
n of
the
183
9 Fe
doro
vka,
even
t ba
sed
on d
iffe
rent
dat
aset
s:us
ing
com
plet
e de
scri
ptio
n fr
om p
rim
ary
sour
ce i
n Ta
tevo
s-si
an a
nd M
okru
shin
a (2
003)
and
arb
itrar
y cu
t out
text
fro
m s
econ
dary
com
pila
tion
in O
gaja
nov
et a
l.(2
001)
. Ide
ntic
al p
arts
of
desc
ript
ion
are
mar
ked
in b
old.
Publ
icat
ion
Oga
jano
v et
al.
(200
1)Ta
tevo
ssia
n an
d M
okru
shin
a (2
003)
Supp
ortin
g te
xt«.
..rum
ble,
wav
e-lik
e os
cilla
tions
,fa
lling
of
chim
neys
,pa
rts
of c
on-
stru
ctio
ns,
crac
ks i
n th
e gr
ound
,ve
rtic
al
and
hori
zont
al
disl
oca-
tions
of
laye
rs,
dryi
ng o
f sp
ring
s.70
hou
ses
wer
e da
mag
ed. A
ll th
eva
lley,
on w
hich
maj
or p
art
ofth
e vi
llage
is
loca
ted
was
sep
a-ra
ted
from
the
hill
foo
t an
d su
b-si
ded
rem
arka
bly
and
mov
ed t
oV
olga
...
Not
icea
ble
osci
llatio
nsan
d m
ovin
g of
the
gro
und
last
ed3
days
,th
en e
very
thin
g ca
lmed
dow
n an
d up
to
6 Ju
ly
(old
styl
e) o
nly
subs
iden
ce a
nd d
am-
ages
occ
urre
d fr
eque
ntly
»
«On
larg
e la
ndsl
ide
of th
e ri
ght b
ank
of th
e V
olga
Riv
er in
Khv
alyn
sk d
istr
ict w
ith v
illag
e Fe
doro
v-ka
par
tly s
ituat
ed o
n it.
Sta
te p
easa
nts
have
bee
n w
aken
on
nigh
t fro
m 1
6 to
17
July
183
9 by
sud
den
rum
ble
and
mov
emen
ts o
f th
e gr
ound
aft
er th
at f
ollo
w lo
ud c
rack
les
of th
eir
hous
es. W
ithou
t und
er-
stan
ding
the
reas
ons
for
that
they
run
out
in h
orro
r an
d sa
w th
at a
ll th
eva
lley,
on w
hich
maj
or p
art
of t
he v
illag
e is
loca
ted
was
sep
arat
ed f
rom
the
hill
foo
t an
d su
bsid
ed r
emar
kabl
y an
d m
oved
to V
olga
!C
onfu
sion
of
the
peop
le r
each
ed h
ighe
st l
evel
,whe
n al
l th
e m
ovin
g m
ass
star
ted
to w
ave
and
in s
ome
plac
es li
fted
and
in o
ther
s pu
lled
dow
n ho
uses
- in
a s
hort
whi
le th
roug
hout
all
the
sub-
side
d ar
ea w
ere
form
ed re
mar
kabl
e gr
ound
bul
ging
and
hol
es,v
ast a
nd re
gula
r for
m c
rack
s ha
ve b
uild
raw
of
terr
aces
see
med
art
ific
ially
mad
e w
here
wer
e m
arsh
es a
nd s
mal
l lak
es,h
ills
grew
,in
uplif
ted
part
s fo
rmed
hol
es w
hich
as
mos
t of
the
crac
ks f
illed
with
wat
er. T
he s
urfa
ce a
ppea
rs a
s an
uns
tabl
era
ft. N
otic
eabl
ew
avin
g an
d m
ovin
g of
the
gro
und
last
ed 3
day
s,th
en e
very
thin
g ca
lmed
dow
nan
d up
to
July
6 (
old
styl
e) o
nly
subs
iden
ce a
nd d
amag
e oc
curr
ed f
rom
tim
e to
tim
e.D
urin
g al
l th
e pr
oces
s 70
hou
ses
wer
e da
mag
ed:
som
e de
stro
yed
com
plet
ely,
man
y ho
uses
wer
ecu
t in
to s
ever
al p
iece
s; b
arns
sep
arat
ed a
nd f
ell,
shed
s m
oved
,all
cella
rs w
ere
dest
roye
d; d
estr
uc-
tive
forc
es w
ere
mos
t se
vere
in
thre
shin
g-fl
oors
and
orc
hard
s w
hich
are
nea
r th
e hi
ll. T
his
part
is
cons
ider
ably
hig
her
than
the
villa
ge a
nd d
urin
g su
bsid
ence
eve
ryth
ing
situ
ated
on
it w
as c
ompl
ete-
ly d
estr
oyed
. L
ucki
ly n
obod
y fr
om t
he v
illag
e w
as a
vic
tim.
