1170 CE Quake(s)

1 among them Antioch, Tripoli, Jableh, Arche, Homs, Hama, Krak des Chevaliers. Gibelcar, Laodicea, Shayzar, Ba'rin, and more.

2 Accounts of earth fissures are frequently embellished in multiple traditions. In the Sabbatical Year Quakes, a talking Mule was said to have emerged from an earth fissure in Mesopotamia and spoke prophecy. In the 1068 CE Quake(s) treasures such as gold and jewelry were reported at the bottom of fissures in the Hejaz.

Strike-Slip Fault Rupture Length - Wells and Coppersmith (1994)

Variable	Input	Units	Notes
Rupture Length		km.	Rupture Length
Variable	Output - not considering a Site Effect	Units	Notes
MW		unitless	Moment Magnitude

Calculate   

Figure 3.12 An isoseismal map produced by kriging of the earthquake of 29 June 1170
produced by kriging of 45 groups of intensity points. Estimated location: 34.7° N, 36.4° E,
M_S = 7.3 (±0.3). (from Ambraseys, N. N., 2009)

AD 1170 Jun 29 Shaizar

The earthquake, preceded by foreshocks, occurred early in the morning of 29 June 1170, and it was as destructive as that of 12 August 1157. Its epicentral region overlaps that of the earthquake of 1157, making it difficult to define its extent, which includes Shaizar, Hama, Barin, Safita, Hisn el Akrad, Homs, Qusayr (now Qalat el-Zau), Hisn al-Akkar, Arqa and Baalbek. An isoseismal map is given in Figure 3.12.

In Shaizar the earthquake ruined what the war and the earthquake 13 years earlier had spared. It caused considerable destruction to the walls [21] and citadel [5] and great parts of the town were destroyed [8], killing many people [1, 5]. The town did not recover until 1232, when it was finally rebuilt [37]. Hama, which had been almost totally ruined 13 years before and partly rebuilt, replacing many of its houses with huts [7], was again badly damaged [4], perhaps even totally ruined [1, 8]. There was considerable destruction of its hastily rebuilt walls [21] and citadel and many people lost their lives [5]. It is said that only one house was left intact [7].

Nevertheless, it is likely that what a traveller who passed through the region some years later says, namely that some 25 000 people perished in Hama, and that of about 200 Jews only 70 escaped, is no more than a gross exaggeration [19]. It may be that he refers to the losses in the town and rural areas combined [2]. Again here the walls were quickly repaired [5]. Great parts of the border castle of Barin were destroyed [8]. Of its citadel not a wall remained standing, and the settlement abutting on Frankish territory was damaged [5]. The repairs occupied the Franks completely for some time [6].

Safitha was also almost totally destroyed, and not one wall was left standing [6]. Hisn Akkar was probably shattered [24] but details are lacking. Homs heavily damaged [4] and great parts of the town were ruined [8] causing many victims [5]. Its walls and citadel were shattered, but quickly repaired [5, 8]. Again here the language used by some occidental authors grossly exaggerates damage [1, 2]. It is said that the castle of Qusayr was also ruined, but details are lacking.

Hisn al-Akrad was seriously damaged, particularly its citadel. It is said [4, 6] that its walls were destroyed, which cannot be true [31] because the Franks rebuilt part of them [6] and the inner enceinte underwent modifications. A massive battered embankment was built up against the wall, which provided resistance for future earthquakes (E1). A11 that is known about Arqa, from a single source only, is that the castle collapsed [22]. In Baalbek the earthquake caused considerable damage to houses and defences. Some parts of its wall and citadels were ruined [8, 21, 36]; and a number of people lost their lives [5]. The damage was quickly repaired [8]. In the mountains overlooking the town, deep fissures opened in the ground [19]. On one of the gates an inscription commemorates repairs in 1168(?) [32]. Damage was considerable at Jabalah, Baniyas (Valanin), Margat (Marqab), Tripilis, Jubail and Damascus. It is said that Jabalah collapsed [1, 4]; however, certain churches are reported as having withstood the shock [2, 21] and there is no evidence that the earthquake affected this port. The same is said about the castle of Baniyas [22], information not found in any other source. Margat is reported as destroyed [33]. It is mentioned by Rohricht (1874) among the localities damaged or affected by the earthquake, but the name of this locality does not appear in any of the references that he mentions in support [29].

A large part of the city of Tripoli was ruined and its castle [22] and the Great Church collapsed [2], but the town was far from being destroyed as some chroniclers maintain [1, 10]. The Syrian Church and the harbour survived the shock, apparently with no serious damage [2]. Jubail suffered damage that is unspecified but was serious enough for the Franks to request immediate repairs. Oddly, Beirut is not mentioned in the sources. In Damascus, one of the large urban centres in the region, the earthquake caused general panic, and in places serious damage to dwellings [2, 5, 8, 10]. The inhabitants left the town [4] and made for the plains of Ghuta. Strangely the only damage to public buildings recorded in the urban area is the knocking down of the crenellations of the Great Mosque and the collapse of the roof of the rostrum. In all only one man died, having been hit by a stone [4]. However, damage to the rural district was widespread and serious.

Further away from the epicentral area, in Aleppo, the largest urban centre in the region, which had already been damaged by the large earthquake of 1157, damage was widespread and in places serious. The descriptions of damage by Christian and Muslim authors are somewhat coloured by their religious perspective, both sides considering the earthquake to be a result of divine justice. Information that the whole city of Aleppo collapsed and became a hill of ruins is a gross exaggeration [1-4, 21]. More sober sources point out that damage was not total. A considerable part of the city [5], or parts of it, were damaged such that the people were not able to take refuge in their homes for fear of another shock [8], an observation suggesting that most dwellings survived the shock. Since the shocks carried on for several days, and despite the fact that the people were apprehensive about camping outside Aleppo lest they found themselves surprised by the Franks [5], they evacuated the city [9]. There is no doubt that many public buildings, dwellings and some parts of the city walls suffered different degrees of damage, some of them seriously. Half of the citadel was ruined [4], but the Syrian Church suffered absolutely no damage and the Ulu Carni survived with only some minor damage to its minaret [26], the crescent of which was hurled almost 200 m [2, 3, 21, 27].

It is said that as a result of the earthquake the ground in the whole city cracked, and was reduced to a series of crevasses and fissures filled with a black fluid [2, 3], which is probably an allusion to liquefaction of the ground along the banks of the Quwayq River. The death count is suspect, with estimates ranging from 5000 [9] to 80 000 [4, 34]. Nevertheless, with Aleppo's jails crowded with several thousand Christian prisoners there is no evidence that any of them died. Damage was very quickly repaired, with the Muslim army camped outside the city supervising the work until all of the walls and the principal mosques had been repaired [5, 8].

It is not certain what happened in Harim or Baghras, since all that is known, from a Muslim source, is that its walls 'fell down' [21]. Antioch, on the River Orontes, a large urban centre already badly damaged by the earthquake of 1157, suffered some damage. Some battlements of the city wall on the riverbank were thrown down, as well as part of the ramparts, while in places cracks that had opened in the ground filled with water [2, 15, 16]. The Cathedral Church of St Peter was shattered and one of its domes fell on the Greek patriarch and his clergy [28] and the altar of the church of St Cosma caved in [21]. In contrast, the Syrian Churches of St Mary, St George and Bar Suma were not damaged [2, 21]. The death toll was relatively low, about 50, most of whom were in the church of St Peter [2, 18]. The walls of the city and its church were rebuilt [2, 3]. Internal evidence suggests that it is unlikely that Antioch was severely damaged; in fact the earthquake seems to have caused fear more than anything else. Again here, some chroniclers exaggerate the situation, saying briefly that Antioch was completely flattened [1,16], overthrown [3], destroyed [4, 22], or swallowed up in the ground [15]. Others say that parts of the city collapsed [10, 12, 14], whereas better-informed sources restrict their accounts to damage in diverse places [2].

There are no records of 'destruction' [1, 4] in the coastal town of Latakia, except for statements that its castle was damaged [22] while its church was left unscathed [21]. The fortress of Hunain may have been damaged, and there is evidence that the wall towers of Sur suffered some unspecified damage [22], the earthquake causing considerable concern in the port area [1]. Nothing is known in any detail about Acre except that its castle allegedly collapsed [22], though this is not substantiated by other sources. The earthquake was felt in the region of Nazareth [25], causing some unspecified damage to the Church in Nazareth [23], and it was perceptible in Jerusalem [12].

There is no evidence that the shock was noticeable at Ashtera [6, 30] or in Cyprus [18]. To the east of the epicentral region it is known that the walls of Samosata had to be repaired, but it is not clear whether this was due to the earthquake [2]. Edessa was unscathed, but the nearby monastery of St Ananias was shaken to the extent that the clergy clung to the altar [3, 21]. Not only in the monastery, but also in the whole country, there was absolutely no damage [2]. The earthquake was felt as far as Raqqa [4], perhaps causing some unspecified damage [6], and in the region of Mardin, Sinjar, Mosul and Nisibis [4]. There is no evidence that the shock was felt in Baghdad, Basra, Harran or Wasit. These localities are mentioned in the sources merely to indicate the general direction in which the earthquake shaking propagated [4].

The duration of aftershocks given in the sources varies from a fortnight to four months, but in general there is little hard evidence that aftershocks were either numerous or destructive. In all, an estimated 30 towns and fortified sites were significantly damaged or destroyed, leaving both the Franks and the Muslims open to military attacks from each other. The Franks believed that damage was worse on the Muslim side [6] and it took them some time to realise that the earthquake had overthrown several cities, as many Christian as Muslim [13]. Thus each side was occupied with repairing the damage, for fear of the other [8]. Ironically, this resulted in a period of unofficial truce, since both sides were repairing the fortifications of their border citadels as quickly as possible. As after the earthquake of 1157, repairs were hasty and for many years little proper rebuilding was done. For instance Antioch, although not so badly affected, seems to have suffered from a shortage of funds since, according to a source writing about ten years later, the repairs did not reach 'even a mediocre standard'.

It is interesting that it was only after the first large shock of 1157 that wood was used extensively in the rebuilding works, demonstrating its earthquake-resistant properties. It was, however, some time before these properties were appreciated to the extent that its higher cost was partially offset by tax relief on wood [7]. The earthquake was felt in most of the regions of Sham, Jazirah, as far as the borders of Mosul and in Iraq, while the area of maximum intensity was in Syria [5, 8], which, incidentally, was misspelled in some occidental sources as Styria [17], thus placing a spurious earthquake in Steiermark, in what was then Hungary. This error passes on unnoticed to modern writers [37, 38, 40]. Undoubtedly the earthquakes of 1157 and 1170 were of sufficient political importance to interest chroniclers throughout Europe, a subject that is outside the scope of this survey. For this event there are several detailed accounts by eye-witnesses, and virtual unanimity regarding the date.

One of the most important sources for the effects of the earthquake in Frankish Syria is William of Tyre (1130-86). Three different versions of William's account are extant: a Latin text, an Old French text and the abridged English translation by the travel writer Samuel Purchas (c. 1577-1626). The Latin text is rhetorical and self-consciously literary in its style, and, therefore, may well exaggerate the earthquake's effects, although in terms of content it closely resembles the briefer and plainer Old French version. Both texts agree that the event took place on 29 June (3 Kal. July in the Latin, Feast of Sts Peter and Paul in the Old French: from the narrative context, it is clear that the year is 1170), at the first hour of the day, i.e. 6 am, and that Jabalah, Laodicea, Aleppo, Shaizar and Hama/Haman (Hamah) were seriously damaged. The Latin text adds `Emissa' (Hims) Regarding aftershocks, the Latin text claims that they lasted 'three or four months, or longer', the Old French `nearly four months'. These two texts agree that aftershocks were felt three or four times per day or night. The remarks of both texts on the effects on Palestine are obscure. The Latin text says only that 'the superiors of our province, Palestine' (Superiores tamen nostrae provinciae, Palestinae videlicet) escaped harm, whereas the Old French asserts that 'the part of Palestine which is around Jerusalem did not suffer sufficient damage to lose towns or men' (en la terre de Palestine qui est vers Jerusalem, ne corut pas cist grant damage de perdre les viles ne les genz). The latter version would indicate that any damage in Palestine was slight.

