Image	Description	Source
Figure 4 The age-depth model of the Ein Gedi profile is derived from radiocarbon dating (black bars indicate 26 ranges) and varve-counting between 0.78 and 3.03 m. The floating annual chronology is anchored by a systematic comparison and correlation of deformed sediment sequences (grey bars) to a succession of historical strong earthquakes. Migowski et al (2004)	Floating Varve Chronology and Radiocarbon dates	Migowski et al (2004)
Figure 4 The age-depth model of the Ein Gedi profile is derived from radiocarbon dating (black bars indicate 26 ranges) and varve-counting between 0.78 and 3.03 m. The floating annual chronology is anchored by a systematic comparison and correlation of deformed sediment sequences (grey bars) to a succession of historical strong earthquakes. Migowski et al (2004)	Floating Varve Chronology and Radiocarbon dates -large	Migowski et al (2004)
Fig. 7.5 (Abb. 7.5) (translated by Google & Williams) The age-depth model of the Ein Gedi profile is made possible by a shift of up to 350 years. x-axis - Age [yrs cal BP] y-axis - Sediment Depth [m] German Das Alters-Tiefen-Modell des Ein Gedi-Profils wird durch die Zuordnung zu den Erdbeben um bis zu 350 Jahre verschoben. Migowski (2001)	Migowski's Date shift	Migowski (2001)
Figure 5 Varve counting and thin section analysis results of core DSEn (2.10–4.35 m composite depth) Tracks from left to right varve thickness including intraclast breccias [in red] (‘seismites’, following Agnon et al., 2006) thickness of coarse and mixed detrital layers; fine light detrital laminae thickness (grey bars) and cloudily distributed occurrences of the same material within aragonite laminae (dry season, black diamonds) and within common detrital layers (rainy season, blue diamonds) K/Si ratio derived from µ-XRF Lithological units correspond to those in Figure 4. For a legend of the core lithology, see Figure 2. Neugebauer at al (2015)	Recounted Age-depth plot	Neugebauer at al (2015)
Figure 5 Varve counting and thin section analysis results of core DSEn (2.10–4.35 m composite depth) Tracks from left to right varve thickness including intraclast breccias [in red] (‘seismites’, following Agnon et al., 2006) thickness of coarse and mixed detrital layers; fine light detrital laminae thickness (grey bars) and cloudily distributed occurrences of the same material within aragonite laminae (dry season, black diamonds) and within common detrital layers (rainy season, blue diamonds) K/Si ratio derived from µ-XRF Lithological units correspond to those in Figure 4. For a legend of the core lithology, see Figure 2. Neugebauer at al (2015)	Recounted Age-depth plot - large	Neugebauer at al (2015)
Figure 2 DSEn and 5017-1 sediment profiles, magnetic susceptibility data (Mag. Sus.) and modelled 14C age–depth plots with 68.2% (dark grey; ~1σ error) and 95.4% (light grey; ~2σ error) confidence intervals note that for 5017-1, the lowermost age included in the model (4673 ± 85 cal. yr BP at 32.36 m; Table 1) is not shown here for better readability of the figure highlighted intervals ~3500–3300 cal. yr BP ~3000–2400 cal. yr BP ML = marker layer LU = lithological units (I–V) as in Figure 4. Neugebauer at al (2015)	Correlated Age-depth plots of DSEn and ICDP 5017-1	Neugebauer at al (2015)
Figure 6 (a) Comparison of the Dead Sea data to other records difference in the total solar irradiance ΔTSI from the year 1986, 1365.57 W/m2 (Steinhilber et al., 2009) clay layer frequency record from the Black Sea (solid line - core GeoB7622, dashed line - core GeoB7625, thick line - 3-point moving average) - Lamy et al., 2006 Dead Sea lake-level reconstruction based on core DSEn (dark blue line - Migowski et al. (2006), light blue line - this study Dead Sea K/Si ratio from µ-XRF element scanning (this study) Dead Sea coarse and mixed detrital layer thickness (this study) Soreq Cave δ18O speleothem record (Bar-Matthews et al., 2003) showing only very minor changes over the entire period investigated here Red Sea terrigeneous sand accumulation rate (core GeoB5804-1, thick line - 5-point moving average) - Lamy et al., 2006 Red Sea stable oxygen isotope difference Δδ18O between planktic and epibenthic foraminifera (core GeoB5804-1, thick line - 5-point moving average) - Lamy et al., 2006 Vertical bars indicate the two dry periods detected in this study AO/NAO: Arctic Oscillation/North Atlantic Oscillation 4. and 5. from core DSEn and on radiocarbon-based age scale (b) Inferred humidity changes in the eastern Mediterranean during the two dry periods at the Dead Sea, discussed here. Neugebauer at al (2015)	Comparison of paleoclimate proxies from DSEn to other sites	Neugebauer at al (2015)
Supplementary Figure S1 Correlation of cores DSEn and 5017-1 by radiocarbon ages, a marker layer (ML) and a characteristic succession of gypsum deposits. Neugebauer at al (2015)	Core correlation DSEn to ICDP 5017-1	Neugebauer at al (2015)
Supplementary Figure S1 Correlation of cores DSEn and 5017-1 by radiocarbon ages, a marker layer (ML) and a characteristic succession of gypsum deposits. Neugebauer at al (2015)	Core correlation DSEn to ICDP 5017-1 -big	Neugebauer at al (2015)
Figure 5 Interpreted log of Ein Gedi core thin-section A3-3-2 (composite core depth 2715–2755 mm) and overlapping thin-section A3-3-3 (composite core depth 2737–2833 mm). As a result of thin-section microstratigraphy and varve quality determination, a composite varve chronology is shown in the central column. Williams et. al. (2011)	Thin Section of Jerusalem Quake showing varve counts shallow section	Williams et. al. (2012)
Figure 6 Interpreted log of Ein Gedi core (for explanation see Figure 5) Williams et. al. (2011)	Thin Section of Jerusalem Quake showing varve counts deep section	Williams et. al. (2012)
Figure 5 Interpreted log of Ein Gedi core thin-section A3-3-2 (composite core depth 2715–2755 mm) and overlapping thin-section A3-3-3 (composite core depth 2737–2833 mm). As a result of thin-section microstratigraphy and varve quality determination, a composite varve chronology is shown in the central column. Williams et. al. (2011)	Thin Section of Jerusalem Quake showing varve counts shallow section - big	Williams et. al. (2012)
Figure 6 Interpreted log of Ein Gedi core (for explanation see Figure 5) Williams et. al. (2011)	Thin Section of Jerusalem Quake showing varve counts deep section - big	Williams et. al. (2012)
Table 2a Deformed sequences of the Ein Gedi site and their correlation with earthquakes Migowski et al (2004)	Table 2a - Seismite Table	Migowski et al (2004)
Table 2b Deformed sequences of the Ein Gedi site and their correlation with earthquakes Migowski et al (2004)	Table 2b - Seismite Table	Migowski et al (2004)
Figure 7 Recurrence intervals and cumulative number of breccias in time. Ein Feshkha (EFE) Ein Gedi (EG) Zeelim (ZA1 and ZA2) Diamonds represent breccias circled diamonds are the IBS (intrabasin seismites) Horizontal gray bars indicate periods of seismic quiescence (left) the earlier period is recorded at EG and ZA, and (right) the younger quiescence period is recorded at all three sites. Horizontal lines connect IBS events at the three sites. Kagan et al (2011)	Figure 7 Recurrence intervals and cumulative number of breccias in time	Kagan et al (2011)