Frig
hten
ed b
y th
e fi
rst
dam
age
they
lived
all
this
tim
e ou
tdoo
rs a
nd o
nly
now
sta
rted
to r
epai
r ho
uses
and
com
e ba
ck to
live
in th
em.
Subs
iden
ce o
f th
e va
lley
is 1
1/2
vers
ts l
ong
and
250
sazh
ens(
*);
how
far
it
ente
red
into
the
Vol
gaha
s st
ill n
ot b
een
inve
stig
ated
. Tak
ing
into
acc
ount
how
far
fro
m th
e ba
nk V
olga
bec
ame
shal
low
-er
in p
lace
s be
ing
deep
bef
ore,
it ha
s to
be
at le
ast a
s fa
r as
som
e te
ns o
f sa
zhen
s.Fe
doro
vka
villa
ge i
s si
tuat
ed n
ear
the
big
road
fro
m S
imbi
rsk
to S
arat
ov 1
5 ve
rsta
bef
ore
Khv
alyn
sk.
Abo
ve th
is v
illag
e ar
e el
evat
ed ra
ther
hig
h hi
lls,o
n to
p of
whi
ch a
re c
onst
ruct
ed fr
om li
mes
tone
and
foot
from
diff
eren
t typ
es o
f cl
ays
and
piec
es o
f si
licat
e an
d lim
esto
ne r
ocks
. The
val
ley
on w
hich
vill
age
Fe-
doro
vka
is s
ituat
ed b
orde
rs w
ith th
e hi
lls f
rom
the
Eas
t and
per
man
ently
was
hed
by V
olga
Riv
er w
ater
s.Fr
om m
any
spec
ulat
ions
con
cern
ing
this
eve
nt,
the
follo
win
g ha
s to
be
men
tione
d:op
posi
te t
hepl
ace
of s
ubsi
denc
e V
olga
Riv
er is
har
dly
sque
ezed
by
its b
anks
and
it s
eem
s it
cann
ot fi
nd a
spa
cefo
r its
wat
ers
and
was
hed
out t
he r
ight
ban
k,ov
er w
hich
Fed
orov
ka v
illag
e is
situ
ated
; and
bec
ause
this
ban
k is
mos
tly b
uilt
from
allu
vial
dep
osits
,wat
ers
infi
ltrat
e be
twee
n pe
rmea
ble
and
non-
per-
mea
ble
laye
rs o
f gr
ound
mak
e em
pty
spac
es w
hich
wer
e fi
lled
with
the
desc
ribe
d su
bsid
ence
.»
Sour
ceC
ard
cata
logu
e (1
991)
Add
enda
to «
Sara
tov
Reg
iona
l Gaz
ette
»,15
Jul
y 18
39
Inte
rpre
tatio
nI
= 7
-8,M
= 5
.3,H
= 1
0 km
Fals
equa
ke:l
ands
lide
(*)
Rus
sian
old
mea
sure
of
leng
th,e
qual
to 2
.13
m.