Purchas' summary translation gives `Hanuin' where the Latin and Old French texts above have Hama/Haman. While this may just be an error, either in Purchas or in the Latin text which he was using (which may well have been different from the text established in modern editions), it is noteworthy that there was a Frankish fortress just over 30 km from Baniyas called Hunain (Le Strange 1890, 418; Dussaud 1927, 25), which was within the area affected by the earthquake. Detailed accounts of the effects of this earthquake in northern Syria are found in the Syriac and Armenian versions of Michael the Syrian. The descriptions are somewhat coloured by the author's religious perspective, but this does not detract from the important information which they contain. A lacuna at the beginning of the passage in the Syriac version seems to have contained the date, but this is supplied by Chabot (Mich. Syr. iii. 337 n. 7) from Bar Hebraeus, whose account is clearly based on Michael's. The Armenian version of Michael confusedly gives 29 June of a.S. 1493 (1182) and a.Arm. 613 (1164), which seems to be due to a systematic chronological error. Both accounts begin with Michael and his clergy celebrating the Feast of Sts Peter and Paul (29 June) in the monastic church of St Anania, near Edessa. The Syriac version notes that 'absolutely no damage' was suffered locally. The same version says that the clergy 'were thrown from side to side', while in the Armenian text 'it seemed as if the earth was going up and then suddenly down'. Both versions mention the destruction of Aleppo, the cracking of the ground there and the black water which issued forth. The collapse of St Peter's church in Antioch is also found in both texts, although the Syriac text adds the information that about 50 people were killed. This is omitted in the Armenian version, although it does mention that the Greek church collapsed, killing the clergy. Both texts also give the story of the expulsion of the dying Greek patriarch and the return of the Frankish bishop. Generally, though, the Syriac text contains more information on the damage to Syrian towns. This includes the town of Samosata, which is not mentioned in any other source and would extend the northern terminus of the damage zone. The same text is quite unusual in noting that the earthquake caused disasters in the 'rural areas' as well as the cities. Most East Mediterranean sources tend to mention the effects of earthquakes only on cities or entire regions.

The record of the contemporary Ibn al-Jauzi is preserved in his nephew's Mirat az-Zeman. The date of a.H. 565 Shawwal (June-July 1170) is entirely consistent with the date given by the majority of Christian sources. Ibn al-Jauzi gives details of the damage in Islamic Syria, particularly in Aleppo (for which he gives a death toll of 80 000, which is possible) and Damascus, as well as many other places. He also notes that the earthquake `spread towards Baghdad, Wasit, Basra and all the regions of Iraq', which is an indicator of the area over which it was generally felt.

Ibn al-Athir, writing a generation later than Ibn al-Jauzi, gives the date of a.H. 565 Shawwal 12 (29 June 1170), which is completely concordant with the main Christian sources. Ibn al-Athir focuses in particular on Nur ed Din's remedial works, and includes Ba'albek among the cities which were damaged. Abu Shama (c. 1203-68) includes in several passages on this earthquake the account of 'Imad ad-Din al-Asfahani (1125-1201). He notes that Nur ed Din was at Ashtera when he was told of the earthquake, and it may be significant that he mentions no damage in that place. Abu Shama probably exaggerates the damage to the Frankish stronghold of Hisn al-Akrad, for he says that `not one wall. .. was left standing'. He notes that in Hims Salah ad-Din survived because of his large valet, who presumably held the roof up. More importantly, he records Nur ed Din's use of wood in the rebuilding work, which he financed partly through tax relief. In another passage, too lengthy to be quoted here, Abu Shama relates how Nur ed Din attempted to obtain money from waqfs for the rebuilding work, which was opposed by the qadi Radhi ad-Din (Abu Shama, 1/17, 18). Kemal ad-Din (1192-1262) does not add much new information, except in quoting Ibn al-Adim, who claims that the death toll in Aleppo reached 5000. This earthquake was sufficiently grave to attract the interest of chroniclers in Europe, such as Robert de Torigni, who was probably a close contemporary. It also appears in numerous twelfth- and thirteenthcentury European chronicles collected by Alexandre (1990, 163f.). Some of them give new information, such as the Annals of Gatines, which say that a total of about 30 towns and villages collapsed. The Annals of Vezelay give 15 days of aftershocks, and the Annals of Admont 14 days (the latter chronicle, presumably because of a scribal error, places the earthquake in Styria (in modern Austria) rather than Syria).

The contemporary hermit St Neophytus of Paphos was visited by a monk from Antioch, who told him that the earth opened, which indicates faulting. His account also implies that, when the earth closed up again, the stones in the erstwhile crack were hurled up to a great height. This suggests that the crack was closed by a strong aftershock. The same source says that 'a great multitude of people' were killed, which is probably an exaggeration in view of Michael the Syrian's number of 50. This event is also mentioned by Ibn Shaddad (writing in the thirteenth century). This event may in addition be alluded to by the twelfth-century Jewish traveller Benjamin of Tudela, in two passages referring to the destruction by earthquake of Tripolis and Hamah respectively (21/17; 49-50/31-2). Since Benjamin's only chronological indicators are 'in times gone by' and `some years ago', he could be referring either to the 12 August 1157 earthquake (q.v.) or to this one, or even to both.

Abu 'l-Faraj (1226-86) practically copies Michael the Syrian, but his account is useful for that very purpose, since it supplies the date missing in Michael. The Armenian chronicler Sembat (fl. c. 1275) dates this event correctly to a.Arm. 619 (1170), and says that it was felt in Armenia on 19 June, the Feast of Sts Peter and Paul; '19' may well be a scribal error for '29'. The Chronicle of Hetum Patmi (c. 1296) also includes this event.

According to Ibn al-Dawadari (writing in the fourteenth century), this earthquake caused cracks in the mountains above Ba'albek, and aftershocks continued for months. Ibn Shihnah (S.67/64) (died 1485) notes details of the damage to the Ulu in Aleppo. See also Ajami (29b/24; viii. 13a/9), al-Ghazzi (n.d. iii. 95) and al-`Umari (f. 78v).

References

Ambraseys, N. N. (2009). Earthquakes in the Mediterranean and Middle East: a multidisciplinary study of seismicity up to 1900.

Location map from Guidoboni et al, 2004


Left - Hypothesis 1 Right - Hypothesis 2 from Guidoboni et al, 2004



(089) 1170 June 29 Eastern Syria and Lebanon

sources 1

Documents

• Amalric I (king), Letter to the Louis VII (king of France), July-August 1170, in Mayer (1989, p.484)
• Amalric I (king), Grant, 1170, in Delaville Le Roulx (1894-1906, I, no.411, pp.284-6)
• Alexander III (pope), Appeal, Tuscolo, 8 December 1170, in Hiestand (1985, no.198, pp.393-4)

Annals and chronicles

• Will. Tyre, Chron., pp.934-6
• Marag. Bern., Ann., pp.49-50
• Ann. Vizel., pp.228-9
• Rob. Torig., Chron., p.519
• Ann. Floreff , p.625
• Chron quod dicitur [W.Godel], in Rob. Aux., Chron., p.240
• Ann. Colon. max., pp.120-1
• Ann. Gastin
• Ann. Magdebur., p.193
• Ann. Admunt., p.584
• Mich. Syr., 19.6, Chron., IV, pp.695-6
• Mich. Syr. Arm., Chron., pp.464-6
• Ibn al-Athir, al-Ta`rikh, p.145
• Ibn al-Athir, al-Kamil, XI, pp.254-5
• Sibt ibn al-Jawzi, Mir'at, VIII, pp.174-5
• Benjamin Tud., Itin.
• Neoph. Enkl., in Delehaye (1907), pp.211-2
• Chron. min. Arm., 1.3, p.76
• 11.24, p.502

sources 2

• Ann. Pegay., p.260
• Chron. univ. Metten., p.518
• Vinc. Beaux, Spec. hist., p.1191a
• Martin Tropp., Chron., p.437
• Martin Tropp., Liber, II, p.450
• Flores temp., p.239
• Will. Nang., Chron.
• Riccob. Ferr., Pomar. , cols.125, 174
• Riccob. Ferr., Compil., co1.240
• Tol. Lucca, Ann., pp.66-7
• Tol. Lucca, Hist., co1.1108
• Pipino, Chron., co1.627
• Dandolo, Chron., p.249
• Bezanis, Cron., p.28
• Palmieri Matteo, Liber, p.97
• Cron. Ramp., II, pp.32-3, 43
• Est. de Eracles, I/I, pp.971-3
• Chron. Terre Sainte, p.7
• Ann. Terre Sainte, p.432
• Cron. Varign., II, p.4
• Sanudo, Le cite, p.272
• Amadi, Chron.
• Chron. ad 1234, p.169
• Bar Hebr., Chron., p.339
• Ibn al-Adim, Zubdat , II, p.330
• Abu Shama, al-Rawdatayn , I, p.184
• Ibn Wasil, Mufarraj , I, p.185
• Ibn Shaddad, al-Nawadir, p.43
• Ibn Qadi Shuhba, al-Kawakib, p.189

historiography

• Rohricht (1898)
• Delaville Le Roulx (1904)
• King (1931)
• Hakobyan (1956)
• Elisseeff (1967)
• Ducellier (1980)
• Mayer (1989)
• Hild and, Hellenkemper (1990)
• Molin (2001)

literature

• Taher (1979)
• Poirier et al. (1980)
• Ambraseys and Barazangi (1989)
• Ambraseys and Jackson (1998)
• Guidoboni et al. (2004)

catalogues d.

• a. Manetti [1457)
• Lycosthenes (1557)
• Bonito (1691)
• Seyfart (1756)
• von Hoff (1840)
• Perrey (1850)
• Mallet (1853)
• Sieberg (1932a)
• Grumel (1958)
• Step`anyan (1964)
• *Ben-Menahem (1979, 1991)
• Amiran et al. (1994)
• *Ambraseys et al. (1994)

catalogues p.

• Ergin et al. (1967)
• Poirier and Taher (1980)
• al-Hakeem (1988)
• Bektur and Alpay (1988)
• Khair et al. (2000)

History of the earthquake's interpretation

The earthquake of 29 June 1170 is one of the largest seismic events ever to occur along the northern part of the Dead Sea Transform Fault System (DSTFS), the c.1000-km. long western boundary of the Arabian plate. The importance of the earthquake on 29 June 1170 has left an indelible mark upon the scholarly and scientific seismological tradition. The first references to it can in fact be found in the earliest Mediterranean area catalogue, namely that of the humanist Giannozzo Manetti [1457]. In the scientific seismological tradition this earthquake has had a variety of interpretations, even contradictory ones, which have persisted until now.

