The Devonian position of the South China Block (SCB) remains debated because apparently contradictory Devonian paleopoles have been documented. Here we report two characteristic remanent magnetization components from the mildly deformed Guanyang Devonian successions (Lochkovian-Famennian) within the cratonic interior of the SCB. Both components pass reversal tests and occur in different samples across the successions. Component A and associated paleopole DA (228.9°E, 37.7°N, A95 = 3.7°) are comparable with published Devonian data and were likely acquired before Permian-Triassic folding and likely reflect syn-depositional magnetization. Component B and its associated paleopole DB (204.6°E, 4.5°N, A95 = 5.5°) are distinct from published results and were probably acquired during minor tilting associated with the Late Devonian Liujiang orogeny. If paleopole DA was acquired prior to the Late Devonian Liujiang orogeny, the paleolatitude of the Guanyang successions varied little throughout the Devonian, but the azimuthal orientation of recorded declinations exhibits a 40° difference. The distinct positions of the two paleopoles are broadly consistent with existing enigmatic Devonian field records. Alternatively, given the uncertainty in the acquisition ages of both components in the Guanyang successions, a case can be made for component A being a secondary magnetization acquired during the Permian-Triassic Indosinian orogeny. Nonetheless, the similar distribution of Devonian paleopoles from Gondwana to those of cratonic interior of the SCB suggests a Devonian connection between the two continents, and adds further support for a non-uniformitarian geomagnetic field during this enigmatic time interval.

华南地块 (SCB) 的泥盆纪位置仍然存在争议，因为已经记录了明显矛盾的泥盆纪古极地。在这里，我们报告了 SCB 克拉通内部轻度变形的灌阳泥盆纪序列（Lochkovian-Famennian）的两个特征剩磁分量。两种成分都通过了逆转测试，并出现在不同系列的不同样本中。组件 A 和相关的古极地 DA（228.9°E，37.7°N，A95 = 3.7°）与已发表的泥盆纪数据相当，可能是在二叠纪-三叠纪折叠之前获得的，可能反映了同沉积磁化。组分 B 及其相关的古极 DB (204.6°E, 4.5°N, A95 = 5.5°) 与公布的结果不同，可能是在与晚泥盆世柳江造山运动相关的轻微倾斜期间获得的。如果古极DA是在晚泥盆世柳江造山运动之前获得的，整个泥盆纪灌阳层序的古纬度变化不大，但记录的偏角方位角却有40°的差异。两个古极地的不同位置与现有的神秘泥盆纪野外记录大体一致。或者，考虑到灌阳层序中两个组分的采集年龄的不确定性，可以假设组分 A 是在二叠纪-三叠纪印支造山运动期间采集的二次磁化强度。尽管如此，来自冈瓦纳的泥盆纪古极地分布与 SCB 克拉通内部的相似，表明这两个大陆之间存在泥盆纪联系，