Russell (1985) cited Negev (1971:166) as evidence for earthquake destruction at Mamphis in the early second century CE. Negev (1971) describes extensive building activity at Mamphis during this period that obliterated much of the earlier, smaller-scale infrastructure, but he does not report a destruction layer or explicitly attribute the rebuilding to an earthquake. Drawing on the results of Erickson-Gini (1999) and Erickson-Gini (2001), Korzhenkov and Erickson-Gini (2003) questioned Russell’s interpretation, noting that more recent research indicates continued occupation at Mamphis throughout the first and second centuries CE. Such occupational continuity suggests that any seismic damage, if present, was limited rather than catastrophic. The rebuilding may have been a response to multiple stimuli, including possible seismic damage associated with an early second-century CE earthquake, or to broader administrative and urban changes occurring in the lead-up to, or aftermath of, the Roman annexation of Nabataea (106 CE).