Go to top

Monaxius and Plinta Quake

Winter or Spring of 419 CE

by Jefferson Williams









Introduction & Summary

An earthquake struck Palestine between 1 January 419 and 3 April 419. Ambraseys (2009), in an apparent mistake1, dates the earthquake to late 418 CE while Guidoboni et al (1994) and Russell (1985) correctly date the earthquake to the year 419 CE. The textual accounts of Marcellinus Comes and Idatius probably constrain the date of the earthquake to between 1 January 419 and 3 April 419 CE. Sources suggest many cities were damaged but only Jerusalem is mentioned specifically. Although the contemporaneous and near contemporaneous sources seem to be in agreement that it was a powerful earthquake, all the authors were located far from Palestine and had to have relied on report(s) from the area which they could not verify. Based on the accounts, the report(s) seems to derive from a widely distributed letter sent from Jerusalem. Archeoseismic and paleoseismic evidence may suggest a fault break in the Araba.
Footnotes

1 Ambraseys's mistake derives from accessing a bad translation. Ambraseys (2009) states

Marcellinus Comes places this event during the consulships of Monaxius and Plinta, in the second indiction, AD 419, whereas Idatius claims that ‘the holy places of Jerusalem as well as others were shaken by a most terrible earthquake’ during the papacy of St Zosimus (March 417 to December 418). In fact the earthquake happened in the second indiction during the consulship of Monaxius and Plinta (AD 419; Cons. Const. i. 240), and it is mentioned after the solar eclipse (Philostorg. xii. 8–9) of 19 July 418 (Schove and Fletcher 1987, 72–73, 290) at about the time of the appearance of fire in the sky (Philostorg. xii. 8–9), which is probably an allusion to the comet of September 418 (Schove and Fletcher 1987, 72–73, 290). These chronological elements suggest a date late in AD 418, probably in September or October.
The primary mistake here is placing the earthquake when Saint Zosimus was the bishop of Rome (March 417 to 26 December 418) rather than when Eulalius was the bishop of Rome (27 December 418 - 3 April 419). This is apparently due to having a copy of Idatius' Chronicon (ed. by Tranoy, 1974) in which there is a textual error in naming the bishop of Rome. This error was recognized by Guidoboni et al (1994) citing Tranoy, 1974. The error of the wrong bishop of Rome is not present in the copy of Idatius Chronicon edited by Burgess (1993).

Faced with the apparent contradiction of Idatius dating the earthquake to the reign of Saint Zosimus (March 417 - 26 December 418) and Marcellinus Comes dating the earthquake to the year of the consulship of Monaxius and Plinta which took place in 419, Ambraseys (2009) looked for other clues in the texts noting that Idatius dated the earthquake after a well dated solar eclipse in July 418 and conjecturing the earthquake took place around the time of a "fire in the sky" (comet ?) which is dated by Philostorgius in Church History (Book XII - Chapters 8 and 9) as lasting until late Autumn and preceding a number of (not specifically located) earthquakes that happened in the next year. Since the next year would presumably be 419 CE, this indicates that Ambraseys (2009) date of late Autumn is flawed when using the "fire in the sky" (described in the text as a meteor) of Philostorgius as a date marker.

Textual Evidence

Text (with hotlink) Original Language Biographical Info Religion Date of Composition Location Composed Notes
Introduction
Annales by Marcellinus Comes Latin
Biography

Marcellinus Comes (died ~534 AD) spent most of his life in Constantinople and only wrote one text which survives - Annales, a continuation of Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History. Marcellinus Comes' Annales spans from 379 to 534 CE with additions to 566 CE by an unknown author (wikipedia). Croke (1995:xxiv) notes that Marcellinus' sources for Portents (earthquakes, eclipses etc.) was a previous chronicle which contained predominantly Constantinopolitan events which was likely based on the so-called 'City Chronicle' of Constantinople. For the Monaxius and Plinta Quake, the ultimate source was probably a letter written by Praulius who was the Bishop of Jerusalem in 419 CE.

Orthodox (Byzantium) ca. 534 CE Constantinople Marcellinus reports that many Palestinian cities were ruined by an earthquake. He dates the earthquake to the same Olympiad year that Valentinian was born. Valentinian was born on July 9, 419 AD and since the Olympiad year starts on roughly July 20 or August 20, this would date this earthquake to between July/August 418 and July/August 419. Marcellinus further places the earthquake under the heading of Monaxius and Plinta who ruled the Eastern Roman Empire in consulship in 419 AD. This further constrains the date of the earthquake to 1 January 419 to July or August 419.
Sermon XIX by Augustine of Hippo Latin
Biography

Chadwick (2001) wrote the following about the life, works, and influence of Augustine of Hippo

Aurelius Augustinus was born in AD 354 and died in 430. He lived all but five years of his life in Roman North Africa, and for the last thirty-four years was bishop of a busy seaport, Hippo, now Annaba in Algeria. At Hippo, only bishop Augustine had books, and his own family background was not one of high culture. That culture he acquired through education. Through his writings, the surviving bulk of which exceeds that of any other ancient author, he came to exercise pervasive influence not only on contemporaries but also in subsequent years on the West.

Orthodox (Byzantium) ca. 419 CE Hippo Regius in what is now Annaba, Algeria Augustine of Hippo reported in a sermon that great earthquakes are reported from the East where some great cities suddenly collapsed in ruins and Jews, Pagans and Catechumens in Jerusalem were terrified, and all were baptised.

Chronicon by Idatius (aka Hydatius) Latin
Biography

Idatius (~400 - ~469 CE) was a Bishop in Aquae Flaviae in Gallaecia (now Portugal). He wrote Chronicon towards the end of his life which follows in the tradition of Jerome's continuation of Eusebius' Chronicle. Idatius' Chronicle starts in 379 CE. Burgess (1993) notes that Idatius used five major chronological systems (Jubilees, Spanish, Years of Abraham, Olympiads, and Regnal Years), there are variations between manuscripts, there are scribal errors, and there are chronological errors made by Idatius himself (e.g. with Olympiads).

Orthodox (Byzantium) ca. 469 CE Aquae Flaviae in Gallaecia (now Portugal) Idatius reported that the holy places in Jerusalem and other areas were shaken by a terrible earthquake. Idatius states that Eulalius was bishop of Rome when the this earthquake struck. This constrains the date of the earthquake to 27 December 418 - 3 April 419 when Eulalius was the antipope in Rome. Since Marcellinus Comes dates the earthquake to the consulships of Monaxius and Plinta which was in 419 CE, this earthquake is further constrained to approximately the first quarter of 419 CE - 1 January 419 to 3 April 419.
Consularia Constantinopolitana Latin
Biography

Burgess (1993:175-177) describes the Consularia Constantinopolitana as follows:

The Consularia Constantinopolitana, to use Mommsen's inappropriate title, is a complex document of differing dates and hands, but is essentially a consular list from 509 BC to AD 468 annotated with numerous historical entries.
...
The text of the Consularia readily breaks down into six sections, based primarily on the material added to the consular list itself.
...
The fifth section, from 390 to 455, is a hodgepodge with only a very few entries relating a variety of events in Gaul, Africa, Spain, and Italy within a fairly complete but obviously Western consular list. This is followed by the sixth and final section, a highly defective Western list of consuls to 464 with a few imperial notices at the very end to fill in the years to 468.

