The words of Amos, one of the shepherds of Tekoa — the vision he saw concerning Israel two years before the earthquake, when Uzziah was king of Judah and Jeroboam (II) son of Jehoash [a] was king of IsraelAlthough the specification of the Kings provides chronological information, there is no description of seismic effects associated with the earthquake or localities affected. However, as noted by Austin et. al. (2000) and others, this earthquake may have initiated a belief in seismic theophany - that God expresses himself through earthquakes (see some examples in Notes). Later prophetic accounts in the Hebrew Bible frequently mention earthquakes. One such account by Zechariah1 prophesied about the "Day of the Lord" and mentions that
you will flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. This appears to reference the same earthquake mentioned in Amos. Other text adjacent to this passage mentions a cleaving of the Mount of Olives which created a valley from which people would flee Jerusalem. Although this is ostensibly about a time in the future which precedes Judgment Day, one is left wondering whether it contains echoes of seismic effects (e.g. a landslide on the Mount of Olives) recounted in oral or written lore which fed the imagination of author of this section of Zechariah. About 850 years later (in ~95 CE), Josephus, without citing a source, wrote an expansive account about the Amos Quake telling a tale where King Uzziah decided to offer incense to God upon the golden altar of the First Temple in Jerusalem. When the Temple Priesthood objected to this transgression, he threatened to kill them. At the same time
a great earthquake shook the ground and a rent was made in the temple, and the bright rays of the sun shone through it, and fell upon the king's face, insomuch that the leprosy seized upon him immediately.2 Kings 15:5, thought to have been written in two editions in the late 7th century BCE and mid-late 6th century BCE (wikipedia citing Fretheim , 1997:7 and Grabbe, 2016) mentions that King Uzziah was afflicted by leprosy but does not add any of the narrative details of Josephus. 2 Chronicles 19:19, perhaps written in the 5th century CE and sometimes using Kings as source material, recounts all of the elements of Josephus except for the earthquake. Josephus goes on to describe a long runout landslide at Eroge (likely Ein Rogel) associated with the earthquake. Later authors such as Avot de-Rabbi Nathan, perhaps originally composed between the 1st and 3rd centuries CE (Goldin, 1995:xxi) and Jerome, writing in 406 CE, repeat the essential elements of Josephus' account - minus the landslide at Ein Rogel.
cannot be precisely dated (sometime around 760). A more precise date requires that we assume that Josephus' chronologically suspect synchronisms are correct. Ben-Menahem (1991), assuming that Josephus' synchronisms are reliable, dated the Amos Quake to the evening of 11 October 759 BCE. This was based on a reasonable supposition that the story of Uzziah and the incense would have been meant to take place on 14 Tishrei, the eve before the Tabernacle holiday (aka Sukkot) which was the paramount holiday during the First Temple period. How Ben-Menahem (1991) or anyone else came up with a year of 759 BCE is not clear as it is not specified in Amos 1:2 or any other source. Austin et. al. (2000) also assumed that Josephus' account was reliable but came up with a year of 750 BCE. Ben-Menahem (1991)'s and Austin et. al. (2000)'s dates appear to be flawed as they do not account for the full uncertainty associated with this event.
1 Longman and Dillard (1994:489) note that there is no consensus scholarship on the date when Chapters 9-14 of Zechariah were composed.
... the consensus among critical scholars has been that chapters 9– 14 are from a different author or authors than chapters 1– 8. However, beyond this assertion there is little unanimity. A bewildering variety of dates and settings have been proposed for the second half of the book, ranging from the eighth century BC to the Maccabean period [167 - 37 BCE].
Text (with hotlink) | Original Language | Biographical Info | Religion | Date of Composition | Location Composed | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Damage Reports from Textual Sources | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
Dating from Textual Sources | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | The first line of the Book of Amos specifies that Amos prophesied while
King Uzziah ruled Judah and
King Jeroboam (II) ruled Israel
and the earthquake struck two years later. If we use Thiele (1983)'s widely accepted chronology of the Kings,
the Amos Quake struck between 766/765 and 751 BCE.
Schoors (2013:115) noted that the Amos Quake cannot be precisely dated (sometime around 760). A more precise date requires that we assume that Josephus' chronologically suspect synchronisms written about ~850 years after the event are correct. Josephus states that when King Uzziah tried to burn incense in the Temple, an earthquake damaged the Temple and he was struck with leprosy or leprosy was first recognized on him. Ben-Menahem (1991), assuming that Josephus' synchronisms are reliable, dated the Amos Quake to the evening of 11 October 759 BCE. This was based on a reasonable supposition that the story of Uzziah and the incense would have been meant to take place on 14 Tishrei, the eve before the Tabernacle holiday (aka Sukkot) which was the paramount holiday during the First Temple period. How Ben-Menahem (1991) or anyone else came up with a year of 759 BCE is not clear as it is not specified in Amos 1:2 or any other source. Austin et. al. (2000) also assumed that Josephus' account was reliable but came up with a year of 750 BCE. Ben-Menahem (1991)'s and Austin et. al. (2000)'s dates appear to be flawed as they do not account for the full uncertainty associated with this event. Josephus' uncited and chronologically suspect synchronisms cannot be relied on with certainty. |
Amos | Hebrew |
Biography
|
Jewish |
Niehaus in McComiskey (2020:316-317) suggest that it is likely that [Amos] prophesied late in Jeroboam [II]'s reign, perhaps in the early 760s. |
not entirely known - Bethel and perhaps other locations in the northern Kingdom such as Samaria | Using Thiele's chronology, the first line of the Book of Amos
dates the earthquake to between 766/765 and 751 BCE. No seismic effects or locations were specified. Amos 1:1 - The words of Amos, one of the shepherds of Tekoa — the vision he saw concerning Israel two years before the earthquake, when Uzziah was king of Judah and Jeroboam (II) son of Jehoash [a] was king of Israel. |
Zechariah | Hebrew |
Biography
|
Jewish | unknown - Longman and Dillard (1994:489) note that estimates for the date of the likely anonymous composition of Zechariah 14 vary from the 8th century BCE to the Maccabean period | unknown | In Zechariah 14:5, a prophetic passage likely written by an unknown author at an unknown date about the
"Day of the Lord" mentions that you will flee as you fled from the earthquake [a] in the days of Uzziah king of Judah.Using Thiele's chronology, this dates this earthquake to between 768/767 and 751/750 BCE. The previous sentence (Zechariah 14:4) refers to a prophetic splitting of the Mount of Olives; creating a valley between northern and southern parts of the Mount. The valley is said to extend to Azel; an unknown location presumably in the vicinity of Jerusalem. This description of a seismic effect on the Mount of Olives could echo previous oral or written reports of landslides on the Mount of Olives during one of the Amos Quakes. |
Isaiah and Targumn Isaiah | Isaiah - Hebrew Targum Isaiah - Aramaic |
Biography - Isaiah
Background - Targum Isaiah
|
Jewish | Isaiah - Ch. 1-39 date to 738-687 BCE Targum Isaiah - between ~100 and ~300 CE (multiple authors) |
Isaiah - Judea and Samaria ? Targum Isaiah - Palestine and Babylon (multiple authors) |
Targum Isaiah 28:21 explains or interprets a cryptic passage in Isaiah 28:21 by stating that
the mountains shook when the glory of the Lord was revealed in the days of Uzziah the King. Using Thiele's chronology, this dates this earthquake to between 768/767 and 751/750 BCE. Isaiah 9:8 appears to describe damage to buildings and fallen trees in Samaria which was due to the Amos Quake. |
Josephus | Greek, possibly translated from an earlier version in Aramaic |
Biography
|
Jewish | about 95 CE | Rome and ? | In a chronologically suspect passage, Josephus synchronizes the earthquake with an incident when King Uzziah (of Judah) put on a holy garment and burned incense at the Temple and, in turn, was afflicted with leprosy and experienced an earthquake which "rents" (cracks) the Temple. Using Thiele's chronology, this equates to 750/751 BCE. The reason that the passage is chronologically suspect is that by wearing the holy garment and burning incense at the Temple (in Jerusalem), Uzziah was usurping the duties and domain of the high Priest (Azariah II); thus incurring punishment from God for his actions in the form of leprosy and an earthquake. Seismic effects from the earthquake include a cracking of the First Temple in Jerusalem and possible landslides at Ein Rogel (near Jerusalem). |
Avot de-Rabbi Nathan | Hebrew with a sprinkling of Aramaic along with Greek and Latin loan words |
Biography
|
Jewish | probably between the 1st and 3rd centuries CE | probably Palestine | Like Josephus, Avot de-Rabbi Nathan synchronizes the earthquake with an incident when King Uzziah (of Judah) burned incense at the Temple and, in turn, was afflicted with leprosy and experienced an earthquake which "rents" (cracks) the Temple. Using Thiele's chronology, this equates to 750/751 BCE. The passage is chronologically suspect because by burning incense at the Temple (in Jerusalem), Uzziah was usurping the duties and domain of the high Priest (Azariah II); thus incurring punishment from God for his actions in the form of leprosy and an earthquake. A second version of this text (version B) recounts the incident of King Uzziah burning incense at the Temple and getting afflicted by leprosy but does not mention an earthquake. |
Midrash Tanchuma | Hebrew |
Background
|
Jewish | Guidoboni et al (1994) noted to
See also Midrash Tanhuma to Noah, chapter 5. Although Amos is quoted in version B (aka Midrash Tanchuma Yelammedenu) of this text (Amos 2:6), the part of Amos mentioning the earthquake is not quoted and there does not seem to be any allusions to an earthquake. There is no mention of Amos or an earthquake in version A (aka Midrash Tanchuma Buber). |
||
Jerome | Latin |
Biography
|
Christian | 406 CE | Bethlehem | Like Josephus, Jerome's commentary synchronizes the earthquake with an incident when King Uzziah (of Judah) attempted to make sacrifices at the 1st Temple in Jerusalem and, in turn, was afflicted with leprosy and experienced an earthquake. Using Thiele's chronology, this equates to 750/751 BCE. Although Jerome does not specifically mention damage to the 1st Temple due to the earthquake, the context of the account indicates that the earthquake was experienced at the 1st Temple in Jerusalem. |
Legends of the Jews | English translated from German |
Background
|
Jewish | 1909 CE | New York City (USA) | Like Josephus, Ginzberg (1936:262) synchronizes the earthquake
with an incident when King Uzziah (of Judah) attempted to make
sacrifices at the 1st Temple in Jerusalem and, in turn, was afflicted with leprosy and experienced an earthquake. Using Thiele's chronology,
this equates to 750/751 BCE. Seismic effects from the earthquake include a cracking of the First Temple in Jerusalem and a landslide.
Although Austin et al (2000:663) state that
details of the earthquake and landslide, as described by Josephus, are independently supported by very old traditions of the rabbis (Ginzberg, 1936, p. 262), Ginzberg (1936:262)'s sources are a complicated mix of Rabbinic and other sources and include Josephus and Avot de Rabbi Nathan (Traditional Version A).Ginzberg (1936:262)'s "seismic" source does not appear be independent from Josephus and the text by Ginzberg describing seismic effects are essentially identical to Josephus' account. |
Text (with hotlink) | Original Language | Biographical Info | Religion | Date of Composition | Location Composed | Notes |
´
Effect | Sources | Notes |
---|---|---|
Earthquake | Amos 1:1, Zechariah 14:5, Josephus, Avot de-Rabbi Nathan, Jerome's Commentary on Amos, Legends of the Jews | |
Landslide | Zechariah 14:4, Josephus, Legends of the Jews |
|
1st Temple cracked | Josephus, Avot de-Rabbi Nathan, Legends of the Jews |
|
Damage to buildings and fallen trees in Samaria | Isaiah 9:9 |
|
Tsunami in the Sea of Galilee | Amos 5:8; 9:5-6 |
|
Amos 5:8 reads as follows:
Who made the Pleiades and Orion,Amos Chapter 5 is a prophecy about the destruction of Israel.
Who turns deep darkness into dawn
And darkens day into night,
Who summons the waters of the sea
And pours them out upon the earth—
His name is the LORD!
5 It is my Lord the GOD of HostsAmos Chapter 9 is a prophecy about the destruction and restoration of Israel. Amos 9:5-6 is in the section about the destruction of Israel and appears to allude to the destruction of Israel by the Neo-Assyrian Empire in 722 BCE.
At whose touch the earth trembles
And all who dwell on it mourn,
And all of it swells like the Nile
And subsides like the Nile of Egypt;
6 Who built His chambers in heaven
And founded His vault on the earth,
Who summons the waters of the sea
And pours them over the land—
His name is the LORD.
Location | Sources | Notes |
---|---|---|
Jerusalem | Zechariah 14:5, Josephus, Avot de-Rabbi Nathan, Jerome's Commentary on Amos, Legends of the Jews |
|
Damage to buildings and fallen trees in Samaria | Isaiah 9:9 |
|
The first line of the Book of Amos specifies that Amos prophesied while
King Uzziah ruled Judah and
King Jeroboam (II) ruled Israel
and the earthquake struck two years later. If we use Thiele (1983)'s widely accepted chronology of the Kings,
the Amos Quake struck between 766/765 and 751 BCE.
Schoors (2013:115) noted that the Amos Quake cannot be precisely dated (sometime around 760)
.
A more precise date requires that we assume that Josephus' chronologically suspect synchronisms written about ~850 years after the event are correct.
Josephus states that when King Uzziah tried to burn incense in the Temple, an earthquake damaged the
Temple and he was struck with leprosy or leprosy was first recognized on him.
Ben-Menahem (1991),
assuming that Josephus' synchronisms are reliable, dated the Amos Quake to the evening of 11 October 759 BCE. This was based
on a reasonable supposition that the story of Uzziah and the incense would have been meant to take place on 14 Tishrei, the eve
before the Tabernacle holiday (aka Sukkot) which was the paramount holiday during
the First Temple period. How Ben-Menahem (1991)
or anyone else came up with a year of 759 BCE is not clear as it is not specified in Amos 1:2 or any other source.
Austin et. al. (2000)
also assumed that Josephus' account was reliable but came up with a year of 750 BCE.
Ben-Menahem (1991)'s
and Austin et. al. (2000)'s
dates appear to be flawed as they do not account for the full uncertainty associated with this event. Josephus' uncited and chronologically suspect synchronisms
cannot be relied on with certainty. Nevertheless, the historical exegeses of
Ben-Menahem (1991)
and Austin et. al. (2000) have value as
hypotheses and explorations so their methodologies are shown in the collapsible panels below.
The other Amos Quake (observed in paleoseismic sections of the Dead Sea) is undated but,
according to Kagan et. al. (2011),
struck within a few decades of the one that is written about.
Date | Reference | Corrections | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
Evening of 11 Oct. 759 BCE | Ben-Menahem, 1991
dates the Amos Quake to the evening of 11 October 759 BCE stating that the day of occurrence, according to II Chron.26 and Josephus, is likely to be on the eve of the Tabernacle holiday (aka Sukkot), 14 Tishrei, 3003, which is October 759 B.C.E. |
none |
|
Date | Reference | Corrections | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
? | Ben-Menahem, 1991
notes that
The date of this earthquake is linked to the eclipse of the Sun on June 15, 763 B.C.E. (Julian Day 1,442,902.8392, or Monday, Sivan 30, 2998, of the Jewish Calendar [see Kudlek and Mickler, 1971; Chambers, 1904, Thompson, 1900; Oppolzer, 1887; Fotheringham, 1920]). The eclipse was partial in Jerusalem (maximal magnitude 0.91). Evidence for the proximity of the earthquake and the eclipse is found in Amos 8:8-9; Zech. 14:4-7, and Jer. 4:24. |
none |
|
In the second year of Pekah son of Remaliah king of Israel, Jotham son of King Uzziah of Judah began to reign)
1 This account of an earthquake at Jerusalem at the very same time when Uzziah usurped the priest's office, and went into the sanctuary to burn incense, and of the consequences of the earthquake, is entirely wanting in our other copies, though it be exceeding like to a prophecy of Jeremiah, now in Zechariah 14:4, 5; in which prophecy mention is made of "fleeing from that earthquake, as they fled from this earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah;" so that there seems to have been some considerable resemblance between these historical and prophetical earthquakes.
Date | Reference | Corrections | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
750 BCE | none |
|
Rev. 9) [I conquered the land Bit-Humri]a (Israel)
17'b-19’a) [I/they] killed Peqah, their king
450 Luckenbill, Ancient Records 1:770; ANET 282; ANEA 193.
451. Poebel, JNES 2 (1943): 89 n. 23.
452 Luckenbill, Ancient Records 1:779; ANET 283; ANEA 194; cf. Thiele, Mysterious Numbers (1951), 90, 106, 121; Albright, BASOR 100 (Dec 1945): 22 n. 26.
453 McFall, "Translation Guide," 31, nos. 45, 46; cf. Nadav Na'aman,
"Historical and Chronological Notes on the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah in the 8th Century BC," in VT36 (July 1986): 71-82:
Pekah twenty years from 749 to 731/730 and Hoshea nine years 731/730-723/722.
454 Thiele, Chronology, S3, 59; Thiele, Mysterious Numbers (1983), 163; McFall, "Translation Guide," 33 nos. 49, 50.
455 ANET 301-303; Thiele, Mysterious Numbers (1983), 163-164.
456 Luckenbill, Ancient Records 2: 4, 55; ANET 284-285.
457 Thiele, Mysterious Numbers (1983), 163-168, citing Hayim Tadmor, "Campaigns of Sargon II," 38.
Austin, S. A., et al. (2000). "Amos's Earthquake: An Extraordinary Middle East Seismic Event of 750 B.C."
International Geology Review 42(7): 657-671.
Borger, R., and Tadmor, H., 1982, Zwei Beitrage zur alttestamentlichen Wissenschaft aufgrund der Inschriften Tiglatpilesers III:
Zeits. Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, v. 94, p. 244-249.
Finegan, J., 1998, Handbook of biblical chronology: Principles
of time reckoning in the ancient world and problems of
chronology in the Bible: Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2nd ed., 426 p. - open access at archive.org
Marcus, R., transl., 1937, Josephus with an English translation, Jewish antiquities,
books IX-XI: Cambridge, MA, Harvard Univ. Press, v. 6,532 p. - can be
borrowed with a free archive.org account - this is volumes 7-8 not volume 6
McFall, L., 1991, A translation guide to the chronological data in Kings and Chronicles: Bibliotheca Sacra, v. 148, p. 3-45.
Na'aman, N., 1986, Historical and chronological notes on the kingdoms of Israel and Judah in the 8th Century BC: Vetus Testamentum, v. 36, p. 71—82.
Tadmor, H., 1979, Chronology of the first temple period: A presentation and evaluation of the sources, in Malamat, A., ed., The world history of the Jewish people,
The Age of the Monarchies, political history: Jerusalem, Massada, p. 44-60.
Tadmor, H., 1994, The inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III King of Assyria: Jerusalem, Israel Acad. Sciences and Humanities, 317 p.
Tadmor, H. (2007). The Inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III, King of Assyria: Critical Edition, with Introductions, Translations,
and Commentary, Israeli Academy of Sciences and Humanities.
Tadmor, H. and S. Yamada (2011). The Royal Inscriptions of Tiglath-Pileser III (744–727 BC) and Shalmaneser V (726–722 BC),
Kings of Assyria, Penn State University Press. - open access at archive.org
Thiele, E. R. (1983). The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings, Academic Books. - can be
borrowed with a free archive.org account
Yeivin, S., 1979, The divided kingdom: Rehoboam-Ahaz/ Jeroboam-Pekah, in Malamat, A., ed.,
The world history of the Jewish people, The Age of the Monarchies, political history: Jerusalem, Massada, p. 161-172.
1 The words of Amos, one of the shepherds of Tekoa — the vision he saw concerning Israel two years before the earthquake, when Uzziah was king of Judah and Jeroboam son of Jehoash [a] was king of Israel.
“The Lord roars from Zion
and thunders from Jerusalem;
the pastures of the shepherds dry up,
and the top of Carmel withers.”
א
דִּבְרֵ֣י עָמ֔וֹס אֲשֶׁר־הָיָ֥ה בַנֹּֽקְדִ֖ים מִתְּק֑וֹעַ אֲשֶׁר֩ חָזָ֨ה עַל־יִשְׂרָאֵ֜ל בִּימֵ֣י | עֻזִּיָּ֣ה מֶֽלֶךְ־יְהוּדָ֗ה וּבִימֵ֞י יָֽרָבְעָ֚ם בֶּן־יוֹאָשׁ֙ מֶ֣לֶךְ יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל שְׁנָתַ֖יִם לִפְנֵ֥י הָרָֽעַשׁ:
ב
וַיֹּאמַ֓ר | יְהֹוָה֙ מִצִּיּ֣וֹן יִשְׁאָ֔ג וּמִירֽוּשָׁלִַ֖ם יִתֵּ֣ן קוֹל֑וֹ וְאָֽבְלוּ֙ נְא֣וֹת הָֽרֹעִ֔ים וְיָבֵ֖שׁ רֹ֥אשׁ הַכַּרְמֶֽל:
Israel to Be Destroyed
“Strike the tops of the pillars
so that the thresholds shake.
Bring them down on the heads of all the people;
those who are left I will kill with the sword.
Not one will get away,
none will escape.
א
רָאִ֨יתִי אֶת־אֲדֹנָ֜י נִצָּ֣ב עַל־הַמִּזְבֵּ֗חַ וַיֹּאמֶר֩ הַ֨ךְ הַכַּפְתּ֜וֹר וְיִרְעֲשׁ֣וּ הַסִּפִּ֗ים וּבְצָ֙עַם֙ בְּרֹ֣אשׁ כֻּלָּ֔ם וְאַֽחֲרִיתָ֖ם בַּחֶ֣רֶב אֶֽהֱרֹ֑ג לֹֽא־יָנ֚וּס לָהֶם֙ נָ֔ס וְלֹֽא־יִמָּלֵ֥ט לָהֶ֖ם פָּלִֽיט:
A Basket of Ripe Fruit
8 “Will not the land tremble for this, and all who live in it mourn? The whole land will rise like the Nile; it will be stirred up and then sink like the river of Egypt.
ח
הַ֚עַל זֹאת֙ לֹֽא־תִרְגַּ֣ז הָאָ֔רֶץ וְאָבַ֖ל כָּל־יוֹשֵׁ֣ב בָּ֑הּ וְעָֽלְתָ֚ה כָאֹר֙ כֻּלָּ֔הּ וְנִגְרְשָׁ֥ה וְנִשְׁקְעָ֖ה (כתיב וְנִשְׁקְהָ֖) כִּיא֥וֹר מִצְרָֽיִם
Israel to Be Destroyed
5 “The Lord, the Lord Almighty—
he touches the earth and it melts,
and all who live in it mourn;
the whole land rises like the Nile,
then sinks like the river of Egypt;
ה
וַאדֹנָ֨י יֱהֹוִ֜ה הַצְּבָא֗וֹת הַנּוֹגֵ֚עַ בָּאָ֙רֶץ֙ וַתָּמ֔וֹג וְאָֽבְל֖וּ כָּל־י֣וֹשְׁבֵי בָ֑הּ וְעָֽלְתָ֚ה כַיְאֹר֙ כֻּלָּ֔הּ וְשָֽׁקְעָ֖ה כִּיאֹ֥ר מִצְרָֽיִם
A Lament and Call to Repentance
8 He who made the Pleiades and Orion,
who turns midnight into dawn
and darkens day into night,
who calls for the waters of the sea
and pours them out over the face of the land—
the Lord is his name.
ח
עֹשֵׂ֨ה כִימָ֜ה וּכְסִ֗יל וְהֹפֵ֚ךְ לַבֹּ֙קֶר֙ צַלְמָ֔וֶת וְי֖וֹם לַ֣יְלָה הֶחְשִׁ֑יךְ הַקּוֹרֵ֣א לְמֵֽי־הַיָּ֗ם וַֽיִּשְׁפְּכֵ֛ם עַל־פְּנֵ֥י הָאָ֖רֶץ יְהֹוָ֥ה שְׁמֽוֹ
Israel to Be Destroyed
6 he builds his lofty palace[a] in the heavens
and sets its foundation[b] on the earth;
he calls for the waters of the sea
and pours them out over the face of the land—
the Lord is his name.