The En Gedi Core (DsEn) suffered from a limited amount of dateable material and the radiocarbon dates for the core are insufficiently sampled in depth to produce an age-depth model that is sufficiently reliable for detailed historical earthquake work in the Dead Sea. Migowski (2001) counted laminae in the core to create a floating varve chronology for depths between 0.78 and 3.02 m which was eventually translated into
a year by year chronology from 140 BCE to 1458 CE . The seismites in the "counted interval" were compared to dates in Earthquake Catalogs [Amiran et al (1994), Guidoboni et al (1994), Ben-Menahem (1991), and Russell (1985)]. Relatively minor additional input was also derived from other studies in the region which likely relied on similar catalogs. Some of these catalogs contain errors and a critical examination of where the dates and locations of historical earthquakes reported in these catalogs came from was not undertaken. Migowski (2001) shifted the dates from the under-sampled radiocarbon derived age-depth model to make the floating varve chronology in the "counted interval" match dates from the earthquake catalogs. Without the shift, the dates did not match. This shift was shown in Migowski (2001)'s dissertation and mostly varies from ~200-~300 years. The "counted interval" dates are ~200-~300 years younger than the radiocarbon dates. Some of Migowski's shift was justified. Ken-Tor et al (2001) estimated ~40 years for plant remains to die (and start the radiocarbon clock) and reach final deposition in Nahal Ze'elim. This could be a bit longer in the deep water En Gedi site but 5 to 7.5 times longer (200-300 years) seems excessive. Although uncritical use of Earthquake catalogs by Migowski (2001) and Migowski et al (2004) led to a number of incorrectly dated seismites , the major "anchor" earthquakes (e.g. 31 BC, 1212 CE, 1293 CE) seem to be correct.