The correct dating of the shock on 29 June 1170 already appears - though not without some uncertainty - in the main descriptive catalogues of the 19th century. However, the persistence of discrepancies and uncertainties among the various catalogue authors has led to a "multiplication" of the event and the generation of shocks for which there was no evidence in the sources. These flawed data have then been transferred unaltered into some second-generation catalogues as well - to modern parametric catalogues, that is to say. Thus, a survey of the parametric catalogues of the last 25 years provides an overview of the different interpretations which still survive. In Ben-Menahem's catalogue (1979), which is subdivided into geographical and tectonic areas, the 1170 earthquake is correctly dated to 29 June and is placed in the section devoted to the northern end of Levant Fault System (p.278, event 14). The parameters reported are those of a high energy earthquake (M_L = 7.9), and the description of effects is limited to the regions lying between the Lebanon and southwestern Syria, though the damage zone is extended to Israel and Caesarea. In a second work, Ben-Menahem (1991, pp.20, 203) slightly downsizes the parameters of the event (M_L = 7.5 and I₀ = X-XI) and gives the epicentral coordinates recorded by Ambraseys and Barazangi (1989), thus shifting the area of greatest effects further north. The information relating to the effects remains, however, substantially the same as for the previous catalogue, with the addition of information about the destruction of Antioch and the damage and victims in the Orontes Valley. Poirier and Taher (1980, p.2192) correctly date the events to 12 Shawwal of the year 565 of the Hegira, but give 30 June instead of 29 June 1170. Amongst the worst-hit locations, only Aleppo, Antioch and Damascus are listed. Another work of the same year, Poirier et al. (1980), provides more detail, but the damage area cannot be distinguished from the felt area.

Al-Hakeem (1988, p.22, event 185) also mistakenly dates the earthquake to 30 June 1170 and estimates its epicentral intensity at grade IX MM. A further three 12th century events, also recorded in this catalogue, are given without the month or day, and could be duplications of the earthquake of 29 June 1170, perhaps inherited from some 19th century catalogues.

Bektur and Alpay (1988, p.41, event 88) record the earthquake with the correct date and with I₀ = IX MSK-64. According to them, the shock caused many thousands of vic- tims and was felt in Cyprus. A further three earthquakes are also recorded in this cat- alogue, with misdatings probably resulting from transcription errors in previously used texts.

In Amiran et al. (1994, p.270) the dates are largely gleaned from previous catalogues (including that of Ben-Menahem, 1979) and Islamic sources. The earthquake is correctly dated to 29 June 1170 and, according to the picture provided by the authors, was devastating in Syria, causing damage in Tyre and hundreds of deaths in Palestine. The main shock parameters (magnitude and intensity) remain uncertain, along with the most seriously affected locations. The information provided in the catalogue of Ambraseys et al. (1994, p.36 and p.101) is very limited because the event falls outside its scope. As to the effects of the 1170 earthquake in the Egyptian area, already recorded by Ben-Menahem (1979, 1991) and before that by Mallet (1853) and Sieberg (1932a), Ambraseys et al. (1994) express some doubts because the local sources for that period have been lost.

In the study by Khair et al. (2000) on the seismic zonation of the Dead Sea fault area, all the known strong (M_S 5.9) earthquakes that occurred along the DSTFS during the past four millennia are listed. As far as we know, this list is the latest available catalogue. The data contained in it are, however, based only on previous works and other historical catalogues, i.e. not on original sources. In their proposed seismic zonation scheme, the 1170 earthquake (p.68) is located in the Karasu seismogenic zone, i.e. the northernmost portion of the DSTFS, in the region straddling the present- day Syro-Turkish border. The M_L (7.5) and epicentre (35.9°N, 36.4°E) values are taken from Ben-Menahem (1991) and Ambraseys and Barazangi (1989).

The variety of interpretations substantially derives from the nature of the texts providing the basic data used by the various authors: these are mostly scientific works and historical catalogues of the 19th and 20th centuries, from which we may have inherited errors as well as omissions. Exceptions to this are Poirier and Taher (1980) and Al- Hakeem (1988), who used primary sources, but solely from the Arabic tradition. This group of sources, although very important and authoritative (see below), constitutes only one of the three main independent cultural-linguistic traditions relevant to the 1170 earthquake (Latin, Syriac and Arabic). The data used by Poirier and Taher (1980) are based on the accounts of two historians: Sibt ibn al-Jawzi (but erroneously referred to as Ibn al-Jawzi, who was in fact his uncle), and Ibn al-Athir (1160 - 1231). The latter is one of the most authoritative Arabic sources for this earthquake, although the picture he provides is incomplete.

Since the historical sources used are direct and authoritative but belong to a single cultural and linguistic area, it is clear that the reconstruction of the event is necessarily limited, and that, at best, they can provide only a partial interpretation. Worthy of mention among more recent studies is that of Ambraseys and Jackson (1998), in which there is a list of historical and recent Eastern Mediterranean earthquakes associated with surface fault breaks. On the basis of a previous catalogue by Ambraseys and some vaguely defined "unpublished data", the event of 29 June 1170 is listed (p.392, event 32) as a large shock (7.0 M_S < 7.8), located in the Afamiyah (ancient Apamea, now Qalat al Madiq) area, in the Orontes Valley (western Syria), with the epicentre at 35.5°N and 36.5°E. Our survey of the seismological literature clearly shows that the earthquake lacks an agreed and reliable interpretation. Figure 40 illustrates the different locations of the epicentre as indicated by the various authors in the catalogues and studies cited. A piece of research on this specific subject (Guidoboni et al. 2004) has revealed a more complex and better documented situation, and hence allowed an assessment of 16 additional localities. It is within this context that the two-earthquake hypothesis has been formulated. Chronology: one or more events?

According to contemporary sources, the earthquake occurred at about 06:00 local time, that is to say, about 03:45 UT. The detailed account by William of Tyre explicitly records it "around the first hour of the day", in terms of the canonical hours. All the texts analysed give 29 June 1170 as the date of the main shock. The Latin sources date it to the third day before the Calends of July or the feast of St.Peter and Paul, in the seventh year of the reign of Amalric I (King of Jerusalem from 1163 to 1174). The Syriac sources give 29 Haziran in the year 1481 (of the Greeks); the Arabic sources give 12 Shawwal in the year 565 of the Hegira. These different styles of dating all correspond to 29 June 1170. In spite of this agreement, it is legitimate to ask whether there was in fact one or more than one earthquake. Leaving aside the geological features of the area, it is the extent of the effects area that suggests the answer. From this specific standpoint we have analysed all the contemporary sources, attempting to highlight any element that may be help to provide an answer. We have focused on the terms with which the selected contemporary sources defined the chronology of the event, seeing whether the terms used are singular or plural and how the date is stated. Although it is hard to be quite sure, we think that only William of Tyre contains anything which would allow us to suppose that there were two events: one generically dated to June 1170, the other more specifically to 29 June 1170. While remaining critically cautious, we can observe in his text a narrative sequence supporting this hypothesis. Indeed, in the first part of the text he says that in June 1170 an earthquake affected seven cities very badly (in order of mention: Antioch, Gabala, Laodicea, Aleppo, Schayzar, Hama, Emesa (Hims). They are located north of Tripoli and correspond to the historical region that the author calls Coelesyria. Then on 29 June Tripoli and Tyre were struck (the area is called Phoenicia by the author, and corresponds to present-day Lebanon).

We could not find any other evidence suggesting two events, and the other contemporary sources agree in identifying 29 June as a single event. Although the two-event interpretation has a sound scientific basis, we have to point out that the historical sources of the period had cognitive limitations. For in the 12th century world-view, systematic analysis was not a key element: at that period the availability of day-to-day data on the shocks that were felt was not the only variable. Taking account of the particular cultural picture which the contemporary sources, provide, we have formulated two hypotheses:

1. that the identified effects can be interpreted as those of a single earthquake; it is on this basis that the parameters have been interpreted (see fig. 42 a and b)
2. that there were two strong earthquakes; for this hypothesis the parameters cannot be calculated because the two areas are not easily differentiated and so there may well be zones with overlapping effects (see fig. 43).

The historical context

Our research aim has been to paint a broad picture of the earthquake's effects, beginning with the territorial divisions in medieval Syria, which included what is now the Lebanon and Israel and was then divided into three Latin states. These territories were formed after the military conquest by the Crusaders. From north to south these territories were: the Principality of Antioch, the County of Tripoli, and the Kingdom of Jerusalem; to the north was the Kingdom of Lesser Armenia. The rest of the territory was under Muslim domination (see map in fig. 41).

The production of sources for the 1170 earthquake at the time or immediately afterwards was thus fostered by the particular historical period in which the earthquake took place, that is to say, between the second (1147-1149) and the third Crusade (1189- 1192). These circumstances explain why such an earthquake is documented by sources in different languages which complement one another from the point of view of the territories struck. This evident fact, however, escaped the notice of the authors cited above, who drew on the tradition of the Arabic texts.

The earthquake's propagation zone was enormous: it struck Al-Mawsil, Sinjar, Nisibin, Al-Ruha, Harran, Ar-Raqqah, and Mardin, reaching as far as Baghdad, Basra and other towns in Iraq; but the sources do not specify in detail the effects in these localities. The earthquake was strongly felt at the monastery of Mar Hananya, but the building did not suffer any damage. There was no damage in Palestine.

The earthquakes lasted for three or four months, or perhaps longer. There were times when three or four or even more shocks were felt by day or night.

Effects of the earthquake

By selecting the data according to the importance and authoritativeness of the various authors, it has been possible to outline a general picture of the damage and felt effects of this large earthquake. It is important to note, however, that this reconstruction is not without its omissions and problems, due to the type of text to be interpreted, the availability of the sources, as well as the difficulty of identifying toponyms: indeed, in the sources the same place is given different names in different languages. In spite of the difficulties and constraints, mainly resulting from the historical time that separates us from the event in question, our analysis has highlighted previously unknown effects at 16 locations.

The whole territory belonging to the cities of Antioch to the north and Tripoli to the south, both along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea, and in the hinterland, along the Bekaa Valley and the River Orontes up to the area of Aleppo was seriously affected, with widespread destruction.

On the coast of modern Lebanon, in what used to be the County of Tripoli (now Tarabulus), the fortified settlements of Archis (also called 'Arco., present-day Mathanat ad Dulbah), Gibelacar (modern Akkar al Atiqah), and even the city of Tripoli itself were completely destroyed. The latter suffered such extensive damage that most of the inhabitants were killed. The contemporary sources agree in describing the state of devastation at Tripoli: William of Tyre called it "untidy piles of stones"; Amalric I, in his letter to Louis VII of France, described it as being destroyed "down to its very foundations", with the death of nearly all the people living there.

In Amalric's letter, the fortresses of Archis and Gibelacar are also said to have been "destroyed from their very foundations". Apart from the particular aims of the letter (mentioned above), we think these dramatic expressions may also be idioms of the time. Medieval Latin sources in fact use such terms to indicate the "complete functional loss" of a building, rather than its total destruction. In any case, we believe that such an expression, even if used in a contingent and perhaps somewhat generic manner, could only refer to very serious and extensive damage. At Baalbek, in the Bekaa Valley in present-day northern Lebanon, the city walls and citadel collapsed.

Farther north, in the territory of the County of Tripoli, there was serious damage to the castle of Margat (present-day al-Marqab), and Crak des Chevaliers (now Qalat al- Hisn). The latter was an important fortified castle, an imposing structure of dark basalt built on a spur of Gebel Alawi, about 750 m above sea-level. It dominated the road to the Crusader port of Valenie/Banyas, and thus controlled the coastal road which ran north from Tripoli to the Principality of Antioch (Molin 2001). This fortification is referred to in the Muslim sources as Hisn al-Akrad, now Qalat al-Hisn. The sources say that it suffered the "complete" collapse of the walls. The texts describe it as "sinking beneath the waves of the earthquake" (Abu Shama), and it was written of the walls - perhaps without exaggeration - "there remained no trace" (Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi). It is understandable that the Muslim sources perhaps exaggerated such devastation, for the castle was an enemy fortification. However, the dam- age was certainly extensive. According to Molin (2001), who also assessed it from an archaeological standpoint, Crak des Chevaliers underwent profound transformations following the destruction caused by the various earthquakes, including that of 1170, which struck it at the end of the 12th and the beginning of the 13th century. The famous and imposing fortress rises high even today, so well preserved as to be considered the greatest medieval fortress in the world. However, it is the result of radical modifications and reconstructions carried out from the last decades of the 12th century to around 1220 (see fig. 44). From these we can understand the complexity and remarkable size of the fortress.

