| Text (with hotlink) | Original Language | Biographical Info | Religion | Date of Composition | Location Composed | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chronicon by Eusebius | Greek translated to Latin by Jerome |
|
Christian | Early 4th century CE | Caesarea | Short passage stating that Nicopolis and Caesarea were ruined in an earthquake. Dates earthquake to 1 July 129 CE to 30 June 130 CE. |
| Chronography by Elias of Nisibis | Syriac and Arabic |
|
Church of the East | Early 11th c. | Nusaybin, Turkey | Short passage stating that In that year there was an earthquake: Nicopolis and Caesarea were overthrown.Cites his source as the Chronological Canon of Andronicus. Guidoboni et al (1994) opined that Elias' ultimate source was Eusebius' account. Dates earthquake to 1 Oct. 126 to 30 Sept. 127 CE. |
| Other Sources | ||||||
| Text (with hotlink) | Original Language | Biographical Info | Religion | Date of Composition | Location Composed | Notes |
| Location (with hotlink) | Status | Intensity | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Heshbon | possible | ≥ 8 | Stratum 14 Earthquake (Mitchel, 1980) - 1st century BCE - 2nd century CE -
Mitchel (1980) identified a destruction layer in Stratum 14
which he attributed to an earthquake. Unfortunately, the destruction layer is not precisely dated. Using some assumptions,
Mitchel (1980) dated the
earthquake destruction to the 130 CE Eusebius Mystery Quake,
apparently unaware at the time that this earthquake account may be either
misdated as suggested by Russell (1985) or mislocated as
suggested by Ambraseys (2009).
Although Russell (1985) attributed the destruction layer
in Stratum 14 to the early 2nd century CE Incense Road Quake, a number of
earthquakes are possible candidates including the 31 BCE Josephus Quake. Mitchel (1980:100)'s 130 CE date for the causitive earthquake rests on the assumption that the "fills" were deposited soon after bedrock collapse. If one discards this assumption, numismatic evidence and ceramic evidence suggests that the "fill" was deposited over a longer period of time - perhaps even 200+ years - and the causitive earthquake was earlier. Unfortunately, it appears that the terminus ante quem for the bedrock collapse event is not well constrained. The terminus post quem appears to depend on the date for lower levels of Stratum 14 which seems to have been difficult to date precisely and underlying Stratum 15 which Mitchel (1980:21) characterized as chronologically difficult. |
| Caesarea | possible | 6-7 | Late 1st/ Early 2nd century CE Earthquake - Using ceramics, Reinhardt and Raban (1999) dated
a high energy subsea deposit inside the harbor at Caesarea to the late 1st / early 2nd century CE. This, along with other supporting evidence, indicated
that the outer harbor breakwater must have subsided around this time. They attributed the subsidence to seismic activity. However,
Dey et al(2014) noted that the subsidence and tilting could also be due to undercutting by current scour from large-scale storms (or tsunamis) and not exclusively seismic activity.Dey et al(2014) concluded that Our data from the inner harbor cannot definitively ascribe the destruction of the harbor at the end of the first century A.D. to a seismic event, although some of the data support this conclusion. However, regardless of the exact mechanism, our sedimentological evidence from the inner harbor and the remains of the late first century A.D. shipwreck indicate that the submergence of the outer breakwater occurred early in the life of the harbor and was more rapid and extensive than previously thought.Goodman-Tchernov and Austin (2015) examined and dated cores taken seaward of the harbor and identified 2 tsunamite deposits (see Tsunamogenic Evidence for the Incense Road Quake) including one which dates to to the 1st-2nd century CE. Although, it is tempting to correlate the 1st-2nd century CE tsunamite deposits of Goodman-Tchernov and Austin (2015) to the L4 destruction phase identified in the harbor ( Reinhardt and Raban, 1999), the chronologies presented by Goodman-Tchernov and Austin (2015) suffer from some imprecision due to the usual paucity of dating material that one encounters with cores. |
| Masada | possible | ≥ 8 | 2nd - 4th century CE Earthquake - Netzer (1991:655) reports that a great earthquake [] destroyed most of the walls on Masada sometime during the 2nd to 4th centuriesCE. In an earlier publication, Yadin (1965:30) noted that the Caldarium was filled as a result of earthquakes by massive debris of stones. Yadin concluded that the finds on the floors of the bath-house represent the last stage in the stay of the Roman garrison at Masada. The stationing of a Roman Garrison after the conquest of Masada in 73 or 74 CE was reported by Josephus in his Book The Jewish War where he says in Book VII Chapter 10 Paragraph 1 WHEN Masada was thus taken, the general left a garrison in the fortress to keep it, and he himself went away to Caesarea; for there were now no enemies left in the country, but it was all overthrown by so long a war.Yadin (1965:36)'s evidence for proof of the stationing of the Roman garrison follows: We have clear proof that the bath-house was in use in the period of the Roman garrison - in particular, a number of "vouchers" written in Latin and coins which were found mainly in the ash waste of the furnace (locus 126, see p. 42). Of particular importance is a coin from the time of Trajan, found in the caldarium, which was struck at Tiberias towards the end of the first century C.E.