Orthodox (Byzantium) a complex document of differing dates and hands (Burgess, 1993:175) Constantinople Consularia Constantinopolitana is essentially a list of consuls (leaders) which may show that Monaxius and Plinta ruled the Eastern Roman Empire in 419 CE and mentions a letter from Jerusalem speaking of signs and terror from God.
Text (with hotlink) Original Language Biographical Info Religion Date of Composition Location Composed Notes
Introduction

Textual accounts for this earthquake come from contemporaneous and slightly later authors all of whom were residing far from Palestine. Levenson (2004:431-432) suggests that the four sources (Augustine, Idatius, Marcellinus Comes, and the Consularia Constantinopolitana) based their commentary/report on a letter from Praulius who was the Bishop of Jerusalem in 419 CE. Levenson (2004:431-432) also suggests that there may be some conflation in these texts with descriptions of the Cyril Quake seeping into the report on the Monaxius and Plinta Quake. An excerpt from Levenson's (2004:431-432) discussion on this topic is repeated below:

A letter sent by the Jerusalem bishop reporting Palestinian earthquakes in or around 419

This letter, no longer extant, but which can be reconstructed from references to it in Augustine, Hydatius, Marcellinus Comes, and the Consularia Constantinopolitana93, shares a number of significant parallels with the letter on the rebuilding of the Temple: an address to all the churches of the world; a report of the collapse of many Palestinian cities in an earthquake; an account of the conversion and baptism of Jews and pagans followed by the appearance of the sign of the cross on the garments of those baptized. It is also possible that the letter of 419 contained an account of a procession to the Mt. of Olives, similar to the one awkwardly inserted into the Syriac letter, since Marcellinus Comes refers to a Christophany on the Mt. of Olives in his report of the events of 419.
Footnotes

93

  • Hydatius, Chronicon 71a (AD 419) (ed. A. Tranoy, Hydace. Chronique [SC 219; 1974],1:124
  • R.W. Burgess, The Chronicle of Hydatius and the Consularia Constantinopolitana [1993],86)
  • Consularia Constantinoplitana AD 419 (ed. T. Mommsen,Chronica minora 1 [MGHaa9; 1894], 246
  • Burgess, The Chronicle, 244); Augustine, Sermo 19.6 (ed. C. Lambot, [CCSL41; 1961], 258)
  • Marcellinus Comes, Chronica (ed. T. Mommsen, Chronica minora 2 [MGHaa 11; 1893], 74).
For the chronological problems of the notices in Hydatius (which appears to belong to 417) and the Consularia Constantinopolitana (which incorrectly gives John as the bishop of Jerusalem in 419), see
  • Burgess, The Chronicle, 43-44
  • 206 (cf. S. Muhlberger, The Fifth-Century Chroniclers [1990], 207).

Annales by Marcellinus Comes

Background and Biography

Background and Biography

Marcellinus Comes (died ~534 AD) spent most of his life in Constantinople and only wrote one text which survives - Annales, a continuation of Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History. Marcellinus Comes' Annales spans from 379 to 534 CE with additions to 566 CE by an unknown author (wikipedia). Croke (1995:xxiv) notes that Marcellinus' sources for Portents (earthquakes, eclipses etc.) was a previous chronicle which contained predominantly Constantinopolitan events which was likely based on the so-called 'City Chronicle' of Constantinople. For the Monaxius and Plinta Quake, the ultimate source was probably a letter written by Praulius who was the Bishop of Jerusalem in 419 CE.

Excerpts
English from Croke (1995)

(1 Sept. 418 — 31 Aug. 419)

2nd indiction, consulship of Monaxius and Plinta

  1. Valentinian the Younger was born at Ravenna on 3 July. Constantius was his father and Placidia his mother.
  2. Many cities and villages of Palestine collapsed in an earthquake.
  3. Our Lord Jesus Christ, who is always and everywhere present, appeared from a cloud above the Mount of Olives near Jerusalem. At that time both male and female of many tribes of the neighbouring races were awe-struck, not so much by what they saw as what they heard, and believed. They were cleansed in the sacred fountain of Christ and there shone out the Saviour's cross which, through divine command, was immediately impressed on the tunics of all those baptized.

Latin

Ind. II. Monaxii et Plintae coss.

  1. Valentinianus iunior apud Rauennam patre Constantio et Placidia matre V nonas Iulias natus est.
  2. Multae Palaestinae ciuitates uillaeque terrae motu conlapsae.
  3. Dominus noster Iesus Christus semper ubique praesens et super montem oliueti Hierosolymae uicinum sese de nube manifestauit.
  4. Multae tunc utriusque sexus uicinarum gentium nationes tam uisu quam auditu perterritae atque credulae sacro Christi fonte ablutae sunt omniumque baptizatorum in tunicis crux saluatoris diuinitatis nutu extemplo inpressa refulsit.

Latin from Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. 51 - embedded



Chronology

Year Reference Corrections Notes
1 Jan. 419 - 31 Aug. 419 CE
  • same year when Valentinian was born.
  • Monaxius and Plinta ruled
  • 2nd Indiction
none
  • Valentinian was born on 9 July 419 CE
  • I don't currently know how Marcellinus counted years. Since his Chronicle was a continuation of Eusebius' Chronicle, he could have, like Eusebius, used Olympiad Years. In any case, the indiction is the more reliable time marker - for now.
  • The 3rd year of the 299th Olympiad ran from 1 July 419 until 30 June 420 CE
  • The 2nd indiction ran from 1 Sept. 418 to 31 Aug. 419 CE (calculated using CHRONOS)
  • Monaxius and Plinta were promoted to consulship of the Eastern Roman Empire in in 419 CE (wikipedia citing Priscus, fragment 14 - Priscus, fragment 14 may be in Panium and Given, 2015)
  • These markers combined restrict the date to between 1 Jan. 419 CE and 31 Aug. 419 CE
1 Sept. 418 — 31 Aug. 419 CE
  • margin note placed by editor reads 1 Sept. 418 — 31 Aug. 419
none
  • Margin note is based on the 2nd Indiction
  • The 2nd indiction ran from 1 Sept. 418 to 31 Aug. 419 CE (calculated using CHRONOS)
Seismic Effects Locations Sources
Sources of information

Croke (1995:xxii-xxiv) describes Marcellinus Comes' sources of information as follows:

In writing his chronicle Marcellinus was consciously continuing the chronicle of Jerome, who had previously translated the chronicle of Eusebius of Caesarea and continued it to 378. There was an established style and format for chronicles to follow, on the model of Jerome, as well as a tradition in the type of sources utilised and how they might be employed. The basic framework of the chronicle was the list of successive indiction numbers. The indictional year ran from 1 September to 30 August and each such year was given a number in the fifteen-year cycle of indictions. Alongside the indictions Marcellinus used a consular list, recording in annual succession the names of the two chief magistrates for the year which ran from 1 January to 31 December. Marcellinus' very reliable consular list reflects the viewpoint of the eastern court in that it records the eastern consul first and normally ignores western consuls not recognised in the east.7 Many apparent dating errors in the chronicle are to be explained by the problems caused by these two overlapping dating systems used by the chronicler, that is, Marcellinus' date is the correct indiction but the wrong consulship (e.g. 429.2,430.3, 454.1,465.1, 469). For detailed information Marcellinus, like most chroniclers, relied on a strictly limited number of sources, using them to supplement information here and there:
  1. Orosius
  2. Gennadius
  3. Papal List
  4. Constantinopolitan chronicle source
    Perhaps the source most frequently used by Marcellinus (and by the Chronicon Paschale which Mommsen reproduced for the years 395—469 in his edition of Marcellinus to illustrate their close textual similarities) was a previous chronicle which contained predominantly Constantinopolitan events. Moreover, it is likely that this chronicle was itself based on the so-called 'City Chronicle' of Constantinople (CP), or else Marcellinus used similar material himself.10 Reflecting this source, Marcellinus devotes considerable space to eastern events of a public ceremonial nature:

    • Adventus (imperial and relic arrivals)11
    • Victories13
    • Imperial Accessions13
    • Deaths14
    • Births15
    • Imperial Marriages16
    • Anniversaries17
    • Portents (earthquakes, eclipses etc)18
    • Building19
    • Ecclesiastical matters (popes, councils, theological writers etc)20
    • Civil strife (faction and other riots)21
    • Deaths of usurpers and high officials22
    • Wars in the east (Isauria and Persia)23
    • Raids in the Balkans24
    • Miscellaneous25

    Most importantly, his local CP
Footnotes

1 In general: Mommsen, 1894. 42; Holder-Egger. 1877, 49—56; SchanzjHosiuslKruger, 1920. 112; Moricca, 1943, 1363; PLRE 2: 711 s.v. Marcellinus 9'.

2 lnst. I. 17. 2. as interpreted in Croke, 1982c.

3 Croke, 1984, 77—88.

10 Holder-Egger, 1877, 73—88; Mommsen, 1894, 44—46; Croke, 1990, passiin; and thecritical treatment by Burgess, 1993, 182—6.

11 381.2, 382.1, 384.1, 386.2, 387.2, 389.1, 391.1, 394.1, 395.2. 401.1, 414.1, 428.2, 431.3, 436, 438.2, 438.3, 439.2, 443.2, 448.1, 448.3, 485, 496.2. 507.2, 520, 525.

12 379.2, 382.2, 385, 386.1, 388.1, 388.2, 394.2. 394.4, 394.5, 398.4, 400, 405, 412.2, 413. 418.1, 421.4, 422.2, 422.3, 422.4, 425.1, 438.1, 4393, 440.2, 441.1, 441.3, 445.1, 452, 469, 477, 488.1, 498.2, 530, 533, 534.

