Modern concept of seismic hazard assessment is based on the assumption that what was observed in the past could likely be expected in the future. It could be easily recognized by comparison of spatial distribution of maximum intensity of shaking nbsp;I maxnbsp; from past earthquakes and actual seismic hazard maps. This makes crucially important the re-evaluation of parameters of earthquakes close to the maximum observed ones in a certain area: even a small change of the parameters can affect considerably the final hazard assessment. A case study of the earthquake on 2 June, 1930 in southern Catalonia, Spain, is presented. A comprehensive analysis of macroseismic and instrumental data leads to a good agreement in magnitude re-evaluation. The earthquake magnitude MS is within the interval 4.5-4.8, which is significantly larger than that reported earlier 3.9. Relatively accurate magnitude evaluation allows us also to assess the hypocenter depth to be at 20-30nbsp;km, deeper than it is commonly assumed for this region. Occurrence of large earthquakes in southern Catalonia at various depths from 10nbsp;km to 30nbsp;km reflects the presence of seismogenic structures which are able to produce earthquakes with magnitudes at least as large as 4.5-4.8. Orientation of isoseismals lets us also to suggest that these seismogenic structures are oriented almost perpendicular to strike of topographic elevations, which follow along the seashore. Modern topography does not inherit deep mid and low crust structures.
Earthquake intensity, Iberian Peninsula, Macroseismic analysis, Old seismograms, Seismic hazard assessment.
1. Boore, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., v. 74, 1984.
2. Brune, J. Geophys. Res., v. 75, 1970.
3. Brune, J. Geophys. Res., v. 76, 1971.
4. Dineva, J. Seismology, v. 6, 2002.
5. Grunthal, Cahiers du Centre Europeen de Geodynamique et de Seismologie, vol. 15, 1998.
6. Fontser#xE8;, Publicado de J. Galbis, v. II, 1940.
7. Fontser#xE8;, Bol. Sec. Met. Sis. Obs. Fab., v. V, no. 38, fig. 1, 1951.
8. Hanks, J. Geophys. Res., v. 84, 1979.
9. Hughes, International Seismological Summary for 1930, 1935.
10. Jim#xE9;nez, Annali di Geofisica, v. 42, no. 6, 1999.
11. K#xE1;rnik, Seismicity of the European Area, Part I, edited by D. Reidel, 1969.
12. Keilis-Borok, Sov. Res. Geophys., v. 4, 1960.
13. Kondorskaya, New catalog of strong earthquakes in the USSR from ancient times through 1977, 1982.
14. L#xF3;pez, Fisica de la Tierra, v. 15, 2003.
15. Martinez-Solares, Cat, 2002.
16. M#xE9;zcua, Cat#xE1;logo general de isosistas de la Peninsula Ib#xE9;rica, 1982.
17. M#xE9;zcua, Sismicidad del area Ibero-Mogrebi, no. 203, 1983.
18. Moskvina, Izv. Akad. Nauk. USSR, Physics of the Earth, v. 23, no. 1, 1987.
19. Munuera, Datos b#xE1;sicos para un estudio de sismicidad en el #xE1;rea de la Peninsula Ib#xE9;rica, vol. XXXII, 1963.
20. Samardjieva, Catalogue of Digital Historical Seismograms 1912-1962, 1998.
21. S#xE1;nchez-Contador, Tesina d'Especialitat, Escola Tecnica Superior d'Enginyers de Camins, Canals i Ports, 1988.
22. Shebalin, Seismic studies for construction, Problems of engineering seismology, vol. 14, 1971.
23. Shebalin, Catalogue of earthquakes of the Balkan region, I, 1974.
24. Susagna, Atles sismic de Catalunya, 1999.
25. Tatevossian, Phys. Solid Earth, v. 39, no. 11, 2003.
26. Tatevossian, Phys. Solid Earth, v. 42, no. 2, 2006.
27. Utsu, International Handbook of Earthquake and Engineering Seismology, Part A, 2002.
28. Wyss, J. Geophys. Res., v. 73, 1968.