828
Ruben Tatevossian
ed four localities named Veseliy. Results ofquery in World map database (Encarta WorldAtlas 1998) reveal 184 localities namedVeseliy, 26 of which are in the Krasnodar re-gion. If we add to this list also localities withslightly altered names (Veselaya, Veseloe) thenwe will get 280 items. Certainly this does notmake earthquake studies an easy task in Russia.
The problem of earthquake identification isalso very hard in platform regions, especiallynear large rivers. Usually, these are regions of ac-tive landslides and other exogenous phenomena,which can produce false earthquakes in cata-logues. This complex problem becomes evenmore complicated when data sources are usedimproperly. Let us consider the event on 29 June(17 June – old style) 1839 near the village Fe-dorovka (middle flow of the Volga River). Twosolutions on this event together with supportingtexts and corresponding sources are given in tableVI: the first interprets the data as a tectonic earth-quake with magnitude 5.3 (Ogajanov et al.,2001), the second, as a landslide (Tatevossian andMokrushina, 2003). The same words in both de-scriptions are marked in bold. The present paperis not intended to discuss all the details of the1839 event, just note how much more completeand detailed is the description in primary sourcecited in Tatevossian and Mokrushina (2003) with-out any omissions.
The description clearly tells that we aredealing with a landslide. Meanwhile arbitrarilyarranged cut out pieces of text enable us to sug-gest that the analysing event might be an earth-quake. Note also the year of publication (1991)used as an information source of the earthquakein 1839 in Ogajanov et al. (2001). This showshow dramatically different conclusions can bedrawn concerning the same event when second-ary sources and arbitrary filtered descriptionsare used.
5. Conclusions
Russia became a seismoactive country start-ing from 1700s. More or less from the same timesocio-cultural conditions developed favourableas a whole for recording earthquake effects andconservation of the records.
Earthquake studies in Russia developedfrom compilation of descriptive catalogues to-ward parametric ones. The remarkable achieve-ment of the principle of «total parameterisation»was in transforming macroseismology from adescriptive supplementary seismological disci-pline into the leading quantitative method ofseismic hazard assessment. But uncontrolledimplementation of this principle together withinsufficient attention paid to the analysis of in-formation sources decreases the reliability of fi-nal evaluations. The following corrections andaddenda to earlier published catalogues do notchange the situation essentially. New perspec-tives in historical earthquake studies come frommore accurate use of primary sources.
Distortions, which come from a differentkind of initial data filtering («administrative»,«arbitrary cut out») can play a dramatic role inseismic hazard assessment of the Russian plat-form. This problem has a little chance of beingsolved without using complete descriptionsfrom primary sources in earthquake studies.
Since the 1960s historical earthquake cata-logue compilation was a part of seismic hazard as-sessment projects. This organisational backgroundis very unfavourable for earthquake studies: per-manent work on collecting and processing ofmacroseismic data is replaced by sporadic activi-ties. At the moment there are no current specialprojects in Russia for historical earthquake stud-ies. Some investigators are receiving contractswith organisations interested in hazard assess-ment, such as the Ministry of Atomic Energy. Themain interest is related to low active territories.The case of 1839 event illustrates one of the rea-sons for that. In no seismoactive region could suchlarge uncertainty in data interpretation be met. Ac-cording to one interpretation, the maximum ob-served magnitude is 5.3, according to another in-terpretation, there was no earthquake at all. Takinginto account the short potential duration ofearthquake studies in Russia together with pos-sible long recurrence times of earthquakes onplatforms, we can easily understand the reasonsfor speculations concerning the historical seis-micity of the Russian platform. It has to bestressed that the overwhelming majority of theRussian population live there. From a certainpoint of view, the Salsk earthquake (Ms = 4.6)
829
History of earthquake studies in Russia
having the maximum recorded magnitude in thesouthern parts of the Russian platform, is moreinformative for hazard assessment, than, say,magnitude 7.5 in the region of the Kuril Islands,where the largest instrumentally recorded eventhad Ms = 8.4 (Shikotan 1969 earthquake).