13 379.1, 383.2, 391.3, 393, 395.3, 402.2, 411.2, 424.1, 424.2, 450.2, 455.2, 457.2, 457.1, 461.2, 467.1, 472.2, 474.1, 475.1, 475.2, 491.1, 519.1, 527.

14 391.2, 395.1, 404.2, 408.1, 408.3, 411.3, 412.1, 424.3, 429.2, 431.1, 444.2, 444.4, 449.1, 450.1, 457.1, 461.2, 465.2, 472.2, 474.2, 474.1, 474.2, 476.1, 476.2, 480.2, 491.1, 515.6, 5183, 527.

15 384.2, 397, 399.2, 4013, 403.1, 419.1, 422.1. 16 421.1, 424.2, 437.

17 387.1, 406.1, 411.1, 422.2, 430, 439.1, 444.1.

18 389.2, 389.3, 390.1, 394.3, 396.3, 401.2, 402.3, 404, 408.2, 417.2, 418.2, 418.3, 419.2, 433, 442.2, 443.1, 444.3, 446.1, 447.1, 452.2, 456.1, 465.1, 460, 467, 472.1, 4723, 480.1, 494.2, 497.1, 499, 512.1, 512.10, 518.1, 526.

19 390.3, 394.4, 403.2, 415.1, 421.2, 421.3, 427.2, 435.1, 443.2, 447.3, 448.2, 453.5, 506, 509.2, 510.11, 528.

20 3801 381.1, 382.3, 383.1, 392.2, 398.1, 398.2, 398.3, 402.1, 403.3, 415.2, 416.1, 416.2, 417.3, 419.3, 420.1, 420.3, 423.1, 426, 428.1, 430, 432.1, 440.2, 449.2, 451, 453.1—4, 456.2, 459, 461.1, 463, 466, 470, 476.2, 478, 482, 494.1, 494.3, 495, 498.1, 500.1, 5103, 511, 512.8, 512.9, 513, 515.1, 516.2, 516.3.

21 3993, 409, 431.2, 445.2, 473.2, 491.2, 493.1, 501.1—3, 507.1, 509.1, 512.2—7, 523, 524, 532.

22 396.2, 399.1, 420.2, 430.2, 432.2—3, 440.1, 449.3, 450.3, 454.2, 481.2, 490, 493.2, 497.3, 520.

23 475.1, 484.1, 492, 497.2, 502.2, 503, 504, 515.5, 529.

24 427.1, 434, 454.1, 464, 468, 479.1, 479.2, 481.1, 482.2, 483, 488.2, 489.1, 499.1, 502.1, 505, 512.11, 517, 530.

25 389.4 (Temple destroyed), 390.2 (empress expelled), 392 (usurpation), 396 (exiles), 410 (sack of Rome), 414.2 (Placidia restored), 455 (Geiseric at Rome), 462 (Jacob the Doctor), 484.2 (Vandal refugees), 496.1 (donative), 498.3 (coinage reform), 500.2 (donative), 508(Tarentum attacked), 510.2 (exile), 514 (rebellion), 515.2 (rebel defeated), 516 (Vitalianreplaced), 519.2 (conspiracy), 531 (Code of Justinian).

Online Versions and Further Reading
References

Marcellinus comes, Chronicon, ed. Th.Mommsen, AIGH. AA 11, in Chronica minora, vol.2, Berlin 1894, pp.37-104.

Marc. Com.: Marcellinus Comes, Marcellini Comitis chronicon, PL, 1846.

Croke, B. (1995). The Chronicle of Marcellinus: A translation with commentary (with a reproduction of Mommsen's edition of the text), Brill.

Croke, B. (2001). Count Marcellinus and His Chronicle, Oxford University Press.

La Cronaca dei Due Imperi, Il Chronicon di Marcellino Comes (A.D. 379-534 & Auctarium). Introduzione, traduzione e note a cura di A. Palo. Testo latino a fronte. Il Saggio Editore 2021.

Panium, P., Given, J.P. (2015). The Fragmentary History of Priscus: Attila, the Huns and the Roman Empire, AD 430–476, Evolution Publishing.

Notes
Extended Biography of Marcellinus Comes

Croke (1995:xix-xx) describes Marcellinus Comes' life as follows:

Count Marcellinus, or Marcellinus comes as he is usually designated, is one of the lesser literary figures of late antiquity. He is known almost exclusively as the author of anannalistic chronicle continuing that of Jerome from AD 379 to 518, which Marcellinus himself later updated to 5341. He composed his chronicle in Constantinople and it was while the Roman senator Cassiodorus was there in 550/1, as a refugee from Justinian's war against the Ostrogoths, that he acquired a copy of it. If Cassiodorus did not actually meet Marcellinus then he certainly knew something about him, for in his Institutiones, a handbook for monks, he tells us that Marcellinus was an Illyrian:
[Jerome] has been followed in turn by the aforesaid Marcellinus the Illyrian who is said to have acted first as cancellarius of the patrician Justinian, but who later, with the Lord's help upon the improvement of his employer's civil status, faithfully guided his work from the time of the emperor (Justin) to the beginning of the thumphant rule of the emperor Justinian.2
By 'illyrian' Cassiodorus meant from the late Roman prefecture of Illyricum, more precisely from one of its Latin-speaking Balkan provinces. At some point (c.500) he must have migrated to the eastern imperial capital, Constantinople, as did so many of his ambitious contemporaries. At Constantinople Marcellinus was eventually able to secure a prestigious position as cancellarius to a fellow-illyrian, the patrician Justinian, in the early 520s. As a cancellarius Marcellinus was comes and of senatorial status (virclarissimus) — the titles he records in the preface to his chronicle. Marcellinus apparently left his court post before Justian became emperor in 527.

In this subsequent period he probably devoted himself to literary pursuits. Marcellinus, who is generally reticent about his own life and views (not that a chronicle gave him much scope to display his individuality), tells us in the preface that his chronicle originally covered the period 379 to 518. Since it was common practice for chroniclers to update their works it is reasonable to assume that the first edition appeared in or soon after 518, that is to say, a few years before Marcellinus entered the service of Justinian. The second edition of the chronicle, the version which survives, continued the work to 534. It was arguably written as a tribute to his former employer Justinian on the occasion of the triumph over the Vandals in Africa which was celebrated at Constantinople in 534. As with other similar chronicles, that of Prosper for example, the purpose of the second edition was merely to up-date the record. Except for minor necessary changes it is unlikely that there were any substantial additions or modifications to what had been already written, for the period 379—518.

Apart from the chronicle, Marcellinus wrote several other works which have not survived, despite the fact that Cassiodorus also recommended these in his handbook:
Marcellinus too has traversed his journey's path in laudable fashion, completing four books on the nature of events and the locations of places with most decorous propriety; I have likewise left this work for you (Inst. 1.17.1).

Marcellinus too, concerning whom I have already spoken, should be read with equal care; he has described the city of Constantinople and the city of Jerusalemin four short books in considerable detail (Inst. 1.25.1)
It is deduced from this statement that there were two other works of Marcellinus (not one work described in two different ways, as sometimes suggested), both in four books, which were known to Cassiodorus: (1) a detailed work on the nature of temporal events and the location of places (de temporum qualitatibus et positionibus locorum) and (2) another on the topography of Constantinople and Jerusalem. The chronicle itself displays the author's interest in both Constantinople (passim) and the 'Holy Land' (s.a. 415,419, 439, 443, 453, 516) and it would not be surprising if his books on Jerusalem, as well as those in the other work on the locations of places, were firmly rooted in first-hand observation — as Cassiodorus seems to imply. Moreover, it is quite possible that Marcellinus traveled as far afield as Dara on the Persian frontier on his sojourn. In any case the only surviving fragment of these works is a detailed description of Dara which appears to derive from the books 'on the locations of places'.3

Except for the facts that Marcellinus was Illyrian, wrote a chronicle in about 518/9, was a cancellarius to Justinian before 527, then retired from imperial service, updated his chronicle to 534 and was responsible for two other works now lost except for all this, we know nothing else about the man. We have no idea when he was born or died, when he came to Constantinople, what sort of education he had and where he stood in the society of his day. Nonetheless the evidence of the chronicle itself permits a sketchy outline of his background and culture.
Footnotes

1 In general: Mommsen, 1894. 42; Holder-Egger. 1877, 49—56; SchanzjHosiuslKruger, 1920. 112; Moricca, 1943, 1363; PLRE 2: 711 s.v. Marcellinus 9'.