ו
הַבּוֹנֶ֚ה בַשָּׁמַ֙יִם֙ מַֽעֲלוֹתָ֔יו (כתיב מַֽעֲלוֹתָ֔ו) וַֽאֲגֻדָּת֖וֹ עַל־אֶ֣רֶץ יְסָדָ֑הּ הַקֹּרֵ֣א לְמֵי־הַיָּ֗ם וַיִּשְׁפְּכֵ֛ם עַל־פְּנֵ֥י הָאָ֖רֶץ יְהֹוָ֥ה שְׁמֽוֹ:
Year | Reference | Corrections | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
766/765 - 751 BCE (Thiele's chronology) |
two years before the earthquake, when Uzziah was king of Judah and Jeroboam (II) son of Jehoash [a] was king of Israel. |
none |
|
Albright, W. F. (1945). "The Chronology of the Divided Monarchy of Israel."
Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 100: 16-22.
Amos 1:1 (wikipedia)
Amos 1:2 (wikipedia)
Anderson, B. W. (1978). The Eighth Century Prophets: Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah, Fortress Press.
Eidevall, G. (2017). Amos: A New Translation with Introduction and
Commentary, Yale University Press. - can be
borrowed with a free archive.org account
Longman, T., Dillard, R.B. (1994). An Introduction to the Old Testament, Zondervan.
McComiskey, T. E. (2020). Minor Prophets: A Commentary on Hosea, Joel, Amos, Baker Publishing Group.
Rosenbaum, S. N. (1990). Amos of Israel: ʻAmos Yiśreʼeli : a New Interpretation, Mercer.
Schoors, Antoon. The Kingdoms of Israel and Judah in the Eighth and Seventh Centuries B.C.E..
United States, SBL Press, 2013.
Thiele, E. R. (1983). The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings, Academic Books. - can be
borrowed with a free archive.org account
The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings - Thiele's chronology (wikipedia)
CHAPTER FIVE:THE CONTEXT OF AMOS’S EARTHQUAKE IMAGERY
1 For a list of scholars who have advocated this position, see Karl Möller, A Prophet in Debate:
The Rhetoric of Persuasion in the Book of Amos (JSOTSup 372; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2003),
160, fn. 22–23.
2 Meir Weiss, The Bible From Within: The Method of Total Interpretation (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1984), 196–197.
3 Artur Weiser, Die Profetie des Amos (BZAW 53; Giessen: Töpelmann, 1929), 84.
4 Artur Weiser, Das Buch der zwölf kleinen Propheten (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1956).
5 Julius Morgenstern, “Amos Studies I,” HUCA 11 (1936): 19–140, esp. 137 n. 144. Morgenstern will
further link Amos 1:2 with the Day of Yahweh, noting, “In this respect the picture here agrees
completely with that of the Day of Yahweh in Zech. 14, with its earthquake likened to the terrible
earthquake in the days of Uzziah. Here the picture goes even beyond, and far beyond, that of Zech. 14;
here the earthquake will even affect both heaven and earth. It is indeed the utmost extreme in the
depicting of an earthquake.”
6 Brent Strawn, What is Stronger than a Lion? Leonine Image and Metaphor in the Hebrew Bible and the
Ancient Near East, (OBO 212; Göttingen: Vandenhocke and Ruprecht, 2005), 59–62; 265–266.
7 Frank Moore Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1972), 156–177.
8 Samuel E. Loewenstamm, “The Trembling of Nature during the Theophany,” in Comparative Studies in Biblical and
Ancient Oriental Literatures (AOAT 204; Kevelaer: Bercker & Butzon; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1984), 173–89.
9 Meir Weiss, “On the Traces of a Biblical Metaphor,” Tarbiz 34 (1964–1965): 107–28, 211–23, 303–18 (Heb); idem,
“Methodologisches über die Behandlung der Metapher dargelegt an Am. 1,2” TZ 23 (1967): 1–25; idem, The Bible from Within, 196–207.
10 Weiss, The Bible from Within, 196–197.
11 Weiss, The Bible from Within, 206.
12 Francesca Rochberg, The Heavenly Writing: Divination, Horoscopy, and Astronomy
in Mesopotamian Culture(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 47.
13 Rochberg, The Heavenly Writing, 63–65. Omens continued to be transmitted into the Persian and
Seleucid periods, but the building of Assurbanipal’s library enabled the bulk of exemplars to be found there.
14 The Nuzi omens were first published by E. R. Lacheman, “An Omen Text from Nuzi,” RA 34 (1937): 1–8.
See also, the discussion in Hermann Hunger and David Pingree, Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 11.
15 Hermann Hunger, Astrological Reports to Assyrian Kings (SAA 8; Helsinki: Helsinki University Press, 1992), 19–20, omen 36.
Another Assyrian parallel is often deduced for Amos 1:2. The Middle Assyrian, “Fable of the Fox” describes the dog’s strength as:
“My strength is overpowering, I am the claw of theZu®-bird, a very lion... At my terrible bellow the mountains and the rivers
dry up[e-ta-na-ab-ba-la-a].” See W. G. Lambert, Babylonian Wisdom Literature (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1960), 192–193.
16 Hunger, Astrological Reports, “shouting” in omens 1, 31, 32; Hunger, Astrological Reports, “thundering” in omens 1, 31, 32, 33.
Omen 36 later states, “either Adad will thun[der], or a storm will come, or [...], or there will bean earth[quake].”
17 See the explanation in Rochberg, The Heavenly Writing, 58.
18 The addition of this subject in the apodosis, not only supplies a grammatical subject, but also suggests that at
least in a rudimentary way, the Assyrians saw the ground as the reason behind the earthquake. Lest this statement
sound elementary, the modern theory of plate tectonics was only suggested in the 1950’s.
19 Ereskigal, known in Akkadian as Allatu,has a long religious history. She appears in “Inanna’s Descent to the Underworld”
when Inanna is led by Neti through the seven gates of the netherworld to enter the underworld where, upon crouching
and stripping bare in front of Ereskigal, Inanna tries to dethrone her sister. Enki will trick Ereskigal by sending two
mourning specialists to free Inanna from the netherworld. A later myth, “Nergal and Eres¥kigal” is found in part in an
Amarna tablet as well as in the first half of the first millennium. Here, Nergal almost kills Ereskigal before finding
love with Nergal, who previously went to the underworld to cut off her head. See, Thorkild Jacobsen, The Treasures of Darkness:
A History of Mesopotamian Religion (New Haven, London, 1976), 56–59, 229–230; Jeremy Black and Anthony Green, Gods,
Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia (Austin: University of Texas, 2006), 77.
2 I will gather all the nations to Jerusalem to fight against it; the city will be captured, the houses ransacked, and the women raped. Half of the city will go into exile, but the rest of the people will not be taken from the city. 3 Then the Lord will go out and fight against those nations, as he fights on a day of battle. 4 On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south. 5 You will flee by my mountain valley, for it will extend to Azel. You will flee as you fled from the earthquake [a] in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the Lord my God will come, and all the holy ones with him.
ב
וְאָֽסַפְתִּ֨י אֶת־כָּל־הַגּוֹיִ֥ם | אֶֽל־יְרֽוּשָׁלִַם֘ לַמִּלְחָמָה֒ וְנִלְכְּדָ֣ה הָעִ֗יר וְנָשַׁ֙סּוּ֙ הַבָּ֣תִּ֔ים וְהַנָּשִׁ֖ים תִּשָּׁכַ֑בְנָה (כתיב תִּשָּׁגַ֑לְנָה) וְיָצָ֞א חֲצִ֚י הָעִיר֙ בַּגּוֹלָ֔ה וְיֶ֣תֶר הָעָ֔ם לֹ֥א יִכָּרֵ֖ת מִן־הָעִֽיר:
ג
וְיָצָ֣א יְהֹוָ֔ה וְנִלְחַ֖ם בַּגּוֹיִ֣ם הָהֵ֑ם כְּי֥וֹם הִלָּֽחֲמ֖וֹ בְּי֥וֹם קְרָֽב:
ד
וְעָֽמְד֣וּ רַגְלָ֣יו בַּיּֽוֹם־הַ֠הוּא עַל־הַ֨ר הַזֵּיתִ֜ים אֲשֶׁ֨ר עַל־פְּנֵ֥י יְרֽוּשָׁלִַם֘ מִקֶּדֶם֒ וְנִבְקַע֩ הַ֨ר הַזֵּיתִ֚ים מֵֽחֶצְיוֹ֙ מִזְרָ֣חָה וָיָ֔מָּה גֵּ֖יא גְּדוֹלָ֣ה מְאֹ֑ד וּמָ֨שׁ חֲצִ֥י הָהָ֛ר צָפ֖וֹנָה וְחֶצְיוֹ־נֶֽגְבָּה:
ה
וְנַסְתֶּ֣ם גֵּֽיא־הָרַ֗י כִּֽי־יַגִּ֣יעַ גֵּֽי־הָרִים֘ אֶל־אָצַל֒ וְנַסְתֶּ֗ם כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֚ר נַסְתֶּם֙ מִפְּנֵ֣י הָרַ֔עַשׁ בִּימֵ֖י עֻזִּיָּ֣ה מֶֽלֶךְ־יְהוּדָ֑ה וּבָא֙ יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהַ֔י כָּל־קְדֹשִׁ֖ים עִמָּֽךְ:
Year | Reference | Corrections | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
768/767 - 751/750 BCE (Thiele's chronology) |
You will flee by my mountain valley, for it will extend to Azel. You will flee as you fled from the earthquake [a] in the days of Uzziah king of Judah |
none |
|
4 On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south. 5 You will flee by my mountain valley, for it will extend to Azel. You will flee as you fled from the earthquake [a] in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the Lord my God will come, and all the holy ones with him.
Ambraseys (2009) notes
The location of Azal is not certain, but the name may denote some place near the western extremity of the valley near Jerusalem or a hamlet on the outskirts of Jerusalem.
Albright, W. F. (1945). "The Chronology of the Divided Monarchy of Israel."
Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 100: 16-22.
Longman, T., Dillard, R.B. (1994). An Introduction to the Old Testament, Zondervan.
Schoors, Antoon. The Kingdoms of Israel and Judah in the Eighth and Seventh Centuries B.C.E..
United States, SBL Press, 2013.
Thiele, E. R. (1983). The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings, Academic Books. - can be
borrowed with a free archive.org account
The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings - Thiele's chronology (wikipedia)
21 The Lord will rise up as he did at Mount Perazim,
Year | Reference | Corrections | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
768/767 - 751/750 BCE (Thiele's chronology) |
For as the mountains shook when the glory of the Lord was revealed in the days of Uzziah the King(Targum Isaiah 28:21) |
none |
|
the mountains shook
Schoors (2013:56) states that The strophe in [Isaiah] 9:8–11
recalls the earthquakes that struck Palestine during Uzziah’s reign
(cf. Amos 1:1)
.
Austin et al. (2000:659) concur
The biblical records indicate that Samaria received severe damage to palace-fortresses, walls, and houses (Amos 3:11 [JW: seems to allude to destruction by war not an earthquake]; 4:3 [JW: seems to allude to the Assyrian conquest(s) not an earthquake]; 6:11 [JW: This could refer to an earthquake]). Pride in Israel's royal citadel and fear of an Assyrian invasion would have been incentives for Samaria to upgrade quickly from the fallen mud brick to stronger hewn stone (Isaiah 9:9,10 [JW: This appears to discuss rebuilding in Samaria after earthquake damage] Heb. 9:8,9 [JW: I don't see how Heb. 9:8,9 is related to destruction in Samaria - this chapter is describing the original Tabernacle]).
Austin, S. A., et al. (2000). "Amos's Earthquake: An Extraordinary Middle East Seismic Event of 750 B.C."
International Geology Review 42(7): 657-671.
Chilton, B. (1987). The Isaiah Targum, Liturgical Press.
Flesher, P. V. M. and B. D. Chilton (2011). The Targums: A Critical Introduction, Brill.
Noegel, S. B. and B. M. Wheeler (2010). The A to Z of Prophets in Islam and Judaism, Scarecrow Press.
Noegel, S. B. and B. M. Wheeler (2002). Historical Dictionary of Prophets in Islam and Judaism, Scarecrow.
Schoors, A. (2013). The Kingdoms of Israel and Judah in the Eighth and Seventh Centuries B.C.E, SBL Press.
Stenning, J. F. (1953). The Targum of Isaiah, Clarendon Press.
(21) This account of an earthquake at Jerusalem at the very same time when Uzziah usurped the priest's office, and went into the sanctuary to burn incense, and of the consequences of the earthquake, is entirely wanting in our other copies, though it be exceeding like to a prophecy of Jeremiah, now in Zechariah 14:4,-5; in which prophecy mention is made of "fleeing from that earthquake, as they fled from this earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah;" so that there seems to have been some considerable resemblance between these historical and prophetical earthquakes.
Date | Reference | Corrections | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
750/751 BCE (Thiele's chronology) |
a great earthquake shook the ground and a rent was made in the temple, and the bright rays of the sun shone through it, and fell upon the king's [Uzziah] face, insomuch that the leprosy seized upon him immediately |
none |
|
a great earthquake shook the ground
a rent was made in the temple
before the city, at a place called Eroge (likely Ein Rogel in Silwan on the outskirts of the border of what was then Jerusalem), half the mountain broke off from the rest on the west, and rolled itself four furlongs (0.75 km.), and stood still at the east mountain, till the roads, as well as the king's gardens, were spoiled by the obstruction.
Ambraseys (2009) notes
As for the location of En-rogel, it has been suggested that it is the fountain of the Virgin, the modern Ain Umm al-Daraj. Others identify it with Bir Eyub, to the south of the Pool of Siloam, and below the junction of the valleys of Kidron and Hinnom, which seems to be a more probable location, but again this is not certain.Some websites discussing Ein-Rogel are listed below
Whiston, W. (1737). The Genuine Works of Flavius Josephus, the Jewish Historian.
Translated from the Original Greek, According to Havercamp's Accurate Edition;
Containing Twenty Books of the Jewish Antiquities, with the Appendix, Or Life of
Josephus, Written by Himself: Seven Books of the Jewish War; and Two Books Against Apion ...
To this Book are Prefixed Eight Dissertations ... With an Account of Jewish Coins, Weights,
and Measures, London, Printed by W. Bowyer for the author, sold by Whiston. - online open access at sacred-texts.com
Whiston, W. (1737). The Genuine Works of Flavius Josephus, the Jewish Historian.
Translated from the Original Greek, According to Havercamp's Accurate Edition;
Containing Twenty Books of the Jewish Antiquities, with the Appendix, Or Life of
Josephus, Written by Himself: Seven Books of the Jewish War; and Two Books Against Apion ...
To this Book are Prefixed Eight Dissertations ... With an Account of Jewish Coins, Weights,
and Measures, London, Printed by W. Bowyer for the author, sold by Whiston. - online open access at archive.org
William Whiston, A.M. Auburn and Buffalo. John E. Beardsley. (1895)
Flavius Josephus. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Antiquities of the Jews - online open access at perseus.tufts.edu
1. PA I: 7; Cf. ARNB, p. 35.
28. Cf., however, ARNS, p. 41, n. 36; ARNB, Ch. 16, p. 36.
29. Literally, "slander."
30. Text adds ma'al; cf. MT.
31. Text: lehaktiro; cf. MT.
32. Literally, "in two parts, twelve by twelve miles." See Legends, 6, 358, n. 30.
33. Cf. MT.
'It is not for you, Uzziyahu, to offer incense to the Lord, but for the priests who are sons of Aaron and who were consecrated to offer incense. Leave the sanctuary, for you have sinned and your reputation before the Lord God will not be improved by it'.Uzziyahu grew angry, as he held the censer in his hand, and at the moment of his irritation with the priests, leprosy appeared on his brow'. At the same moment the temple split open and the fissure extended for twelve miles in each direction. The priests made him leave, and he himself hurried to depart because the Lord had struck him. [King Uzziyahu] remained a leper until his death, and lived in a leper house, because he had been sent away from the house of the Lord. Meanwhile, his son Jotham supervised the royal palace and administered justice to the people of the country.
1. Ms. R and Schechter's edition omit this first sentence, but Ms. P (Schechter, p. 169) has it.
It dropped out through homoeoteleuton between the two mentions of Joshua's name.
2 Joshua and Nittai were the second pair and flourished during the second half of the second century, B.C.
Joshua had to flee to Alexandria to escape John Hyrcanus (Weiss, Dor, I, p. 133). See PA 1:6 and ARNA p. 35 (G p. 49).
3 The sayings of Joshua and Nittai have been switched in B (as compared to PA and ARNA). This switch suggests
a possible disturbance in the text in Version B. Similarly, the sayings of the next pair are switched, in Ch. 20 (p. 42) below.
7. The causes of leprosy are a recurring theme in rabbinic literature. Here Rabbi Simeon distinguishes plagues
(ng`m) and leprosy (qr`t) and specifies the transgressions which cause them. Then the story of Uzziah is told
as an example of haughtiness causing leprosy. The Hebrew term for haughtiness (gbh rwh) is taken from 2 Chr. 26:16.
Ms. H has gsy hrwh, a term similar to the one which occurs in the sources mentioned below. Ms. P : gbhy rwh;
Ms. N : gbhwt hrwh. Slander causes plagues. See also LevRab 18:4 (Margulies, p. 409).
ARNA has two passages similar to this one : p. 39 (G p. 54) and p. 41 (G pp. 56-57). In the first Rabbi
Simeon says that plagues come from slander and adduces the example of Miriam and Aaron in Num. 12.
In the second Rabbi Simeon ben Eleazar says the same and then adduces the example of Gehazi lying and contracting
Naaman's leprosy (2 Ki. 5:27). Rabbi Simeon then says that plagues come upon the haughty and adduces the example of Uzziah.
Slander is said to cause leprosy and the example of Miriam and Aaron is adduced in ARNB p. 116 (end of Ch. 41) and in
SifreDt 275 (Finkelstein, p. 294).
Rabbi Simeon is usually Rabbi Simeon ben Johai, a member of the third generation of Tannaim and a pupil of Akiba.
But if A's final attribution is accurate, Rabbi Simeon is ben Eleazar, of the fourth generation (end of the second century),
a pupil of Meir and contemporary of Rabbi.
Several rabbinic passages give the reasons for which leprosy comes. LevRab 17:3 (Margulies, p. 374ff) gives ten reasons,
among them haughtiness (gsy hrwh) with Uzziah as example and slander (lkwn hr`) with Aaron and Miriam as example.
Arakin 16a gives seven reasons including haughtiness (gswt hrwh) with Uzziah as example and slander followed by the
quoting of Ps. 101:5. In NumRab 7:5 eleven reasons are given. Haughtiness (gswt hrwh) is one, but Naaman (2 Ki. 5:1)
is the example. Uzziah is connected with the sin of encroaching on another's domain (that is, unauthorized entry into
the temple). Uzziah occurs under the same heading in Tan, Mesora', 4 and TanBub, Lev., pp. 48-49 where eleven things are
again given. Haughtiness does not occur, but slander is given with the example of Miriam and Aaron.
8 Seder Olam Rabba 19, end, like ARNB, says that Uzziah lived for twenty-five years after contracting leprosy.
TosSot 12:4 says that Jotham, his son, judged Israel all the years he had leprosy (that is, Jotham was co-regent).
For the years of Uzziah and Jotham see 2 Chr. 26-27 and 2 Ki 15. He was twenty-five when he began to reign (2 Ki. 15:33).
Why ARNB and Seder Olam say Uzziah was twenty-five years leprous is not clear. Perhaps they connected this with Jotham's
birth (for he was twenty-five at Uzziah's death). See Schechter, n. 6, who says it is a digression. Actually, the sentence
at least shows how severe the penalty is for being haughty.
Date | Reference | Corrections | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
750/751 BCE (Thiele's chronology) |
the temple split open and the fissure extended for twelve miles in each direction |
none |
|
At that time the sanctuary split in two parts, leaving a cleft of twelve miles- literally
in two parts, twelve by twelve miles
Goldin, J. (1955). The Fathers According to Rabbi Nathan, Yale University Press. - version A, the traditional version
Avot de Rabbi Nathan, ed S.Schechter, Wien, London, Frankfurt 1887. in Hebrew - versions A and B
The Fathers According to Rabbi Nathan: Abot De Rabbi Nathan Version B, Anthony J. Saldarini, Brill Academic, 1975. - version B
Franz Tayler, London, 1654:
Tractatus de Patribus Rabbi Nathan Auctore, in Linguam Latinam Translatus. - Latin Translation
Louis Finkelstein, Mabo le-Massektot Abot ve-Abot d'Rabbi Nathan
(Introduction to the Treatises Abot and Abot of Rabbi Nathan) (New York, 1950), English summary
An English version is given by M. L. Rodkinson in his translation of the Babylonian Talmud, i. 9, New York, 1900.
'Aboth d'Rabbi Nathan, translated into English with Introduction and Notes, by Eli Cashdan, in The Minor Tractates of the Talmud, Soncino, 1965.
The Fathers According to Rabbi Nathan, Jacob Neusner, University of South Florida Press, 1986.
See also Midrash Tanhuma to Noah, chapter 5. Although Amos is quoted in version B (aka Midrash Tanchuma Yelammedenu) of this text (Amos 2:6), the part of Amos mentioning the earthquake is not quoted and there does not seem to be any allusions to an earthquake. There is no mention of Amos or an earthquake in version A (aka Midrash Tanchuma Buber)
See also Midrash Tanhuma to Noah, chapter 5. Although Amos is quoted in version B (aka Midrash Tanchuma Yelammedenu) of this text (Amos 2:6), the part of Amos mentioning the earthquake is not quoted and there does not seem to be any allusions to an earthquake. There is no mention of Amos or an earthquake in version A (aka Midrash Tanchuma Buber)
See also Midrash Tanhuma to Noah, chapter 5. Although Amos is quoted in version B (aka Midrash Tanchuma Yelammedenu) of this text (Amos 2:6), the part of Amos mentioning the earthquake is not quoted and there does not seem to be any allusions to an earthquake. There is no mention of Amos or an earthquake in version A (aka Midrash Tanchuma Buber).
13 Cf. Cicero, De republica 3, frag. 4.
14 CE 2 Kings 15:1-2.
15 CE 2 Chron 26:16-23.
Date | Reference | Corrections | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
750/751 BCE (Thiele's chronology) |
Now this is Uzziah, also called Azariah, the king of Judah, who tried to claim the priesthood as his right and was afflicted with leprosy on his forehead. Not only the punishment of this sacrilegious man, but the earthquake, too, which the Hebrews remember happened then, showed the anger of God |
none |
|
the earthquake, too, which the Hebrews remember happened then, showed the anger of God
details of the earthquake and landslide, as described by Josephus, are independently supported by very old traditions of the rabbis (Ginzberg, 1936, p. 262). The relevant extract from Ginzberg (1936:262) and it's accompanying footnotes indicates a complicated provenance which includes Josephus and some Christian sources in addition to Rabbinic sources.
Two years after Amos ceased to prophesy,
Date | Reference | Corrections | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
750/751 BCE (Thiele's chronology) |
Like Josephus and Avot de Rabbi Nathan (Traditional Version A), Ginzberg (1936:262) synchronizes the earthquake with the day that King Uzziah attempted to offer sacrifices at the 1st Temple in Jerusalem and, in the process, contracted leprosy and experienced an earthquake which damaged the Temple. | none |
|
the earth quaked so violently that a great breach was torn in the Temple
On the west side of Jerusalem, half of the mountain was split off and hurled to the east, into a road, at a distance of four stadia [0.75 km.].
