Porphyroblast rotation: eppur si muove * ?

In a number of recent papers, the theory has been postulated that porphyroblasts as a rule do not rotate with respect to geographical coordinates, and can be used to determine the original orientation of older foliations. Complex inclusion patterns in spiral garnets have even been used to advocate a new model of orogenesis, involving several alternating phases of horizontal shortening and extension. Critical assessment of the assumptions and data used to support the theory of irrotational porphyroblasts reveals numerous flaws. Millipede structures, used as proof for flow partitioning, can also form by other flow geometries. Evidence quoted to support irrotational behaviour of porphyroblasts is unsound. Porphyroblasts do occur in sets with a preferred orientation of the internal foliation trace, but these cannot be shown to represent original orientations. Microstructures which resemble truncation planes in spiral garnets are used as evidence that these structures developed by several phases of deformation and as proof for periodic extension and horizontal shortening in orogenesis. They can, however, also be explained by intermittent growth of a rotating porphyroblast during a single phase of deformation. Finally, porphyroblast sets in which orientation is a function of aspect ratio indicate that porphyroblast rotation with respect to kinematic axes does occur in at least some situations.