2 lnst. I. 17. 2. as interpreted in Croke, 1982c.

3 Croke, 1984, 77—88.

Sermon XIX by Augustine of Hippo

Background and Biography

Background and Biography

Chadwick (2001) wrote the following about the life, works, and influence of Augustine of Hippo

Aurelius Augustinus was born in AD 354 and died in 430. He lived all but five years of his life in Roman North Africa, and for the last thirty-four years was bishop of a busy seaport, Hippo, now Annaba in Algeria. At Hippo, only bishop Augustine had books, and his own family background was not one of high culture. That culture he acquired through education. Through his writings, the surviving bulk of which exceeds that of any other ancient author, he came to exercise pervasive influence not only on contemporaries but also in subsequent years on the West.

Excerpts
English from Guidoboni et. al. (1994)

Great earthquakes are reported from the East. Some great cities suddenly collapsed in ruins. Jews, pagans and catechumens in Jerusalem were terrified, and all were baptised.

English from Ambraseys (2009)

‘Great earthquakes are reported in the East – some great cities suddenly collapsed. Jews, pagans and catachumens were terrified in Jerusalem, and were baptised. The sign of Christ appeared on the clothes of the baptized Jews.’ (Aug. Serm. xix. 6/136).

Latin from Guidoboni et. al. (1994)

Terrae motus magni de orientalibus nuntiantur. Nonnullae magnae repentinis conlapsae sunt civitates. Territi apud Hierosolvmam qui inerant iudaei, pagani, catechumini, omnes sunt baptizati. Dicuntur fortasse baptizati septem millia hominum. Signum Christi in vestibus iudaeorum baptizatorum apparuit. Relatu fratrum fidelium constantissimo ista nuntiantur.

Chronology

Russell (1985) wrote that that Sermon XIX is undated.

Seismic Effects Locations Online Versions and Further Reading

Chronicon by Idatius (aka Hydatius)

Background and Biography

Background and Biography

Idatius (~400 - ~469 CE) was a Bishop in Aquae Flaviae in Gallaecia (now Portugal). He wrote Chronicon towards the end of his life which follows in the tradition of Jerome's continuation of Eusebius' Chronicle. Idatius' Chronicle starts in 379 CE. Burgess (1993) notes that Idatius used five major chronological systems (Jubilees, Spanish, Years of Abraham, Olympiads, and Regnal Years), there are variations between manuscripts, there are scribal errors, and there are chronological errors made by Idatius himself (e.g. with Olympiads).

Excerpts
English from Burgess (1993)

OLYMPIAD 299

The author of this work did not know who presided over the church in Alexandria after Theophilus.
Constantius took Placidia as his wife.

23 (Margin Note - 417 AD)

In the name of Rome Vallia, the king of the Goths, inflicted a vast slaughter upon the barbarians within Spain.
There was an eclipse of the sun on 19 July, which was a Thursday. [Note: Actually it was on a Friday (Schove, D., Fletcher, A. (1987)]
The thirty-ninth bishop to preside over the church in Rome was Eulalius.
While the aforementioned bishop was still in office, the holy places in Jerusalem and other areas were shaken by a terrible earthquake. This information was revealed in the writings of this same bishop.

24 (Margin Note - 418 AD)

All of the Siling Vandals in Baetica were wiped out by King Vallia.
The Alans, who were ruling over the Vandals and Sueves, suffered such heary losses at the hands of the Goths that after the death of their king, Addax, the few survivors, with no thought for their own kingdom, placed themselves under the protection of Gunderic, the king of the Vandals, who had settled in Gallaecia.
The Goths broke off the campaign which they were waging and were recalled by Constantius to Gaul where they were given settlements in Aquitania from Tolosa all the way to the Ocean.
Vallia, the king of the Goths, died and was succeeded as king by Theoderic.

25 (Margin Note - 419 AD)

After a quarrel broke out between Gunderic, the king of the Vandals, and Hermeric, the king of the Sueves, the Sueves were blockaded in the Erbasian Mountains by the Vandals.
Valentinian, the son of Constantius and Placidia, was born.
Many terrifying signs which appeared in the city of Biterrae in Gallic territory are described in a widely-circulated letter of Paulinus, bishop of that same city.

Latin

Durante episcopo quo supra grauissimo terremotu sancta Hierosolimis loca quassantur et cetera, de quibus ita gestis eiusdem episcopi scripta declarant.

Latin - embedded

  • see p. 67 starting with XXV,      1 Durante episcopo quo supra
  • from archive.org


Chronology
Year Reference Corrections Notes
27 December 418 - 3 April 419 CE Eulalius was bishop of Rome when the this earthquake struck none
  • Guidoboni et al (1994) notes that
    the manuscripts place Hydatius' entry under the year 418, but as A. Tranoy, the editor of the text, has shown, the scribe seems to have confused a mention of bishop John of Jerusalem (who was already dead by this time) with one of bishop Eulalius of Rome, who is referred to in paragraph 66 of the Chronicle. Tranoy dates the earthquake to 419 on the basis of evidence from Marcellinus and the Consularia Constantinopolitana.
    The error of the wrong Bishop is not present in the edition by Burgess (1993). It appears that Ambraseys (2009) did not access the edition by Burgess (1993) and either did not recognize the error of the wrong Bishop or made a poor correction as he inserted a note in his catalog entry noting that "this same bishop" was Saint Zosimus who ruled from ruled March 417 until his death on 26 December 418. This led Ambraseys (2009) to state that Idatius dated the earthquake to within the papacy (aka the bishop of Rome) of Saint Zosimus.

    Considering that Eulalius was bishop of Rome when the this earthquake struck, this constrains the date of the earthquake to 27 December 418 - 3 April 419 when Eulalius was the antipope in Rome.
1 July 417 CE to 30 June 418 CE first year of the 299th Olympiad none
  • Margin Note - 417 AD appears to be based on this Olympiad Year reckoning.
  • Cross referencing events listed in the excerpt reveal that the year could by off by as much as ± 2


Seismic Effects Locations Online Versions and Further Reading

Consularia Constantinopolitana

Background and Biography

Background and Biography

Burgess (1993:175-177) describes the Consularia Constantinopolitana as follows:

The Consularia Constantinopolitana, to use Mommsen's inappropriate title, is a complex document of differing dates and hands, but is essentially a consular list from 509 BC to AD 468 annotated with numerous historical entries.
...
The text of the Consularia readily breaks down into six sections, based primarily on the material added to the consular list itself.
...
The fifth section, from 390 to 455, is a hodgepodge with only a very few entries relating a variety of events in Gaul, Africa, Spain, and Italy within a fairly complete but obviously Western consular list. This is followed by the sixth and final section, a highly defective Western list of consuls to 464 with a few imperial notices at the very end to fill in the years to 468.

Excerpts

The consul list for the years surrounding 419 CE are shown in tabular form below.
Latin from Burgess (1993) and English from Google, Quick Latin, and Williams

CCCCL
...
Consuls Year Additional Text (Latin) Additional Text (trans. to English)
Theodosio VII et Palladio (416) n/a n/a
Honorio XI et Constantio II (417) n/a n/a
Honorio XII et Theodosio VIII (418) n/a n/a
Monaxio et Pienta (419) HIS CONSS. sanctus Iohannes Hierosolimorum episcopus qui supra epistolam dirigit per ecclesias orbis terrarum, quae habetur de signis terroribusque diuinitus perpetratis HIS CONSS. Saint John, bishop of Jerusalem, whose letter was sent to all churches, described signs and terrors from God.
Theodosio VIIII et Constantio III (420) n/a n/a

Chronology
Year Reference Corrections Notes
419 CE Margin Note says 419 none
Seismic Effects Locations Online Versions and Further Reading

Archaeoseismic Evidence

Location (with hotlink) Status Intensity Notes
Khirbet Shema possible to unlikely
2nd Earthquake - Debated Chronology

Although excavators Meyers, Kraabel, and Strange (1976) identified two earthquake events ( Eusebius' Martyr Quake of ~306 CE and Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE) which destroyed a Synagogue I and then a Synagogue II at Khirbet Shema, subsequent authors ( e.g. Russell, 1980 and Magness, 1997) re-examined their chronology and redated the earthquake evidence. Russell (1980) redated the two earthquake events to the northern Cyril Quake of 363 CE and the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE while Magness (1997) concluded that there was no solid evidence for the existence of a Synagogue I on the site and evidence for an earthquake event in ~306 CE was lacking. She posited that Synagogue II was constructed in the late 4th to early 5th century CE and concluded that there was no solid evidence for the 419 CE (or 363 CE) earthquake as well. In Magness (1997) interpretation of the evidence, she suggested that the site had been abandoned when an earthquake brought down Synagogue II sometime before the 8th century CE.