Austin, S. A., et al. (2000). "Amos's Earthquake: An Extraordinary Middle East Seismic Event of 750 B.C."
International Geology Review 42(7): 657-671.
Austin, S. 2010. The Scientific and Scriptural Impact of Amos' Earthquake. Acts & Facts. 39 (2): 8-9.
Ginzberg, L. (1936). "Legends of the Jews." Philadelphia, Jewish Publ. Soc. Amer. vol. 4
Ginzberg, L.. "Legends of the Jews." Philadelphia, Jewish Publ. Soc. Amer. vol. 6 - footnotes for Volumes 3 and 4
Note: Legends of the Jews was written in manuscript form in German in 1909 and published in English translation in 1936.
See gearth for more textual references
ck ambraseys methodological and 2009 for refs
Am09 - [7] ‘. . . the posts of the temple moved when the Lord spoke . . .’ (2 Chron., XXVI. 16–17; 2 Kings XV.1–7).
Am09 - There remains the question of whether there is any evidence today for active faulting in the immediate vicinity of Old Jerusalem that can be associated with the
ground deformations mentioned by Zechariah, Josephus and Nathan. Old aerial photographs of the chalky geological formations of the region show only landslides on steep
slopes, but no through-going faults. A relatively large slide can be recognised on the Mount of Olives, which is located on the slope which faces west towards the Old City,
the scarp of which can be seen halfway up the Mount of Olives. However, according to the Geological Survey of Israel, it is probably much more ancient than Biblical
times (Wachs and Lewitte 1984; Frydman 1997). The multitude of short scarps shown on relatively recent geological maps of Jerusalem all terminate at the Kidron Valley (Gil 1996).
The exception is a short northeast– southwest-running fault trace, which is shown on the Geotechnical Map of Jerusalem (Israeli 1977), which the Atlas of Israel labels
Zechariah 14:4, earthquake fault. This feature extends from a point a few hundred metres south of the Jerusalem Railway Station to the west, running for more than three
kilometres, to just north of al-Ayzariyah to the east, striking about N–70◦ E (Atlas of Israel 1985). The reason why this feature has been associated with Zechariah’s earthquake is not given.
Am09 - Amos’ earthquake may be dated vaguely from the line of Jewish kings chronicled in the Old Testament, which provides us with 756 or 759 BC as a terminus ante quem (Soggin 1970, 120),
or perhaps earlier. Courville dates this earthquake to 751–750 BC, on the basis of the Jewish legend reported by Josephus in which the prophet Zechariah is quoted as a source indicating the
severity of the earthquake. This, however, would be the correct date only if the earthquake could be associated with the judgement on Uzziah, that is, only if Josephus’ account that the
earthquake occurred at the same time as Uzziah was stricken with leprosy could be proven to be true [6]. While the Zechariah quotation is suggestive, it does not specifically associate
the earthquake with God’s judgement on the king, and we cannot follow either Josephus’ or Courville’s attempts at a correlation without further evidence (Courville 1971, ii, 122). For
instance, Courville goes on to correlate Uzziah’s earthquake with other catastrophic events, such as, for instance, the eruption of Thera. He can do this only because he brings the
Late Bronze age down to the time of Uzziah, a view that must be rejected (Crisler 2004). If Courville’s view is adopted, however, the placement of Uzziah’s earthquake at the end of
Samaria II can be correlated with a wave of destructions at this stratigraphic level, destruction that is said to have affected the Holy Land and could also have been due to the
invasion by the Egyptians.
Am09 - This earthquake happened probably somewhere E of Jerusalem, most likely along the Jericho fault. Apparently, the offset of the rocks across it was great enough to reveal
the northward slip of the eastern side relative to the southward slip of the western side. This motion is remarkably similar to the motion observed in the 1927 Jericho earthquake,
and is, of course, consistent with the N–S movement of the plates in this area’ (Nur and Ron 1996, 81). need to find Nur and Ron
ANTONOPOULOS (1979) lists a tsunami hitting Coasts of Lebanon. Sur (Tyre) with m = VI
Sources are
AMBRASEYS N., 1962 - Data for the investigation of the seismic seawaves in the Eastern Mediterranean. Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., , 52, No. 4, pp. 895-913, October.
SIEBERG A., 1932 - Untersuchungen Aber Erdbeben und Bruchschollenban im Astlichen Mittelmeergebiet.
Denkschriften der Medizinish-Naturwissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft zu Jena, vol. 2, Jena.
Location (with hotlink) | Status | Intensity | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
Jerusalem - Introduction | n/a | n/a | n/a |
Jerusalem - Givati Site | probable | ≥ 8 | |
En Hazeva | possible | ≥ 8 | |
Samaria-Sebaste | |||
Shechem and enrirons - Tell er-Ras | |||
Iraq el-Amir | |||
Location (with hotlink) | Status | Intensity | Notes |
additional archeoseismic evidence found in Tell es-Safi (Gath) by
Aren Maeir. Web page for excavation project
here.
Academia.edu site for Aren Maeirhere.
Ain Ummal-Davaj possibly Bir Eyuh, En-Rogel
759 BC ? - Ambraseys (2009)
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=353104901
759 BC ? - Ambraseys (2009)
Josephus in his Antiquities of the Jews (AD 93), a book written about six centuries later, refers to an earthquake that happened in the last months of King Uzziah's life, which caused a crack in the Temple at Jerusalem. Josephus adds that at a place called Enrogel, outside the city, half of the mountain in the west broke off from the rest and slid 800 m up to the mountain on the east, spoiling the king's gardens [6]. Assuming that the two authors refer to the same event, this passage in Josephus seems to suggest that in all probability Zechariah describes a landslide, perhaps triggered by an earthquake, rather than a graben formed by normal faulting.
There is a further reference to these events in Uzziah's days by Nathan ha-Bavli, who was writing in the middle of the second century AD. He does not mention the earthquake, but he says that at the time of the desecration of the temple by Uzziah the temple split open and the fissure extended for twelve 'miles' in each direction [6a].
The location of Azal is not certain, but the name may denote some place near the western extremity of the valley near Jerusalem or a hamlet on the outskirts of Jerusalem. As for the location of En-rogel, it has been suggested that it is the fountain of the Virgin, the modern Ain Umm al-Daraj. Others identify it with Bir Eyub, to the south of the Pool of Siloam, and below the junction of the valleys of Kidron and Hinnom, which seems to be a more probable location, but again this is not certain.
Nahal Azal ? 759 BC Landslide ? Ambraseys (2009)
Executive Summary
Some have interpreted a landslide description from the Biblical accounts regarding the Amos Quake. Ambraseys (2009) discusses this possibility below; suggesting a landslide probably did not occur,
759 BC ? - Ambraseys (2009)
About three centuries later, early in the sixth century BC, Zechariah (c. 520 BC) mentions an earthquake in Judaea, again in the days of King Uzziah and probably the same event as that mentioned by Isaiah, which he says affected Jerusalem and caused the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, to split and form a valley [3]. The interpretation of this passage in Zechariah (14, 4-5), which seems to be a later fifth- or fourth-century-BC insertion, is not clear. Other versions of the same passage say that the Mount of Olives will split in two and create a valley that will reach Azel. This valley will run from east to west with half of the Mount of Olives moving to the north, away from the position it occupied, while the other half will move to the south. The valley will stop where the mountains will touch each other [3.1, 3-7].
A somewhat different reading is to be found in the Masoretic version, where, following the mention of the splitting of the Mount of Olives, it says that the valley shall reach unto Azal, as compared with the Revised Standard Version, which says instead that the valley shall be stopped up, for the valley shall touch the side of it (the mountain) [4, 5]. The source of this difference lies perhaps in the confused reading of the Hebrew words for `shall be stopped up' (ve-nistam), and 'you shall flee' (venastem). The consonants are identical, but when the diacritical points were added to the Hebrew Bible to facilitate reading, the text was apparently misunderstood and the meaning changed (see the editor's note in Wachs and Lewitte 1984). Upon adopting the latter reading as more plausible in relation to the natural phenomenon described, it is obvious that there is no other explanation than a large landslide, which may, or might not, have been triggered by this or by another earthquake. Also, Josephus in his Antiquities of the Jews (AD 93), a book written about six centuries later, refers to an earthquake that happened in the last months of King Uzziah's life, which caused a crack in the Temple at Jerusalem. Josephus adds that at a place called Enrogel, outside the city, half of the mountain in the west broke off from the rest and slid 800 m up to the mountain on the east, spoiling the king's gardens [6]. Assuming that the two authors refer to the same event, this passage in Josephus seems to suggest that in all probability Zechariah describes a landslide, perhaps triggered by an earthquake, rather than a graben formed by normal faulting.
There is a further reference to these events in Uzziah's days by Nathan ha-Bavli, who was writing in the middle of the second century AD. He does not mention the earthquake, but he says that at the time of the desecration of the temple by Uzziah the temple split open and the fissure extended for twelve 'miles' in each direction [6a].
The location of Azal is not certain, but the name may denote some place near the western extremity of the valley near Jerusalem or a hamlet on the outskirts of Jerusalem. As for the location of En-rogel, it has been suggested that it is the fountain of the Virgin, the modern Ain Umm al-Daraj. Others identify it with Bir Eyub, to the south of the Pool of Siloam, and below the junction of the valleys of Kidron and Hinnom, which seems to be a more probable location, but again this is not certain.
There remains the question of whether there is any evidence today for active faulting in the immediate vicinity of Old Jerusalem that can be associated with the ground deformations mentioned by Zechariah, Josephus and Nathan. Old aerial photographs of the chalky geological formations of the region show only landslides on steep slopes, but no through-going faults. A relatively large slide can be recognised on the Mount of Olives, which is located on the slope which faces west towards the Old City, the scarp of which can be seen halfway up the Mount of Olives. However, according to the Geological Survey of Israel, it is probably much more ancient than Biblical times (Wachs and Lewitte 1984; Frydman 1997). The multitude of short scarps shown on relatively recent geological maps of Jerusalem all teiminate at the Kidron Valley (Gil 1996). The exception is a short northeastsouthwest- running fault trace, which is shown on the Geotechnical Map of Jerusalem (Israeli 1977), which the Atlas of Israel labels Zechariah 14:4, earthquake fault. This feature extends from a point a few hundred metres south of the Jerusalem Railway Station to the west, running for more than three kilometres, to just north of al- Ayzariyah to the east, striking about N-70° E (Atlas of Israel1985). The reason why this feature has been associated with Zechariah's earthquake is not given. There is no direct or indirect evidence that Jerusalem was damaged, and it is interesting that the details in Josephus concerning the effects of the earthquake on the temple are not supported by earlier sources, which remain silent about damage anywhere in Judaea and Israel [7].
Location Info
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=353105114
Bethel
Approximate Location - Literary Evidence Only - Austin, S. A., et al. (2000)
Austin, S. A., et al. (2000)
At Bethel, Amos indicated severe damage to
altars, houses, and the temple (Amos 3:14,15; 9:1).
However, excavators have not located Bethel’s temple
at Beitin, and they provide only a general
description of damage (Kelso, 1968, p. 37, 52). This
Iron Age II damage is neither precisely dated to
Jeroboam II’s time, nor has it been assigned to just
one earthquake.
Location Info
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=353102545
References
Austin, S. A., et al. (2000). "Amos's Earthquake: An Extraordinary Middle East Seismic Event of 750 B.C." International Geology Review 42(7): 657-671.
Gezer
aka Tel Gezer - Approximate Location - Austin et. al. (2000), Ambraseys (2009)
759 BC - Austin et. al. (2000)
Gezer was a strategic and well-fortified city in the Shephelah of Judah adjacent to the coastal plain some 30 km west northwest of Jerusalem (Fig. 1). Excavations of Iron Age construction at Gezer reveal extraordinary damage to a large section of the âOuter Wallâ (Field XI) on the north side of the city. Figure 4 (center of photo) shows three courses of well-drafted ashlars that are cracked through from top to bottom, with the stones of each higher course being displaced an increasing amount northward. Figure 4 (foreground) shows a northward-leaning section of the wall with three courses of stones that have jumped up to 40 cm northward off their foundation course (Dever, 1992). The inner face of the uppermost courses of the wall fell southward into the city, further evidence for the suddenness of the wallâs collapse (Younker, 1991). Stratum VI at Gezer, which contains the earthquake debris, is terminated by the military destruction layer attributed by Dever (1993) to the city's conquest by Tiglath- pileser III in his campaigns of 733-732 B.C. (see Fig. 3). The earthquake evidence at Gezer is dated stratigraphically to 760 B.C. ± 25 years, the year 760 being specified by Dever (1992).
Samaria was the capital of Israel at the time of the earthquake. According to Yadin et al. (1960, p. 36), traces of the middle-eighth-century earthquake were found at Samaria. However, no detailed excavation report has been published concerning this period. The biblical records indicate that Samaria received severe damage to palace-fortresses, walls, and houses (Amos 3:11; 4:3; 6:11). Pride in Israelâs royal citadel and fear of an Assyrian invasion would have been incentives for Samaria to upgrade quickly from the fallen mud brick to stronger hewn stone (Isaiah 9:9,10 [Heb. 9:8,9]).
At Bethel, Amos indicated severe damage to altars, houses, and the temple (Amos 3:14,15; 9:1). However, excavators have not located Bethel's temple at Beitin, and they provide only a general description of damage (Kelso, 1968, p. 37, 52). This Iron Age II damage is neither precisely dated to Jeroboam II's time, nor has it been assigned to just one earthquake.
FIG. 4. Earthquake damage at Gezer within the excavation of the Iron Age Outer Wall. View is toward the east looking down the line of the wall (Field XI, Area 20) at the northern edge of the mound. The foundation of the wall was constructed on bedrock within a trench against the Middle Bronze, steeply sloped earthen rampart (called a glacis) at the extreme right. Foreground left shows three northward-tilted masonry courses which have jumped northward up to 40 cm off of their in situ bottom course. Large, well-drafted ashlars (an insert into the wall at the middle of photo) are not tilted, but have vertical cracks on three courses, and have moved northward slightly off foundation. Background middle shows further stretch of the Outer Wall, radically displaced northward from the line described by the lowest, in situ foundation blocks. Surface debris at background right includes the uppermost courses of the wall, which collapsed southward into the city. The substantial glacis in the foreground right appears to have buttressed the lower courses on the south side, so the lower portion of the wall deformed by tilting toward the north. Scale is indicated by the large, well-drafted ashlars that each have a height of about 0.5 m (photo courtesy of William G. Dever and Randy Younker).
759 BC - Ambraseys (2009)
For Tel Gezer, 'evidence for the destruction, as other sites, can be attributed to the earthquake in Amos and Zacharia c. 760 BC' (Dever and Younker 1991, 286;Younker 1991; Dever 1992, 30).
[13] Tel Gezer
Estimated period of occurrence: 760 BC.
Extract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
`According to Macalister, a number of ashlar towers had been inserted into the Late Bronze Age Outer Wall by Solomonic engineers. In order to test this claim it was decided to locate his "Tower VII" (situated immediately north of the "Egyptian Governor's Residency", according to Macalister's plan) and open two soundings one against each of the inner and outer faces of the "tower" in order to determine if indeed the "towers" were constructed in the manner and at the time Macalister claimed (see Plates 4, 6, and 19). After clearing off the top of the Outer Wall, however, it was discovered that Macalister's "Tower VII" was not a tower at all, but rather an offset that was similar to what he found further west in his trenches 22-29, a stretch of wall which he described as "rebuilt". Macalister had apparently found the same corner as our team and had simply drawn in the other three corners on his plan.
Excavation against the inner face of the "tower" reached bedrock in just over a meter (Plate 14). A foundation trench, which showed up clearly in the eastern balk, indicated that the offset was initially constructed in the 8th century B.C. Later, during the Hellenistic period, a second trench had been dug into the earlier one, suggesting that at least part of the wall was rebuilt during this period. Indeed, the ashlars in the upper two or three courses of the wall were poorly laid. They were uneven and not in the headerâ stretcher fashion. Thus they were probably reused from the earlier Iron Age construction.
The fact that the earliest architectural phase of the offset dated no earlier than the 8th century B.C. would seem to raise doubts about the claims of those who have argued for an earlier dating of the Outer Wall. However, excavation along the outer face of "Tower VII" revealed at least nine courses (ca. 5 m.) of excellent headerâstretcher masonry. Although bedrock could not be reached in this sounding, the pottery from the lowest level of fills against the outer face consisted of red-slipped 10th century B.C. wares.
Above these 10th century fills (which were more than 2 m. thick) were at least two plastered surfaces which ran up against the wall face. The debris on these surfaces included fallen ashlar blocks in a bricky fill containing 8th century B.C. sherds. The debris layers may be evidence of both an earlier 8th century earthquake (see below) and a later 8th century B.C. Assyrian destruction (Plate 15). The latter was followed much later by a hasty repair and rebuild, probably during the Maccabean period (2nd century B.C.). Thus, based on the results of the excavation along the outer face of "Tower VII", it appears that the Outer Wall was originally constructed at least by the 10th century B.C., and probably earlier. The discoveries in Square 22 to the east (see below) even suggest the possibility of an initial construction in the LB II. Engineers of the Iron 11 and Hellenistic periods apparently found it necessary to repair isolated sections of the inner face (which rested on the top of an escarpment), thus leading to the discrepancy between the dates for the construction of the inner and outer faces of the Outer Wall.
Macalister's Tower VI
In the hope of finding a genuine Solomonic tower inserted into a Late Bronze Age wall, it was decided to move east and attempt to locate Macalister's "Tower VI". According to Macalister's top plan, Tower VI was located between 25 m. and 30 m. east of Tower VII (Plate 19). Using the bulldozer to clear away Macalister dump and post-Macalister debris accumulation (which included some 1947 Jordanian army trenches), it was not long before an ashlar block of what appeared to be the southwest corner of Macalister's Outer Wall Tower VI was uncovered. Unfortunately, excavations indicated that this "tower" was also only an offset (Plate 16). However, the pottery from the foundation trench indicated that the earliest phase of this stretch of the Outer Wall was founded probably during the 10th century B.C. Two additional pieces of evidence also support a 10th century B.C. dating. First, a stone of the lowest course of the inner face of the Outer Wall is roughly bossed in a fashion typical of foundation ashlars of the 10th century. Second, this lowest course is clearly cut by the later "tower" or offset, indicating that this stretch of the wall preceded the construction of the "tower". Since in the "inserted tower" dated to the 9th to th century B.C. (seebelow), the wall must be dated earlier. While this second line of evidence is not sufficient by itself to provide a 10th century date, the bossed ashlar and the 10th century trench combine to make a 10th century B.C. date for this section of the wall most probable.
Sometime during the 9th/8th century B.C. the upper courses of the Outer Wall were remodelled with large ashlars to create an offset. The ashlar offset was "inserted" more than a meter into the10th century B.C. wall line. The 9`h /8`h /o century ashlar inserts and wall appear to have been destroyed sometime during the 8th century B.C. Several lines of evidence suggest that the agent of destruction was an earthquake. For one thing, several sections of the Outer Wall had been clearly displaced from their foundations by as much as 10 to 40 cm. Furthermore, these wall sections were all severely tilted outward toward the north. That this tilting was not due to slow subsidence over a long period of time was evident from the fact that intact sections of upper courses of the inner face of the wall had fallen backwards into the city. Only a very rapid outward tilting of the wall, such as that caused by an earthquake, could cause these upper stones to roll off backwards, away from the tilt. If the wall's outward tilt had occurred slowly, the stones on the top of the wall should have fallen off toward the downward-sloping outer face of the wall.
The southwest corner of the ashlar insert had been similarly displaced from its foundational cornerstone, although to a lesser degree because of the greater stability of the ashlar construction. However, even the cornerstone had been split longitudinally because of the great pressure created by the lateral movement of the upper courses. This same tremendous pressure also created fissures in the ashlar stones that penetrated through several courses. The reason the foundation stones were not themselves dislodged to any significant degree is probably due to the fact that they were set into levelled out depressions cut directly into the bedrock.
.Evidence for an 8th century B.C. earthquake has been discovered at several other sites, such as Hazor. It is not impossible that the wall was destroyed by the wellknown earthquake of Amos 1 and Zech 14:5 (ca. 760 B. C.)' (Younker 1991).
`Here, too, the "tower" we expected to find (Macalister's "tower VI") turned out to be simply an offset portion of ashlar masonry (Fig. 1). This later wall, dated by eighthcentury B.C.E. sherds in the secondary back-filled trench, was probably destroyed by the well-known earthquake of Amos 1 and Zech. 14:5, c. 760 B.C. E. Not only was the ashlar "tower" cracked from top to bottom and the adjoining boulders violently thrown off their foundations, but a long stretch of the wall to the east was tilted sharply outward in one piece (Fig. 2). Preliminary research indicated that the GezerâRamla region has been subject to repeated earthquake damage in historical timesi an earthquake hypothesis, therefore, seems plausible' (Dever and Younker 1991, 286).
`While the two Iron Age phases in the "Outer Wall" were so crystal clear in the sections that they constituted a "textbook" example of stratigraphy, of more interest was the evidence they preserved of an earthquake destruction of the second, 9th/8th century BCE phase. The evidence was twofold. (1) First, all three courses of the large rectangular blocks just at the "tower" offset were cracked clear through, from top to bottom, the heavy stones still approximately in place but with a large open gap running from top to bottom (Ill. 3). (2) Second, immediately to the west of the "tower" offset, the foundation course (here of marginally drafted ashlars) was still in situ; but the upper two courses of rougher boulders were found radically displaced upward and outward, but still lying in a row â as though they had violently "jumped" off their foundations (Ill. 4).
Now it seems evident that such severe damage cannot have resulted simply from the usual siege tactics carried out at ancient walled Palestinian towns. There was none of the typical evidence of burning: no calcinated stones; no trace of undermining and collapse; no evidence of battering or forcing of the wall inward. On the contrary, the wall had fallen suddenly outward, "split apart" violently. For some time I resisted the suggestions of various staff members that perhaps an earthquake was the best explanation. And certainly I not identifying with traditional "biblical archaeology" â did not have the earthquake of Amos or Zachariah in mind, despite the 9th/8th century BCE date for the wall that we had posited on quite independent archaeological grounds. Nor at the moment did I recall Yadin's earthquake hypothesis at Hazor. Yet, in the end, the evidence seemed overwhelming. Several of our group from California, including Associate Director Randy Younker, had personally seen just such earthquake damage, even to the fact that random areas of the wall had been affected, and this seemed to provide the confirmation that we needed.
A final probe still farther east, in Area 20, yielded further evidence. Here we cleared a stretch of the same wall for some 15 m. At first, our efforts to trace the wall eastward failed. Because we were following the projected tine from the "tower" offset on a straight course and had found no stones, we supposed that the top course was robbed out. To our surprise, we later discovered what was clearly the line of the top course curving radically, a long section bowed outward yet still intact. Furthermore, the tops of the whole line of stones were tilted outward at an angle of ca. 10-15 degrees (Ill. 4). One could, I suppose, argue that here we are dealing simply with subsidence, perhaps because the bedrock dipped downward at this point (as indeed it did). A more reasonable explanation, however, would seem to be an earthquake that displaced the whole section bodily, especially as the foundations were already weak. Certainly a battering ram, or the work of sappers, could not have produced such a peculiar phenomenon as this whole stretch of wall tipped outward. It does indeed resemble rather closely one of Schaeffer's toppled walls at Ugarit' (Dever 1992, 30).
Location Info
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=343100790
Iraq al Amir
759 BC - Ambraseys (2009)
(Butler 1907, 13 = 760?)Location Info
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=353101291
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesKeyword.php
References
Ambraseys, N. (2009). Earthquakes in the Mediterranean and Middle East: a multidisciplinary study of seismicity up to 1900. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.
Khirbet al Asiq
aka En Gev - Location guessed - Ambraseys (2009)
759 BC - Ambraseys (2009)
[20] Khirbet al Asiq (En Gev) (Dever 1992, 34 n. 10 = n.d.).