There was further destruction at Ba`rin (known by the Crusaders as Montferrand or Mons Ferrandus), where the city walls collapsed, as well as at the Frankish-Crusader citadel of Safita (also known by its Frankish name of Chastel Blanc), situated between Crak des Chevaliers and the Mediterranean coast. The historian Abu Shama (the only one who cites this location) records Safita as having "subsided": this is another term used by the narrators of the times, often to indicate landslides and the subsidence or collapse of buildings.

In the hinterland territory around the River Orontes, then controlled by the Muslims, the earthquake caused serious damage to the walls and citadels of Hims (ancient Emesa), Hamat (Hamah) and Shayzar. Even though the last of these is in a poor state of preservation, it still rises from a rocky spur overlooking the left bank of the Orontes.

Along the Mediterranean coast between Tripoli and Antioch there was destruction in the territories of the states controlled by the Crusaders. In the Principality of Antioch, the ports of Laodicea (present-day A1-Ladhiqiya) and nearby Gabala (modern Jablah) were struck. According to Michael the Syrian, the latter collapsed entirely. Further north, the earthquake caused extensive destruction in Antioch and Aleppo, two great cities which were enemies at that time.

Antioch (Antakya) was an important city of ancient origins (founded in 301 BC by Seleucus I), and the capital of the Frankish Principality of Antioch. The fortified city rose along the slopes of Mount Silpius. Its walls, dating back to the early Byzantine period (they were probably built after the violent earthquake of 526 AD, see Guidoboni et al. 1994), were 18 km long, and formed a triangle at the top of which a tenth-century citadel was built on a mountain peak to defend the whole city (Cuneo 1986; Molin 2001). The earthquake in Antioch must have been highly destructive if it is true that, as the sources report, it caused the collapse of the towers and walls, famous at the time for their strength. It is nonetheless true that to say "the walls had been destroyed" was a sort of literary topos, intended to convey that there were gaps in the walls (owing to collapses of a greater or lesser extent) and that their defensive function could no longer be guaranteed. Thus they no longer existed as a fortification.

Furthermore, many buildings and churches in Antioch also collapsed, in particular the cathedral of St.Peter; the collapse of this church was considered by many Catholic Christians in a highly ideological light and was contrasted with the "resistance" of the three churches of the Mother of God, St.George and St.Barsauma. What had happened? According to the sources (Michael the Syrian, Ibn al-Athir and William of Tyre), the Franks perceived it as divine intervention because the Orthodox Christian patriarch was officiating at mass with the clergy when the earthquake occurred. Fifty people died altogether and Antioch is described as being half-destroyed.

Aleppo (Alab) lay to the east of Antioch. Along with Damascus and Cairo, it was one of the main political, economic and cultural centres of the Mediterranean Muslim world. It was an important and highly populated city, with a fortified citadel, high and imposing defensive walls, and large mosques. From the descriptions in the sources, the severity of effects in the city become clear. The historian Ibn al-Athir recalls that in Aleppo "the effects of the earthquake could not stand comparison with those of the fig. 43 Earthquakes on June 1170: hypothesis 2): probable areas of two different seismic events separated by the dashed black line, according to the interpretation that we have given to the text by William of Tyre, coeval Latin source (elaborated after Guidoboni et al. 2004). other cities", leaving us to suppose that effects were perhaps more serious than at Antioch, Damascus or Tyre; he then states that "the survivors were still prey to panic, which prevented them from returning to the places that were unscathed". The presence of "unscathed" places suggests differentiated effects, as always happens in large Urban areas. According to the historian Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi, the citadel that dominated Aleppo only partially collapsed; he then adds, as confirmation of the severity of the effects, that there was great damage to the city and that 80,000 of its inhabitants perished.

In the Syriac sources there are expressions that may appear to be contradictory, but it should be borne in mind that the earthquake was a sign of divine wrath. Source narratives might therefore stress that the damage was limited, particularly in regard to powerfully symbolic buildings such as the churches, especially in that scenario of military and religious conflict. Michael the Syrian, the most important of the Syriac sources, refers to Aleppo in two different passages in the following terms: i) "the whole city became a waste hill" and "the whole town fell down"; ii) the Catholic church of the city remained intact and "not a single stone [of the church] fell down". We believe that the effects of the earthquake at Aleppo were very serious and destructive, presumably not lower than grade X MCS, with some areas of the city perhaps less damaged than others, as is normally the case.

Bernardo Maragone (c.1108 - c.1188), diplomat and authoritative Italian author of the Annales Pisani, reports that there were also serious collapses in the castle of Uringa. According to Mayer (1989), this is the medieval and modern Arab town of Harim (Harenc in Latin), situated in present-day northern Syria near the Syro-Turkish border, between Antioch and Aleppo.

The earthquake also caused damage in Damascus and Tyre (now Sur), although significantly less than in the other centres mentioned above. In Damascus, the balconies of the Umayyad Great Mosque collapsed along with the tops of the minarets; there is mention of the death of just one person hit by a falling stone. In Tyre, situated on the coast of southern Lebanon, about 150 km south of Tripoli, several towers collapsed, but without causing much serious inconvenience for the inhabitants. The earthquake had a vast area of propagation. North-eastwards it affected present-day Turkish territory, being felt in Al-Ruha (Edessa in the Latin sources, present-day Urfa), Harran, Mardin, and Nisibin (present-day Nusaybin, in the Turkish province of Mardin Ili, near the Syrian border). From the very fact that they are mentioned, we deduce that the earthquake must have been strongly felt at these locations, and the damage threshold of V-VI MCS may have been approached. To the south of this area it spread in the desert of eastern Syria, where al-Raqqa (Ar-Raqqah) is mentioned, on the banks of the Euphrates; it was felt as far east as present-day Iraq, in Singar (modern Sinjar), Mosul (Al-Mawsil), and to the south, as far as Baghdad, Basra (Al-Basrah) and "other cities", not specified by the sources. The historian Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi (the only source to mention these locations) does not specify the level of effects. In attributing an intensity level we have taken account of two criteria: i) the types of source and the context of the narratives, which lead us to believe that such places would not have been mentioned if the earthquake had not been felt fairly distinctly; ii) the geographical situation, i.e. the distance of these cities from the epicentral area.

This decision has been reinforced by an analysis of the valuable witness report by Michael the Syrian: he in fact testifies that the earthquake was also strongly felt in the monastery of Mar Hananya, but that the building suffered no damage. This monastery is now Dair az-Zalaran (also known as Kurkmo Dayro in Syriac and Deyrulzafran in Arabic), and .is situated about 6 km south east of the city of Mardin, in south-eastern Turkey. The account by William of Tyre is clear in indicating that in Palestine there was neither damage nor victims. Further confirmation of that comes from another Latin source, the Chronicon quod dicitur Guillelmi Godelli (see the Latin sources), from which it can be deduced that the main shock on 29 June 1170 in Jerusalem was strongly felt, but without any damage of note ("the holy city of Jerusalem shook strongly, but did not collapse thanks to God's goodness"). In our opinion, the shaking at Jerusalem can bE confirmed at V-VI MCS, as indicated by Ben-Menahem (1979, 1991); but we do not havE any confirmation for the suggested damage at Caesarea, on the Mediterranean coast about 230 km south of Tripoli - also mentioned by Ben-Menahem. Lastly, our research has not found any evidence to suggest that the earthquake was fell in Egypt, as was argued by Ben-Menahem (1979) but questioned by Ambraseys et al (1994).

Social and economic effects

The accounts of the two Arab historians Sibt ibn al-Jawzi and Ibn al-Athir also provide some information about the effects that the earthquake caused on the anthropic context In Aleppo, the surviving inhabitants sought refuge in the surrounding countryside; man: fig. 44 Crak des Chevaliers, one of the most famous medieval castles in the Mediterranean area, was damaged in the 1170 earthquake. Plan of the castle, which stands 750 m above sea level. Note the extensive and complex internal articulation and.the fortifications. The double external wall and the complicated entry system made access difficult (from Molin 2001). survivors, however, were also terrified of remaining outside the city, for fear of an attack by the Franks. The governor of Aleppo and Damascus, the famous Nur al-Din (Elisseeff 1967), having taken note of the very serious damage that had struck Aleppo, set up camp nearby and personally directed the work of reconstructing the walls and buildings, also taking into account the fact that the city could be treacherously attacked by the Crusaders. By way of confirmation of the seriousness and extent of the damage, the sources report that the cost of the reconstruction work was extremely high. Another location visited by Nur al-Din was the city of Ba`rin. The Syrian governor was indeed worried for his own safety, given that the location was very close to the Crusaders' military outposts. The historian Ibn al-Athir records that there was frantic repair work in the Crusaders' territories as well, since they feared an attack from Nur al-Din ("both parties rushed to reconstruct, each one fearing the other"). Indeed, the reconstruction was immediate and required enormous sums of money in Antioch too. At Crak des Chevaliers (Hisn al-Akrad) the work went on for a long time. As has been mentioned above, Amalric I donated the castles of Archis and Gibelacar to the Hospitaller Knights in order to improve his shaky finances, on condition that they rebuilt them. In Damascus, most of the population was panic-stricken and, fearing new shocks, abandoned the city and sought refuge in the desert.

Historical sources: an overall view

The earthquake struck during the period between the Second and Third Crusades. The serious damage it caused remained impressed on the memories of contemporaries, and was passed down to later generations. Hence the large number of sources which record it, each adding to the information provided by the others.

Three independent source traditions can be distinguished: Latin (including Italian and French), Syriac and Arabic. Another small and more heterogeneous group consists of Armenian, Greek and Hebrew sources. The corpus of sources set out here is the same as that used in Guidoboni et al. (2004), where those in Latin have been shown to make a fundamental contribution to our understanding of the event.

The most important Latin sources are three documents: a letter and a document from Amalric I, an appeal from pope Alexander III and the chronicle of William of Tyre. He was a contemporary writer, and indeed the most important Latin author in the Holy Land. He was in Syria from 1162 onwards, and was appointed archbishop of Tyre in 1175. The letter from king Amalric I of Jerusalem to king Louis VII of France (1137- 1180) was written in July-August 1170. The document of 1170, also from Amalric I, certifies that the castles of Archas (Arche) and Akkar (Gibelacar) are ceded to the Knights of the Order of St.John of Jerusalem (the Hospitallers), on condition that they are rebuilt. The appeal to the Church of France for funds was drawn up on 8 December 1170 on the orders of pope Alexander III (1159-1181).