Meyers, Kraabel, and Strange (1976) archeoseismic evidence for the 2nd earthquake, the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE, appears to be shaky. It is based on a lacuna of coin evidence starting in 408 CE and lasting for the last three quarters of the 5th century CE. They suggest this indicates abandonment of the site during this time period and in turn suggest that abandonment was likely due to the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE. Magness (1997: 217-218) provided a number of reasons why she classifies this as a dangerous argument from silence.

Khorazin possible
419 CE Earthquake - Potentially debated Chronology

Russell (1985) relates that it has been suggested that the early 5th century destruction evidence at Khorazin relates to this earthquake (Yeivin, 1973: 157 - in hebrew). Jones (2021) reports that Magness has disputed archaeological evidence for this earthquake at Khorazin and other sites in the Galilee (1997: 217-18; 2005: 8-10; 2007: 271-72; 2012: 113-14).

Aphek/Antipatris possible ≥ 7
Byzantine Earthquake - 4th-5th century CE - Questions on Chronology

Karcz and Kafri (1978: 244-245) reported that tilted and distorted walls and subsiding arches were encountered in the excavations of the Byzantine town of Antipatris (Aphek) which led Kochavi (1976) and Kochavi (personal communication to Karcz) to attribute the end and decay of the town to the earthquake of 419 AD. In his preliminary report on excavations Kochavi (1975) reported that very little was uncovered in the Early Byzantine Period and suggested that Byzantine Antipatris, as a city of any importance, probably came to its end around the beginning of the 5th century B.C.E. while Kochavi (1981) reports that the entire city of Antipatris was destroyed by an earthquake in 419 CE. Golan (2008) does not present any earthquake evidence but mentions that Kochavi thought that the city was destroyed by the Cyril Quake of 363 CE.

The fact that most of the coins dated to the second half of the fourth century CE suggests that the cardo may have been abandoned at the beginning of the Byzantine period, which seems to corroborate the excavators’ conclusions (Kochavi 1989) that assumed the city was destroyed in the year 363 CE.
The latest coins reported by Kochavi (1975), apparently come from the Early Byzantine level, dated to Constantine the Great (308-337 C.E.), Constantius II (337-361 C.E.), and Arcadius (395-408 C.E.).

Jones (2021) added
Caution must be exercised in interpreting the numismatic data, however, as the ceramic fords included PRS 3 forms dating to the mid-5th-6th century (Golan 2008: fig. 5.5-6). More troubling is the apparent presence of `Mefjar ware' (i.e. Islamic Cream Ware), which dates no earlier than the late 7th century (see Walmsley 2001), in the `earthquake stratum' (Neidinger 1982: 167). This may indicate multiple destructions, but without more complete publication of the excavations, this is difficult to evaluate. It is, however, worth noting the presence of a bishop of Antipatris at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 (Dauphin 2000; Frankel and Kochavi 2000: 23, 31). This may be explained, as Fischer (1989: 1806) suggests, by assuming that the role of Antipatris `was filled with a great number of smaller settlements' like Khirbat Dhikrin (Zikrin) after the 418/419 earthquake, but it is equally likely that Antipatris was simply not abandoned in the early 5th century.

Tiberias - Introduction n/a n/a n/a
Hammath Tiberias - Synagogue needs investigation
Stratum IIa Earthquake - Potentially debated Chronology

Jones (2021), without citing a source, reports that evidence for the Monaxius and Plinta Earthquake of 419 CE has been reported in Stratum IIa of the synagogue at Hammath Tiberias. Jones (2021) also reports that Magness has disputed archaeological evidence for this earthquake at the Synagogue in Hammath Tiberias and other sites in the Galilee (1997: 217-18; 2005: 8-10; 2007: 271-72; 2012: 113-14).

Khirbet Wadi Hamam possible
419 CE Earthquake - NEEDS INVESTIGATION

Jones (2021) reports that evidence for the Monaxius and Plinta Earthquake of 419 CE has been reported at Khirbet Wadi Hamam by Leibner and Arubas (2018: 97).

En Hazeva possible ≥ 8
Earthquake from 324 CE to early 6th century CE

Although Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) attributed seismic damage dated to between 324 CE and the 6th century CE to the southern Cyril Quake of 363 CE, their bracketed dates entertain the possibility that the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE is also responsible for the observed seismic damage. Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) report that coins below collapsed arches in Room 45 provide an apparent terminus post quem of 324 CE while coins above an associated floor date from the first half of the 4th century to the early 6th century CE. Erickson-Gini and Moore Bekes (2019) discussed the structural history of the site as follows:

Three phases of construction and occupation were identified in the camp (Erickson-Gini 2010:97–99). The camp appears to have been built around the time that the Diocletianic fort was constructed on the tell, in the late third or early fourth century CE. It was devastated in the earthquake of 363 CE, which damaged the bathhouse and the fort as well. The camp was subsequently reconstructed and remained in use until the sometime in the sixth century CE.

Avdat/Oboda possible ≥ 8
The previous earthquake

The previous earthquake of Korjenkov and Mazor (1999) was dated by Negev (1989) to between ~300 CE and 541 CE and by Erickson-Gini (2014) to the early 5th century. An early 5th century date may suggest the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE while Negev (1989)'s wider date range entertains the possibility that damage was caused by the Fire in the Sky Quake of 502 CE or the hypothesized Negev Quake of ~500 CE. Korjenkov and Mazor (1999) did not produce an Intensity estimate for the previous earthquake. The Intensity estimate presented here is based on seismic effects associated with rebuilding. A Ridge Effect is likely present at Avdat.

Mampsis possible ≥ 8
First Earthquake - Early Byzantine ? - Mampsis suffers from a problematic and some times debated chronology

Mampsis suffers from a problematic and some times debated chronology [e.g., Magness (2003) vs. Negev (1974:412, 1988)]. Negev (1974) dated the 'first' earthquake observed by Korzhenkov and Mazor (2003) to late 3rd/early 4th century via coins and church architectural styles however he dated construction of the East Church, where some archaeoseismic evidence for the 'first' earthquake was found, to the 2nd half of the 4th century CE - which seems like a contradiction. Although neither of these dates allows for seismic damage due to the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE, archaeoseismic chronology in the Negev has a history of changes and Mampsis seems like a site that is particularly susceptible to changing chronological perceptions. Korzhenkov and Mazor (2003) characterized this as a strong earthquake with an epicenter at the north, and an EMS-98 scale intensity of IX or more. They also opined that the epicenter was some distance away. Kamai and Hatzor (2005) and Kamai and Hatzor (2007) estimated an Intensity of ~7 - ~8 based on DDA analysis of a dropped keystone in an arch in Mampsis.

Haluza possible ≥ 8
1st Earthquake - late 3rd - mid 6th century CE - perhaps around 500 CE

Korjenkov and and Mazor (2005) surmised that the first earthquake struck in the Byzantine period between the end of the 3rd and the mid-6th centuries A.D.. This was based on dates provided by Negev (1989). The Intensity estimate presented here is based on Seismic Effects categorized as Earthquake Damage Restorations by Korjenkov and and Mazor (2005)

Yotvata possible to probable ≥ 8
Post Roman Legion Abandonment Earthquake - 5th century CE

Davies et al (2015) dated a seismic destruction layer at at a Roman Fort in Yotvata to soon after the Fort was systematically abandoned in the early 5th century. An ephemeral Byzantine period occupation was established on top of the collapse, without any attempt at leveling. They noted that although the ensuing ephemeral Byzantine period occupation was undated due to a lack of recovered pottery, significant sediment accumulated between the Byzantine layer and the well dated Early Islamic layer suggesting that these two layers are a century or two apart.