Neugebauer (2015) and Neugebauer at al (2015) recounted laminae from 2.1 - 4.35 meters in the En Gedi Core (DsEn) while also making a stratigraphic correlation to ICDP Core 5017-1. Nine ¹⁴C dates were used from 1.58 - 6.12 m but samples KIA9123 (inside the Late Bronze Beach Ridge) and KIA1160 (the 1st sample below the Late Bronze Beach Ridge) were discarded as outliers. These two samples gave dates approximately 400 years older than what was expected for the Late Bronze Age Beach Ridge - a date which is fairly well constrained from other studies in the Dead Sea. This left 7 samples distributed over ~4.5 m - an average of 1 sample every 0.65 meters - not a lot. Their DSEn varve count, anchored to an age-depth model derived from these 7 samples, produced an average shift of ~300 years compared to Migowski et al (2004)'s chronology (i.e. it is ~300 years older). Although two well dated earthquakes were available to use as time markers (the Josephus Quake of 31 BCE and the Amos Quake(s) of ~750 BCE), they chose not to use earthquakes as chronological anchors (Ina Neugebauer personal communication, 2015). Instead, they used the Late Bronze Age Beach Ridge as evidenced by discarding the two radiocarbon samples. Using the Beach Ridge as a chronological anchor was likely a good decision as the Late Bronze Age Beach ridge is fairly well dated. Their newly counted chronology produced a paleoclimate reconstruction that aligned fairly well with data from other locations . Although paleoclimate proxies are not necessarily synchronous and suffer from greater chronological uncertainty than, for example, well dated earthquakes, the problem with their recount for our purposes does not lie with their relatively good fit to other site's paleoclimate proxies. That is probably approximately correct. The problem is they calibrated their count to the bottom of their counted interval (Late Bronze Age Beach Ridge) but did not have a calibration marker for the top.

In the En Gedi core (DSEn), the Late Bronze Age Beach Ridge (Unit II of Neugebauer et al, 2015) is found from depths 4.35 to 4.55 m. It's top coincides with the bottom of the recounted interval - far away from the overlap (2.1 - 3.02 m) with Migowski's counted interval. Thus, if there were any problems with the recounted dates (e.g. hiatuses or accumulating systemic errors) as one moved to the top of the recounted interval, they would go unnoticed. Varve counts in the overlapped interval were fairly similar - 583 according to Migowski (2001) vs. 518 according to Neugebauer et al (2015). There wasn't a major discrepancy in terms of varve count interpretation. But, the lack of a calibration point near the top of the recounted interval leaves one wondering if the recounted dates in the overlap are accurate and why Migowski's pre-shifted chronology doesn't correlate well with the reliable parts of the earthquake record.