Acknowledgements
Special thanks to Max Stucchi, who initiatedthis work. It was partly supported by RFBR 02-05-64894 grant. This publication would havebeen impossible without discussions with andcomments received from N.G. Mokrushina, F.F.Aptikaev, Zh. Ya. Aptekman, and S.S. Arefiev.
REFERENCES
ABICH, H. (1862): Earthquakes in Shemakha and Erzrum onMay 1859, Zapiski RGO, 5 (in Russian).
ABICH, H. (1882): Geologie des Armenischen HohlandesWesthalfte, in Geologische Forschungen in den Kauka-sischen Ländern, Wien.
BIUS, E.I. (1948): Seismic conditions of the Lesser Cauca-sus, Part I, Chronology of earthquakes in the LesserCaucasus pp. 304 (in Russian).
BUNE, V.I. and G.P. GORSHKOV (Editors) (1980): Seismiczoning of the USSR territory (Nauka Moskow), pp. 306(in Russian).
GEOPHYSICAL SERVICE OF RAS (2001): Information onthe Salsk earthquake of May 22, 2001 (on line:http://www.ceme.gsras.ru/1251/mainnn.htm).
GORSHKOV, G.P. (1947): Earthquakes of Turkmenia TrudySeismologicheskogo in-ta AN SSSR, 122 (in Russian).
ENCARTA WORLD ATLAS (1998), CD-ROM.LEVITSKI, G. (Editor) (1902): St. Peterburg, Bull Permanent
Central Seismological Commission, pp. 206 (in Russian).KONDORSKAYA, N.V. and N.V. SHEBALIN (Editors) (1977): New
Catalog of Large Earthquakes in the USSR Area (Nauka,Publishing House, Moscow), pp. 536 (in Russian).
KONDORSKAYA, N.V. and N.V. SHEBALIN (Editors) (1982): NewCatalog of Strong earthquakes in the USSR from ancienttimes through 1977 (Boulder, U.S.A.), pp. 608.
MALLET, R.W. (1858): Fourth report upon the facts and the-ory of earthquake phenomena, Report of 28th Meetingof British Association for the Advancement of Science(John Murray, London), 1-136 (plateXI).
MALINOVSKIY, N.V. (1935): Katalog zemletryaseniy v ASSR,Baku, Catalogue of earthquakes in ASSR (in Russian).
MUSHKETOV, I.V. (1890): Vernenskoe zemletryaseniy 28maya (9 iunya) 1887 g. (The Verniy earthquake of May28 (June 9), 1887), Trudy Geologicheskogo Komiteta,X (1), pp. 154 (in Russian).
MUSHKETOV, I.V. and A.P. ORLOV (1893): Katalog zemle-tryaseniy Rossiyskoi Imperii (Catalogue of earthquakes inRussian Empire), Zapiski RGO, 26, pp. 582 (in Russian).
OGAJANOV, V.A., L.S. CHEPKUNAS, R.S. MIKHAILOVA, S.V.SOLOMIN and A.V. USANOVA (2001): O kataloge zem-letryaseniy Srednego i Nizhnego Povolzhya, Zem-letryaseniya Severnoy Evrazii v 1995 g. (On earth-quake catalogue of Middle and Lower Volga), Moscow,119-127 (in Russian).
PERREY, A. (1843): Nouvelles recherches sur les tremble-ments de terre ressentis en Europe, et dans les partiesde l’Afrique et de l’Asie de 1801 à juin 1843, ComptesRendus Acad. Sc., Paris.
REBAI, S., H. PHILIP, L. DORBATH et al. (1993): Active tec-tonics in the Lesser Caucasus: coexistence of compres-sive and extensional structures, Tectonophysics, 12 (5),1089-1114.