Petra - Introduction n/a n/a n/a
Petra - Wadi Sabra Theater possible ≥ 8
Phase 4 earthquake - Late Roman/Early Byzantine

Tholbecq et al (2019) uncovered a Phase 4 destruction layer. Phase 4 occurs at a date still undetermined (Late Roman period or Byzantine but not later). They added

We do not know when the destruction of the northern masonry of the orchestra occurred, at the level of the old corridor, rebuilt using the stone seats during the previous phase. However, this destruction is directly posed, both in hole 2 and in hole 7, on the embankments of the 3rd-4th centuries CE; we can therefore deduce that this event (earthquake?) occurs shortly after the late Roman period, or even during this period. The monument will no longer be occupied after this phase, being marked only by natural horizons of aeolian and alluvial sediments.

Petra - Jabal Khubthah possible ≥ 8
End of Phase 3 Earthquake - 5th or 6th centuries CE

The End of Phase 3 Earthquake was dated to the 5th or 6th centuries CE. Fiema in Tholbecq et al (2019) encountered difficulties in dating this presumed seismic destruction and suggested that the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE or a later earthquake was responsible.

Petra - ez Zantur possible ≥ 8
5th-6th Century CE Earthquake - Debated Chronology

Excavators dated a seismic destruction to the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE. Jones (2021) argues that this date is likely too early and that the late 6th century CE Inscription at Areopolis Quake is a plausible candidate.

Petra - Urn Tomb possible
5th-6th Century CE Earthquake - Debated Chronology

Jones (2021) argues that al-Zantur I Spatromisch II ceramics, rather than dating from 363 CE - 419 CE, should date to at least a century later. If true, this would negate archaeoseismic evidence for an earthquake reported in 419 CE (i.e. the Monaxius and Plinta Quake) at ez-Zantur and other sites in Petra such as in a structure outside the Urn Tomb, and in Structure I of the NEPP Project. Jones (2021) suggests instead that the causitive earthquake was more likely the late 6th century CE Inscription At Areopolis Quake. Jones (2021) provides a discussion below:

Within Petra, the 418/419 earthquake has been suggested as the cause for the destruction of three structures:
  • al-Zantur I, specifically the end of Bauphase Spatromisch II
  • one of the structures outside of the Urn Tomb, House II
  • North-Eastern Petra Project (NEPP) Structure I
At the Urn Tomb, a 363 earthquake destruction has been suggested for a cave below the tomb (Zayadine 1974: 138) as well as House II, which was partially rebuilt afterwards and by the 6th century was being `used as a quarry' (Zeitler 1993: 256-57). Taking this quarrying as evidence for a 5th century abandonment of House II, Kolb (2000: 230; 2007: 154-55) suggests a second destruction in the 418/419 earthquake, primarily based on analogy to al-Zantur I. As only a preliminary report has appeared for House II, it is not possible to evaluate the archaeological evidence for this attribution, but a 5th century abandonment of House II may instead be related to the modification of the Urn Tomb for use as a church in 446 (Bikai 2002: 271).

Petra - NEPP site possible
5th-6th Century CE Earthquake - Debated Chronology

Fiema and Schmid (2014:429-430) suggest that Structure 1 in the NEPP area was destroyed by the 363 earthquake, but later restored although in much altered form and appearance with final destruction and abandonment taking place afterwards, perhaps sometime in the early 5th century. They suggest final destruction and abandonment may have been due to the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE. Jones (2021) argues that al-Zantur I Spatromisch II ceramics, rather than dating from 363 CE - 419 CE, should date to at least a century later. If true, this would negate archaeoseismic evidence for an earthquake reported in 419 CE (i.e. the Monaxius and Plinta Quake) at ez-Zantur and other sites in Petra such as in a structure outside the Urn Tomb, and in Structure I of the NEPP Project. Jones (2021) suggests instead that the causitive earthquake was more likely the late 6th century CE Inscription At Areopolis Quake. Jones (2021) provides a discussion below:

Within Petra, the 418/419 earthquake has been suggested as the cause for the destruction of three structures:
  • al-Zantur I, specifically the end of Bauphase Spatromisch II
  • one of the structures outside of the Urn Tomb, House II
  • North-Eastern Petra Project (NEPP) Structure I
NEPP Structure I has not been excavated, and the claim that it was destroyed in the 418/419 earthquake is based on surface finds and reference to al-Zantur I (Fiema and Schmid 2014: 431). Without excavation, the actual date and nature of the building's destruction remain uncertain. The claim for damage at Petra related to the 418/419 earthquake rests primarily, therefore, on the evidence from al-Zantur I.

Khirbet Tannur possible ≥ 8
End of Period III Earthquake - 3rd-4th centuries CE

McKenzie et al (2013) suggested that the End of Period III seismic damage (3rd -4th centuries CE) was caused by the southern Cyril Quake but the Monaxius and Plinta Quake is also a possible candidate.

Location (with hotlink) Status Intensity Notes
Khirbet Shema



Khorazin



Antipatris aka Aphek



Tiberias - Introduction



Hammath Tiberias - Synagogue



Khirbet Wadi Hamam



En Hazeva



Avdat



Mampsis



Haluza



Yotvata



Petra - Introduction



Petra - Wadi Sabra Theater



Petra - Jabal Khubthah



Petra - ez-Zantur



Petra - Urn Tomb



Petra - NEPP Site



Khirbet Tannur



Tsunamogenic Evidence

Paleoseismic Evidence

Location (with hotlink) Status Intensity Notes
al-Harif Syria possible ≥ 7
MW = 7.3-7.6
(based on 4.2 m of slip)
Sbeinati et. al. (2010) report a seismic event X which they dated to 335 AD ± 175 years at a displaced aqueduct at al-Harif, Syria (close to Masyaf, Syria).
Bet Zayda no evidence ≥ 7 Wechsler at al. (2014) did not see any evidence for this earthquake in paleoseismic trenches just north of the Sea of Galilee (aka Lake Kinneret).
Dead Sea - Seismite Types n/a n/a
Dead Sea - ICDP Core 5017-1 possible 6 Lu et al (2020) associated a turbidite in the core to the Monaxius and Plinta Quake. CalBP is reported as 1513 +/47. This works out to a date of 437 CE with a 1σ bound of 390-484 CE. Ages come from Kitagawa et al (2017). The deposit is described as a 2.7 cm. thick turbidite (MMD). Lu et al (2020) estimated local seismic intensity of VI which they converted to Peak Horizontal Ground Acceleration (PGA) of 0.09 g. Dr. Yin Lu relates that "this estimate was based on previous studies of turbidites around the world (thickness vs. MMI)" ( Moernaut et al (2014). The turbidite was identified in the depocenter composite core 5017-1 (Holes A-H).
Dead Sea - En Feshka possible 7.9-8.8 Kagan et. al. (2011) identified two seismites at En Feshka which might match with the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE.
Top Depth (cm.) Thickness (cm.) Seismite Type Modeled Age (± 1σ) Modeled Age (± 2σ)
220 2 4 462 AD +/- 54 452 AD +/- 118
228 1 4 430 AD ± 58 422 AD ± 126
Dead Sea - En Gedi possible 5.6-7 Migowski et. al. (2004) assigned a 419 CE date to 0.5 cm. thick seismite at a depth of 237 cm (2.37 m). Williams et. al.(2012) varve counted part of the same 1997 GFZ/GSI core that Migowski et. al. (2004) worked on and produced an estimate of varve count uncertainty based on distance from a well dated "anchor" earthquakes which in this case are the Josephus Quake of 31 BC and the Sabbatical Year Quake of 747/749 CE. These anchor quakes are between 329 and 394 years away from the Cyril Quake of 363 CE and/or the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE. Assuming a worst case scenario of 394 years, the 8% varve count error estimated by Williams et al (2012) constrains Migowski et. al.'s (2004) 419 CE to +/-32 years - i.e. between 387 and 451 CE. Two conclusions can be drawn.

  1. Migowski et. al.'s (2004) varve count suggests they identified a seismite caused by the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE.
  2. The Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE would not likely have masked or overprinted the Cyril Quake seismite of 363 CE indicating that the Cyril Quake did not produce a seismite in En Gedi. Simple calculations supporting this are shown below. This is consistent with Migowski et al (2004: Table 2) which did not list a 363 CE seismite being masked or overprinted by a 419 CE seismite.
Calculations

Migowski et al (2004) report the 419 CE seismite at a depth of 2.3716 m with a thickness of 0.5 cm. They report the ~175 CE seismite at a depth of 2.5562 m. A simple calculation reveals that in this part of the core, 1 cm. of sediment represents ~13 years of time. As 363 CE is 56 years earlier than 419 CE, it should be ~4 cm deeper and thus ~3.5 cm. below the bottom of the 0.5 cm. thick 419 CE seismite. It should not have been masked or overprinted.