Location Info
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=353101291
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesKeyword.php
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=353202562
En Gev is shown as being under water
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=353202763
References
Ambraseys, N. (2009). Earthquakes in the Mediterranean and Middle East: a multidisciplinary study of seismicity up to 1900. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.
Khirbet Magari
approx. location, Karcz, Kafri, and Meshel (1977)
approximate location based on map of Karcz, Kafri, and Meshel (1977)
7th - 8th century BC - Karcz, Kafri, and Meshel (1977)
Violent destruction, collapse
References
11 Encyclopaedia of Archeological Excavations in Eretz Israel, Hebrew edn, 2 vol (Massada, Jerusalem, 1970).
12 Encyclopaedia of Archeological Excavations in Eretz Israel, English edn (updated), vol 1 and 2 (from 4) (Massada, Jersualem, 1975).
References
Karcz, I., et al. (1977). "Archaeological evidence for Subrecent seismic activity along the Dead Sea-Jordan Rift." Nature 269(5625): 234-235.
Samaria
Austin, S. A., et al. (2000)
759 BC Austin, S. A., et al. (2000)
Samaria was the capital of Israel at the time of
the earthquake. According to Yadin et al. (1960, p.
36), traces of the middle-eighth-century earthquake
were found at Samaria. However, no detailed excavation
report has been published concerning this
period. The biblical records indicate that Samaria
received severe damage to palace-fortresses, walls,
and houses (Amos 3:11; 4:3; 6:11). Pride in Israel’s
royal citadel and fear of an Assyrian invasion would
have been incentives for Samaria to upgrade quickly
from the fallen mud brick to stronger hewn stone
(Isaiah 9:9,10 [Heb. 9:8,9]).
Location Info
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaria_%28ancient_city%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaria
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=353205053
References
Austin, S. A., et al. (2000). "Amos's Earthquake: An Extraordinary Middle East Seismic Event of 750 B.C." International Geology Review 42(7): 657-671.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00206810009465104#
Tell Deir Alla
Ambraseys (2009), Austin et. al. (2000), Ferry et. al. (2011)
700–800 B.C. - possibly the Amos Earthquake - Ferry et. al. (2011)
Archeological Period - Eighth century B.C.
Date of Event (inferred) - 700–800 B.C.
Proposed Cause of Destruction - Earthquake, fire
Probability of an Earthquake - not reported
Site - Deir ’Alla
Description form Archeological Source
“Phase M was destroyed by earthquake and fire.” (Franken (1989) p.204)
759 BC - Austin et. al. (2000)
Deir Alla was an Iron Age city located near the confluence of the Jabbok River with the Jordan River (Fig. 1). Architecture was primarily mud bricks on a foundation of Quaternary alluvium. Therefore, the constructions were very susceptible to earthquake damage. Cracked foundations and fallen walls characterize phase IX (also called phase M) at Deir Alla (Ibrahim and van der Kooij, 1977â 1978, 1979). Walls constructed of mud bricks tended to fall in a southerly direction (Lemaire, 1985). The suddenness of the collapse is most vividly indicated by the extraordinary preservation of an ink-on-plaster inscription that was excavated from beneath the debris of one fallen wall. This famous inscription is called the Balaam Text and, ironically, foretells a cosmic disaster (Lemaire, 1985).
Deir Alla phase IX (= phase M) is dated by radiocarbon and ceramic evidence (Fig. 3). Carbon date GrN-14260 on grain and leaf material beneath earthquake rubble gave 2630 ± 50 years B.P. (van der Kooij, 1993), which calibrates to 800 ± 50 B.C. (Stuiver and Becker, 1993). The Balaam Text shows signs of wear, indicating that it stood for many years before being buried by an earthquake. One paleographer dates the inscription to the middle of the eighth century, or even a decade or two earlier than that (Naveh, 1967). The pottery analysis suggests that phase IX ended ~770 B.C. (Ibrahim and van der Kooij, 1977â1978, 1991; Vilders, 1992). This is consistent with an earthquake dated at 770 B.C. ± 25 years.
759 BC - Ambraseys (2009)
For Tell Deir Alla the excavators say that 'Indeed, the earthquake that destroyed level M/IX could well be the one mentioned in Amos, dated about 760 BC' (Dever 1992, 35, n. 10; Lemaire 1997, 139 = 750; Knauf 2002).
[17] Tell Deir AllaExtract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
`I have already mentioned that the site was shaken by earthquake round 1200 B.C. The destruction of the buildings of Phase M, the phase to which the Aramaic text belongs, was also caused by an earthquake. Deir Alla has suffered more earthquakes, not only during the time of habitation but also afterwards. These earthquakes and tremors caused vertical cracks which in the excavated area run mostly in eastâwest direction. When tracing the frequency of these cracks along a northâsouth line we find at least one every twenty cms. The tell is thus cut into vertical slices and these slices may have sunken for instance from a few cms. to several cms. and sometimes shifted sideways, whereas most of them apparently under the pressure from higher parts of the tell are inclined to lean out to the north. Expressed in geological terms we have found, be it in miniature size normal faults and even pivot faults. Cracks reaching the present surface must have been caused after the tell had reached that height and cannot therefore be dated to the stratigraphy ... Moreover, unless all the cracks that run through the deposits overlying Phase M and their exact position had been recorded, we would not be able to say whether any cracks seen in Phase L stop at the floor levels of Phase M. However we had several other indications. We have recorded cracks and shifts of material that run through the ruined buildings but stop at the point where erosion began to level off the debris. These were caused by a second shock which followed the first one after the buildings collapsed and the fire caused by the earthquake had burned itself out. I shall have to refer to the second shock in relation to the position of the text.
However, the first shock was also recorded. There is a long crack about 10 cms. wide running through the deposits of a little lane which formed during Phase M and is almost 60 cms. high. This crack is closed further to the east but here a horizontal shift could be seen because the crack runs lengthwise through the low stump of a mud brick wall. The clay mortar between the bricks on both sides of the crack does not fit together any longer. The horizontal shift was about 10 ems. Such cracks have not only been recorded on paper but also on "pull offs", a method used in agriculture to take a thin slice of earth to the laboratory (Franken 1965b), in order to keep an authentic record of the accumulation of deposits. The slice is thick enough to make samples from it for microscopic analysis. Incidentally horizontal shifts of more than 30 ems. were recorded. It was the second shock which brought the preserved fragments of the Aramaic text down from their support' (Franken 1976, 7-8).
`We have seen that Phase M consists of traces of a situation that must have existed one day in the past when an earthquake hit the site and traces of the impact of the first and the second earthquake shock. We must now consider the value of the interpretation of Phase M as a sanctuary. The earthquake has nothing to do with this interpretation, but had it not been for the earthquake the text might not have been preserved. Also thanks to the earthquake many objects were found which otherwise might have disappeared for ever. The plan of the buildings has to be partly hypothetically reconstructed since some walls were dislocated at floor level leaving barely any traces of where they stood before the destruction. Also a number of objects like the text were knocked about when the shocks hit the site. In contrast to two earlier earthquake phases we did not find human victims in the ruins. This may indicate that the disaster took place during daylight but it seems more likely that the destruction happened at night when there was nobody in these rooms. Somewhere there was a fire burning in a breadoven or otherwise, because the first shock was followed by a conflagration, wooden objects burned away like the looms, of which we found the clay weights in several rooms, and charred beams which may also partly have belonged to other wooden furniture. But what was left, the less perishable objects, was found and reconstructed as far as possible' (Franken 1976, 12).
'Pl. 16a shows the plan of four rooms. On this plan the entrance to room GG205 from the south is located between walls BB 320 and BB 427. When found this entrance was blocked by a wall fragment. The blockage may have been caused by the earthquake. In the corner formed by wall BB 320 and the blocked doorway eighteen burned clay loom weights were found lying on the floor. Eighty cms. north of the corner and lying against wall BB 320 inside room GG 205 three remarkable objects were found [in the debris on the floor: the inscribed stone, a goblet on a 18]
high foot with a spout (R. no. 1990) and an outsize loom weight (R. no. 2006). A large piece of charred wood lay beside these objects in front of the passage between rooms GG 205 and GG 102. The goblet (pl. 16b) was only slightly damaged near the rim; the stone and loom weight were com- plete . (Franken 1976, 15).
`This phase IX is the same as phase M in previous countings. Much of it had been excavated in 1967 in an area of c. 25 x 25 m NW of the trenches dug during the last three seasons. Much of the architecture had been revealed, and some of it has been published preliminarily in J. Hoftijzer, G. van der Kooij, Aramaic Texts from Deir Alla, Leiden, 1976, (Pls. 16-19) and in A.D.A.J. op. cit. 1978, p. 64, fig. 6 (square B/C5). During this season excavations of phase M were done in one square only, namely in B/C6, to the E of B/C5, labeled EE 400 and EE 300 respectively in 1967. In 1967 it became clear that all the phase M architecture excavated had been destroyed by earthshock and fire. The room found in B/C6 was destroyed by fire too.
The walls are partly still standing up to 1.25 m high, and the room is found filled with burnt roof and wall debris. For a plan of the walls combined with those of B/C5 see plan drawing (fig. 5). The height of the debris (deposits 61 and 63) is shown on (Pl. XX, 2) where the floor is visible as well as the E most part of the burnt debris. Note also the lower course of mudbricks 57 going N-S at the top of the photograph. To the left is a doorway with a quern at the threshold. See also (Pl. XXI, 1) for a photograph of one stage in the removal of the debris inside the roorn. In the NW corner the floor of the room is visible. An especially interesting feature is the antler found as fallen almost directly on the floor of the room (Pl. XXI, 2). Some of the artifacts found may be mentioned here. Plates (XXVIII, 2- XXIX, 2) show some of the pottery found. A sealed jar handle (see Pl. XXX, 1). A shard with graffiti writing and drawing (PL XXX, 2). Phase IX probably has to be dated in the 8th century B.C. (PL XXXI)' (Ibrahim and Kooij 1979, 48-50).
`The empirical evidence at Deir Alla, dated to the mid-8th century BE, perhaps by the famous "Balaam Inscription", is stronger' (Dever 1992, 35 n. 10). `The details of their language [of the texts], restoration, script, reading, and interpretation are still under discussion; however, following a preliminary palaeographic dating to the Persian period, and then in the editio princeps to about 700 BCE (Hoftijzer and Kooij, 1976), most commentators now agree that the palaeography fits the dating of the archaeological context: about 800 BCE (Hoftijzer and Kooij, 1991) or the first half of the eighth century BCE. Indeed, the earthquake that destroyed level M/IX at Deir Alla could well be the one mentioned in Amos 1:1 (cf. Also 4:11, 6:8-11, 8:8, and 9:1; and Zee. 14:5), dated to about 760 BCE' (Lemaire 1997, 139).
1150–1100 B.C. - Ferry et. al. (2011)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Alla
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=353200267
ReferencesAustin, S. A., et al. (2000). "Amos's Earthquake: An Extraordinary Middle East Seismic Event of 750 B.C." International Geology Review 42(7): 657-671.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00206810009465104#
Ferry, M., et al. (2011). "Episodic Behavior of the Jordan Valley Section of the Dead Sea Fault Inferred from a 14-ka-Long Integrated Catalog of Large Earthquakes." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 101(1): 39-67.
Tell el Hauma
aka Tel el Hama aka Hauma - Ambraseys (2009)
759 BC - Ambraseys (2009)
18]Tell al Hama(Mazar 1993, 208 -= ?).
Location Info
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=353100377
References
Ambraseys, N. (2009). Earthquakes in the Mediterranean and Middle East: a multidisciplinary study of seismicity up to 1900. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.
Tel Mevorakh
Ambraseys (2009)
759 BC - Ambraseys (2009)
21] Tel Mevorakh (Mazar 1993, 298 = ?).
Location Info
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=343200074
References
Ambraseys, N. (2009). Earthquakes in the Mediterranean and Middle East: a multidisciplinary study of seismicity up to 1900. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.
Tel Michal
Ambraseys (2009)
759 BC - Ambraseys (2009)
[14] Tel Michal (Mazar 1993, 298 = ?).
Location Info
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Michal
References
Ambraseys, N. (2009). Earthquakes in the Mediterranean and Middle East: a multidisciplinary study of seismicity up to 1900. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.
Tel Qasile
Ambraseys (2009)
1100-1050 BC - Ambraseys (2009)
For Tell Qasile, which is included in the list of sites damaged by the earthquake of 760 BC, archaeological evidence suggests that the site was damaged during the period 1100-1050 BC (Dothan and Dunayevsky 1993; Mazar 1993, 298; Stern 1993).
[15] Tell QasileExtract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
`Stratum XI was completely cleared in the southern part of the mound, where a large building, built mostly of kurkar stones, was found. The structure's plan was not fully traced. East of it was a large square, and nearby were two clay crucibles containing remains of smelted copper. In the northern sector of the mound, the buildings in this stratum were destroyed down to their foundations when the stratum X buildings were erected. The nature of the ruins indicates that the settlement was destroyed by an earthquake. The fortifications in Area B include a massive brick wall (c. 5 m thick) in stratum XI. No architectural continuity was noted between strata XII and XI. The latter was laid out on a different plan and a new wall was added. It was possible to distinguish clearly between the different Iron Age I strata (XIIâX) at Tell Qasile; thus, separate and well-defined pottery assemblages could be established. Changes and developments can be traced in the ordinary local pottery, in which the Canaanite pottery tradition continues, as well as in the Philistine ware. The stratum XII Philistine pottery includes bowls, kraters, jugs with strainer spouts, and stirrup jars. The pottery contains several distinctive features that date it tb the early phase of its appearance in Israel: thick white slip and bichrome decoration on some of the vessels with narrow, close-set lines, similar to the Mycenaean "close style"; the bird motif is limited to stratum XII (only one example was found in stratum XI). The ceramic assemblage of stratum XI is similar to that of stratum XII. However, a change is discernible in the Philistine pottery: there is a deterioration in ornamentation, and monochrome decorations become more frequent. Other finds in this stratum include bronze arrowheads, a bone graver, spindle whorls, flint sickle blades, numerous loom weights, and various stone objects, such as grindstones and mortars. Iron objects were not found in Area A in strata XII and XI' (Dothan and Dunayevsky 1993).
Location Infohttp://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=343200210
References
Ambraseys, N. (2009). Earthquakes in the Mediterranean and Middle East: a multidisciplinary study of seismicity up to 1900. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.
Tel Abu Hawam
Approximate Location - Not 759 BC but 1125-1050 BC instead- Ambraseys (2009)
Not 759 BC but 1125-1050 BC instead - Ambraseys (2009)
Tell Abu Hawam was damaged between 1125-1050 BC (Balensi 1980, 586;Warren and Hankey 1989, 161).
[23] Tell Abu Hawam
Estimated period of occurrence: 1126-1050 BC.
Extract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
`Stratum IVA (dates) from c. 1125 to c. 1050 B.C. This city was violently destroyed, possibly by earthquake' (Warren and Hankey 1989, 161).
Location Info
Bat Galim in Haifa was built in the same spot as Tel Abu Hawam.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tell_Abu_Hawam
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bat_Galim
References
Ambraseys, N. (2009). Earthquakes in the Mediterranean and Middle East: a multidisciplinary study of seismicity up to 1900. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.
Tell Arad
Ambraseys (2009)
759 BC - Ambraseys (2009)
An earthquake during the reign of Uzziah in 760 or 750 BC' (Herzog and Singer 2002, 96-98; Singer-Avitz 2002, 162)
[10] Tel AradExtract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
`At Arad, a new fortress was erected that only partially used the previous casemate wall. A solid wall surrounded by a glacis protected the fortress of Stratum X A new imposing gate and an elaborate water system were constructed in this phase. As shown above, the temple, too, was first erected in this stratum. At Tel Beersheba, Strata V and IV cover the period equivalent to that of Stratum XI at Tel Arad .. . Tentatively this development might be associated with a severe earthquake dated to c. 760 BCE, based on biblical references (Dever 1992). A strong earthquake in the southern part of the Judean Kingdom might explain the total destruction of the upper parts of the fortification systems at Tel Arad XI and Beersheba IV and the need to rebuild them in Strata X and III, respectively.
The pottery assemblage of Stratum X at Tel Arad is remarkably different from that of Stratum XI and exhibits new forms that display similarity to the assemblages known from the destruction layers of the end of the 8th century (Aharoni and Aharoni 1970). The time span of the three strata was apparently fairly short. Attributing the destruction of the fortress of Stratum XI to the earthquake of ca. 760 BCE, the construction of the Stratum X fortress may be dated to 750 BCE. The circumstances of the destruction of the Stratum X fortress and its reconstruction in Stratum IX are unclear' (Herzog 2002, 97-98).
`As stated above, the material culture of Stratum XI resembles that of Lachish Level IV. The excavators attribute the destruction of Level IV at Lachish to an earthquake during the reign of Uzziah in 760 or 750 BCE, so that this date may mark the end of Stratum XI at Arad and the establishment of Stratum X. If we accept this view, then Stratum XI existed for a lengthy period, approximately 150 years' (Singer-Avitz 2002, 162).
Location Info
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=353102530
References
Ambraseys, N. (2009). Earthquakes in the Mediterranean and Middle East: a multidisciplinary study of seismicity up to 1900. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.
Be'er Sheva'
Approximate Location - Austin et. al. (2000), Ambraseys (2009)
759 BC - Austin et. al. (2000)
Tel Sheva, identified by some as biblical Beersheva, shows signs of earthquake destruction in the Stratum III. This destruction was dated by the excavator to the middle of the eighth century B.C. (Aharoni, 1973, p. 107).
759 BC - Ambraseys (2009)
[9] Tel Beersheba (Tel Sheva)
Estimated period of occurrence: 760 BC.
Extract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
. . and Beersheva depends largely upon the opinion of Aharoni, thus far unsupported by an adequate publication, see Y. Aharoni et al., Beer-Sheba I. Excavations at Tell Beer-Sheba, 1969-1971 Seasons (Tel Aviv 1973) 107.' (Dever 1992, 35* n. 10).
`At Tel Beersheba, Strata V and IV cover the period equivalent to that of Stratum XI at Tel Arad. The plan of Stratum III at Tel Beersheba is, again, drastically different from that of Stratum IV. The former solid city wall and city gate were completely razed, and a new fortification system was constructed. We subscribe to the "low chronology", these changes may not be attributed to Shishak's raid or to the division of the alleged United Monarchy. If so, what generated such a cultural shift? Since typological modification runs parallel to drastic changes in the design of settlements, as observed at Tel Beersheba and Lachish, they should be related to significant events. Tentatively this development might be associated with a severe earthquake dated to c. 760 BCE, based on biblical references (Dever 1992). A strong earthquake in the southern part of the Judean Kingdom might explain the total destruction of the upper parts of the fortification systems at Tel Arad XI and Beersheba IV and the need to rebuild them in Strata X and III, respectively' (Herzog 2002, 97-98).
Location Info
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=343100771
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=343200103
References
Ambraseys, N. (2009). Earthquakes in the Mediterranean and Middle East: a multidisciplinary study of seismicity up to 1900. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.Austin, S. A., et al. (2000). "Amos's Earthquake: An Extraordinary Middle East Seismic Event of 750 B.C." International Geology Review 42(7): 657-671.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00206810009465104#
Yadin, Y. and S. Angress (1960). Hazor II: an account of the second season of excavations, 1956, Magnes Press, Hebrew University.
http://books.google.com/books/about/Hazor_II.html?id=C-EMAQAAMAAJ
Tell Erany
Approximate Location - Austin et. al. (2000)
759 BC - Austin et. al. (2000)
Excavations at Tel Erany indicate a mid-eighth century earthquake in Stratum VI of the acropolis (Yeivin, 1979, p. 168). Unfortunately, a final report has not been published.
Location Info
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=343100170
References
Austin, S. A., et al. (2000). "Amos's Earthquake: An Extraordinary Middle East Seismic Event of 750 B.C." International Geology Review 42(7): 657-671.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00206810009465104#
Tell Hazor
Approximate Location - Austin et. al. (2000),
Ambraseys (2009), Ben-Menahem (1991), Karcz, Kafri, and Meshel (1977), Danzig (2011)
759 BC - Austin et. al. (2000)
FIG. 2. Southward-leaning wall within Hazor Stratum VI (Area A, Locus 113). Many walls within Stratum VI that did not collapse show significant tilt southward. The rod was oriented to vertical using the plumb line. Thickness of the wall is ~1 m (from Yadin et al., 1960, plate IX).
759 BC - Ambraseys (2009)
for Tel Hazor 'The damage is likely to be due to the well-known earthquake mentioned by Amos' (Yadin 1972, 113, 181; Dever 1992, 28; Knauf 2002).
Tel Hazor
Estimated period of occurrence: 760 BC.
Extract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
`Stratum VI was found to have been destroyed by a violent earthquake which could be associated with the one mentioned in Zechariah (14:5) and Amos (1:4) in the days of King Uzziah, c. 760 B.C.' (Yadin 1972, 11).
`Stratum VI, Area A, Building 2a. The house was severely damaged by an earthquake; all the walls and pillars were tilted southwards. In all the rooms, as well as in the western part of the court, huge blocks of ceiling plaster were found sealed off by the floors of Stratum V, which were built 1.5 m. above the floors of Stratum VI. The reason for this is that, although the walls of Stratum VI were still standing after the earthquake, they were so tilted that only their tops could be used, and even those only as a base for the new foundations. The earthquake which destroyed Stratum VI seems to be the one referred to in the Bible, which occurred during the reign of King Uzziah (c. 760 B.C.)' (Yadin 1972, 181).
`Area A, Stratum VI, Building 2a.
Due to the excellent construction of building 2a, we can trace in it the effects of the earthquake which destroyed Stratum VI better than anywhere else in the excavation area. Its strongly-built walls remained standing to a considerable height, but the earthquake is evidenced by their tilt southwards, particularly that of the three pillars (Pl. XXV, 2). In all the rooms and in the northern part of the courtyard, we came upon great quantities of debris comprising lumps of plaster from the collapsed ceilings (Pl. XXVII, 1, 4), resembling those that we found in storeroom 148 in 1956 (Hazor p. 23)' (Bent-Tor 1989, 41-44).
`A later, more modest effort to utilize seismic chronology was that of the late Yigael Yadin, who saw the destruction of Hazor VI (Area A) as dramatic evidence of the earthquake of ca. 760 BCE, citing the biblical texts mentioned above. Despite the clear evidence of several displaced walls and cracked surfaces at Hazor, Yadin's earthquake hypothesis does not seem to have attracted much attention. This was possibly because of the author's well known predilection towards using biblical texts to explain or corroborate archaeological phenomena â a style of "biblical archaeology" that Yadin popularized with enviable success, but one that left some of his professional colleagues skeptical. Nevertheless, when the Hazor excavations were resumed in 1990 under the direction of Amnon Ben-Tor, further evidence of a Stratum VI earthquake came to light, especially in a street and drain in Area A that seemed simply to have split down the centre â difficult to explain by any other hypothesis. And since Stratum VI dates to the early 8th century BCE on independent grounds (as one may maintain, with Yadin), the well known earthquake of ca. 760 BCE seems a likely candidate' (Dever 1992, 28).
`The destruction of Phase H5a [in Megiddo] should probably be attributed to the earthquake in the time of Jeroboam II, mentioned in Amos 1:1 and archtleologically also attested at Hazor and Tell Deir Alla. . (Knauf 2002).
759 BC - Ben-Menahem(1991)
5.4.3. 759 B.C.E. Felt throughout Israel, Egypt and Mesopotamia, Af 1200 km. According to the Bible, Josephus, the Talmudic literature and the late archeological findings at Hazor and Sebastia, the epicenter seems to be east of Hazor, approximately at 33.0° 35.5° E.