The other Latin sources are much briefer and in more general terms than the above, so we only list those which date to the 12th century:

• Annales Pisani of Bernardo Maragone, a politician and ambassador of Pisa
• Annales Vizeliacenses from the abbey of Vezelay: they go back to the middle of the 12th century, and were continued up to 1343
• Chronica of Robert of Torigny (or Robertus de Monte), a monk at the abbey of Bec from 1128 to 1154, and subsequently abbot of Mont-St-Michel
• Annales Floreffienses, from the abbey of Floreffe
• Chronicle mistakenly attributed to William Godel but in fact compiled by an unidentified author who belonged to the entourage of the archbishop of Sens
• Annales Colonienses maximi, drawn up in the 1170s by a canon of Cologne cathedral, and continued up to 1220
• Annales Gastinenses, a shortened version of the Annales Uticenses, which was continued from 1161 to 1226 by the monks of the abbey of Gatines
• Annales Magdeburgenses, compiled in the monastery of Kloster Berge, near Magdeburg, up to 1188, and continued up to the mid-15th century
• Annales Admuntenses from the abbey of Admont, compiled by various hands from the second half of the 12th century up to 1250

As far as Syriac sources are concerned, the most important is the chronicle compiled by Michael the Syrian, a contemporary writer. His text was used by Bar Hebraeus, a 13th century writer, in his chronicle. There is also a brief reference to the earthquake in the Chronicon ad annum Christi 1234, compiled in the first half of the 13th century. Of the Arabic sources, the most informative are Ibn al-Athir, a historian from Mosul who visited Baghdad and Aleppo, and Sibt ibn al-Jawzi, who settled at Damascus. Both these writers lived in the second half of the 12th century and the first half of the 13th. Reports of the earthquake in the works of 13th century writers are much briefer and more telegraphic. The writers concerned are: the historian and biographer Ibn al- Adim, a native of Aleppo; the historian and textual scholar Abu Shama, from Damascus; the historian Ibn Wasil, who was also an ambassador; and the historian and geographer Ibn Shaddad, a native of Aleppo who later lived in Egypt. Of later writers, we pick out Ibn Qadi Shuhba, a Syrian who lived in the second half of the 14th century and the first half of the 15th.

The earthquake is recorded not only in the above-mentioned three traditions, but also in one contemporary Jewish source, the traveller Benjamin of Tudela, a native of Spain, in one contemporary Greek source, namely the work of Neophytus Enkleistus, a Cypriot saint and hagiographer; and it gains a passing mention in a few Armenian sources: namely, what are known as the Annals of King Het`um (Chron. min. Arm., 1.3, p.76) and a brief anonymous chronicle (Chron. min. Arm., 11.24, p.502).

Latin sources

ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTS

A few weeks after the earthquake, in July-August 1170, king Amalric I of Jerusalem sent a letter to king Louis VII of France (1137-1180). It has been published in Mayer (1989, p.484):

To Louis by the grace of God the most Christian king of the Franks, most dear lord and father, from Amalric, by the same grace of God king of Jerusalem, greetings. Amidst the daily torments of our enemies, which have so weakened the eastern church that it is close to ruin, there has come an extraordinary disaster through the just but hidden judgment of God. For on the day of the passion of the apostles Peter and Paul [29 June], a terrible earthquake suddenly and unexpectedly reduced the city of Tripoli to ruins, killing almost everyone who was there. It also shook Margat, Gabulum [Gabala] and Laodicea, and almost all the castles and towns between Tripoli and Antioch in such an amazing and indescribable way that no trace of buildings can be seen. In Antioch, too, quite apart from the fact that houses and other buildings were torn apart and almost all reduced to ruins, so that we are bound to speak with a deep groan of grief, town walls were damaged to such an extent that they seem to be beyond repair, and indeed they are. The result is that Antioch and Tripoli and their dependent provinces will be occupied by the enemies of the Cross of Christ, if Tripoli, Archas [Archis], Gibellum [Gibelacar], Laodicea, Margat and Antioch do not receive clandestine aid. But by the will of God, the land of the Gentiles is all laid waste, and their towns and fortresses have been more widely destroyed, not without some of their people being killed.

Ludovico dei gratia christianissimo Francorum regi, domino et patri karissimo, Amalricus per eandem gratiam Iherosolimorum rex salutem. Cotidianis, quibus Orientalis ecclesia usque ad sui defectum contunditur, inimicorum infestationibus, inusitata celitus iusto, sepe tamen oculto, dei iudicio accessit calamitas. In passione namquam apostolorum Petri et Pauli subitus et hactenus inauditus terre motus totam Tipolim funditus delevit et omnem fere in ea carnem suffocavit. Similiter Margat, Gabulum, Laodiciam et omnia pene castella et civitates, que suet a Tripoli usque Anthiochiam, miro et ineffabili modo excussit, ut nec edificiorum vestigia appareant. In Anthiochia quoque, quod non sine gravi gemitu loquimur, edificiorum et domorum, que ferme omnes corruerunt, discidium tacentes, tanta murorum ruina facta est, ut inreparabilis esse videatur et sit. Constat ergo quia Anthiochia et Tripolis cum provintiis sibi suffraganeis, nisi celitus .eis subveniatur, ab inimicis crucis Christi occupabuntur: Tripolis, Archas, Gibellum, Laodicia, Margat et Anthiochia. Sed deo disponente terra gentilium miserabilitus tota dissipata est urbesque et munitiones non sine suorum occisione latius deiecte.

According to a document dating to 1170 (published in Cartulaire de l'Ordre de St.Jean de Jerusalem), Amalric I ceded the castles of Archis (Arche) and Gibelacar to the Hospitallers, on condition that they were rebuilt:

In the name of the holy and indivisible Trinity, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Since it is our duty devoutly to seek the common benefit of the Christian community by means of wise justice and intuitive reasoning, and to excel in many other good works, we have taken steps, in accordance with the dictates of Divine Clemency, to ensure that the castles of Arche and Gibelacar, which have been reduced to ruins by the earthquake, are not lost to the Christians. Let it therefore be known that [...] I, Amalric, by the grace of God, fifth king of the Latins of Jerusalem and regent of the County of Tripoli, have given to God and to the holy House of the Hospital and to Gilbert, by the grace of God, the venerable Master of the House, the above-mentioned castles of Arche and Gibelacar, in perpetuity with all their rights and appurtenances, in order that they shall be rebuilt [...]. In the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1170, in the first indiction".

In nomine summe et individue trinitatis, patris filiii et spiritus sancti, amen. Quoniam communi christianitatis utilitati pie providere censura justicie et rationis intuitu ceteris etiam bonis operibus precellere dinoscitur, castro quod dicitur Arche et Gibelacar, terre motu funditus eversis, prout divina nobis administravit dementia, ne christiculis amitterentur subvenire curavimus Patet igitur scire volentibus quod ego Amalricus, Dei gratia Jerosolimorum rex Latinorum quintus, Tripolis comitatum procurans, Deo et sanctae domui Hospitalis Jerusalem, et Giberto, Dei gratia domus ejusdem venerabili magistro prenominata castra, Archas videlicet et Gibelacar, restauranda perhenniterque cum suis omnibus pertinentiis et juribus possedenda donavi Anno dominice incarnationis M C L XX, indiction prima.

As the editor of the letter points out, its dating presents some problems, for Gilbert d'Assailly, Grand Master of the Order of Hospitallers, proves to have resigned from this post around September 1169. However, negotiations to resolve the crisis at the head of the Order may well account for his still appearing formally in that position in 1170, and hence being the legal recipient of a royal deed of gift. Furthermore, his successor, Caste de Muriols, was certainly elected some time in 1171, though the exact date is not known (Delaville Le Roulx 1904, pp.78-9; king 1931, pp.98-9).

Worries over the situation resulting from the earthquake are evident in an appeal to the Church of France, drawn up on 8 December 1170 on the orders of pope Alexander III (1159-1181) to gather funds for the earthquake-stricken towns and castles in the Holy Land, and especially for the Church of Nazareth:

Bishop Alexander, servant of the servants of God. Beloved sons, to all the faithful in the realm of France, [we give] apostolic blessing and [we wish them] good health. You will all have been able to learn, from the accounts of travellers, of the trials, tribulations, sufferings and troubles experienced by the towns, castles and other places in the Eastern Lands; nevertheless, it has seemed appropriate to us, not without much concern, to remind you of these things, and to urge you even more insistently to exercise your charity in the face of these disasters. By the inscrutable will of God, many towns and castles have been wholly or partly reduced to ruins or razed to the ground by the earthquake, and a multitude of people have lost their lives in the ruins. And emboldened by this, the enemies of Christ have tyrannically occupied some Christian places. Amongst these is a large and populous village belonging to the Church of Nazareth, where, for their sins, clergy and other inhabitants have been taken prisoner. For this reason, and because of other troubles, the canons of the above-mentioned church find themselves in a state of such want and poverty that, unless the other faithful come to their aid, they will no longer be able to remain in His church and pay their Creator his tribute. [-J. Issued at Tuscolo on the sixth day before the Ides of December [8 December]".

Alexander episcopus servus servorum Dei. Dilectis filiis universis fidelibus per regnum Francie constitutis salutem et apostolicam benedictionem. Civitatum, castellorum et aliorum locorum, terre Orientalis desolationem, tribulationes et angustias, pariter et dolores, licet ex relatione commeantium vestra potuerit universitas didicisse, vobis tamen non sine merore necessarium duximus significare et ad compassionem tantorum malorum vestram sollicitare studiosius caritatem. Divino siquidem et occulto iudicio faciente ex terre motu plures civitates et oppida, quedam ex toto, quedam ex parte diruta et funditus evulsa, in ruina quorum ingens hominum multitudo est suffocate. Unde quidam inimici contrarii Christi audaciam assumentes nonnulla loca Christianorum invasion tyrannica occuparunt; inter quae magnum et populosum casale ecclesie Nazarene peccatis exigentibus capientes clericos et ceteros habitatores in captivitatem duxerunt. Inde est, quod canonici prescripte ecclesie turn ex hoc, turn ex aliis malis et angustiis supervenientibus ad tantam devenere inopiam et paupertatem, quod nisi a Dei fidelibus adiuventur, in ecclesia sua non poterunt diutius ad summi conditoris obsequium permanere. Datum Tusculano VI idus decembris.

ANNALS AND CHRONICLES

As we have already pointed out, the most important Latin source is the chronicle of William of Tyre (pp.934-6), which provides a long and detailed description of the earthquake:

A very great earthquake struck almost the whole of the East, and destroyed some very ancient cities. The following summer, that is to say in the seventh year of king Amalric's reign [king Amalric I of Jerusalem, 1163-1174], in the month of June, there was an earthquake of such violence in eastern parts that none greater is known to the memory of man in this century. It reduced to ruins some of the most ancient and best fortified cities in all the East, plunging their inhabitants into disaster and reducing buildings to rubble, with the result that there were very few survivors. From one end of these lands to the other, there was no place where families did not lose a member or suffer some domestic tragedy: lamentations and funerals were everywhere. Amongst these places, even cities in our provinces of Coelesyria and Phoenicia - great cities ennobled by their centuries-old history, have collapsed in ruins. In Coelesyria, the earthquake totally destroyed the city of Antioch, the capital of many provinces and once the head of many realms, killing its inhabitants. Its walls and the very strong towers along their circuit - a work of incomparable strength - were shaken with such violence, together with churches and other buildings, that even today, in spite of continuous work, enormous expenditure, constant care and devoted zeal, they can scarcely be said to have been restored to an acceptable condition. The coastal towns of Gabulum [Gabala] and Laodicea in the same province were also destroyed, as well as other inland towns held by the enemy: Verea - also called Halapia [Aleppo] - Cesara [Shayzar], Hama, Emissa [Hims] and many others; not to mention countless smaller places. In Phoenicia, furthermore, on the third day before the Calends of July [29 June], towards the first hour of the day, the noble and populous city of Tripoli was suddenly shaken by so violent an earthquake that scarcely anyone who was there escaped alive. The whole city became a heap of rubble, burying the inhabitants, and crushing them beneath this public tomb. At Tyre, the most famous city in the province, on the other hand, an even more violent earthquake proved to be no danger to the population, though it did cause the collapse of some very solidly built towers. In enemy territory as well as our own, towns were seen to be half in ruins, and therefore helpless before the wiles and attacks of their enemies. Consequently, as long as each one feared to bring down upon himself the wrath of the stern judge, he took care not to injure his neighbour. Each had his own sufficient troubles, and since domestic affairs brought their own problems, harming one's neighbour was abandoned. A brief truce was arranged, thanks to the efforts of men, and a treaty was drawn up out of fear of divine judgment. And since each man expected due heavenly punishment for his sins, he held back from hurling himself upon the usual objects of his hostility, and curbed his aggression. In this case, divine wrath manifested itself not just once, as usually happens, but for three or four months or more; three or four times a day, and perhaps even more, by day and night, an awesome shaking of the earth was felt. Every shock was regarded with apprehension, and nowhere was it possible to live in calm and safety. And even the minds of those who slept were so cast down by the fears of waking hours, that the calm of sleep was broken, and their bodies suddenly shook in agitation. However, our upper provinces - Palestine, that is to say - with all that they contain, were spared these great ills by the grace of God".