Dead Sea - Nahal Ze 'elim possible 8.0-8.9 (ZA-1)

8.1-8.9 (ZA-2)
There has been an ongoing debate since the start of the millennium whether a seismite in Nahal Ze 'elim should be assigned to the southern Cyril Quake of 363 CE or to the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE.

Ken-Tor et al. (2001a) assigned a 4 cm. thick Type 4 seismite dated to 358-580 CE (± 2σ) and labeled as Event D in Nahal Ze 'elim (ZA-1) to the 363 CE Cyril Quake Seismite as did Williams (2004). Neither Ken-Tor et al. (2001a) nor Williams (2004) were aware at the time that the Cyril Quake was a result of two earthquakes with northern and southern epicenters; just that the damage reports were so widespread that it was doubtful that one earthquake could have produced so much destruction. Considering the possibility that textual reports overstated the damage, this cast significant uncertainty in determining which date to assign to the seismite. Williams (2004) estimated that that the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE was unlikely to produce sufficient shaking to form a seismite in Nahal Ze 'elim which is why he rejected that earthquake for Event D. At the time, he was relying on Russell (1980) whose article suggested an epicenter north of the Sea of Galilee. This may not have been a good assumption. He also noted that at the time three authors (Abou Karaki, 1987, Ben-Menahem et. al, 1981, and Galli and Galadini, 2001) had placed the epicenter of the 363 CE Cyril Quake to the south in the Araba. Other authors had estimated that the epicenter was in the north due to the many northern cities listed in Cyril's letter (Brock, 1977).

At ZA-2, Kagan et. al. (2011) assigned a 5 cm. thick intraclast breccia at a depth of 342 cm (Modeled Age ±1σ - 453 CE ± 67, ±2σ - 456 CE ± 86). to the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE. this appears to be the same seismite Ken-Tor (2001a) labeled as Event D at ZA-1. Kagan et al (2011) likely assigned a 419 CE date because it better fits with the modeled ages. Bookman (nee Ken-Tor) co-authored a paper in 2010 ( Leroy et. al., 2010) which maintained a 363 CE date for Event D.

Because Migowski et. al. (2004) had used varve counting in the En Gedi core to assign a seismite to the 419 CE earthquake rather than the 363 CE Cyril Quake, there was doubt whether the 363 CE Cyril Quake had created seismites in the Southern Dead Sea.

Because the southern Cyril Quake produced fatalities in nearby Ghor-es-Safi, Jordan (see Archeoseismic evidence for the Cyril Quake), it seems likely that the southern Cyril Quake produced a seismite in Nahal Ze 'elim however there is a significantly better radiocarbon match with the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE and thus the correct Quake assignment remains unresolved.
Araba - Introduction n/a n/a n/a
Araba - Taybeh Trench possible ≥ 7 LeFevre et al. (2018) might have seen evidence for this earthquake in the Taybeh Trench (Event E3 - Modeled Age 551 AD ± 264).
Araba - Qatar Trench possible ≥ 7 Klinger et. al. (2015) identified a seismic event (E6) in a trench near Qatar, Jordan in the Arava which they modeled between 9 BCE and 492 CE. The large spread in age caused them to consider two possible earthquakes as the cause; the Incense Road Quake between 110 CE and 114 CE and the southern Cyril Earthquake of 363 CE. They preferred the Cyril Earthquake of 363 CE based on weighing other evidence not related to their paleoseismic study and noted that further investigation was required. Although they did not consider the Monaxius and Plinta Earthquake of 419 CE as a possibility, it fits within their modeled ages.
Location (with hotlink) Status Intensity Notes
Displaced Aqueduct at al Harif, Syria

Sbeinati et. al. (2010) report a seismic event X which they dated to 335 AD ± 175 years at a displaced aqueduct at al-Harif, Syria (close to Masyaf, Syria).



Bet Zayda (aka Beteiha)

Wechsler at al. (2014) did not see any evidence for this earthquake in paleoseismic trenches just north of the Sea of Galilee (aka Lake Kinneret).



Dead Sea - Seismite Types



Dead Sea - ICDP Core 5017-1

Lu et al (2020) associated a turbidite in the core to the Monaxius and Plinta Quake. CalBP is reported as 1513 +/47. This works out to a date of 437 CE with a 1σ bound of 390-484 CE. Ages come from Kitagawa et al (2017). The deposit is described as a 2.7 cm. thick turbidite (MMD). Lu et al (2020) estimated local seismic intensity of VI which they converted to Peak Horizontal Ground Acceleration (PGA) of 0.09 g. Dr. Yin Lu relates that "this estimate was based on previous studies of turbidites around the world (thickness vs. MMI)" ( Moernaut et al (2014). The turbidite was identified in the depocenter composite core 5017-1 (Holes A-H).

See the following from Lu et al (2020b) regarding estimating intensity from turbidites:

Previous studies have revealed that the intensity threshold for triggering historic turbidites are variable in different regions and range from MMI V½ to VII½ (Howarth et al., 2014; Moernaut, 2020; Van Daele et al., 2015; Wilhelm et al., 2016). The intensity threshold constrained from the Dead Sea data (≥VI½) is situated in the middle of this range.

Previous studies in Chilean lakes have indicated that the (cumulative) thickness of historic turbidites across multiple cores correlates with seismic intensity, and can thus be used to infer paleo-intensities in this setting (Moernaut et al., 2014). However, in the case of the Dead Sea core 5017-1, there is a random relationship (a correlation factor of 0.04) between the thickness of prehistoric turbidites and seismic intensity (Figure 5a).


Dead Sea - En Feshka

Kagan et. al. (2011) identified two seismites at En Feshka which might match with the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE.

Top Depth (cm.) Thickness (cm.) Seismite Type Modeled Age (± 1σ) Modeled Age (± 2σ)
220 2 4 462 AD +/- 54 452 AD +/- 118
228 1 4 430 AD ± 58 422 AD ± 126




Dead Sea - En Gedi

Migowski et. al. (2004) assigned a 419 CE date to 0.5 cm. thick seismite at a depth of 237 cm (2.37 m). Williams et. al.(2012) varve counted part of the same 1997 GFZ/GSI core that Migowski et. al. (2004) worked on and produced an estimate of varve count uncertainty based on distance from a well dated "anchor" earthquakes which in this case are the Josephus Quake of 31 BC and the Sabbatical Year Quake of 747/749 CE. These anchor quakes are between 329 and 394 years away from the Cyril Quake of 363 CE and/or the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE. Assuming a worst case scenario of 394 years, the 8% varve count error estimated by Williams et al (2012) constrains Migowski et. al.'s (2004) 419 CE to +/-32 years - i.e. between 387 and 451 CE. Two conclusions can be drawn.

  1. Migowski et. al.'s (2004) varve count suggests they identified a seismite caused by the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE.
  2. The Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE would not likely have masked or overprinted the Cyril Quake seismite of 363 CE indicating that the Cyril Quake did not produce a seismite in En Gedi. Simple calculations supporting this are shown below. This is consistent with Migowski et al (2004: Table 2) which did not list a 363 CE seismite being masked or overprinted by a 419 CE seismite.
Calculations

Migowski et al (2004) report the 419 CE seismite at a depth of 2.3716 m with a thickness of 0.5 cm. They report the ~175 CE seismite at a depth of 2.5562 m. A simple calculation reveals that in this part of the core, 1 cm. of sediment represents ~13 years of time. As 363 CE is 56 years earlier than 419 CE, it should be ~4 cm deeper and thus ~3.5 cm. below the bottom of the 0.5 cm. thick 419 CE seismite. It should not have been masked or overprinted.





Dead Sea - Nahal Ze 'elim

There has been an ongoing debate since the start of the millennium whether a seismite in Nahal Ze 'elim should be assigned to the southern Cyril Quake of 363 CE or to the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE.

