How can you interpret tectonic history using stratigraphy?

Actually, I would like to add one principle which is "Principle of Inclusion". The principle implies that, any rock that contains fragments of an adjacent rock must be younger than the adjacent rock.

These basic principles are extremely important but there are import exceptions that do not indicate tectonic movements. Some sedimentary rocks have impressive non-horizontal layers reflective of the paleotopography of the depositional setting. My favorite example is the peak known as El Capitan in Guadalupe Mountains National Park, a succession of steeply-dipping carbonate debris beds down dip from the Capitan "reef" on the edge of a deep basin. Paleoclimate must also be considered when drawing conclusions about superposition. Some of the Florida Keys, for example, are masses of Pleistocene carbonates flanked by submerged modern carbonates. This unconformity does not violate superposition but could be misinterpreted as tectonic.

Tectonic settings refer to regions where Earth's lithospheric plates interact. Sigma 1, 2, and 3 denote principal stresses. In compressional settings, sigma 1 aligns with maximum compression, forming folds and thrust faults. Extensional settings see sigma 1 in the direction of stretching, creating normal faults. Transform settings involve sigma 1 as horizontal stress, yielding strike-slip faults. Personally intrigued by sigma concepts, I favor exploring their role in tectonics over traditional convergence and divergence studies.

Direct proof of convergence or divergence requires sea-floor spreading data. Widespread sea-floor spreading data is only available since the Mesozoic so no direct evidence of tectonic settings can be made for older rocks. Attempting to determine the tectonic setting of Paleozoic and older rocks requires interpretation of indirect data sources so, while plate tectonics appears to have been active early in earth history, when it began is hypothetical.

Stratigraphic analysis as described here is the only approach that can be used to interpret pre-Mesozoic tectonic settings. Prior to the widespread adoption of plate tectonics based on sea-floor spreading data, the same approach was used to develop the Geosynclinal Theory. As a theory, plate tectonics has been more successful in explaining all the observations.

Often, the orientation and locations of structural features do not seem to fit with others formed at the same time such as the Central Basin Platform uplift within the Permian Basin of Texas and New Mexico. It is an example of a structure formed by multiple events. Deep drilling and gravity data indicate that it was part of the extensional Precambrian Midcontinent Rift. The rift was inverted during the late Paleozoic and was further deformed in the late Cretaceous through middle Tertiary. The latter two regional stress fields reactivated older faults to create complex slip motions. It is crucial to consider the older structural features if one wants to correctly interpret the tectonic setting.

As useful theories do, plate tectonics has helped geologists define some of its short comings. When certain geologic features are not explained by a very successful theory, new ideas emerge. One example is that of mantle hot spots that are also useful for the same reasons mentioned in this article. The systematic application of stratigraphy and structural geology move the science forward.