*The latest coin discovered from this occupation phase was found in one of the northern rooms of Building VII and dates to 110/111 CE (Yadin, 1965:119)**. Yadin (1965:119) interpreted this to mean that, this meant that the Roman garrison stayed at Masada at least till the year 111 and most probably several years later.Russell (1985) used this 110/111 coin as a terminus post quem for the Incense Road Earthquake while using a dedicatory inscription at Petra for a terminus ante quem of 114 CE. Masada may be subject to seismic amplification due to a topographic or ridge effect as well as a slope effect for those structures built adjacent to the site's steep cliffs. |
| Khirbet Tannur | possible | ≥ 8 | End of Period I Earthquake - 1st half of 2nd century CE - Glueck (1965:92)
found Altar-Base I from Period I severely damaged probably by an earthquakewhich may have precipitated the rebuild that began Period II. McKenzie et al (2013:47) dated Period II construction, which would have occurred soon after the End of Period I earthquake, to the first half of the 2nd century CE. McKenzie et al (2002:50) noted that a bowl found underneath paving stones that were put in place soon before Period II construction dates to the late first century CE along with two other bowls which date to the first half of the second century CE. This pottery and comparison to other sites led them to date Period II construction to the first half of the second century CE. |
| Emmaus/Nicopolis | no evidence | There is no evidence that I am aware of | |
| Location (with hotlink) | Status | Intensity | Notes |
| Location (with hotlink) | Status | Intensity | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bet Zayda | possible | ≥ 7 | Wechsler at al. (2014) report modeled ages of 137 - 206 CE for event CH4-E5. Although outside their modeled ages, Eusebius Mystery Quake was listed as the historical report for Event CH4-E5. The Migowski Quake II of ~175 CE or an unknown earthquake from around this time seems a better fit for the modeled ages. |
| Dead Sea - Seismite Types | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| Dead Sea - En Feshka | no evidence | Kagan et. al. (2011) did not see any evidence for a seismite created around this time. | |
| Dead Sea - En Gedi | possible | 6.3-8.8 | Migowski et. al. (2004) assigned two seismites at depths of 264 and 265 cm. (2.64 and 2.65 m) at En Gedi to earthquakes in 112 and 115 CE. The 112 CE date refers to the early second century CE Incense Road Earthquake and the 115 CE date refers to the Trajan Quake which was too far away to have created a Dead Sea seismite. During field work in January 2014 in the nearby En Gedi Trench, Jefferson Williams saw evidence for a sizable earthquake from a ~5 cm. thick seismite from around 112 ± 8 CE which was probably created by the Incense Road Quake. Williams also observed two detachment planes in the Incense Road Quake seismite (use magnifying glass to see at high resolution) which might explain why Migowski, while doing microscope work on the En Gedi Core, identified two separate seismites from the same deformation event. |
| Dead Sea - Nahal Ze 'elim | possible | 8.1-8.9 | At site ZA-2, Kagan et al (2011) assigned a 5 cm. thick Type 4 seismite at a depth of 445 cm. (Modeled Ages 1σ - 125 CE ± 39 and 2σ - 133 CE ± 78) to a date of 115 CE. The 115 CE date refers to the Trajan Quake which was too far away to have created a Dead Sea seismite. The seismite observed by Kagan et al (2011) likely formed during the Incense Road Earthquake. |
| Araba - Introduction | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| Araba - Taybeh Trench | possible | ≥ 7 | LeFevre et al. (2018) identified a seismic event (E4) in the Taybeh trench with a modeled age of 111 CE ± 31 which was associated with the early 2nd century CE Incense Road Earthquake. |
| Araba - Qatar Trench | possible | ≥ 7 | Klinger et. al. (2015) identified a seismic event (E6) in a trench near Qatar, Jordan in the Arava which they modeled between 9 BCE and 492 CE. The large spread in age caused them to consider two possible earthquakes as the cause; the early 2nd century CE Incense Road Quake and the southern Cyril Quake of 363 CE. They preferred the Cyril Quake of 363 CE based on weighing other evidence not related to their paleoseismic study and noted that further investigation was required. |
| Location (with hotlink) | Status | Intensity | Notes |