Ken-Tor et al. (2001a) assigned a 4 cm. thick Type 4 seismite dated to 358-580 CE (± 2σ) and labeled as Event D in Nahal Ze 'elim (ZA-1) to the 363 CE Cyril Quake Seismite as did Williams (2004). Neither Ken-Tor et al. (2001a) nor Williams (2004) were aware at the time that the Cyril Quake was a result of two earthquakes with northern and southern epicenters; just that the damage reports were so widespread that it was doubtful that one earthquake could have produced so much destruction. Considering the possibility that textual reports overstated the damage, this cast significant uncertainty in determining which date to assign to the seismite. Williams (2004) estimated that that the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE was unlikely to produce sufficient shaking to form a seismite in Nahal Ze 'elim which is why he rejected that earthquake for Event D. At the time, he was relying on Russell (1980) whose article suggested an epicenter north of the Sea of Galilee. This may not have been a good assumption. He also noted that at the time three authors (Abou Karaki, 1987, Ben-Menahem et. al, 1981, and Galli and Galadini, 2001) had placed the epicenter of the 363 CE Cyril Quake to the south in the Araba. Other authors had estimated that the epicenter was in the north due to the many northern cities listed in Cyril's letter (Brock, 1977).

At ZA-2, Kagan et. al. (2011) assigned a 5 cm. thick intraclast breccia at a depth of 342 cm (Modeled Age ±1σ - 453 CE ± 67, ±2σ - 456 CE ± 86). to the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE. this appears to be the same seismite Ken-Tor (2001a) labeled as Event D at ZA-1. Kagan et al (2011) likely assigned a 419 CE date because it better fits with the modeled ages. Bookman (nee Ken-Tor) co-authored a paper in 2010 ( Leroy et. al., 2010) which maintained a 363 CE date for Event D.

Because Migowski et. al. (2004) had used varve counting in the En Gedi core to assign a seismite to the 419 CE earthquake rather than the 363 CE Cyril Quake, there was doubt whether the 363 CE Cyril Quake had created seismites in the Southern Dead Sea.

Now, however, armed with the knowledge that the Cyril Quakes had northern and southern epicenters and that the southern Cyril Quake produced fatalities in nearby Ghor-es-Safi, Jordan (see Archeoseismic evidence for the Cyril Quake), it can more confidently be stated that the southern Cyril Quake likely did produce a seismite in Nahal Ze 'elim. However, the mystery of Kagan et. al.'s (2011) radiocarbon match with the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE still remains.

Because Migowski et. al. (2004) had used varve counting in the En Gedi core to assign a seismite to the 419 CE earthquake rather than the 363 CE Cyril Quake, there was doubt whether the 363 CE Cyril Quake had created seismites in the Southern Dead Sea.

Because the southern Cyril Quake produced fatalities in nearby Ghor-es-Safi, Jordan (see Archeoseismic evidence for the Cyril Quake), it seems likely that the southern Cyril Quake produced a seismite in Nahal Ze 'elim however there is a significantly better radiocarbon match with the Monaxius and Plinta Quake of 419 CE and thus the correct Quake assignment remains unresolved.



Araba - Introduction



Araba - Taybeh Trench

LeFevre et al. (2018) might have seen evidence for this earthquake in the Taybeh Trench (Event E3 - Modeled Age 551 AD ± 264).



Araba - Qatar Trench

Klinger et. al. (2015) identified a seismic event (E6) in a trench near Qatar, Jordan in the Arava which they modeled between 9 BCE and 492 CE. The large spread in age caused them to consider two possible earthquakes as the cause; the Incense Road Quake between 110 CE and 114 CE and the southern Cyril Earthquake of 363 CE. They preferred the Cyril Earthquake of 363 CE based on weighing other evidence not related to their paleoseismic study and noted that further investigation was required. Although they did not consider the Monaxius and Plinta Earthquake of 419 CE as a possibility, it fits within their modeled ages.



Notes

Ambraseys (2009)

AD 418 Palestine

A damaging earthquake in Palestine ruined many towns and villages, which are not given by name, and in Jerusalem the earthquake must have been strongly felt, insofar as it is said that the ensuing terror prompted many non-Christians to be baptised.

The villages of Khirbet Shema’ and Khorazin, near Gush Halav in northern Galilee, may have been affected by this earthquake, but the evidence is very tenuous.

Marcellinus Comes places this event during the consulships of Monaxius and Plinta, in the second indiction, AD 419, whereas Idatius claims that ‘the holy places of Jerusalem as well as others were shaken by a most terrible earthquake’ during the papacy of St Zosimus (March 417 to December 418).

In fact the earthquake happened in the second indiction during the consulship of Monaxius and Plinta (AD 419; Cons. Const. i. 240), and it is mentioned after the solar eclipse (Philostorg. xii. 8–9) of 19 July 418 (Schove and Fletcher 1987, 72–73, 290) at about the time of the appearance of fire in the sky (Philostorg. xii. 8–9), which is probably an allusion to the comet of September 418 (Schove and Fletcher 1987, 72–73, 290). These chronological elements suggest a date late in AD 418, probably in September or October.

Saint Augustine, who was contemporary with the event, claims that ‘great cities collapsed’, although it is possible that this is poetic licence because it appears in the course of a sermon and is recorded in no other extant source. He speaks of terror in Jerusalem, but does not mention any damage.

Marcellinus’s unique assertion that towns and villages in Palestine collapsed prompts Russell to associate with this earthquake the destruction of the Northern Galilean villages of Khirbet Shema’ and Khorazin (Russell 1981, 14ff.). While this statement of Marcellinus is certainly unusual, since most chroniclers are concerned only with major towns or districts, it is hardly surprising that villages were damaged, for this earthquake affected an entire area. Nevertheless, in the fourth excavated stratum at Khirbet Shema’, which contained evidence that the synagogue had collapsed, the latest coins found dated from AD 408 (Meyers et al. 1976, 6, 37ff., 81, 112, 258), while around the remains of the synagogue at Khorazin the latest coins found dated from the early fifth century AD, although it is possible that the Khorazin synagogue collapsed much earlier (Yeivin 1973, 27). Archaeological evidence (Russell 1985) for the effects of the earthquake in Palestine is in need of authentication.

Notes

‘Ind. 2, consulships of Monaxius and Plintas. Many towns and villages in Palestine collapsed in an earthquake.’ (Marc. Com. 924).


‘During the above episcopacy, the holy places of Jerusalem as well as others were shaken by a most terrible earthquake, by which the writings of the same bishop [Zosimus, bishop of Rome] were revealed.’ (Idat. 24/878).


‘Great earthquakes are reported in the East – some great cities suddenly collapsed. Jews, pagans and catachumens were terrified in Jerusalem, and were baptised. The sign of Christ appeared on the clothes of the baptized Jews.’ (Aug. Serm. xix. 6/136).


References

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

Guidoboni et al (1994)

(171) 419 Jerusalem, •Palestine sources

literature catalogues In his Sermons, Augustine mentions various earthquakes in Palestine as a result of which thousands of people were baptised:
"Great earthquakes are reported from the East. Some great cities suddenly collapsed in ruins. Jews, pagans and catechumens in Jerusalem were terrified, and all were baptised. It is said that perhaps as many as seven thousand people were baptised. The sign of Christ appeared on the clothes of baptised Jews. These things were told in a thoroughly reliable report by our brothers in the faith".
Terrae motus magni de orientalibus nuntiantur. Nonnullae magnae repentinis conlapsae sunt civitates. Territi apud Hierosolvmam qui inerant iudaei, pagani, catechumini, omnes sunt baptizati. Dicuntur fortasse baptizati septem millia hominum. Signum Christi in vestibus iudaeorum baptizatorum apparuit. Relatu fratrum fidelium constantissimo ista nuntiantur.
According to Marcellinus:
"Many towns and villages in Palestine were reduced to ruins in an earthquake".
Multae Palaestinae civitates villaeque terrae motu conlapsae.
Hydatius reports:
"During the episcopacy mentioned above, the Holy Places of Jerusalem and other areas were shaken by a very severe earthquake".
Durante episcopo quo supra, gravissimo terrae motu sancta in Hierosolymis loca quassantur et cetera.
The manuscripts place Hydatius' entry under the year 418, but as A.Tranoy, the editor of the text, has shown, the scribe seems to have confused a mention of bishop John of Jerusalem (who was already dead by this time) with one of bishop Eulalius of Rome, who is referred to in paragraph 66 of the Chronicle. Tranoy dates the earthquake to 419 on the basis of evidence from Marcellinus and the Consularia Constantinopolitana. For archaeologists' identification of sites where the earthquake struck, see Russell (1985, pp.42-3). References

Guidoboni, E., et al. (1994). Catalogue of Ancient Earthquakes in the Mediterranean Area up to the 10th Century. Rome, Istituto nazionale di geofisica.

Paleoclimate - Droughts

References