Year of occurrence is likely to be 759 B.C.E., in which King Uziah abdicated the throne in favor of his son Yotam [Cassuto, 1976; Josephus; II Chr. 26]. The date of this earthquake is linked to the eclipse of the Sun on June 15, 763 B.C.E. (Julian Day 1,442,902.8392, or Monday, Sivan 30, 2998, of the Jewish Calendar [see Kudlek and Mickler, 1971; Chambers, 1904, Thompson, 1900; Oppolzer, 1887; Fotheringham, 1920]). The eclipse was partial in Jerusalem (maximal magnitude 0.91). Evidence for the proximity of the earthquake and the eclipse is found in Amos 8: 8-9; Zech. 14: 4-7, and Jer. 4: 24.
The location of the causative fault can be estimated from the oriented tilt of the walls in stratum 6 at Hazor (Figure 6), a detail of which is shown in Figure 7. According to the report of the excavating archeologists [Yadin et al., 1959], northern walls were tilted southward, while western walls tilted eastward. Figure 8 shows that these orientations are consistent with the effect of a near field horizontal shear acceleration coming to Hazor from the north east. This is consistent with modern ideas that structures in the near-field of a major earthquake are mostly affected by SH body waves and the fundamental Love mode.
Day of occurrence, according to II Chron.26 and Josephus, is likely to be on the eve of the Tabernacle holiday, 14 Tishrei, 3003, which is October 759 B.C.E. There was great destruction in Judea, Samaria, and Galilee. Intensity at Jerusalem (A = 135 km) estimated as MM 8; Io = 11; big earth slips in the Kidron Valley, destruction of Razor, Sebastia (Mic. 1: 6) and the ancient city of Kinnereth (9 km north of Tiberias). A tsunami in the Sea of Galilee is hinted in Amos 5: 8; 9: 5-6.
8th century BC - Karcz, Kafri, and Meshel (1977)Location Info
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=353300402
References
Ambraseys, N. (2009). Earthquakes in the Mediterranean and Middle East: a multidisciplinary study of seismicity up to 1900. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.Austin, S. A., et al. (2000). "Amos's Earthquake: An Extraordinary Middle East Seismic Event of 750 B.C." International Geology Review 42(7): 657-671.
Danzig, D. (2011). A Contextual Investigation of Archaeological and Textual Evidence for a Purported mid-8thCentury BCE Levantine Earthquake Book of Amos, Dr. Shalom Holtz.Ben-Menahem, A. (1991). "Four Thousand Years of Seismicity along the Dead Sea rift." Journal of Geophysical Research 96((no. B12), 20): 195-120, 216.
Karcz, I., et al. (1977). "Archaeological evidence for Subrecent seismic activity along the Dead Sea-Jordan Rift." Nature 269(5625): 234-235.
Tell Judeiedeh
Approximate Location - Austin et. al. (2000)
759 BC - Austin et. al. (2000)
Another fortified Iron Age city of Judah was Tell Judeideh, located eight km northeast of Lachish. Excavations at Tell Judeideh by Bliss and Macalister (1902) showed that the Iron IIb could be divided into two phases. Bliss and Macalister provide no answers to the destruction of the lower phase. However, Gibson (1994), after an extensive review of the archival materials, noted that pottery of the two phases has strong stratigraphic correlation to Level III and IV of nearby Lachish. He agreed with Ussishkin and Dever that earthquake destruction debris marks the top of Lachish Level IV. Therefore, Gibson (1994, p. 230) concluded that an earthquake in approximately 760 B.C destroyed Tell Judeideh's lower-phase buildings.
Location Info
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=343100044
References
Austin, S. A., et al. (2000). "Amos's Earthquake: An Extraordinary Middle East Seismic Event of 750 B.C." International Geology Review 42(7): 657-671.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00206810009465104#
Tell Lachish
Austin et. al. (2000), Ambraseys (2009)
759 BC - Austin et. al. (2000)
Lachish in the late Iron Age was a strongly fortified city of Judah on the boundary of the coastal plain and the Hebron Hills. The Iron II floor within Level IV in Area S was covered with large quantities of pottery, including intact and broken vessels, which indicates sudden destruction (Ussishkin, 1977, p. 43). The overall observation of abrupt termination of Level IV, without evidence of military conquest, led the excavator to follow M. Kochav's suggestion that the city was destroyed by an earthquake during the reign of Uzziah, in approximately 760 B.C. (Ussishkin, 1993). The destruction debris at the top of Level IV is attributed to an earthquake and is dated to 760 B.C. ± 30 years.
759 BC - Ambraseys (2009)
The case for Lachish (Hesy), where the archaeologists consider 'A natural catastrophe of this sort would, perhaps, be compatible with the earthquake mentioned by Amos' (Ussishkin 1977, 5; Dever 1992, 35, n. 10; Herzog 2002, 97).
11] Lachish (Hesy)
Estimated period of occurrence: 760 BC.
Extract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake
damage:
' Level IV apparently came to a sudden end, but it seems clear that this was not caused by fire. On the other hand, the lower house of Level III and the rebuilt enclosure wall followed the lines of the Level IV structures, while the Level IV city wall and gate continued to function in Level III; these facts point towards the continuation of life without a break. Considering that the fortifications remained intact, we can hardly identify this level with the city which was stormed and completely destroyed in the fierce Assyrian attack. Here we may mention M. Kochavi's suggestion (made during a visit to the excavations in 1976 and quoted here with his kind permission) that the end of the Level IV structures may have been caused by an earthquake. A natural catastrophe of this sort would, perhaps, be compatible with the above findings. Of interest in this connection is the earthquake mentioned in Amos 1:1 and Zech. 14:5, which occurred around 760 BCE during the reign of Uzziah, king of Judah' (Ussishkin 1977, 52).
`The case of Lachish IV is perhaps the strongest' (Dever 1992, 35* n. 10).
`Since typological modification runs parallel to drastic changes in the design of settlements, as observed at Tel Beersheba and Lachish, they should be related to significant events. Tentatively this development might be associated with a severe earthquake dated to c. 760 BCE, based on biblical references (Dever 1992)' (Herzog 2002,97).
Location Info
http://daahl.ucsd.edu/DAAHL/SitesDataView.php?SiteNo=343100799
References
Ambraseys, N. (2009). Earthquakes in the Mediterranean and Middle East: a multidisciplinary study of seismicity up to 1900. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.Austin, S. A., et al. (2000). "Amos's Earthquake: An Extraordinary Middle East Seismic Event of 750 B.C." International Geology Review 42(7): 657-671.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00206810009465104#
Location (with hotlink) | Status | Minimum PGA (g) | Likely PGA (g) | Likely Intensity1 | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Jordan River Delta | possible | Niemi and Ben-Avraham (1994) estimated that Event 2 was younger than 3-5 ka and older than 1927 CE. | |||
Location (with hotlink) | Status | Minimum PGA (g) | Likely PGA (g) | Likely Intensity1 | Comments |
Niemi and Ben-Avraham (1994) estimated that Event 2 was younger than 3-5 ka and older than 1927 CE.
Location (with hotlink) | Status | Intensity | Notes |
---|---|---|---|
Hacipasa Trenches | possible to unlikely | ≥ 7 | The oldest event identified in the Ziyaret Trench dated to before 983 CE. A lower bound on age was not available due to insufficient radiocarbon dates. |
Kazzab Trench | possible | ≥ 7 | Daeron et al (2007)
dated events S4, ?S5, and ?S6 to between 2115 and 6288 years B.P. These appear to be in Sequence 2 for which the age-depth functionis unknown and a hiatus was suspected. |
Jarmaq Trench | possible | ≥ 7 | Nemer and Meghraoui (2006) date Event Y to between 2920-2879 BCE and 84-239 CE. |
al-Harif Aqueduct | possible | ≥ 7 | Sbeinati et al (2010)
dated Event W, characterized from paleoseismology (Trench C only), to between 3400-3000 BCE and 800-510 BCE and speculated that it may have been caused by the ~1365 BCE
earthquake which, they claim, affected Ugharit near Latakia in Northern Syria and Tyre in Southern Lebanon or another earthquake. They noted that
the rate of sedimentation in unit f of trench C implies a minimum age of 962 B.C. for event Wand estimated ~4.6 m of slip. |
Qiryat-Shemona Rockfalls | possible | Kanari, M. (2008) examined rockfalls in Qiryat-Shemona which were attributed to earthquakes. Optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dating was performed on soil samples beneath the fallen rocks. Sample ID QS-13 was dated to 3.2 +/- 0.45 ka BP which makes one of the Amos Quakes a possible candidate (Kanari, 2008). | |
Bet Zayda | no evidence | ≥ 7 | Earthquakes before 392 BCE were not observed by Wechsler et al (2014) or Wechsler et al (2018) however Tom Rockwell (personal correspondence, 2022) indicates that several unstudied southern channels in the area could have captured older events such as one of the Amos Quakes. |
Jordan Valley - Tel Rehov Trench | possible | Zilberman et al (2004) dated Event I to the 7th century BCE and Event II to the 6th century BCE. Based on displacements, they estimated a Magnitude of 6.5-6.6 for Event I and 6.6-6.7 for Event II. | |
Jordan Valley - Tell Saidiyeh and Ghor Kabed Trenches | no evidence | ≥ 7 | Ferry et al (2011) detected 12 surface rupturing seismic events in 4 trenches (T1-T4) in Tell Saidiyeh and Ghor Kabed; 10 of which were prehistoric. They did not identify any paleoseismic events matching with the Amos Quakes and cited archaeoseismic evidence from other studies in Deir 'Alla (Franken, 1989:204) and Tell Saidiyeh (Tubb, 1988:126-127, 130) for an earthquake from around this time. |
Dead Sea - Seismite Types | n/a | n/a | n/a |
Dead Sea - En Feshka | probable | 8 - 8.8 (both seismites) | Two seismites are candidates (Kagan et al, 2011)
|
Dead Sea - Nahal Darga | possible to probable | ≥ 7 | Enzel et. al. (2000) identified a 150 cm. thick seismite in coarse grained lithology in Deformed Unit 7 in Stratigraphic Unit 9 which dated to ~750 BCE +/- 300 (~ 3000-2400 yrs BP). |
Dead Sea - En Gedi | possible | 8 - 8.9 (both seismites) | Two possible seismites from the En Gedi Core
(
Migowski et. al., 2004)
|
Dead Sea - Nahal Ze 'elim | probable | 8 - 9 (both seismites) | Two possible seismites from Kagan et al (2011) at ZA-2.
Jefferson Williams observed similar seismites in the East section of site ZA-4 above the Late Bronze Beach Ridge at (floating) depths of 577 cm. (8 cm. thick) and 616 cm. (6-8 cm.thick). |
Araba - Introduction | n/a | n/a | n/a |
Araba - Taybeh Trench | possible to probable | ≥ 7 | Event E8 in the Taybeh Trench (LeFevre et al., 2018) was dated to 700 BCE +/- 186 and matches well with a ~750 BCE date for the Southern Amos Quake. |
Araba - Qatar Trench | unlikely | ≥ 7 | Klinger et. al. (2015) did not identify any events in the Qatar Trench which correlate with either of the Amos Quakes. |
Araba - Taba Sabhka Trench | unlikely | ≥ 7 | None of the events in the Taba Sabhka Trench correlate with an earthquake around the time of the Amos Quakes (Allison, 2013). |
Araba - Shehoret, Roded, and Avrona Alluvial Fan Trenches | possible | ≥ 7 | Event 5, with 0.2 m of displacement, dated to 500 BCE +/- 1000 (1500 BCE - 500 CE). |
Location (with hotlink) | Status | Intensity | Notes |
The oldest event identified in the Ziyaret Trench dated to before 983 CE. A lower bound on age was not available due to insufficient radiocarbon dates.
Daeron et al (2007)
dated events S4, ?S5, and ?S6 to between 2115 and 6288 years B.P. These appear to be in Sequence 2 for which the age-depth function
is unknown and a
hiatus was suspected.
Nemer and Meghraoui (2006) date Event Y to between 2920-2879 BCE and 84-239 CE.
Sbeinati et al (2010)
dated Event W, characterized from paleoseismology (Trench C only), to between 3400-3000 BCE and 800-510 BCE and speculated that it may have been caused by the ~1365 BCE
earthquake which, they claim, affected Ugharit near Latakia in Northern Syria and Tyre in Southern Lebanon or another earthquake. They noted that
the rate of sedimentation in unit f of trench C implies a minimum age of 962 B.C. for event W
and estimated ~4.6 m of slip.
Kanari, M. (2008) examined rockfalls in
Qiryat-Shemona which were attributed to earthquakes.
Optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dating was performed on soil samples beneath the fallen rocks.
Sample ID QS-13 was dated to 3.2 +/- 0.45 ka BP which makes one of the Amos Quakes a possible candidate
(Kanari et al, 2019).
Earthquakes before 392 BCE were not observed by Wechsler et al (2014) or
Wechsler et al (2018) however Tom Rockwell
(personal correspondence, 2022) indicates that several unstudied southern channels in the area could have captured older events such as one of the
Amos Quakes.
Zilberman et al (2004) dated Event I to the 7th century BCE and Event II to the 6th century BCE.
Based on displacements, they estimated a Magnitude of 6.5-6.6 for Event I and 6.6-6.7 for Event II.
Ferry et al (2011) detected 12 surface rupturing seismic events in 4 trenches (T1-T4) in Tell Saidiyeh and Ghor Kabed; 10 of which were prehistoric.
They did not identify any paleoseismic events matching with the Amos Quakes and cited archaeoseismic evidence from other studies in Deir 'Alla
(Franken, 1989:204) and Tell Saidiyeh
(Tubb, 1988:126-127, 130)
for an earthquake from around this time.
Two possible seismites from Kagan et al (2011).
Enzel et. al. (2000)
identified a 150 cm. thick seismite in coarse grained lithology in Deformed Unit 7 in Stratigraphic Unit 9 which dated to ~750 BCE
+/- 300 (~ 3000-2400 yrs BP).
Two possible seismites from the En Gedi Core ( Migowski et. al., 2004)
Two possible seismites from Kagan et al (2011) at ZA-2.
Event E8 in the Taybeh Trench (LeFevre et al., 2018)
was dated to 700 BCE +/- 186 and matches well with a ~750 BCE date for the Southern Amos Quake.
Klinger et. al. (2015) did not identify any events in the Qatar Trench
which correlate with either of the Amos Quakes.
None of the events in the Taba Sabhka Trench correlate with an earthquake around the time of the Amos Quakes
(Allison, 2013).
Event 5, with 0.2 m of displacement, dated to 500 BCE +/- 1000 (1500 BCE - 500 CE).
c. 759 BC Judaea
Among Biblical earthquakes the mid-eighth-century-BC
earthquake known as ‘Amos”, ‘Zechariah’s’ or ‘Uzziah’s’
earthquake is an important event. Modern writers date
the earthquake to 759 BC and assign to it a very large
magnitude of ML (sic.) 8.2, with an intensity in Jerusalem
between VIII and IX (Ben-Menahem 1979, 262; Austin
et al. 2000). In addition, the event is said to have been
associated with the coseismic left-lateral offset of the
Jericho fault, which is a segment of the north–south
trending strike–slip Dead Sea fault (Nur and Ron
1996). Obviously, such an important earthquake deserves
authentication and its effects, reappraisal.
The earliest reference to a mid-eighth-century-BC
earthquake in Judaea can be found in the opening verse
of the Book of Amos who, without giving any details,
mentions in passing an earthquake during his time, somewhere
in Judaea, during the reign of Uzziah (791–752 BC)
(numbers in square brackets refer to the notes at the end
of the entry, [1]), perhaps the same event as alluded to by
Isaiah (c. 700 BC) [2].
About three centuries later, early in the sixth century BC,
Zechariah (c. 520 BC) mentions an earthquake
in Judaea, again in the days of King Uzziah and probably
the same event as that mentioned by Isaiah, which he says
affected Jerusalem and caused the Mount of Olives, east
of Jerusalem, to split and form a valley [3]. The interpretation
of this passage in Zechariah (14, 4–5), which seems
to be a later fifth- or fourth-century-BC insertion, is not
clear. Other versions of the same passage say that the
Mount of Olives will split in two and create a valley that
will reach Azel. This valley will run from east to west with
half of the Mount of Olives moving to the north, away
from the position it occupied, while the other half will
move to the south. The valley will stop where the mountains will touch each other [3.1, 3–7].
A somewhat different reading is to be found in
the Masoretic version, where, following the mention of
the splitting of the Mount of Olives, it says that the
valley shall reach unto Azal, as compared with the Revised
Standard Version, which says instead that the valley shall
be stopped up, for the valley shall touch the side of it (the
mountain) [4, 5]. The source of this difference lies
perhaps in the confused reading of the Hebrew words for
‘shall be stopped up’ (ve-nistam), and ‘you shall flee’ (venastem).
The consonants are identical, but when the diacritical points
were added to the Hebrew Bible to facilitate reading,
the text was apparently misunderstood and
the meaning changed (see the editor’s note in Wachs
and Lewitte 1984). Upon adopting the latter reading as
more plausible in relation to the natural phenomenon
described, it is obvious that there is no other explanation
than a large landslide, which may, or might not, have been
triggered by this or by another earthquake.
Also, Josephus in his Antiquities of the Jews
(AD 93), a book written about six centuries later, refers
to an earthquake that happened in the last months of
King Uzziah’s life, which caused a crack in the Temple
at Jerusalem. Josephus adds that at a place called En-rogel,
outside the city, half of the mountain in the west
broke off from the rest and slid 800 m up to the
mountain on the east, spoiling the king’s gardens [6]. Assuming
that the two authors refer to the same event, this
passage in Josephus seems to suggest that in all
probability Zechariah describes a landslide, perhaps triggered by
an earthquake, rather than a graben formed by normal
faulting.
There is a further reference to these events in
Uzziah’s days by Nathan ha-Bavli, who was writing in the
middle of the second century AD. He does not mention
the earthquake, but he says that at the time of the
desecration of the temple by Uzziah the temple split open
and the fissure extended for twelve ‘miles’ in each direction [6a].
The location of Azal is not certain, but the name
may denote some place near the western extremity of
the valley near Jerusalem or a hamlet on the outskirts of
Jerusalem. As for the location of En-rogel, it has been
suggested that it is the fountain of the Virgin, the
modern Ain Umm al-Daraj. Others identify it with Bir Eyub,
to the south of the Pool of Siloam, and below the
junction of the valleys of Kidron and Hinnom, which seems
to be a more probable location, but again this is not
certain.
There remains the question of whether there is
any evidence today for active faulting in the immediate
vicinity of Old Jerusalem that can be associated with the
ground deformations mentioned by Zechariah, Josephus
and Nathan. Old aerial photographs of the chalky
geological formations of the region show only landslides on
steep slopes, but no through-going faults. A relatively
large slide can be recognised on the Mount of Olives,
which is located on the slope which faces west towards the
Old City, the scarp of which can be seen halfway up the
Mount of Olives. However, according to the Geological
Survey of Israel, it is probably much more ancient than
Biblical times (Wachs and Lewitte 1984; Frydman 1997).
The multitude of short scarps shown on relatively recent
geological maps of Jerusalem all terminate at the Kidron
Valley (Gil 1996). The exception is a short northeast–
southwest-running fault trace, which is shown on the
Geotechnical Map of Jerusalem (Israeli 1977), which the
Atlas of Israel labels Zechariah 14:4, earthquake fault.
This feature extends from a point a few hundred metres
south of the Jerusalem Railway Station to the west,
running for more than three kilometres, to just north of
al-Ayzariyah to the east, striking about N–70◦ E (Atlas of
Israel 1985). The reason why this feature has been
associated with Zechariah’s earthquake is not given.
There is no direct or indirect evidence that
Jerusalem was damaged, and it is interesting that the
details in Josephus concerning the effects of the
earthquake on the temple are not supported by earlier sources,
which remain silent about damage anywhere in Judaea
and Israel [7].
Amos’ earthquake may be dated vaguely from
the line of Jewish kings chronicled in the Old
Testament, which provides us with 756 or 759 BC as a
terminus ante quem (Soggin 1970, 120), or perhaps earlier.
Courville dates this earthquake to 751–750 BC, on the
basis of the Jewish legend reported by Josephus in which
the prophet Zechariah is quoted as a source indicating
the severity of the earthquake. This, however, would
be the correct date only if the earthquake could be
associated with the judgement on Uzziah, that is, only if
Josephus’ account that the earthquake occurred at the same
time as Uzziah was stricken with leprosy could be proven
to be true [6]. While the Zechariah quotation is
suggestive, it does not specifically associate the earthquake
with God’s judgement on the king, and we cannot follow
either Josephus’ or Courville’s attempts at a correlation
without further evidence (Courville 1971, ii, 122).
For instance, Courville goes on to correlate Uzziah’s
earthquake with other catastrophic events, such as, for
instance, the eruption of Thera. He can do this only
because he brings the Late Bronze age down to the time
of Uzziah, a view that must be rejected (Crisler 2004). If
Courville’s view is adopted, however, the placement of
Uzziah’s earthquake at the end of Samaria II can be
correlated with a wave of destructions at this stratigraphic
level, destruction that is said to have affected the Holy
Land and could also have been due to the invasion by the
Egyptians.
Modern writers have suggested that archaeological
evidence points to at least 20 sites in Judaea and Israel
that were destroyed by the same earthquake, although it
is not possible to confirm this. The chief problem is the
identification of the cause of the destruction at these sites,
which are scattered in a north–south direction from Tel
Hazor in the north to Tel Batash in the south, a distance
of 350 km, and from the Mediterranean coast to the east
side of the Dead Sea fault zone, that is, within an area
of about 100 km radius. Archaeological reports give
little or no technical justification to support the conclusion
that damage was due to earthquake, and if so, due to the
very same earthquake as that mentioned by Amos.
Stratigraphic control did not consider or discuss the possibility
that the observed damage was the result of later earthquakes,
and dating is based solely on the only literary
source available, the Bible.
For example, for Tel Beersheba (Tel Sheva)
Herzog concludes that ‘Tentatively the destruction might
be associated with a severe earthquake dated c. 760 BC,
based on biblical references’ (Herzog 2002, 96).
For Tel Arad the excavators attribute the destruction ‘to an earthquake during the reign of Uzziah in 760
or 750 BC’ (Herzog and Singer 2002, 96–98; Singer-Avitz
2002, 162).
The same is also the case for Lachish (Hesy),
where the archaeologists consider ‘A natural catastrophe
of this sort would, perhaps, be compatible with the
earthquake mentioned by Amos’ (Ussishkin 1977, 5; Dever
1992, 35, n. 10; Herzog 2002, 97).
For Tel Gezer, ‘evidence for the destruction, as in
other sites, can be attributed to the earthquake in Amos
and Zacharia c. 760 BC’ (Dever and Younker 1991, 286;
Younker 1991; Dever 1992, 30).
For Tell Qasile, which is included in the list of
sites damaged by the earthquake of 760 BC,
archaeological evidence suggests that the site was damaged during
the period 1100–1050 BC (Dothan and Dunayevsky 1993;
Mazar 1993, 298; Stern 1993).
Also Tell Abu Hawam, belonging to the same list,
was damaged between 1125–1050 BC (Balensi 1980, 586;
Warren and Hankey 1989, 161).
Crisler considers that ‘The destruction of Samaria
[Shechem] was probably due to Uzziah’s earthquake of
783 BC’ (Crisler 2003; 2004).
For Tell Deir Alla the excavators say that ‘Indeed,
the earthquake that destroyed level M/IX could well be
the one mentioned in Amos, dated about 760 BC’ (Dever
1992, 35, n. 10; Lemaire 1997, 139 = 750; Knauf 2002).
The same assumption is also made for the case
of Megiddo, for which it is concluded that
‘The destruction may be linked to the biblical reference to a major
earthquake c. 760 BC in the time of Jeroboam II’ (Knauf
2002).
Similarly for Tel Hazor ‘The damage is likely to
be due to the well-known earthquake mentioned by Amos’
(Yadin 1972, 113, 181; Dever 1992, 28; Knauf 2002).