Terremotus maximus pene universum concutit Orientem et urbes deicit antiquissimas. Estate vero sequente, anno videlicet domini Amalrici septimo, mense Iunio, tantus tamque vehemens circa partes Orientales terremotus factus est, quantus qualisque memoria seculi presentis hominum nunquam legitur accidisse. Hic universi Orientalis tractus urbes antiquissimas et munitissimas funditus diruens, habitatores earum ruina involvens edificiorum casu contrivit, ut ad exiguam redigeret paucitatem. Non erat usque ad extremum terre locus, quem familiaris iactura, dolor domesticus non angeret: ubique luctus, ubique funebria tractabantur. Inter quas et provinciarum nostrarum Celessyrie et Phenicis urbes quam maximas et serie seculorum antiquitate nobiles, solotenus deiecit: in Celessyria multarum provinciarum metropolim olimque multorum moderatricem regnorum Antiochiam cum populo in ea commorante, stravit funditus, menia et in eorum circuitu turres validissimas, incomparabilis soliditatis opera, ecclesias et quelibet edificia tanto subvertit impetu, quod usque hodie multis laboribus, sumptis inmensis, continua sollicitudine et indefesso studio vix possint saltem ad statum mediocrem reparari. Ceciderunt in eadem provincia urbes egregie, de maritimis quidem Gabulum et Laodicia, de mediterraneis vero, licet ab hostibus detinerentur, Verea, que alio nomine dicitur Halapia, Cesara, Hamam, Emissa et alie multe, municipiorum autem non erat numerus. In Phenice autem Tripolis, civitas nobilis et populosa, tercio Kalendas Iulii tanto terremotus impetu circa primam diei horam subito concussa est, ut vix uni de omnibus, qui infra eius ambitum reperti sunt, salutis via pateret: facta est tota civitas quasi agger lapidum et oppressorum civium tumulus et sepulchrum publicum. Sed et Tyri, que est eiusdem provincie metropolis famosissima, terremotus violentior, absque tamen civium periculo, turres quasdam robustissimas deiecit. Inveniebantur tam apud nos quam apud hostes opida semiruta, insidiis et hostium viribus late patentia, sed dum quisque districti iudicis iram sibi metuit, alium molestare pertimescit. Sufficit cuique dolor suus et dum quemlibet cura fatigat domestica, alii differt inferre molestias: facta est, sed brevis, pax, hominum studio procurata, et foedus compositum, divinorum iudiciorum timore conscriptum, et dum indignationem peccatis suis debitam expectat quisque desuper, ab his que hostiliter solent inferri manum revocat et impetus moderatur. Nec ad horam, ut plerumque solet, fuit ista ire dei revelatio, sed tribus aut quattuor mensibus, vel etiam eo amplius, ter aut quater vel plerumque saepius vel in die vel in nocte sentiebatur motus ille tam formidabilis. Omnis motus iam suspectus erat et nusquam tuta quies inveniebatur, sed et dormientis animus plerumque, quod vigilans timuerat perhorrescens, in subitum saltum, rupta quiete, corpus agitari compellebat. Superiores tamen nostre provincie, Palestine videlicet, horum omnium domino protegente fuerunt expertes malorum.

The fact that the author draws attention to the greater violence of the earthquake at Tyre, without the city suffering much damage, may reflect a desire on his part to emphasise both the solidity of its buildings and the divine protection bestowed upon it. Of the other Latin sources listed above, we quote only the Annales Pisani of Bernardo Maragone:

In the year of our Lord 1171, in the third indiction. Since the times of Dathan and Abiron and of Sodom and Gomorrah, there have never been such amazing and disturbing prodigies as those which then took place in the land of Jerusalem. The city of Tripoli with its great church dedicated to the Blessed Virgin Mary and all its people, and half the city of Antioch, with the church of St.Peter the Apostle, where the the saint's throne was preserved, as well as many villages and castles belonging to the above cities, were destroyed by an earthquake on the very day of the feast of St.Peter, which falls on the third day before the Calends of July [29 June]. And the earthquake caused the death of at least forty thousand Christians and many animals. On the same day, Aleppo, Cesara [Shayzar] and Hama, large towns belonging to the Saracens, together with their depend- ent villages and castles, including the great castle of Uringa [Harim], were destroyed by the earthquake. It caused the death of more than two hundred thousand Saracens".

Anno Domini MCLXXI, indictione III. A temporibus Dathan et Abiron et Sodome et Gomorre non fuerunt tam miranda et stupenda prodigia, qualia evenerunt in terra Ierosolimitana. Civitas Tripoli cum magna ecclesia dedicata ad honorem beate Virginis Marie, cum toto populo, et medietas civitatis Antioche cum ecclesia beati Petri apostoli, in qua cathedra eius fuit, et cum aliquantis villis et castellis predictarum civitatum, ipsa sollempnitate sancti Petri, que est III Kalendas Iulii, a terre motu subverse sunt. De quo terre motu XL milia hominum chrisitanorum et ultra perierunt, et bestie multe. Similiter eodem die Alap, Cesaria, Emma, civitates magne Sarracenorum, cum parte villarum et castrorum earum, et Uringa castrum magnum, a terre motu subverse sunt. De quo terremotu CC milia Saracenorum et ultra perierunt.

Syriac sources

The most important Syriac source is the chronicle of Michael the Syrian, which records:

In the same year fourteen hundred and eighty-one [of the Greeks, 1170], on Monday 29 Haziran [June], there was a violent earthquake, and the earth trembled like a boat on the sea [the beginning of Michael the Syrian's account is missing in the original Syriac, and so the opening sentence has been supplied from the parallel passage in Bar Hebraeus] [...] We were in the monastery church of Mar Hananya, and lay prostrate before the altar, to which we clung and were tossed about from one side to the other [...] when we saw and heard and were assured that there was absolutely no damage in the monastery nor in the whole region. And when we heard what horrors had taken place in the lands and in the cities [...] In this earthquake, the city of Berotha, that is to say Aleppo, collapsed in ruins... And those who said that God could not save or deliver the prisoners from their hands [i.e. from the Arabs], were suddenly heaped up in piles by the earthquake: their walls and their houses were reduced to ruins, and the air and the water became infected by (the bodies of) the suffocated. The whole city was rent asunder and became a series of cracks and fissures. The black ones (?) went up on them. The whole city became a heap of ruins. And what shows most clearly that the sword of anger had been drawn against it, is that nowhere else was there such horror. The seaward wall of Antioch collapsed, and the great church of the Greeks collapsed completely. The sanctuary of the great church of St.Peter collapsed, as well as houses and churches in various places. About fifty souls died in Antioch. Jabala completely collapsed. And in Tripoli a large part (of the city) and the great church similarly collapsed. And in the other coastal cities, and at Damascus, Homs and Hama, and in all the other towns and villages, the earthquake caused major disasters; but nowhere else had a disaster similar to that which had happened to Aleppo been seen or heard of [...] Although the whole town of Aleppo collapsed, our church was preserved and not a single stone fell from it. And in Antioch three churches were saved for us: that is to say, the church of the Mother of God, and those of St.George, and St.Barsauma. In Jabala, too, the little church we had was preserved, and the same is true of the churches in Laodicea and Tripoli.

Arabic sources

Arabic sources call this earthquake "the Aleppo earthquake". The account provided by Ibn al-Athir is rich in detail:

In that same year [565 H.], on 12 Shawwal [29 June], the earth shook a number of times in a terrifying way: no-one had ever seen anything like it. The earthquake struck the whole region of Syria, Mesopotamia, Mawsil and Iraq. The most devastating effects were produced in Syria: there was very serious damage at Damascus, Ba'alabik, Hims, Hamat, Shayzar, Ba`rin, Aleppo and elsewhere; walls and citadels were destroyed everywhere; the walls of houses fell on to the inhabitants, who were killed in great numbers. When Nur al-Din heard about the earthquake, he came to Ba'alabik to rebuild the ruined walls and citadel, unaware that the earthquake had brought destruction to other places as well. When he arrived, he was told of the situation in the rest of the country: town walls destroyed and inhabitants scattered. When he had put someone in charge of reconstruction and defence at Ba'alabik, Nur al-Din made his way to Hims, in order to guarantee protection to its people; then he went to Hamat, and then to Ba`rin. The whole country was in severe danger from the Franks, especially the citadel of Ba`rin, which was near their positions and had lost all its surrounding walls. So he left part of his army there under the command of a general, so that reconstruction work could be carried out night and day. Then he went to Aleppo, where the effects of the earthquake were beyond comparison with what had happened at other towns. The survivors were still in a state of panic, which kept them from returning to places that had not been damaged, for fear of further shocks. Moreover, they were terrified at the idea of remaining in the countryside near Aleppo, because there was the danger that the Franks might attack. When Nur al-Din saw the effects of the earthquake on the town and its inhabitants, he camped outside Aleppo and directed the work of reconstruction himself, overseeing the work of the labourers and masons until the town walls, mosques and houses had been rebuilt. The cost of the work was enormous. In the territory of the Franks as well, - may God destroy them - the earthquake caused a great deal of damage. They too worked feverishly at reconstruction, fearing an attack by Nur al-Din. In this way, both sides hurried to rebuild, each out of fear of the other.

Sibt Ibn al-Jawzi also provides a great deal of information:

In the month of Shawwal, there were terrible earthquakes in Syria, causing severe damage at Damascus: the balconies of the mosque [the Great Umayyad Mosque] collapsed, as well as the tops of the minarets, which shook like palm trees on a stormy day. [...] The earthquakes which struck Aleppo were even stronger: half of its citadel collapsed, and there was severe damage in the city; 80,000 people are reckoned to have died in the ruins. The walls of all the fortresses were damaged, and the people fled into the countryside. Hisn al-Akrad collapsed, and no trace of its walls was left. The same thing happened at Hamat and Hims. When Nur al-Din came to Aleppo, he was worried that the collapse of its walls would expose it to enemy attack. The earthquake was felt everywhere. Muslim fortresses were destroyed throughout the province of Syria: at Aleppo, at other towns, and at Antioch. The earthquake even reached Laodicea and Jabala, and struck all the coastal towns, as far as Byzantine territory. They say that the only man to be killed at Damascus was struck by a piece of stone as he climbed the Jayrun steps, the entire population having fled into the desert. The earthquake then reached the Euphrates, struck Mawsil, Sinjar, Nisibin, al-Ruha, Harran, Al-Raqqa, Mardin and other towns as well, reaching as far as Bagdad, Basra and other towns in Iraq: No-one had ever seen such an earthquake since the beginning of Islam.