SHEBALIN, N.V. (1961): Ballnost, magnituda i glubina ocha-ga zemletryseniy (Intensity, magnitude and sourcedepth of earthquakes), Zemletryseniya v SSSR (Izd-voAN SSSR), 126-138 (in Russian).
SHEBALIN, N.V. (Editor) (1974): Atlas izoseist zemletry-seniy k Novomu katalogu (Archive of Strong eq. Lab.,UIPE RAS, Moscow).
SHEBALIN, N.V. and R.E. TATEVOSSIAN (1997): Catalogue oflarge historical earthquakes of the Caucasus, in Histor-ical and Prehistorical Earthquakes in the Caucasus,edited by D. GIARDINI and S. BALASSANIAN, ILP Publi-cation 333, NATO ASI Ser. 28 (Kluwer Academic Pub-lishers), 201-232.
SCHMIDT, S.O. (Editor) (1998): Moskva, in Enciclopedia(Bol’shaya Rossiyskaya Entsiklopediya Publ., Moscow),p. 974 (in Russian).
STEPANYAN, V.A. (1942): Istoricheskiy obzor o zemletry-seniyakh Armenii i v prilegaushchikh rayonakh (His-torical review on earthquakes in Armenia and adjacentregions), (Erevan, izd-vo AN Arm. SSR), (in Russian).
STUCCHI, M., P. ALBINI, R. CAMASSI, R.M.W. MUSSON andR. TATEVOSSIAN (2001): Main results of the projectBEECD «A Basic European Earthquake Catalogue anda Database for the evaluation of long-term seismicityand seismic hazard», in Seismic risk in the EuropeanUnion, vol. III (Brussels-Luxembourg).
TATEVOSSIAN, R.E. and N.G. MOKRUSHINA (2003): Istorich-eskaya seismichnost Srednego Povolzhya (Historicalseismicity of Middle Volga), Fizika Zemli, 3, 1-29 (inRussian).
TATEVOSSIAN, R.E., P. ALBINI, R. CAMASSI, N.G. MOKRUSHINA,N.V. SHEBALIN and A.E. PETROSSIAN (1997): Analysingand improving supporting dataset of the Akhalkalak, De-cember 31, 1899, earthquake, in Historical and Prehis-torical Earthquakes in the Caucasus, edited by D. GIAR-DINI and S. BALASSANIAN, ILP Publication 333, NATOASI Ser. 28 (Kluwer Academic Publishers), 383-400.
TATEVOSSIAN, R.E., S.S. AREFIEV and K.G. PLETNEV (2002):Macroseismic survey of the Salsk (Russian platform)earthquake of 22 May 2001, Russian J. Earth Sci., 4(2), 163-169.
ULOMOV, V.I. (Editor) (1993): Katalog zemletryseniy Sever-noy Evrazii, Seismichnost i seismicheskoe ray-onirovanie Severnoy Evrazii (Catalogue of earthquakesin Northern Eurasia), vol. 1, pp. 302 (in Russian).
VOLODIKHIN, D. (Editor) (1995): Istoriya Rossii. Ot drevnikhslavyan do Petra Velikogo (History of Russia, From an-cient Slavons up to Peter the Great), in Ensiclopedia(Moscow, Avanta+), vol. 5, part I, p. 670 (in Russian).
830
Ruben Tatevossian
VOLODIKHIN, D. (Editor) (1997): Istoriya Rossii. Otdvortsovykh perevorotov do epokhi Velikikh reform(History of Russia, From palace revolutions up to theepoch of Great reforms), in Ensiclopedia (Moscow,Avanta+), vol. 5, part II, p. 702 (in Russian).
ZALESSKIY, K., E. ANAN’EVA and D. VOLODIKHIN (Editors)(2001): Rossiyskie stolitsy, Moskva i Sankt-Peterburg(Russian capitals Moscow and Saint-Petersberg), inEnsiclopedia (Moscow, Avanta+), additional vol., p.445 (in Russian).
Top Related