An earthquake that could obliterate man-made
structures within an epicentral area of radius about
100 km, an area including all the sites listed as destroyed,
is an earthquake of a size beyond the limits of the
possible. The destruction of the towns and forts could have
been the result of Zechariah’s earthquake or of
separate events that occurred during the same week, month
or year, but were not differentiated in the sources or,
more likely, was the result of the invasion of Judaea and
Israel by pharaoh Sheshonk I. It is interesting that many
of the sites are included in the list of cities conquered
by the Egyptians, the names of which are carved into
the south wall of the courtyard of the temple of Karnak in Egypt, i.e. Timna (Tel Batash), Tel Gezer, Tel
Michal, Tell Qasile, Tell el-Mazar, Tell el Saiidiyeh, Tell
el-Hama, Tel Mevorakh, Tell Abu Hawam and Megiddo.
It is probable that Megiddo, where Sheshonk erected a
victory stele, was only partially destroyed, since it continued in use.
The stele belongs to the time of Jeroboam
II, and is dated to c. 783 BC (Kitchen 1986; Mazar 1993,
298; Ng 2004; Crisler 2004). Unfortunately, because of the
differences between the Egyptian record and the Biblical
account, it is difficult to establish whether the invasion by
Sheshonk I was coeval with Amos’ earthquake.
In conclusion it is possible that the earthquake
mentioned by Amos was embellished by Josephus and
by later writers in their narratives to include the effects
of an earthquake, to which the prophets do not refer.
The available tectonic and geological evidence suggests,
however, that it is more probable that the natural
phenomenon that Zechariah describes fits better the more
plausible ‘shall be stopped up’ reading of his text, which
implies the occurrence of a large landslide, perhaps
triggered by an earthquake. The uncritical amalgamation
of biblical information and archaeological evidence from
various distant parts of Judaea has produced a very large
earthquake of MS > 8.0. Such an earthquake should have
razed Jerusalem to the ground, an event that the prophets
or later chroniclers would have mentioned or that would
itself have left its mark in the form of a major surface fault
rupture. The date of this earthquake is very uncertain,
since archaeological evidence is hampered by the
unresolved differences between conventional chronology and
New Chronology. The description by Josephus, whether
really of the earthquake mentioned by Amos, Josephus
and Nathan or not, is at least evidence of the effects of
an earthquake that had occurred before their time
somewhere in Judaea for which there are no means today of
assessing its location and magnitude.
[1] Amos says that the prophet received visions ‘. . . during
the reigns of Uzziah king of Judah and Jeroboam son of
Jehoash king of Israel, two years before the earthquake . . .’
(Amos, I. 1).
[2] ‘. . . they shall go into the holes of the cracks and into
the caves of the earth when He arises to shake (terrify) the
earth . . .’ (Isa. II. 19, 21).
[3.1] ‘. . . the Lord will go out fully armed for war, to fight against
those nations. That day his feet will stand upon the Mount
of Olives, to the east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives
will split apart, making a very wide valley running from east
to west, for half the mountain will move towards the north
and half toward the south. You will escape through that valley,
for it will reach across to Azel. You will escape as your
people did long centuries ago from the earthquake in the
days of Uzziah, king of Juda . . . [c. 767–753 BC]’ (Zech.
xiv. 4–5).
[3.2] ‘And the mountain will split in half, forming
a wide valley that runs from east to west . . . Then you people will
escape from the Lord’s mountain, through this valley,
which reaches to Azal. You will run in all directions, just
as everyone did when the earthquake struck in the time of
King Uzziah of Judah.’ (Contemporary English Version).
[3.3] ‘And the Mount of Olives shall be split in two from east
to west by a very wide valley; so that one half of the
Mount shall withdraw northward, and the other half southward . . . And the valley of my mountains shall be stopped
up, for the valley of the mountains shall touch the side of
it; and you shall flee as you fled from the earthquake in the
days of Uzzi’ah king of Judah.’ (Revised Standard Version).
[3.4] ‘And the Mount of Olives shall be split in two from east
to west by a very great valley; and half of the mountain
shall remove toward the north and half of it toward the
south . . . And you shall flee by the valley of my mountains;
for the valley of the mountains shall reach to Azel; and you
shall flee, as you fled from before the earthquake in the days
of Uzziah king of Judah.’ (Amplified Bible).
[3.5] ‘And the Mount of Olives shall be split in the midst thereof
toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a
very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove
toward the north, and half of it toward the south . . . And you
shall flee by the valley of my mountains; for the valley of the
mountains shall reach unto Azel. And you shall flee, like as
you fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah.’
(American Standard Version).
[3.6] ‘And the Mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof
toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a
very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove
toward the north and half of it toward the south . . . And you
shall flee by the valley of my mountains; for the valley of the
mountains shall reach unto Azal; you shall even flee, like as
you fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah
king of Judah.’ (Darby English Version).
[3.7] ‘And the Mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof
toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a
very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove
toward the north, and half of it toward the south . . . And you
shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley shall
reach unto Azal; you shall flee, like as you fled from before
the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah.’ (King
James Version).
[4] ‘And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains;
for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal . . .’ (Masoretic
text).
[5] ‘And the valley of my mountains shall be stopped up; for
the valley of the mountains shall touch the side of it . . .’
(Revised text).
[6] ‘. . . a great earthquake shook the ground and a rent was
made in the temple, and the bright rays of the sun shone
through it, and fell upon Uzziah’s face, insomuch that the
leprosy seized upon him immediately. And before the city,
at a place called Eroge, half the mountain broke off from
the rest on the west, and rolled itself four furlongs and stood
still at the east mountain, till the roads, as well as the king’s
gardens, were spoiled by the obstruction . . .’ (Joseph.AN:
IX. x. 4).
[6a] ‘. . . when leprosy appeared on Uzziah’s brow, at the same
moment the temple split open and the fissure extended for
twelve miles in each direction . . .’ (Nathan ha-Bavli. ix).
[7] ‘. . . the posts of the temple moved when the Lord spoke . . .’
(2 Chron., XXVI. 16–17; 2 Kings XV.1–7).
[8] Timna (Tel Batash)
(Rotherberg and Lupu 1967, 59; Rothenberg 1972, 128,
149–150; Mazar 1993 = in fact 1160–1156).
[9] Tel Beersheba (Tel Sheva)
Estimated period of occurrence: 760 BC.
Extract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
‘. . . and Beersheva depends largely upon the opinion of Aharoni,
thus far unsupported by an adequate publication, see Y. Aharoni et al., Beer-Sheba I. Excavations at
Tell Beer-Sheba, 1969–1971 Seasons (Tel Aviv 1973) 107.’
(Dever 1992, 35* n. 10).
‘At Tel Beersheba, Strata V and IV cover the period
equivalent to that of Stratum XI at Tel Arad. The plan of
Stratum III at Tel Beersheba is, again, drastically
different from that of Stratum IV. The former solid city wall
and city gate were completely razed, and a new fortification
system was constructed. We subscribe to the “low chronology”,
these changes may not be attributed to Shishak’s
raid or to the division of the alleged United Monarchy. If
so, what generated such a cultural shift? Since typological
modification runs parallel to drastic changes in the design
of settlements, as observed at Tel Beersheba and Lachish,
they should be related to significant events. Tentatively this
development might be associated with a severe earthquake
dated to c. 760 BCE, based on biblical references (Dever
1992). A strong earthquake in the southern part of the
Judean Kingdom might explain the total destruction of the
upper parts of the fortification systems at Tel Arad XI and
Beersheba IV and the need to rebuild them in Strata X and
III, respectively’ (Herzog 2002, 97–98).
[10] Tel Arad
Estimated period of occurrence: c. 760 BC.
Extract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
‘At Arad, a new fortress was erected that only partially used the previous casemate wall.
A solid wall surrounded by a glacis protected the fortress of Stratum X.
A new imposing gate and an elaborate water system were
constructed in this phase. As shown above, the temple, too,
was first erected in this stratum. At Tel Beersheba, Strata V
and IV cover the period equivalent to that of Stratum XI at
Tel Arad . . . Tentatively this development might be associated
with a severe earthquake dated to c. 760 BCE, based
on biblical references (Dever 1992). A strong earthquake
in the southern part of the Judean Kingdom might explain
the total destruction of the upper parts of the fortification
systems at Tel Arad XI and Beersheba IV and the need to
rebuild them in Strata X and III, respectively.
The pottery assemblage of Stratum X at Tel Arad is remarkably
different from that of Stratum XI and exhibits new
forms that display similarity to the assemblages known from
the destruction layers of the end of the 8th century (Aharoni
and Aharoni 1976).
The time span of the three strata was apparently
fairly short. Attributing the destruction of the fortress of
Stratum XI to the earthquake of ca. 760 BCE, the
construction of the Stratum X fortress may be dated to 750 BCE. The
circumstances of the destruction of the Stratum X fortress
and its reconstruction in Stratum IX are unclear’ (Herzog
2002, 97–98).
‘As stated above, the material culture of Stratum
XI resembles that of Lachish Level IV. The excavators
attribute the destruction of Level IV at Lachish to an
earthquake during the reign of Uzziah in 760 or 750 BCE, so
that this date may mark the end of Stratum XI at Arad and
the establishment of Stratum X. If we accept this view, then
Stratum XI existed for a lengthy period, approximately 150
years’ (Singer-Avitz 2002, 162).
[11] Lachish (Hesy)
Estimated period of occurrence: 760 BC.
Extract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
‘Level IV apparently came to a sudden end, but it
seems clear that this was not caused by fire. On the other
hand, the lower house of Level III and the rebuilt enclosure
wall followed the lines of the Level IV structures, while the
Level IV city wall and gate continued to function in Level
III; these facts point towards the continuation of life
without a break. Considering that the fortifications remained
intact, we can hardly identify this level with the city which
was stormed and completely destroyed in the fierce
Assyrian attack. Here we may mention M. Kochavi’s suggestion
(made during a visit to the excavations in 1976 and quoted
here with his kind permission) that the end of the Level IV
structures may have been caused by an earthquake.
A natural catastrophe of this sort would, perhaps, be compatible
with the above findings. Of interest in this connection is the
earthquake mentioned in Amos 1:1 and Zech. 14:5, which
occurred around 760 BCE during the reign of Uzziah, king
of Judah’ (Ussishkin 1977, 52).
‘The case of Lachish IV is perhaps the strongest’
(Dever 1992, 35* n. 10).
‘Since typological modification runs parallel to
drastic changes in the design of settlements, as observed
at Tel Beersheba and Lachish, they should be related to
significant events. Tentatively this development might be
associated with a severe earthquake dated to c. 760 BCE,
based on biblical references (Dever 1992)’ (Herzog 2002,
97).
[12] Iraq al Amir
(Butler 1907, 13 = 760?)
[13] Tel Gezer
Estimated period of occurrence: 760 BC.
Extract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
‘According to Macalister, a number of ashlar towers had been inserted into the Late Bronze Age Outer Wall
by Solomonic engineers. In order to test this claim it was
decided to locate his “Tower VII” (situated immediately
north of the “Egyptian Governor’s Residency”, according
to Macalister’s plan) and open two soundings – one against
each of the inner and outer faces of the “tower” – in order
to determine if indeed the “towers” were constructed in the
manner and at the time Macalister claimed (see Plates 4,
6, and 19). After clearing off the top of the Outer Wall,
however, it was discovered that Macalister’s “Tower VII”
was not a tower at all, but rather an offset that was similar to what he found further west in his trenches 22–29,
a stretch of wall which he described as “rebuilt”. Macalister had apparently found the same corner as our team
and had simply drawn in the other three corners on his
plan.
Excavation against the inner face of the “tower”
reached bedrock in just over a meter (Plate 14).
A foundation trench, which showed up clearly in the eastern balk,
indicated that the offset was initially constructed in the 8th
century B.C. Later, during the Hellenistic period, a second
trench had been dug into the earlier one, suggesting that at
least part of the wall was rebuilt during this period. Indeed,
the ashlars in the upper two or three courses of the wall
were poorly laid. They were uneven and not in the header–
stretcher fashion. Thus they were probably reused from the
earlier Iron Age construction.
The fact that the earliest architectural phase of the
offset dated no earlier than the 8th century B.C. would seem
to raise doubts about the claims of those who have argued
for an earlier dating of the Outer Wall. However,
excavation along the outer face of “Tower VII” revealed at
least nine courses (ca. 5 m.) of excellent header–stretcher
masonry. Although bedrock could not be reached in this
sounding, the pottery from the lowest level of fills against
the outer face consisted of red-slipped 10th century B.C.
wares.
Above these 10th century fills (which were more
than 2 m. thick) were at least two plastered surfaces which
ran up against the wall face. The debris on these surfaces
included fallen ashlar blocks in a bricky fill containing 8th
century B.C. sherds. The debris layers may be evidence of
both an earlier 8th century earthquake (see below) and a
later 8th century B.C. Assyrian destruction (Plate 15). The
latter was followed much later by a hasty repair and rebuild,
probably during the Maccabean period (2nd century B.C.).
Thus, based on the results of the excavation along
the outer face of “Tower VII”, it appears that the Outer
Wall was originally constructed at least by the 10th century
B.C., and probably earlier. The discoveries in Square 22 to
the east (see below) even suggest the possibility of an
initial construction in the LB II. Engineers of the Iron 11 and
Hellenistic periods apparently found it necessary to repair
isolated sections of the inner face (which rested on the top
of an escarpment), thus leading to the discrepancy between
the dates for the construction of the inner and outer faces of
the Outer Wall.
Macalister’s Tower VI
In the hope of finding a genuine Solomonic tower
inserted into a Late Bronze Age wall, it was decided to move
east and attempt to locate Macalister’s “Tower VI”.
According to Macalister’s top plan, Tower VI was located between
25 m. and 30 m. east of Tower VII (Plate 19).
Using the bulldozer to clear away Macalister dump and post-Macalister
debris accumulation (which included some 1947 Jordanian
army trenches), it was not long before an ashlar block of
what appeared to be the southwest corner of Macalister’s
Outer Wall Tower VI was uncovered.
Unfortunately, excavations indicated that this
“tower” was also only an offset (Plate 16). However, the
pottery from the foundation trench indicated that the
earliest phase of this stretch of the Outer Wall was
founded probably during the 10th century B.C. Two additional pieces of
evidence also support a 10th century B.C. dating. First, a
stone of the lowest course of the inner face of the Outer Wall
is roughly bossed in a fashion typical of foundation
ashlars of the 10th century. Second, this lowest course is clearly
cut by the later “tower” or offset, indicating that this stretch
of the wall preceded the construction of the “tower”. Since
the “inserted tower” dated to the 9th/8th century B.C. (see
below), the wall must be dated earlier. While this second
line of evidence is not sufficient by itself to provide a 10th
century date, the bossed ashlar and the 10th century trench
combine to make a 10th century B.C. date for this section of
the wall most probable.
Sometime during the 9th/8th century B.C. the upper
courses of the Outer Wall were remodelled with large
ashlars to create an offset. The ashlar offset was “inserted”
more than a meter into the 10th century B.C. wall line.
The 9th/8th century ashlar inserts and wall appear
to have been destroyed sometime during the 8th century
B.C. Several lines of evidence suggest that the agent of
destruction was an earthquake. For one thing, several
sections of the Outer Wall had been clearly displaced from
their foundations by as much as 10 to 40 cm. Furthermore,
these wall sections were all severely tilted outward toward
the north. That this tilting was not due to slow subsidence
over a long period of time was evident from the fact that
intact sections of upper courses of the inner face of the wall
had fallen backwards into the city. Only a very rapid
outward tilting of the wall, such as that caused by an
earthquake, could cause these upper stones to roll off backwards,
away from the tilt. If the wall’s outward tilt had occurred
slowly, the stones on the top of the wall should have
fallen off toward the downward-sloping outer face of the
wall.
The southwest corner of the ashlar insert had
been similarly displaced from its foundational cornerstone,
although to a lesser degree because of the greater stability
of the ashlar construction. However, even the cornerstone
had been split longitudinally because of the great pressure
created by the lateral movement of the upper courses. This
same tremendous pressure also created fissures in the
ashlar stones that penetrated through several courses.
The reason the foundation stones were not themselves dislodged to
any significant degree is probably due to the fact that they
were set into levelled out depressions cut directly into the
bedrock.
Evidence for an 8th century B.C. earthquake has
been discovered at several other sites, such as Hazor. It
is not impossible that the wall was destroyed by
the well-known earthquake of Amos 1 and Zech 14:5 (ca. 760 B.C.)’
(Younker 1991).
‘Here, too, the “tower” we expected to find (Macalister’s “tower VI”)
turned out to be simply an offset portion
of ashlar masonry (Fig. 1). This later wall, dated by eighth-century
B.C.E. sherds in the secondary back-filled trench,
was probably destroyed by the well-known earthquake of
Amos 1 and Zech. 14:5, c. 760 B.C.E. Not only was the
ashlar “tower” cracked from top to bottom and the adjoining
boulders violently thrown off their foundations, but a long
stretch of the wall to the east was tilted sharply outward
in one piece (Fig. 2). Preliminary research indicated that
the Gezer–Ramla region has been subject to repeated
earthquake damage in historical times; an earthquake
hypothesis, therefore, seems plausible’ (Dever and Younker 1991,
286).
‘While the two Iron Age phases in the “Outer Wall”
were so crystal clear in the sections that they constituted a
“textbook” example of stratigraphy, of more interest was
the evidence they preserved of an earthquake destruction of
the second, 9th/8th century BCE phase. The evidence was
twofold. (1) First, all three courses of the large rectangular
blocks just at the “tower” offset were cracked clear through,
from top to bottom, the heavy stones still approximately
in place but with a large open gap running from top to
bottom (Ill. 3). (2) Second, immediately to the west of the
“tower” offset, the foundation course (here of marginally
drafted ashlars) was still in situ; but the upper two courses
of rougher boulders were found radically displaced upward
and outward, but still lying in a row – as though they had
violently “jumped” off their foundations (Ill. 4).
Now it seems evident that such severe damage cannot have
resulted simply from the usual siege tactics carried out
at ancient walled Palestinian towns. There was none
of the typical evidence of burning: no calcinated stones; no
trace of undermining and collapse; no evidence of battering
or forcing of the wall inward. On the contrary, the wall had
fallen suddenly outward, “split apart” violently.
For some time I resisted the suggestions of various staff
members that perhaps an earthquake was the best
explanation. And certainly I – not identifying with
traditional “biblical archaeology” – did not have the earthquake
of Amos or Zachariah in mind, despite the 9th/8th century
BCE date for the wall that we had posited on quite
independent archaeological grounds. Nor at the moment did I recall
Yadin’s earthquake hypothesis at Hazor. Yet, in the end, the
evidence seemed overwhelming. Several of our group from
California, including Associate Director Randy Younker,
had personally seen just such earthquake damage, even to
the fact that random areas of the wall had been affected,
and this seemed to provide the confirmation that we
needed.
A final probe still farther east, in Area 20, yielded
further evidence. Here we cleared a stretch of the same wall
for some 15 m. At first, our efforts to trace the wall eastward
failed. Because we were following the projected line from
the “tower” offset on a straight course and had found no
stones, we supposed that the top course was robbed out. To
our surprise, we later discovered what was clearly the line
of the top course curving radically, a long section bowed
outward yet still intact. Furthermore, the tops of the whole
line of stones were tilted outward at an angle of ca. 10–15
degrees (Ill. 4).
One could, I suppose, argue that here we are dealing
simply with subsidence, perhaps because the bedrock
dipped downward at this point (as indeed it did). A more
reasonable explanation, however, would seem to be an
earthquake that displaced the whole section bodily,
especially as the foundations were already weak. Certainly a
battering ram, or the work of sappers, could not have produced
such a peculiar phenomenon as this whole stretch of wall
tipped outward. It does indeed resemble rather closely one
of Schaeffer’s toppled walls at Ugarit’ (Dever 1992, 30).
[14] Tel Michal
(Mazar 1993, 298 = ?).
[15] Tell Qasile
Estimated period of occurrence: Stratum XI of Tel Qasile
belongs to the phase Iron Age IB (= first half of the
eleventh century BC).
Extract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
‘Stratum XI was completely cleared in the southern
part of the mound, where a large building, built mostly of
kurkar stones, was found. The structure’s plan was not fully
traced. East of it was a large square, and nearby were two
clay crucibles containing remains of smelted copper. In the
northern sector of the mound, the buildings in this stratum
were destroyed down to their foundations when the stratum
X buildings were erected. The nature of the ruins indicates
that the settlement was destroyed by an earthquake.
The fortifications in Area B include a massive brick
wall (c. 5 m thick) in stratum XI. No architectural
continuity was noted between strata XII and XI. The latter was laid
out on a different plan and a new wall was added.
It was possible to distinguish clearly between the
different Iron Age I strata (XII–X) at Tell Qasile; thus,
separate and well-defined pottery assemblages could be
established. Changes and developments can be traced in the
ordinary local pottery, in which the Canaanite pottery tradition
continues, as well as in the Philistine ware. The stratum XII
Philistine pottery includes bowls, kraters, jugs with strainer
spouts, and stirrup jars. The pottery contains several
distinctive features that date it to the early phase of its
appearance in Israel: thick white slip and bichrome decoration on
some of the vessels with narrow, close-set lines, similar to
the Mycenaean “close style”; the bird motif is limited to
stratum XII (only one example was found in stratum XI).
The ceramic assemblage of stratum XI is similar to that
of stratum XII. However, a change is discernible in the
Philistine pottery: there is a deterioration in ornamentation, and monochrome decorations become more frequent.
Other finds in this stratum include bronze arrowheads, a
bone graver, spindle whorls, flint sickle blades, numerous
loom weights, and various stone objects, such as grindstones
and mortars. Iron objects were not found in Area A in strata
XII and XI’ (Dothan and Dunayevsky 1993).
[16] Samaria (Shechem)
Estimated period of occurrence: 784–750 BC.
Extract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
‘In the Shechem essay it was argued that the end
of Shechem 9b correlates to the end of Samaria Building Period 2.
Excavations at Shechem 9b yielded evidence
that it had been destroyed by an earthquake, and this was
interpreted as the level destroyed by the earthquake of
Uzziah’s day. Since the end of Samaria 2 correlates to the
end of Shechem 9b, this means the destruction of Samaria 2
could well have resulted from the same earthquake. Wright
describes the destruction of Samaria 2 (which required a
rebuilding under Samaria 3):
“In Period III a wholesale rebuilding of the
structure adjacent to the northern enclosure walls, and also of
the royal palace to the west, suggests that a catastrophe had
brought Period II to a close . . . The stones employed for this
purpose were re-used from earlier buildings; some still had
plaster adhering to them. The date for this period is given as
ca. 840–800 B.C. [sic].” (BASOR, 155, pp. 18–19.)
The 2nd ceramic phase in use at the time of the
earthquake (as we are interpreting it) was used as fill for
Jeroboam’s rebuilding operations – i.e., Building Period 3.
From this point on until the destruction of Samaria, the 3rd
Ceramic Phase developed. This is enough time to allow for
Wright’s view that the difference between Pottery Periods
3 & 4 was of a “similar interval” to the difference between
Pottery Periods 2 & 3. The time would be from 783 BC to
721 BC – 62 years, the date of Sargon’s capture of the city.
The date of Uzziah’s earthquake
According to Wright, the Ostraca House of
Samaria correlates with Building Period 3 . . . In his article,
“The Samaria Ostraca: An Early Witness to Hebrew Writing,” Ivan T. Kaufman points out that the ostraca were not
found on the floor of the Ostraca House but were found
in the fill underlying it. This was affirmed also by Anson
F. Rainey . . . From this, we can infer that the ostraca were
found in the fill of Building Period 3, and hence would correlate to our 2nd ceramic phase. If the 2nd ceramic phase
was brought to an end by Uzziah’s earthquake, as we have
argued, then it may be possible to link the ostraca to the
earthquake. This is of considerable importance, because
one thing we know about these ostraca is that they can be
dated. Some of the ostraca are dated to the 15th year of an
unnamed king, and some are dated to the 9th or 10th years of
an unnamed king. The lack of any intervening years, among
other things, led Kaufman and Rainey to regard these years
as belonging to a single date of two co-regent kings, rather
than to different dates of one king (cf., Kaufman, p. 235.).
