Jones (2021) re-evaluates earthquake attributions that have been linked to the Urn Tomb area at Petra, arguing that a key chronological pillar—al-Zantur I Spätromisch II ceramics—should date at least a century later than the traditional 363–419 CE range. If this revised dating is correct, it weakens the case for assigning destruction at ez-Zantur and other Petra contexts to the 419 CE Monaxius and Plinta Quake, including a structure outside the Urn Tomb (House II) and Structure I in the NEPP area. On this basis, Jones suggests that a later event is more likely, specifically a late-6th-century CE earthquake such as the Inscription At Areopolis Quake. Within the Urn Tomb complex, earlier interpretations had proposed earthquake destruction in multiple loci, including damage attributed to a 363 event in a cave below the tomb and in House II. House II was then partly rebuilt, and by the 6th century it was reportedly being “used as a quarry” (Zeitler 1993:256–257, as discussed by Jones 2021). Kolb’s proposal of a second destruction in 419 relied largely on analogy with al-Zantur I, but Jones notes that the archaeological evidence for House II cannot be independently evaluated because only a preliminary report has appeared. Jones further raises an alternative historical explanation for a 5th-century shift in House II’s use: it may relate to the modification of the Urn Tomb for use as a church in 446 (Bikai 2002:271, as summarized by Jones 2021), rather than requiring a discrete 419 earthquake destruction horizon.