6th century CE Coastal Uplift
Morhange et al. (2006b:91)
reported that tectonic uplift affected the Lebanese coast during
the 6th century CE (Pirazzoli 2005, Morhange et al., submitted).
Subsequent geomorphological and marine-geophysical studies have
refined this picture, revealing significant evidence for
co-seismic coastal deformation linked to the major
551 CE Beirut earthquake.
Elias et al. (2007) documented
uplifted marine benches along the Lebanese coastline between
Sarafand and Tripolis, including the area near
Tabarja (~20 km northeast of Beirut). Their
investigation showed that the lowest emergent bench (B1) was
uplifted by approximately 80 cm in the 6th century CE. Offshore
geophysical surveys revealed fresh west-facing fault scarps
cutting across the otherwise smooth seafloor, which they linked
to seismic slip on the newly identified offshore
Mount Lebanon Thrust Fault system
. Based on the extent of faulting, they
inferred that ~100–150 km of the thrust ruptured in 551 CE,
producing an earthquake with a moment magnitude
(Mw) of
approximately 7.5.
The chronology of coastal uplift was established by
Morhange et al. (2006a), who
dated fossil
vermetids on the uplifted
benches to establish when they were last situated in the
subtidal zone (close to mean sea level). These data, when
combined with the structural evidence, strongly support
attributing the uplift of ~80 ± 30 cm to the 551 CE earthquake.
Despite clear geological evidence for significant co-seismic
uplift along the central Lebanese coastline in the 6th century CE
and multiple textual reports of a tsunami
associated with the
551 CE Beirut earthquake,
sedimentological investigations at Byblos have revealed no trace
of tsunami-related deposits.
Carayon et al. (2011), who
examined six sediment cores from Byblos — two taken from the
northern harbor and four from the bay of El-Skhiny — as part of a
broader reconstruction of the harbor’s geomorphic evolution,
reported no evidence of tsunami-generated layers or sedimentary
disturbances attributable to the 6th century CE seismic event.
It is important to note, however, that the publication did not
include core profile data, limiting the ability to independently
verify the absence of tsunami deposits.