We cannot go into great detail about it, but the conclusion of
Anson Rainey’s discussion of these finds is that they should
be dated to 784/783 BC, during the time of Jeroboam 2.
Thus, the ostraca are something like a stopped watch during
an accident or explosion. Just as the watch gives the actual
time of the accident or explosion, so the ostraca provide, on
our theory, the actual year of the earthquake, c. 783 BC.
Courville himself dated the earthquake of Uzziah’s
day to 751–750 B.C, based on a Jewish legend reported
by Josephus. (Exodus Problem, 2:122–23.) The prophet
Zechariah is quoted as a source indicating the severity of
the earthquake . . . Josephus claimed that the earthquake was
God’s judgment on Uzziah for his attempt to burn incense
to the Lord, a rite reserved to the priests alone (2 Chr.
26:17–18). Josephus speaks of a rent made in the temple,
and bright sunlight falling on the king’s face, as he was
seized with leprosy. The king’s son, Jotham, perforce had to
become the acting king, c. 750 B.C., while Uzziah remained
in a quarantined house for the rest of his reign. Courville
concludes from this that the earthquake must have happened in the year 751–750 B.C.’ (Crisler 2004).
[17] Tell Deir Alla
Estimated period of occurrence: 800–750 BC.
Extract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
‘I have already mentioned that the site was shaken
by earthquake round 1200 B.C. The destruction of the
buildings of Phase M, the phase to which the Aramaic
text belongs, was also caused by an earthquake. Deir Alla
has suffered more earthquakes, not only during the time
of habitation but also afterwards. These earthquakes and
tremors caused vertical cracks which in the excavated area
run mostly in east–west direction. When tracing the frequency of these cracks along a north–south line we find
at least one every twenty cms. The tell is thus cut into vertical slices and these slices may have sunken for instance
from a few cms. to several cms. and sometimes shifted sideways, whereas most of them apparently under the pressure
from higher parts of the tell are inclined to lean out to the
north. Expressed in geological terms we have found, be it in
miniature size normal faults and even pivot faults. Cracks
reaching the present surface must have been caused after the
tell had reached that height and cannot therefore be dated
to the stratigraphy . . .Moreover, unless all the cracks that
run through the deposits overlying Phase M and their exact
position had been recorded, we would not be able to say
whether any cracks seen in Phase L stop at the floor levels
of Phase M. However we had several other indications. We
have recorded cracks and shifts of material that run through
the ruined buildings but stop at the point where erosion
began to level off the debris. These were caused by a second shock which followed the first one after the buildings
collapsed and the fire caused by the earthquake had burned
itself out. I shall have to refer to the second shock in relation
to the position of the text.
However, the first shock was also recorded. There
is a long crack about 10 cms. wide running through the
deposits of a little lane which formed during Phase M and
is almost 60 cms. high. This crack is closed further to the
east but here a horizontal shift could be seen because the
crack runs lengthwise through the low stump of a mud brick
wall. The clay mortar between the bricks on both sides of
the crack does not fit together any longer. The horizontal
shift was about 10 cms. Such cracks have not only been
recorded on paper but also on “pull offs”, a method used
in agriculture to take a thin slice of earth to the laboratory
(Franken 1965b), in order to keep an authentic record of
the accumulation of deposits. The slice is thick enough to
make samples from it for microscopic analysis. Incidentally
horizontal shifts of more than 30 cms. were recorded. It was
the second shock which brought the preserved fragments of
the Aramaic text down from their support’ (Franken 1976,
7–8).
‘We have seen that Phase M consists of traces of a
situation that must have existed one day in the past when
an earthquake hit the site and traces of the impact of the
first and the second earthquake shock. We must now
consider the value of the interpretation of Phase M as a
sanctuary. The earthquake has nothing to do with this
interpretation, but had it not been for the earthquake the text
might not have been preserved. Also thanks to the earthquake many objects were found which otherwise might have
disappeared for ever. The plan of the buildings has to be
partly hypothetically reconstructed since some walls were
dislocated at floor level leaving barely any traces of where
they stood before the destruction. Also a number of objects
like the text were knocked about when the shocks hit the
site. In contrast to two earlier earthquake phases we did
not find human victims in the ruins. This may indicate that
the disaster took place during daylight but it seems more
likely that the destruction happened at night when there was
nobody in these rooms. Somewhere there was a fire burning in a breadoven or otherwise, because the first shock was
followed by a conflagration, wooden objects burned away
like the looms, of which we found the clay weights in several rooms, and charred beams which may also partly have
belonged to other wooden furniture. But what was left, the
less perishable objects, was found and reconstructed as far
as possible’ (Franken 1976, 12).
‘Pl. 16a shows the plan of four rooms. On this
plan the entrance to room GG205 from the south is located
between walls BB 320 and BB 427. When found this
entrance was blocked by a wall fragment. The blockage may
have been caused by the earthquake. In the corner formed
by wall BB 320 and the blocked doorway eighteen burned
clay loom weights were found lying on the floor. Eighty
cms. north of the corner and lying against wall BB 320
inside room GG 205 three remarkable objects were found
in the debris on the floor: the inscribed stone, a goblet on a
high foot with a spout (R. no. 1990) and an outsize loom
weight (R. no. 2006). A large piece of charred wood lay
beside these objects in front of the passage between rooms
GG 205 and GG 102. The goblet (pl. 16b) was only slightly
damaged near the rim; the stone and loom weight were complete . . .’ (Franken 1976, 15).
‘This phase IX is the same as phase M in previous
countings. Much of it had been excavated in 1967 in an area
of c. 25 × 25 m NW of the trenches dug during the last three
seasons. Much of the architecture had been revealed, and
some of it has been published preliminarily in J. Hoftijzer,
G. van der Kooij, Aramaic Texts from Deir Alla, Leiden,
1976, (Pls. 16–19) and in A.D.A.J. op. cit. 1978, p. 64, fig. 6
(square B/C5). During this season excavations of phase M
were done in one square only, namely in B/C6, to the E of
B/C5, labeled EE 400 and EE 300 respectively in 1967. In
1967 it became clear that all the phase M architecture excavated had been destroyed by earthshock and fire. The room
found in B/C6 was destroyed by fire too.
The walls are partly still standing up to 1.25 m high,
and the room is found filled with burnt roof and wall debris.
For a plan of the walls combined with those of B/C5 see
plan drawing (fig. 5). The height of the debris (deposits 61
and 63) is shown on (Pl. XX, 2) where the floor is visible as well as the E most part of the burnt debris. Note
also the lower course of mudbricks 57 going N–S at the top
of the photograph. To the left is a doorway with a quern
at the threshold. See also (Pl. XXI, 1) for a photograph of
one stage in the removal of the debris inside the room. In
the NW corner the floor of the room is visible. An especially interesting feature is the antler found as fallen almost
directly on the floor of the room (Pl. XXI, 2). Some of the
artifacts found may be mentioned here. Plates (XXVIII, 2–
XXIX, 2) show some of the pottery found. A sealed jar
handle (see Pl. XXX, 1). A shard with graffiti writing and
drawing (Pl. XXX, 2). Phase IX probably has to be dated
in the 8th century B.C. (Pl. XXXI)’ (Ibrahim and Kooij
1979, 48–50).
‘The empirical evidence at Deir Alla, dated to
the mid-8th century BE, perhaps by the famous “Balaam
Inscription”, is stronger’ (Dever 1992, 35 n. 10).
‘The details of their language [of the texts], restoration,
script, reading, and interpretation are still under discussion;
however, following a preliminary palaeographic
dating to the Persian period, and then in the editio princeps to about 700 BCE (Hoftijzer and Kooij, 1976), most
commentators now agree that the palaeography fits the dating of the archaeological context: about 800 BCE (Hoftijzer
and Kooij, 1991) or the first half of the eighth century BCE.
Indeed, the earthquake that destroyed level M/IX at Deir
Alla could well be the one mentioned in Amos 1:1 (cf. Also
4:11, 6:8–11, 8:8, and 9:1; and Zec. 14:5), dated to about 760
BCE’ (Lemaire 1997, 139).
[18] Tell al Hama
(Mazar 1993, 208 = ?).
[19] Tell al Saiidiyeh
(Mazar 1993, 208 = ?).
[20] Khirbet al Asiq (En Gev)
(Dever 1992, 34 n. 10 = n.d.).
[21] Tel Mevorakh
(Mazar 1993, 298 = ?).
[22] Megiddo
Estimated period of occurrence: c. 760 BC.
Extract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
‘What did we excavate in the season of 2000 in
Area H? At the lowest level, we reached an elaborate
semi-monumental building added to a pre-existing, small-scale
domestic occupation (Phase H6b). The monumental building was never finished; it may have housed some squatters in
the period of its abandonment (Phase H6a). Squatter occupation continued in the ruins (Phase H5d), followed by the
construction of city Wall 325 (Phase H5c). It is obvious
from the inclination of the Area H surfaces that Wall 325
represents the first city wall of Iron Age Megiddo. Throughout the different phases of occupation of Level H5, Area H
is devoid of architecture; it contains a sequence of more than
20 floor levels with abundant traces of open-air domestic
activity. There was domestic architecture immediately to the
south of Area H (unexcavated), for the occupation of Phase
H5a was terminated by an earthquake, which cracked the
city wall and strewed parts of walls of these southern buildings all over Area H. Our Phases H6b–a should be assigned
to the University of Chicago’s Stratum V, while our Phases
H5d–a (plus Levels H4 and H3 excavated in past seasons)
cover the time-span of the University of Chicago’s Stratum
IVA.
How to decipher all this historically? The commencement of elaborate construction in Level H6b testifies
to the prosperity at the end of the Omride dynasty as its
abandonment may reflect the consequences of Jehu’s revolt.
The destruction of Phase H6a and the subsequent squatter-occupation (H5d) illustrate the fate of
Israel under Aramaean domination (II Kgs 10:32–33; 13:3, 22).
The construction of the city wall in Level H5c indicates the
beginning of Israel’s recovery under Joash and Jeroboam II (II
Kgs 13:24f; 14:25–28). City Wall 325 was the wall of the city
conquered by Tiglat-pileser III in 733 BCE. The destruction
of Phase H5a should probably be attributed to the earthquake in the time of Jeroboam II, mentioned in Amos 1:1
and archaeologically also attested at Hazor and Tell Deir
’Alla in the Jordan Valley, where it toppled and buried the
stele with the famous Balaam-text.
Synchronizing the stratigraphy of Area H with the
biblical record is perfectly possible within the framework
of the “Low Chronology”. According to the traditional
chronology, Phase H6b (= University of Chicago’s VA)
should reflect the time of Solomon. The subsequent decline
would then be due to the demise of the “United Monarchy”
and the civil wars in Israel between Jeroboam I and Omri.
It would have been Omri or Ahab who built city Wall 325
But then, the earthquake of Jeroboam II’s time would not
have left any trace in the occupational deposits, whereas the
earthquake in our Phase H5a escaped the attention of the
ancient texts’ (Knauf 2002).
‘In the summer of 2000 we carried out fieldwork
at Megiddo, with the aim of tracing evidence of ancient
earthquakes. We were looking for structural damage such
as tilted walls, cracks and fractures in stones etc. We located
about a dozen spots with possible evidence for tectonic
activity. Following are three examples.
Extension cracks occur in the six-chambered, Iron
II gate complex. Rows of ashlars in the middle of the walls
(enclosed between other rows) are fractured. Horizontal
sliding of the fragments occurred everywhere in the same
direction, nearly parallel to the face of the wall. The damage was probably caused by earthquake-related horizontal
shaking. The 8th century Stratum III gate built on top of the
six-chambered gate is not damaged. Therefore, this event
may be linked to the biblical reference to a major earthquake in the time of Jeroboam II, ca. 760 BCE.
In Area L, the stone and plaster floors of the Stratum IVA “stables” are level, while the walls and fills of
Stratum VA–IVB Palace 6000 are tilted. This indicates a
deformation after the construction of the palace, but before
the building of the “stables”, a deformation which may be
linked to the 8th century event mentioned above’ (Shmulik
and Amotz 2002).
[23] Tell Abu Hawam
Estimated period of occurrence: 1126–1050 BC.
Extract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
‘Stratum IVA (dates) from c. 1125 to c. 1050 B.C.
This city was violently destroyed, possibly by earthquake’
(Warren and Hankey 1989, 161).
[24] Tel Hazor
Estimated period of occurrence: 760 BC.
Extract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
‘Stratum VI was found to have been destroyed by
a violent earthquake which could be associated with the one
mentioned in Zechariah (14:5) and Amos (1:4) in the days
of King Uzziah, c. 760 B.C.’ (Yadin 1972, 11).
‘Stratum VI, Area A, Building 2a.
The house was severely damaged by an earthquake; all the walls and pillars were tilted southwards. In
all the rooms, as well as in the western part of the court,
huge blocks of ceiling plaster were found sealed off by the
floors of Stratum V, which were built 1.5 m. above the floors
of Stratum VI. The reason for this is that, although the walls
of Stratum VI were still standing after the earthquake, they
were so tilted that only their tops could be used, and even
those only as a base for the new foundations. The earthquake which destroyed Stratum VI seems to be the one
referred to in the Bible, which occurred during the reign of
King Uzziah (c. 760 B.C.)’ (Yadin 1972, 181)
‘Area A, Stratum VI, Building 2a.
Due to the excellent construction of building 2a, we
can trace in it the effects of the earthquake which destroyed
Stratum VI better than anywhere else in the excavation area.
Its strongly-built walls remained standing to a considerable
height, but the earthquake is evidenced by their tilt southwards, particularly that of the three pillars (Pl. XXV, 2). In
all the rooms and in the northern part of the courtyard, we
came upon great quantities of debris comprising lumps of
plaster from the collapsed ceilings (Pl. XXVII, 1, 4), resembling those that we found in storeroom 148 in 1956 (Hazor
I, p. 23)’ (Bent-Tor 1989, 41–44).
‘A later, more modest effort to utilize seismic
chronology was that of the late Yigael Yadin, who saw the
destruction of Hazor VI (Area A) as dramatic evidence of
the earthquake of ca. 760 BCE, citing the biblical texts mentioned above. Despite the clear evidence of several displaced
walls and cracked surfaces at Hazor, Yadin’s earthquake
hypothesis does not seem to have attracted much attention. This was possibly because of the author’s well known
predilection towards using biblical texts to explain or corroborate archaeological phenomena – a style of “biblical
archaeology” that Yadin popularized with enviable success,
but one that left some of his professional colleagues skeptical.
Nevertheless, when the Hazor excavations were
resumed in 1990 under the direction of Amnon Ben-Tor,
further evidence of a Stratum VI earthquake came to light,
especially in a street and drain in Area A that seemed simply to have split down the centre – difficult to explain by
any other hypothesis. And since Stratum VI dates to the
early 8th century BCE on independent grounds (as one may
maintain, with Yadin), the well known earthquake of ca.
760 BCE seems a likely candidate’ (Dever 1992, 28).
‘The destruction of Phase H5a [in Megiddo]
should probably be attributed to the earthquake in the time
of Jeroboam II, mentioned in Amos 1:1 and archaeologically also attested at Hazor and Tell Deir Alla . . .’ (Knauf
2002).
[25] Jerusalem
Estimated period of occurrence: 760–750 BC. (Guidoboni
1989, 632 n. 17).
Extract of pertinent statement by author relating to earthquake damage:
‘Going further back in time, the Bible records
Zechariah’s prophecy, based upon the description of a large
earthquake which occurred during the reign of King Uzziah
around 760 BC: “ . . . and the Mount of Olives shall cleave
in the midst thereof toward the E and toward the W, and
there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain
shall remove toward the N, and half of it toward the S. And
ye shall flee . . . like as ye fled from before the earthquake in
the days of Uzziah King of Judah” (Zechariah, Chapter 14,
Verse 4–5).
This earthquake happened probably somewhere E
of Jerusalem, most likely along the Jericho fault. Apparently, the offset of the rocks across it was great enough to
reveal the northward slip of the eastern side relative to the
southward slip of the western side. This motion is remarkably similar to the motion observed in the 1927 Jericho
earthquake, and is, of course, consistent with the N–S movement of the plates in this area’ (Nur and Ron 1996, 81).
(001) c.760-750 B.C. Jerusalem, the valley of Hinnom, landslide
The words of Amos, one of the sheep-farmers of Teqoa, which he received in visions concerning Israel during the reigns of Uzziah king of Judah and Jeroboam son of Jehoash king of Israel, two years before the earthquake.Amos is considered to be the foremost and earliest of the prophets of Israel. The opening words of the book say that he lived at Teqoa, a village south of Bethlehem; and if we accept the biblical chronology - it is possible to establish fairly accurately that he was active during the reigns of Uzziah in Judah (c.783-742 or 787-736 BC) and Jeroboam II in Israel (c.786-746 or 787-747BC.). Since the memorable occurrence of an earthquake is used in the prologue to the book to indicate the date of the prophecy, it must have been serious enough to suggest itself as an obvious and unquestionable term of reference, even though a number of years had passed. But exactly when did the earthquake occur, and what area did it affect? While Amos provides us with the broad chronological limits of c.787 and c.736 B.C., we can gain more accurate information from the book of the prophet Zechariah. According to Rahmer (1870), Shalem (1948, p.28), Soggin (1970) and Ben-Menahem (1979), the whole of Zechariah 14.3-5 is related to an earthquake which occurred during the reign of king Uzziah. First of all, however, it has to be kept in mind that the passage in question, as it appears in the Hebrew text of the Bible, is very corrupt. If it is to be interpreted correctly, therefore, we must have recourse to emendations arrived at by comparing it with early Aramaic, Greek and Latin translations of the Scriptures. Using the textual emendations suggested in the apparatus to the Biblia hebraica Stuttgartensia, we can establish the following reading:
The Lord will come out and fight against those peoples, as in the days of his prowess on the field of battle. On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which is opposite Jerusalem to the east, and the mountain shall be cleft in two by an immense valley running east and west; half the mountain shall move northwards and half southwards. And the valley of Hinnom shall be blocked, for it shall reach as far as [the valley] which is close to it [the text being emended to read as follows: We-nistam ge'-Hinnom ki-yaggia` ge-Hinnom el eslo]. You shall flee as you fled from the earthquake in the time of Uzziah king of Judah. And the Lord my God will appear with his angels.A literal translation of verse 5, however, following the unemended Hebrew text, gives a different topographical description of events:
You shall flee from the valley of the hills, for the valley of the hills will reach as far as Asal; you shall flee as you fled from the earthquake in the time of Uzziah king of Judah.It should be noted that, even though the prophecy about Jerusalem is expressed in the future, the reference to the earthquake at the end of verse 5 and the accuracy with which the splitting of the Mount of Olives into two is described, suggest an underlying historical earthquake experience.
Thus, on the occasion of a notable day which was a public festival, he put on the priestly garment and entered the sacred precinct to offer sacrifice to God on the golden altar. And, when the high priest Azarias, with whom there were eighty priests, tried to prevent him for they said it was not lawful for anyone to offer sacrifice, but to do so was allowed only to those of the line of Aaron and they all clamoured for him to go out and not transgress against God, he became angry and threatened them with death if they did not hold their peace. But, while he spoke, a great tremor shook the earth, and, as the temple was riven, a brilliant shaft of sunlight gleamed through it and fell upon the king's face so that leprosy at once smote him, while before the city at a place called Eroge half of the western hill was broken off and rolled four stades till it stopped at the eastern hill and obstructed the roads and the royal gardens. When the priest saw the king's face smitten with leprosy, they explained to him the cause of his misfortune, and told him to go out of the city as an unclean person.The same damage as that mentioned by Josephus is also mentioned in chapter 9 of Auot de-Rabbi Nathan, one of the so-called extra-canonical tractates of the Talmud:
In connection with Uzziah we find [written (2 Chron. 26.16-7)]: 'But when he gained power, his heart grew so proud that it caused his downfall. For he transgressed against the Lord his God and went into the sanctuary of the Lord to offer incense on the altar of perfumes. He was followed there by the priest Azaryahu with eighty courageous priests of the Lord. They stood before king Uzziyahu and said to him: 'It is not for you, Uzziyahu, to offer incense to the Lord, but for the priests who are sons of Aaron and who were consecrated to offer incense. Leave the sanctuary, for you have sinned and your reputation before the Lord God will not be improved by it'. Uzziyahu grew angry, as he held the censer in his hand, and at the moment of his irritation with the priests, leprosy appeared on his brow'. At the same moment the temple split open and the fissure extended for twelve miles in each direction. The priests made him leave, and he himself hurried to depart because the Lord had struck him. [King Uzziyahu] remained a leper until his death, and lived in a leper house, because he had been sent away from the house of the Lord. Meanwhile, his son Jotham supervised the royal palace and administered justice to the people of the country.See also Midrash Tanhuma to Noah, chapter 5 and Jerome's commentary on Amos (PL, vol.25, co1.992).
In the twenty-seventh year of Jeroboam king of Israel, Azariah son of Amaziah king of Judah became king. He was sixteen years old when he came to the throne, and he reigned in Jerusalem for fifty-two years; his mother was Jecoliah of Jerusalem. He did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, as Amaziah his father had done. But the hill-shrines were allowed to remain; the people still continued to slaughter and burn sacrifices there. The Lord struck the king with leprosy, which he had till the day of his death; he was relieved of all his duties and lived in his own house, while his son Jotham was comptroller of the household and regent. The other acts and events of Azariah's reign are recorded in the annals of the kings of Judah. So he rested with his forefathers and was buried with them in the city of David; and he was succeeded by his son Jotham.If we compare the various pieces of literary evidence mentioned above - that is to say, Amos, Zechariah, Kings, Chronicles, Josephus and the rabbinical tradition of exegesis - we find that historical fact and legendary elements are superimposed on one another. And we can summarise the available data by saying that the sources speak of an earthquake at Jerusalem and in the nearby Valley of Hinnom, in the Mount of Olives area.
at Yom-Kippur, Monday, 10 Tishrei, 3003, which is Oct. 07, 759 B.c., during day time.
760-750 BCE
Time Uncertainty +/- 10 years
Type of Quake Single
Reliability Very High
Zone central (Israel and southern Lebanon)
Most Damaged or felt locations Judea
Damaging event during mid-8th century BCE. Amos references his prophecy according to an earthquake occurred two years before in a time frame that can be
reconstructed today, during the reign of Uziah and Jerova'm, kings of Judea and Israel, respectively. Consequently, we assume the event had indeed occurred
and was significant enough to be remembered and documented. However, apart from Amos, there are only a few late secondary sources (Ambraseys (2009);
Guidoboni et. al. (1994) and references therein) that imply of a possible damage in Jerusalem but they cannot be authenticated. Other archaeological evidence
cannot be unequivocally associated with this event (Ambraseys (2009))
Reported damaged localities
Jerusalem, Judea
Estimated magnitude in previous studies
7.8-8.2 Austin et al. (2000)
8.2 Ben-Menahem (1979)
7.3 Ben-Menahem (1991)
Average magnitude n/a
Size degree n/a
Casualties n/a
Table 1 Earthquake damage around the DST during Bronze and Iron Ages
Raphael, Kate and Agnon, Amotz (2018). EARTHQUAKES EAST AND WEST OF THE DEAD SEA TRANSFORM IN THE BRONZE AND IRON AGES.
Tell it in Gath Studies in the History and Archaeology of Israel Essays in Honor of Aren M. Maeir on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday
J. R. C. Itzhaq Shai, Louise Hitchcock, Amit Dagan, Chris McKinny, and Joe Uziel.
2. Biblical Evidence for the Earthquake Mentioned in Amos
Physical phenomena related to earthquakes include loud noises, ground shaking, ground displacement, landslide, liquefaction of unstable soils,
sand blows from the ground, damage to or collapse of units of the human constructed environment, fire, changes of water courses, and tsunami.