The accounts provided by the other four 13th century Arab historians are much briefer. According to Abu Shama

al-Imad al-Isfahani said:

the Frankish citadels of Hisn al-Akrad, Safita and Arqa, near Ba`rin, collapsed in the waves of the earthquake; the first of the three, in particular, was left without walls, and rebuilding work kept the Franks occupied for a long time. From all parts of Syria came news of earthquakes and their disastrous effects; but one piece of news gladdened hearts in the midst of such desolation: the damage inflicted on Frankish camps was even worse. For the earthquake caught them on a feast day, when they had gathered in church. Ceilings collapsed on their heads, and so punishment came whence they would never have expected it.

Ibn Wasil simple records:

This earthquake came to be known as the earthquake of Aleppo and its region, just as that of the year 552 was the earthquake of Hamat

Ibn al-Adim reports

Nur al-Din was informed of the earthquakes which had struck Syria, especially the one which had destroyed Aleppo, and which, because of the continuing shocks, had caused the inhabitants to abandon the town and take refuge in the country from dawn on Monday 12 Shawwal [30 June].

Finally, Ibn Shaddad reports:

There was an earthquake at Aleppo which destroyed a large part of that region. It was on 12 Shawwal in the year 565. Many confuse this earthquake with that of 552.

Hebrew source

A 12th century Jewish traveller, Benjamin of Tudela, a native of Spain, made a long journey to visit numerous Hebrew communities in the Near East. In his account he mentions some violent earthquakes that hit Tripoli and Hamah, and that caused the death of many Jews. The text by Benjamin does not contain any explicit chronological references, if we exclude the citing of the year 4933 of the Hebrew calendar, corresponding to 1173 of the Julian calendar, inserted by the author to indicate the year of his return to Spain. However, the implicit chronological references in this text allow us to date Benjamin's journey between the first half of the 1160s and 1173. In the passage that is referred to Tripoli of Syria, Benjamin writes that the earthquake had occurred "in the past years", and in the one concerning the city of Hamah, "several years before". According to Prawer (1988, pp.193-4), in both cases Benjamin was referring to the earthquake of 29 June 1170. The text of the two passages is the following:

Some years ago there was an earthquake at Tripoli, in which many Jews and Gentiles lost their lives, because houses and walls collapsed on top of them. At that time, the whole of Tres Isra'el was laid waste, and more than twenty thousand people died there. [...1. Hamah, that is to say Hamath, is one day's journey [from Hims]; it stands on the banks of the river Jabboq, at the foot of Mt.Lebanon. Some years ago, there was a great earthquake in the city and in a single day twenty-five thousand people were killed, of whom about two hundred were Jews, but seventy survived.

Greek source

We think we can add to our corpus of sources the text of Neophytus Enkleistus, who was living on the island of Cyprus:

Then [after the Paphos earthquake of c.1165], a short time later, a monk of the great city of Antioch came to see me, and told me that there had been a tremendous earthquake in that city; not only, he said, was the earth violently shaken, but it also made a roaring noise and was split open, and stones were thrown down as though into an abyss. As the earth joined together again, stones which were on the upper edges were hurled upwards as though they had been thrown by a ballista. Not only did the town walls and a large proportion of houses collapse, but also the great church, killing the patriarch and a great many other people.

In the period of this earthquake, between Syria and Turkey there was also a small Armenian kingdom (Lesser Armenia or Armenian Cilicia). Presumably some mention of this earthquake in several Armenian chronicles was due to direct contact with the affected areas. There are two Armenian texts that contain some reference to this earthquake: the so-called Annals of King Het`um (Chron. min. Arm., 1.3, 76) and a short anonymous chronicle (Chron. min. Arm., 11.24, 502), both published by Hakobyan (1951-56).



References

Guidoboni, E. and A. Comastri (2005). Catalogue of Earthquakes and Tsunamis in the Mediterranean Area from the 11th to the 15th Century, INGV.

Figure 5 - Cities hit by the earthquake in June 1170, cited in the text of William of Tyre,
coeval Latin author. Circles indicate the seven locations that could have been hit by an
earthquake occurring before 29 June; they are all situated in the area north of Lebanon
(Coelesyria region); squares indicate the two cities of Lebanon cited as having been hit by
the earthquake on 29 June (Phoenicia region); and dots indicate the remaining locations cited
by the other sources with no distinction (June or 29 June) (see Table 3). Taking into consideration
the hypothesis of two distinct events, there is a central area, roughly between Arche and Akkar,
of highly uncertain attribution from Guidoboni et al, 2004



References

Guidoboni, E., et al. (2004). "The large earthquake on 29 June 1170 (Syria, Lebanon, and central southern Turkey)." Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 109(B7).

Fig. 10. Map of intensity distribution for June 29, 1170 earthquake.(from Sbeinati et al, 2005)

〈084〉 1170 June 29

• Damascus: VII-VIII
• Homs: VII-VIII
• Hama: VII-VIII
• Al-Sham: VII-VIII
• Lattakia: VII-VIII
• Baalbak: VII-VIII
• Shaizar: VII-VIII
• Barin: VII
• Aleppo: VII-VIII
• Iraq: V
• Al-Jazira: V
• Al-Mousel: V

• Tsunami
• aftershocks

Sources

In this year [565 A.H.] [1169 September 25-1170 September 14], there was a great earthquake, destroying Al-Sham. (Abu Al-Fida)

Also in this year [565 A.H.] 12 Shawwal [1170 June 29], there were successive great terrible earthquakes which had never been seen before. Al-Sham, Al-Jazira, Al-Mousel, Iraq and other countries were affected. They were strongest in Al-Sham, where most of Damascus, Baalbak, Homs, Hama, Shaizar, Barin, Aleppo and others were destroyed, with their ramparts and fortresses, houses collapsed over their residents, killing countless numbers of people. Sultan Nur ed-Din visited these later towns and ordered to rebuild their ramparts and fortresses, while he found Aleppo had not been destroyed as these towns previously. Bilad Al-Firnj [in that time during the Crusader wars the Syrian coastal area was occupied by the Crusaders and called in Arabic Bilad Al-Firanj] was affected. (Ibn Al-Athir)

during the year of 1170, there was a very large earthquake that occurred in Northern Syria, causing heavy damage in Lattakia and other cities. (Saadeh, 1984)

Parametric catalogues

• Ambraseys and Barazangi (1989): 1170 June 29, 35.9N-36.4E, M_S > 7.0, tsunami.
• Plassard and Kogoj (1981): 1170 June 29, in Lebanon I = IX, there was an earthquake, causing destruction in Tripoli and Aleppo (Al-Suyuti; Berloty; Guillaume de Tyre; Perrey).
• Poirier and Taher (1980): 1170 June 30, I₀ = IXX (MMS), Aleppo was totally destroyed with 80,000 victims. Damage in Orontes Valley. In Antioch, St. Peters cathedral collapsed over the patriarch.
• Ben-Menahem (1979): 1170 June 29, 34.6N, 36.2E, I₀ = XI-XII, M_L = 7.9, damage and casualties in Palestine. It was felt throughout Mesopotamia, Cyprus and Upper Egypt. Tripoli ruined. Destruction at Damascus, Sur, Sidon and Baalbak (most columns fell down). Damage to the walls of Sur. Jerusalem (M_M = V-VI). The obelisk at Caesaria may have been thrown down (Amiran; Humphrey; Plassard and Kogoj; Sieberg; Willis).

Seismological compilations

• Ambraseys et al. (1994): 1170 June 29, 35.0N-36.5E, I ≤ VI. A catastrophic earthquake in northwest Syria, felt in Egypt (Abu Shama; Ibn Al-Athir; Ibn Qadi Shuhba).
• Sieberg (1932): 1170 June 29, a destructive earthquake in Syria, killing 2000 persons. Lattakia and half of Hosn Al-Akrad were ruined. Antioch, Jableh, Tripoli and Jerusalem were also felt. Cyprus, Egypt and Mousel were also felt. Aftershocks lasted for three months.

References

Sbeinati, M. R., R. Darawcheh, and M. Monty (2005). "The historical earthquakes of Syria: An analysis of large and moderate earthquakes from 1365 B.C. to 1900 A.D.", Ann. Geophys. 48(3): 347-435.

Fig. 4. Intensity distribution determined by Ambraseys (2009) for the 1170 earthquake.
Circles indicate locations at which intensity values can be estimated from available
historical sources. (from Hough and Avni, 2011)

Hough and Avni, 2011 estimated M 6.6 for the 1170 CE earthquake using an attenuation relationship developed from the 1927 Jericho Quake and site specific Intensity estimates which were curated (generally downgraded to lower values) from Ambraseys (2009).

References

Hough, S. E., and R. Avni (2011). "The 1170 and 1202 Dead Sea Rift earthquakes and long term magnitude distribution on the Dead Sea fault zone." Isr. J. Earth Sci. 57.

1170 June 29 12 Sharvwal 565 North Syria

A catastrophic earthquake in northwest Syria was said to have been felt in Egypt.¹ There is no evidence of the effects there, nor has a reference so far been found in later Egyptian sources.²

References

Ambraseys, N. N., et al. (1994). The seismicity of Egypt, Arabia, and the Red Sea : a historical review. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

30 JUNE 1170 A.D. 12 SHAWWAL 565 A.H. Monday at dawn

Event continuing in the year 598 A.H. (1202 A.D.)

NAJA: We had already reported a type I error in (BM1)

- (565), Earthquake associated with the Bekaa faults, namely the Yammouneh, Shaba or Serghaya faults; strong at Baalbek, and at Damascus; felt in Mesopotamia and Palestine M_L = 6.7 (BM1) which refers to the work of (Will) and (SIEB).

- June 29, 1170, 34°,6N 36°,2E, Io=XI -XII, ML = 7.9 (BM1) felt in Mesopotamia, in Cyprus, Egypt. Destructions at Damascus, Tire, Sidon, and Baalbek, Tripoli ruined. Damages and Victims in Palestine,..., (BM1) also refers to the work of (Will) and (SIEB) and 5 other contributions.

NAJA: It is certain that these "two events" are in fact only one; this is due to a type I error; this mistake was made by (Will - 1928), and propagated by (SIEB-1932); the error was pointed out in Willis (1933), corrected and verified by (AMBR1-1962) but taken over by (BM1-1979). What is remarkable are the quantifications, the dispersion notes in the magnitude calculations for the "two" cases 6.7 and 7.9, as well as the locations of two sites considered as independent.

- June 30, 1170, 12 SHAWWAL 565 A.H., Aleppo (IX-X), Antioch (IX), Damascus (VIII). (PTAH); Aleppo was totally destroyed, there were 80,000 victims; damage in the Antioch area (PRETA).

- Very numerous descriptions and testimonies in (TAHA) which can justify the intensity estimates proposed by (PTAH and PRETA), but we give the complete list of the cities mentioned, as well as the most significant testimonies, the following for example... according to Ibn Wasil, "This earthquake is known as the earthquake of Aleppo and its region, it resembles the earthquake of Hama of the year 552 apr. H. (TAHA)." Briefly, the cities and regions mentioned are Syria, Mesopotamia, Iraq, Mosul, but the maximum force was in Syria: Damascus, Baalbek, Homs, Hama, Chizar, Baarine, Aleppo (where the citadels, the walls and the houses collapsed and where there were victims under the ruins, impossible to count), Antioch, Latakia, and the whole coast; but they say there was only one victim in Damascus, killed by a stone that fell on her, because the people of Damascus had already evacuated to the desert,... The tremors followed one another for many days,... Here is another significant testimony..: "there was an earthquake in Aleppo, which caused a lot of destruction, it is another earthquake than that of Hama of the year 552 A.H., then the reader should not think that it is a mistake, there were indeed two earthquakes", (TAHA). It remains to mention that these events were widely commented upon by the people of the time, and often inspired the survivors with poems which reflect extent of damage, see (TAHA pp. 81-120).