Forty possible references exist to almost all of these throughout the Book of Amos, excluding only sand blows and changes of water courses
(see Table 1). Of these forty, ten are quite certain. The distribution of such references throughout the book clearly indicates the high degree of impact
that at least one earthquake had upon Amos and the people of Israel. Earthquake-related destruction is one of the major types of looming destructive forces
that Amos proclaims will befall the Israelites. When taken in aggregate including all of the possible resultant phenomena, earthquake-related destructive
threats are the most numerous among the threats in Amos. The prominence of earthquake references and allusions substantiates the notion that the earthquake
in Amos's time is what solidified his prophecies as true via what must have been seen, at least in part, as their fulfillment. Some scholars have gone as
far as designating this turn of events as a major causative factor in the onset of classical Israelite prophecy in the form of non-professional, morally sensitive,
exhortatory prophets whose visions and admonitions were written down as non-narrative, literary works.
There are several types of references to earthquakes and earthquake-related phenomena in Amos. Most straightforward are explicit references to actual events,
which is found only in the superscription to the book (Amos 1:1). Other references in are found in the types of literature common to the book, mostly visions and
oracles. In those, there are allusions to impending disastrous events and descriptions of God's power over nature, as well as to God's walking and
presence, which may cause catastrophes. All of these types of allusions are used in multiple ways in connection with earthquakes and earthquake-related events.
...
The explicit references in Amos to the earthquake at his time are found in 1:1 and 9:1. The former, the superscription to the book, or at least its first group of
prophecies, locates the earthquake in time as [] two years before the earthquake. It also places Amos' mission in the days of Uzziah and Jereboam II,
which substantiates the equation of Amos' earthquake with that mentioned in Zechariah
14:4-5 that is said to have occurred in the days of Uzziah. Isaiah may also refer to that same earthquake in 2:10-21 and 6:4.
Amos 9:1 describes an interactive prophetic vision:
[] I saw my Lord standing by the altar, and He said: Strike the capitals so that the thresholds quake, and make an end of the first of them all.God instructs Amos to strike the capitals of the columns of the doorway to a temple in which Amos beholds Him standing atop or beside the altar. This will then shake the pillars of the doorway, which will tumble down on the people. Seemingly, this will initiate an earthquake. Even though this is not stated as historical fact, it still might indicate that the epicenter, the central surface location of an earthquake that corresponds to its underground focus, was near this temple. It is unclear to what temple the text refers. The only specific temple environs referred to in Amos are that of Bet El in the vignette of Amos and the priest Amaziah (7:10-17). As such, it is the most likely location for this story, although it may be in the temple in Jerusalem in Amos' homeland, or in another temple.
[] 4 On that day, He will set His feet on the Mount of Olives, near Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount of Olives shall split across from east to west, and one part of the Mount shall shift to the north and the other to the south, a huge gorge. 5 And the Valley in the Hills shall be stopped up, for the Valley of the Hills shall reach only to Azal; it shall be stopped up as it was stopped up as a result of the earthquake in the days of King Uzziah of Judah. And the Lord my God, with all the holy beings, will come to you.This passage describes some type of ground movements, either faulting, or, more probably, major landslides, which significantly changed the landscape east of Jerusalem. The first verse seems to describe the disintegration of the central part of the mountain, leaving two sister mountains, side-by-side. The second seems to refer to the damming up of the valley, either the new one between the mountains or the one between the Mount of Olives and the temple mount. However, it is very unclear as to how much of this description refers to the earthquake in the days of Uzziah. If one reads the word [] in accordance with the Massoretic Pointing as you escape(d), then the whole description seems to be of something similar to the earthquake in the days of Uzziah. But, if one understands [] as was closed up, then it seems that only the closing up of the valley is what was similar to that of the days of Uzziah. In either reading, it seems to imply that the earthquake in the days of Uzziah affected Jerusalem, although even that could be questioned.
[] And all of it swells like the Nile and subsides like the Nile of Egypt (8:8, 9:5).The image of the rise and fall of the Nile as applied by these verses to [] forms a double entendre, indicating both the ground movements of an earthquake and the water movements of a tsunami. Another phrase that is doubled in Amos, which directly describes God as creating a tsunami, reads,
[] Who summons the waters of the sea and pours them over the land (5:8, 9:6).It seems that the phrases in 8:8 and 5:8 were copied from the earlier locations in Amos and collated in Amos 9:5-6, possibly as an expansion on Amos' vision of the striking of the capitals in 9:1. If so, the collator definitely understood 9:1 as describing the divine onset of the earthquake. Tsunamis reach the Levantine shores of the Mediterranean due to either earthquakes from the underwater subduction zone arcing south of Cyprus or from farther afield, such as offshore Greece or Italy, or to nearby underwater slumps or avalanches caused by seismic shaking from the Dead Sea Transform.
7 Brian J. Skinner and Stephen C. Porter The Dynamic Earth: An Introduction to Physical Geology (2d ed.; New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1992), 415-7.
8 Other instruments of God's wrath said to be in store for Israel include an unnamed foreign oppressor, such as in 2:15, 3:11, 5:5, 5:27, 6:7, 7:17, 9:9-10,
as well as some other natural disasters, though they are not related to one type of event. Those include drought (4:7-8), blight (4:9), pestilence (4:10), and eclipse (8:9).
9 Ben Zion Luria, Understanding the Land via the Interpretation of Difficult Verses: (1) Haqqore leme hayyam vayishpehem al pene
haarets [Hebrew], Bet Miqra 101 (1987), 261, views the earthquake as a formative experience for Amos in that he understood it as
God's punishment and therefore felt the need to proclaim that to Israel. Wolff, Joel and Amos, 110, 125, sees the earthquake as the cause for the
formation of the book of Amos' prophecies, since it proved his threats true.
10 See Freedman and Welch, Amos's Earthquake and Israelite Prophecy, 196-7. For a description of classical prophecy, see Joseph Blenkinsopp,
A History of Prophecy in Israel (2d ed., revised and enlarged; Louisville, Kent.: Westminster John Knox, 1996), 65-110.
13 This seems to mean that Amos prophesied during the overlapping years of the Israelite and Judahite monarchs, and according to Wolff, Joel and Amos, 124,
in exclusion of the later years of Uzziah, when Jotham was his coregent. This sets Amos' prophecies between 787/86, the accession year of both Jeroboam II
and Uzziah, until the beginning of Jotham's coregency in 757/56, according to Wolff; 791/90, the first year of Azariah's reign
(third of Jeroboam II's coregency with his father), until 753, the year of Jeroboam II's death, according to Edwin R. Thiele,
The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings: A Reconstruction of the Chronology of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1951), 69-73; or 788/87,
the accession year of Uzziah (second year of Jeroboam II), until 758/57, the beginning of Jotham's coregency, according to Gershon Galil,
The Chronology of the Kings of Israel and Judah (Studies in the History and Culture of the Ancient Near East 9; Leiden: Brill, 1996), 76-9. Also,
see the chart in King, Archaeological Commentary, 8.
16 Wolff, Joel and Amos, 338, thinks it unknown and discounts completely scholars who had posited Jerusalem as the location.
19 So does Natan Shalem, Earthquakes in Jerusalem, [Hebrew] Jerusalem: Quarterly Devoted to the Study of Jerusalem and its History 2 (1949), 28-9, 32-4.
20 David L. Petersen, Zechariach 9-14 and Malachi (The Old Testament Library; Louisville, Kent.: Westminster John Knox, 1995), 135, reviews the conflicting
versional evidence. LXX reads the root as indicative of to be stopped up and Targum splits the first appearance of the word accordingly and
the other two as to flee. Petersen sides with MT, which is backed by V and S, finding that the locution of stopping up does
not make sense modifying a valley nor is it used as such. Nonetheless, it is possible that it forms a circumlocution for the stopping up of
waters that would flow through the valley.
27 Characters not in parentheses appear identically in both verses. Translation is of 9:5, JPS, 1325.
28 See Luria, Haqqore leme hayyam, 260-1, who collocates several
rabbinic sources related to God's use of tsunami as a destructive, retributive force based off of this verse.
29 Tsunamis reaching the Levant are found in the historical record back to the 2nd century B.C.E. For an up to date overview of eastern Mediterranean Tsunamis,
see Amos Salamon, et al., Tsunami Hazard Evaluation of the Eastern Mediterranean: Historical Analysis and Selected Modeling,Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America 97:3 (2007), 705-24, with Electronic Supplement (), 1-23.
30 James L. Crenshaw, Wedorek al bamote ares, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 34:1 (1972), 43, sees Amos 4:13 as referring to God's
trampling of the sanctuaries on the elevated heights. Although his interpretation is aimed at understanding the purpose of the trampling, the means of trampling
could have a physical analog in the earth shaking due to God's enormous size.
51 Ambraseys, Earthquakes and Archaeology, 1009-11.
52 See above, n. 49.
53 Galadini, et al., Archaeoseismology, 402-3, 404-6.
54 Ambraseys, Earthquakes and Archaeology, 1009-11.
55 Complete reports of the first two seasons were published subsequently in 1958 and 1960 (Yigael Yadin, et al., Hazor I: An Account of the First Season of Excavations, 1955
[Jerusalem: Magnes, 1958]; Yigael Yadin, et al., Hazor II: An Account of the Second Season of Excavations, 1956 [Jerusalem: Magnes, 1960]), along with plates from the third
and forth seasons in 1961 (Yigael Yadin, et al., Hazor III-IV: An Account of the Third and Fourth Season of Excavations, 1957-1958. Vol. 1: Plates [Jerusalem: Magnes, 1961]).
The text of those later reports was published in 1989 (Yigael Yadin, et al., Hazor III-IV: An Account of the Third and Fourth Season of Excavations, 1957-1958. Vol. 2: Text
[Biblical Archaeology Society, 1989]). Excavations were continued in 1990 under the direction of Amnon Ben-Tor, who also published the results of Yadin's 1968 season
in conjunction with some of the results of his first four seasons (Amnon Ben-Tor and Robert Bonfil, Hazor V: An Account of the
Fifth Season of Excavations, 1968 [Israel Exploration Society, 1997]).
56 Yigael Yadin, Hazor: The Head of All Those Kingdoms (London: Oxford University Press, 1972).
57 Yigael Yadin, Hazor: The Rediscovery of a Great Citadel of the Bible (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1975).
58 Amnon Ben-Tor, The Yigael Yadin Excavations at Hazor, 1990-1993: Aims and Preliminary Results, in The Archaeology of Israel: Constructing the Past,
Interpreting the Present (Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 237; Eds. Neil A. Silberman and David Small; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1997), 107-27.
59 Yadin, Hazor II, 24, lists damage in four rooms as follows (see Figure 4): [Room] 78 The N. wall was leaning to the S., and was partly supported by the debris
that blocked the W. entrance to the room. Next to the wall was a sloping pile of debris made up of courses of stones; buried beneath it were several vessels.
The earthquake wrought most havoc in this room, and it was the wreckage here that first gave us the clue to the disaster. [Room] 14a The W. wall leans
sharply to the E., the E. wall less so. [Room] 113 The W. wall is cracked down the middle and leans eastwards. The N. wall leans southwards very markedly.
[Room] 21a The E. wall slants eastwards, and fallen courses of stones covered the street to the E. of the room (28a).
72 Although the chronology of Iron Age strata of many sites in Israel has come under question, this seems to not be an issue at Hazor for the levels beginning exactly with
Stratum VII. Israel Finkelstein spearheaded the argument that the Iron Age levels at Hazor and other sites need to be down-dated to better correlate with carbon 14 dates from
those sites (see Amihai Mazar, The Debate over the Chronology of the Iron Age in the Southern Levant, in The Bible and Radiocarbon Dating: Archaeology, Text, and
Science [Ed. Thomas E. Levy and Thomas Higham; London: Equinox, 2005], 15-30). But, he leaves Stratum VII at Hazor untouched (Israel Finkelstein, Hazor and the North
in the Iron Age: A Low Chronology Perspective, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 314 [May, 1999]: 57).
87 William G. Dever, A Case Study in Biblical Archaeology: The Earthquake of Ca. 760 BCE, Eretz-Israel 23 (1992), 27*-35*.
88 Randall W. Younker, A Preliminary Report of the 1990 Season at Tel Gezer: Excavations of the Outer Wall and the Solomonic
Gateway (July 2 to August 10, 1990), Andrews University Seminary Studies 29:1 (1991), 28.
89 Galadini, et al., Archaeoseismology, 403.
90 Ambraseys, Earthquakes and Archaeology, 1010.
91 Younker, Preliminary Report, 29.
When He comes forth to overawe the earthis also translated as
when he rises to shake the earth
The mountains quake because of Him, And the hills melt. The earth heaves before Him, The world and all that dwell therein.
every human being on earth shall quake before Me. Mountains shall be overthrown, cliffs shall topple, and every wall shall crumble to the ground.
it shall be stopped up as it was stopped up as a result of the earthquake in the days of King Uzziah of Judah
sefaria.org desribes Joel as follows:
Joel (“Yoel”) is the second of 12 books of Minor Prophets (“Trei Asar”), marked by their shortness. The prophet begins by describing the devastation wrought by a locust plague and calling for repentance, fasting and prayer. Joel describes God’s future response to Israel’s reform, promising abundance and prophecy for all. He also tells of a future “great and terrible day of God” when the “sun shall turn to darkness” (3:3-4) and Israel’s oppressors will be judged.
So that heaven and earth tremble
the Lord will roar from Zion and from Jerusalem
In the Gospel we often mention we read that the immense Temple Lintel fell and broke into piecesWhile the canonical synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) all mention the tearing of the curtain of the Temple in the moments after Jesus death, the description above is more compatible with archeoseismic evidence in the region. Lintel Stones above doorways are in fact among the weakest part of a structure and are frequently the first part of a structure to fail. Hence the description of lintel destruction associated with an earthquake is seismically compatible and could also explain the curtain tearing descriptions in the canonical synoptic gospels since the curtain (parochet) would presumably (possibly?) be attached to the lintel.
In the Gospel we often mention we read that the immense Temple Lintel fell and broke into pieces
In evangelio cuius saepe facimus mentionem superluminare temple lintel infinitae magnitudinis fractum esse atque divisum legimus.
Austin, S. A., et al. (2000). "Amos's Earthquake: An Extraordinary Middle East Seismic Event of 750 B.C."
International Geology Review 42(7): 657-671.
Austin, S. 2010. The Scientific and Scriptural Impact of Amos' Earthquake. Acts & Facts. 39 (2): 8-9.
Roberts, R. N. (2012). Terra Terror: An Interdisciplinary Study of Earthquakes in
Ancient Near Eastern Texts and the Hebrew Bible. Near Eastern Languages and Cultures.
Los Angeles, University of California - Los Angeles Doctor of Philosophy.
Danzig, D. (2011). A Contextual Investigation of Archaeological and Textual
Evidence for a Purported mid-8th Century BCE Levantine Earthquake Book of Amos, Dr. Shalom Holtz.
Albright, W.F., The archaeological results of an expedition to Moab and Dead Sea, Bull. Am. Sch. Orient. Res., 7, 2-12, 1924.
Ambraseys, N. (2005). "Historical earthquakes in Jerusalem -
A methodological discussion." Journal of Seismology 9(3): 329-340.
Ogden, K. 1992. The earthquake motif in the book of Amos. In Schunck, K., and M. Augustin, eds.,
Goldene apfel in silbernen schalen. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 69–80
Freedman, D.N., and A. Welch. 1994. Amos's earthquake and Israelite prophecy. In Coogan, M.D., J. C. Exum, and L. E. Stager, eds.,
Scripture and other artifacts: essays on the Bible, and archaeology in honor of Philip J. King. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 188–198
Nur, A. and H. Ron (1996). The walls came tumbling down: Earthquake history of the Holy Land.
in Stiros, S. and Jones, R. Archaeoseismology. Institute of Geology & Mineal Exploration at the University of Michigan
ANTONOPOULOS, J. 1979, "Catalogue of Tsunamis in the Eastern Mediterranean from
Antiquity to Present Times." Annals of Geophysics 32(1): 113-130.
Atlas of Israel (1985), Physical and Human Geography, 3rd edn, The Survey of Israel, Jerusalem, p. 17.
Avi-Yonah, M. (1975). The Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, Israel Exploration Society and Massada Press.
Balensi, J. M. J. C. (1980). LES FOUILLES DE R.W. HAMILTON A TELL ABU HAWAM
EFFECTUEES EN 1932-1933 POUR LE COMPTE DU DEPARTEMENT DES ANTIQUITES DE LA
PALESTINE SOUS MANDAT BRITANNIQUE NIVEAUX IV ET V DOSSIER SUR L'HISTOIRE
D'UN PORT MEDITERRANEEN DURANT LES AGES DU BRONZE ET DU FER (?1600-950 ENV.AV. JC. [S.l.], [s.n.].
Cassuto, U.M.D. (Ed.), Encyclopedia Biblica, The Bialik Institute, Jerusalem, 1976.
Chambers, G.F., The Story of Eclipses, McClure, Phillips, New York, 1904.
Crisler, V. (2003). "Shechem."
Crisler, V. (2004). "Samaria (rough draft)."
Dever, W. G., Younker, R. W. (1990). "Tel Gezer, 1990." Israel Exploration Journal 41(282-286).
Dever, W. G., 1992, A case study in biblical archaeology: The earthquake of ca. 760 BCE: Eretz Israel, v. 23, p. 27-35
Dothan, T., Dunayevsky, I. (1993). Tel Qasile. Excavations in area A and B The New Encyclopaedia
of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land. E. Stern.
Fotheringham, J.K., A solution of ancient eclipses of the Sun, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 81, 104-126, 1920.
Frydman, S. (1997). "Geotechnical problems in the Holyland - Then and Now." Electronic J. Geotechn. Eng. 2(1-28).
Garstang, J. (1948). The Story of Jericho, Marshall, Morgan & Scott.
Gil, D. (1996). The geology of the city of David and its ancient subterranean waterworks.
Excavations at the City of David 1978-1985, vol. 4. D. T. A. a. A. De and Groot. Jerusalem,
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem: 1-28.
Herzog, Z. e. (2002). "The Fortress Mound at Tel Arad an Interim Report." Tel Aviv 2002(1): 3-109.
Israeli, A. (1977), Geotechnical map of Jerusalem and surroundings, Report M.M./12/77, Jerusalem: Geological Survey of Israel.
Karcz, I., et al. (1977). "Archaeological evidence for Subrecent seismic activity
along the Dead Sea-Jordan Rift." Nature 269(5625): 234-235.
Kenyon, K. M. (1957). Digging Up Jericho. London, Ernest Benn.
Kenyon, K. M. (1985). Archaeology in the Holy Land, Methuen.
Kenyon, K. M., et al. (1987). The Bible and recent archaeology, British Museum Publications.
Kitchen, K. A. (1986). The Third Intermediate Period in Egypt: (1100-650 B.C.), ARIS & PHILLIPS % HUMANITIES.
Knauf, E. A. (2002), 'Excavating Biblical history, revelations from Megiddo',
The Newsletter of the Megiddo Expedition 6, Tel Aviv: Technical University of Tel Aviv.
Kudlek, M., and E.H. Mickler, Solar and Lunar Eclipses of the Ancient
Near East from 3000 B.C. to 0 With Maps, Butzon and Bercker Kevelaer, Berlin, Germany, 1971.
Lemaire, A. (1997), Deir 'Alla Inscriptions', in E. M. Meyers (ed.),
The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East, vol. 11, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 138-140.
Lemonick, M. D. (1990). Score one for the Bible: fresh clues support story at the walls of Jericho',,. Time: 59.
Marco, S., A. Agnon, I. Finkelstein, and D. Ussishkin (2006).
Megiddo earthquakes, in Megiddo IV: The 1998-2002 Seasons, edited by I.
Finkelstein et al. Tel Aviv, Israel: pp. 568-575.
Mazar, A. (1993a), 'Beth Shean. The Beth Shean and the Northern Cemetery', in Stern (1993), vol. 1, pp. 214-223.
Mazar, A. (1993b), 'Beth Shean in the Iron Age.
Preliminary Report and Conclusions of the 1990-1991 Excavations', Israel Exploration J. 43 (4), 201-229.
Neev, D., and K.O. Emery, The Dead Sea, Bull. Geol. Surv. Isr., 41, 147pp., 1967.
Neev and Emery, W. H. O. Institution (1995). The Destruction
of Sodom, Gomorrah, and Jericho : Geological, Climatological,
and Archaeological Background, Oxford University Press, USA.
Nigro, L., Marchetti, N. (1998). ? New York Times.
Nur, A. and H. Ron (1997). "Armageddon's Earthquakes." International Geology Review 39(6): 532-541.
Oppolzer, T.R., Cannon Der Finsternisse, Denkschriften der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschafter, Wien, 1887.
Rothenberg, B. (1972), Timna. Valley of the Biblical Copper Mines, London: Thames and Hudson.
Schaeffer, C. F. A. and G. Institute (1948).
Stratigraphie Compare Et Chronologie de L'Asie Occidentale (IIIe Et IIe Millnaires): t. 1, Griffith institute.
Schaeffer, Claude Frédéric-Armand (1948). Syrie, Palestine, Asie mineure, Chypre, Perse et Caucase
Sellin, E. and C. Watzinger (1913). Jericho: die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen, Hinrichs.
Singer-Avitz, L. (2002). "The Iron Age pottery assemblage." Tel Aviv 29: 110-215.
Thompson, R.C., The Reports of the Magicians and Astrologers of Nineveh
and Babylon in the British Museum, I-II, Luzac, 1900
Tristram, H. (2005). The Land Of Moab: Travels And Discoveries On The
East Side Of The Dead Sea And The Jordan, Kessinger Publishing.
Ussishkin, D. (1977). "The Destruction of Lachish by Sennacherib and the Dating of the
Royal Judean Storage Jars." Tel Aviv 4(1-2): 28-60.
Wachs, D., Lewitte, D. (1984). "Earthquakes in Jerusalem and the Mount of Olives landslides." Israel Land & Nature 3: 118-121.
Warren, P. M. and V. Hankey (1989). Aegean Bronze Age Chronology, Bristol Classical Press.
Wood, B. G. (1990). "Did the Israelites conquer Jericho?" Biblical Archaeol. Review 16(2): 5.
Yadin, Y., Y. Aharoni, I. Dunayevsky, T. Dothan, R. Amiran, and J. Perrot,
Excavations at Hazor. The Second Campaign, Aug. 1, 1956-Nov. 1, 1956 (in Hebrew),
Mosad Bialik and the Israel Exploration Society, Jerusalem, 1959.
Yadin, Y. (1972), Hazor, The Schweich Lectures of the British Academy 1970, London.
Younker, R. W. (1991). A preliminary report of the 1990 season at Tel Gezer.
Excavations of the `outer wall' and the `Solomon wall', July to August 10,1990'
Andrews University Seminar Studies, Andrews University 29: 19-60.
Citations in Ambraseys (2009)
Carville 1971
Aharoni et al 1970
Aharoni and Aharoni 1970
Soggin 1970
Herzog and Singer 2002
Ng 2004
Rotherberg and Lupu 1967
Ancient Texts
Josephus, F. (1930). Jewish antiquities. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press.
Josephus; II Chr. 26
Josephus [9: 14]
Biblical References
Amos 1.1
Amos 3: 14-15
Amos 4: 11
Amos 5: 8
Amos 6:11
Amos 8: 8-10
Amos 9: 1
2 Chron. 26.16-7
Jeremiah 1:3-6
Jeremiah 4: 24
2 Kings 12: 6
2 Kings 15.1-7
2 Kings 23: 22
Nahum 1: 4-5
Zechariah 14.3-7
Misc Links
Nathan Ha-Bavli
The Archaeological Context of the Tell Deir Alla Tablets