French

30 JUIN 1170 apr. J.C., 12 CHAW 565 apr. H., le lundi à l'aube.

Evénement se poursuivant en l'année 598 apr. H. (1202 apr. J.C.)

NAJA : Nous avions déjà signalé une- erreur du type I dans (BM1)

- - (565), Séisme associé aux failles de la Békaa, soient les failles de Yamouné, Shaba ou Sergaya ; fort à Baalbek, et à Damas ; ressenti en Mésopotamie et en Palestine ML = 6,7 (BM1) qui se réfère aux travaux de (Will) et de (SIEB).

- 29 juin 1170, 34°,6N 36°,2E, Io=XI -XII, ML = 7,9 (BM1) ressenti en Mésopotamie, à Chypre, en Egypte. Destructions à Damas, à Tyr, à Sidon, et à Baalbek, Tripoli ruiné. Dommages et victimes en Palestine,..., (BM1) se réfère également au travaux de (Will) et (SIEB) et à 5 autres contributions.

NAJA : il est certain que ces "deux événements" n'en sont en fait qu'un s'eul ; cela est dû à une erreur du type I ; cette erreur a été commise par (Will - 1928), et propagée par (SIEB-1932) ; l'erreur été soulignée dans Willis (1933), corrigée et vérifiée par (AMBR1-1962) mais reprise par (BM1-1979). Ce qui est remarquable, ce sont les quantifications , la dispersion constate dans les calculs de magnitudes pour les "deux" cas 6,7 et 7,9, ainsi que les localisations de deux sites consi¬dérés comme indépendants.

- 30 Juin 1170, le 12 CHAW. 565 apr. H., Alep (IX-X), Antioche (IX), Damas (VIII). (PTAH) ; Alep fut totalement détruite, il y a eu 80 000 victimes; des dommages dans la zone d'Antioche (PRETA).

- Descriptions et témoignages très nombreux dans (TAHA) qui peuvent justifier les estimations d'intensités proposées par (PTAH et PRETA), mais nous donnons la liste complète des villes mentionnées, ainsi que les témoignages les plus significatifs,, le suivant par exemple... d'après Ibri-Wasel, "Ce tremblement de terre est connu sous le nom du séisme d'Alep et de sa région, il .ressemble au séisme de Hama de l'année 552 apr. H. (TAHA)." Brièvement, les villes et les régions citées sont la Syrie, la Mésopotamie, l'Irak, Mossoul, mais la force maximale se situait en Syrie : Damas, Baalbek, Homs, Hama, Chizar, Baarine, Alep (où les citadelles, les murailles et les maisons se sont effondrées et où il y avait des victimes sous les ruines, impossibles.à compter), Antioche, Lattaquié, et toute la côte ; mais on dit qu'il n'y avait qu'une seule victime à Damas, tuée par une pierre qui est tombée sur elle, car les habitants de Damas l'avait déjà évacué pour le désert,... Les secousses se sont succédées pendant de nombreux jours, ... Voici un' autre témoignage significatif..: "il y a eu un séisme à Alep, qui a causé beaucoup de destruction , c'est un autre séisme que celui de Hama de l'année 552 apr. H., alors le lecteur ne devrait pas penser qu'il s'agit d'une erreur, il y a bien eu deux séismes", (TAHA). Il reste à mentionner que ces événements ont été largement commentés par les gens de l'époque,, et 'ont souvent inspiré aux survivants des poêmes qui reflètent d'étendue des dommages, voir (TAHA pp. 81-120).

References

Abou-Karaki, N. (1987). Synthèse et carte sismotectonique des pays de la bordure Orientale de la Méditerranée: sismicité du système de foilles du Jourdain – Mer Morte, University of Strasbourg, France. Ph.D. Diss.

• from Taher (1996)

565/1170 : on Shawwâl 12 (June 30),¹¹⁸, there was a terrible earthquake; its effects are felt in Syria, in Djezîra , in Mosul, in Iraq and in other countries, the zone of maximum intensity being Syria; he caused numerous devastation in Damascus, Belabak , Homs, Hamâ , Cézarée , Bârîn , Aleppo, al-`Awâsim ; we add¹¹⁹ Antioch, Lâdhiqiyya , Djabala , and all the cities of the coast, up to the countries of Rûm . It destroyed walls, ramparts and citadels and caused countless victims. Nûr al-Dîn travels to damaged towns and citadels to repair them. We learned of the seriousness of the damage among the Franks in the citadels, near Bârîn , Hisn al-Akrâd , Sâfithâ and al-Ruqâ . The Jewish traveler Benyamîn (Benjamin) of Tudela¹²⁰ reports that Tripoli had been afflicted by an earthquake before his arrival. There were victims among the Jews and also among the other inhabitants. Abu Shama¹²¹ says that the people in Syria settled in wooden huts; in Aleppo, Nûr al-Dîn built a wooden house with better security.

• Ben-Menahem (1991:Table 5g) states that more columns at Baalbek fell and King Herods' obelisk at Caesarea (founded 20 B.C.) [was] thrown down during this earthquake. Sources may be Brittanica (1910), Ergin et al (1967), Plasard and Kojoj (1968), Ben-Menahem (1979), Alsinawi and Galib (1975), Schaeffer (1948), Sieberg (1932a,b), Willis (1928), and/or somebodies imagination.

Ambraseys, N. N. and M. Barazangi (1989). "The 1759 Earthquake in the Bekaa Valley: Implications for earthquake hazard assessment in the Eastern Mediterranean Region." Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 94(B4): 4007-4013.

Ambraseys and Jackson (1998). "Faulting associated with historical and recent earthquakes in the Eastern Mediterranean region." Geophysical Journal International 133(2): 390-406.

Ambraseys and Jackson (1998). "Faulting associated with historical and recent earthquakes in the Eastern Mediterranean region." Geophysical Journal International 133(2): 390-406.

Guidoboni, E., et al. (2004). "The large earthquake on 29 June 1170 (Syria, Lebanon, and central southern Turkey)." Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 109(B7).

Hough, S. E., and R. Avni (2011). "The 1170 and 1202 Dead Sea Rift earthquakes and longâterm magnitude distribution on the Dead Sea fault zone." Isr. J. Earth Sci. 57.

Kázmér, M. and B. Major (2015). "Sāfitā castle and rockfalls in the ‘dead villages’ of coastal Syria – an archaeoseismological study." Comptes Rendus Geoscience 347(4): 181-190.

Kázmér, M., et al. (2010). Distinguishing damages from two earthquakes—Archaeoseismology of a Crusader castle (Al-Marqab citadel, Syria). Ancient Earthquakes, Geological Society of America. 471: 0.

Mayer Das syrische Erdbeben von 1170: Ein unedierter Brief Kanig Amalrichs von Jerusalem: CHAP.

Molin, K. (2001). Unknown Crusader Castles, Bloomsbury Academic.






Ancient Texts (partial list)


Benj. Tud.: Benjamin of Tudela, The Itinerary of Benjamin of Tudela, text and transi. M. Adler, London, 1907.

http://books.google.com/books?id=oBWAAAAAMAAJ
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/2988-benjamin-of-tudela
http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/mhl/mhl20.htm
https://archive.org/details/itineraryofrabbi01benjuoft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_of_Tudela
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14981/14981-h/14981-h.htm

MichaelTheSyrian, Chronicle

https://archive.org/details/ChronicleOfMichaelTheGreatPatriarchOfTheSyrians
http://rbedrosian.com/Msyr/msyrtoc.html

Galatariotou, C. (2004). The Making of a Saint: The Life, Times and Sanctification of Neophytos the Recluse, Cambridge University Press.

Hagenmeyer, H. (1902). Chronicon S. Maxentii Pictavensis.

ROBERT DE TORIGNI, Chronique de Robert de Torigni, abbé du Mont Saint Michel, suivie de diverses opuscules historiques de cet auteur et de plusieurs religeux de la meme abbaye, edited by L. DELISLE, Société de l’His- toire de Normandie, Rouen 1872-1873.

http://books.google.com/books?id=hl0UAQAAMAAJ
http://archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A%22Robert%2C%20de%20Torigni%2C%20d.%201186.%20Chronique%22
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_of_Torigni

Smbat, S. and G. Dayan (1980). La Chronique attribuée au connatable Smbat, Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner.

http://books.google.com/books?id=DOGZAAAAIAAJ
http://rbedrosian.com/cssint.htm

WILLIAM OF TYRE, Historia rerum in partibus transmarinis gestarum a tempore successorum Mahumeth usque ad a. 1184, cum vet. Trans. Gallica dicta Estoire de Eracles empereur et la conqueste de la terre d’Outremer», RHC Hist. Occid., vol. 1, Paris 1844.

http://books.google.com/books?id=BmtqPwAACAAJ
http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/williamtyre.html





Ancient Arabic Texts (partial list)


AJAMI ABU DARR, Sibt ibn al-Ajami, Kunuz al-dhahab fi tarikh Halab, translated by J. SAUVAGET, Materiaux pour servir à lâ histoire de la ville dâ Alep, Beirut 1950.

Ibn al-Athir, 'Izz al-Din, (Kitab) al-Kamil fil-tarikh, ed. C. J. Tornberg, Leiden, 1851-76; (C) RHC Hist.Orient., Paris, 1872; 12 volumes, ed. Tornberg, Leiden, 1851-1876.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_ibn_al-Athir
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Complete_History IBN AL-DAWADARI, Kanz al-durar wa jamiâ al-ghurar, edited by AL-MUNAJJID, vol. 7, Cairo 1960.

IBN AL-DAWADARI, Kanz al-durar wa jamiâ al-ghurar, edited by AL-MUNAJJID, vol. 7, Cairo 1960.

Al-Gawzi, S. I. and S. S. Hajjar (1982). Mir'at al-Zaman i tarih al-a'yan, S. Sayde Hajjar.

http://books.google.com/books?id=SrebOwAACAAJ
http://books.google.com/books?id=DbCFBX6b3eEC&pg=PA719&lpg=PA719&dq=Mir%E2%80%99at+al-zaman%22&source=bl&ots=btqPS__oiT&sig=2Md4QRv_y8etcJfGhX9M7blZ1do&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tpLcU9KLN8bD8AGEh4CwAg&ved=0CEUQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=Mir%E2%80%99at%20al-zaman%22&f=false
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibt_ibn_al-Jawzi

ABU SHAMA, Dhailâ ala al-raudatain fi akbar al-daulatayn, edited by M. ZAHID AL-KAUTHARI, Cairo 1947.
ABUSHAMA, Kitâb al-Raudatayn fi akbar al-daulatayn, edited by M. HILMI, 2 vols., Cairo 1956-1962.
ABUSHAMA, Opus dictum Kitâb er-Raudhateïn, sub titulo «Le Livre deux jardins ou Histoire de deux Règnes» auctore Abou Chamach, edited and translated by A.C. BARBIER DEMEYNERD, RHC Hist. Or., vol. 4, Paris 1896.

IBN AL-SHIHNAH, an-Nawadir as-Sultanya, British Library, London, Ms. Or. Add. 2, 36

AL-UMARI YASIN, al-Athar al-jaliyya fi hawadith alardiyya, Ms., Iraq Academy, Baghdad; also British Library, London, Ms. Or. 6300.

Yaqut al-Hamawi, Mu jam al-buldan, ed. F. Wfistenfeld, Leipzig, 1866-73, 4 volumes.

https://archive.org/details/YaqutMudjamAlBuldamDeir
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu%27jam_Al-Buldan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaqut_al-Hamawi