Neugebauer at al (2015:5) counted 1351 varves with an uncertainty of 7.5% (Neugebauer at al, 2015:8). That leads to an uncertainty of ~100 varves by the time one gets to the top of the recounted interval away from the Late Bronze Age Beach Ridge calibration point. The Beach Ridge itself likely has an uncertainty of +/- 75 years. Add the two together and the uncertainty approaches Migowski's shift. In addition, roughly 15% of the recounted interval went through intraclast breccias (seismites) where the varves were uncountable and the varve count was interpolated with a questionable multiplication factor of 1.61 applied to the interpolated varve count (Neugebauer at al, 2015:5). Migowski et al (2004) also interpolated through the intraclast breccias however in her case she used the interpolation to line up with events out of the Earthquake catalogs.

Unfortunately, Neugebauer at al (2015)'s study did not resolve the uncertainties associated with Migowski's varve counts. Both studies lack a sufficiently robust calibration over the entire depth interval. Dead Sea laminae are difficult to count. They are not nearly as "well-behaved" as they are in the older Lisan formation or in Glacial varves. This was illustrated by Lopez-Merino et al (2016). Their study, which used seasonal palynology to ground truth varve counts, showed that between 1 and 5 laminae couplets (ie varves) could be deposited in a year . This study, undertaken in Nahal Ze'elim, represents a worst case scenario. It is essentially impossible to count varves in Nahal Ze 'elim because the site receives too much fluvial deposition which muddies up the varve count (pun intended) compared to the deeper water site of En Gedi. While the conclusions from Lopez-Merino et al (2016) cannot be generalized to the entire Dead Sea, it does point out that Holocene Dead Sea varve counts need to be calibrated to be used in Historical Earthquake studies. The calibration can come through anchor events such as strong earthquakes and/or clearly defined and dated paleoclimate events, seasonal palynology work (determining the season each laminae was deposited in), and/or dense radiocarbon dating - much denser than what is available from the En Gedi core (DESn). There may also be geochemical ways to calibrate varve counts.

In 2018, Jefferson Williams collected ~55 samples of dateable material from an erosional gully in En Gedi (aka the En Gedi Trench) located ~40 m from where the En Gedi Core (DsEn) was taken in 1997 . This erosional gully was not present when the En Gedi core was taken. It developed afterwards due to the steady drop in the level of the Dead Sea which has lowered base levels and creates continually deeper erosional features on the lake margins. Due to cost, these samples have not yet been dated but lab analysis of this material should resolve dating ambiguities in En Gedi. The samples are well distributed in depth (68 - 303 cm. deep) and can be viewed here in the Outcrop Library. Radiocarbon from the En Gedi Core can be viewed here. In the Google sheets presented on the radiocarbon page for the En Gedi Core, Neugebauer's radiocarbon samples and a reconciliation table can be viewed by clicking on the tab labeled Nueg15.

Core Depths were measured from surface. The core was taken about a meter above the Dead Sea level which was ~ -411 m in 1997. In 2011, Jefferson Williams measured the elevation of the surface where the En Gedi Core (DSEn) was taken using his GPS. The recorded elevation was -411 m however GPS is less accurate measuring elevation than it is for Lat. and Long. so this depth measurement should be considered approximate.

Image	Description	Image	Description	Image	Description	Image	Description
Composite Core Depths 19-397 cm. Sections from top to bottom - C1, A2, A3, and A4 GFZ/GSI	Composite Core Sections C1, A2, A3, A4 19-397 cm.	Litholog and Composite Core Depths 47-325 cm. Litholog from Migowski (2001)	Litholog and Composite Core 47-325 cm.	Litholog of Entire Core Depths -30-1022 cm. (-0.3-10.22 m) Migowski (2001)	Litholog Entire Core -30 cm.-1022 cm.	Litholog Legend Migowski (2001)	Litholog Legend
Core DSEn Section C1 19-114 cm. GFZ/GSI	Section C1 19-114 cm.	Core DSEn Section A2 114-196 cm. GFZ/GSI	Section A2 114-196 cm.	Core DSEn Section A3 200-296 cm. GFZ/GSI	Section A3 200-296 cm.	Core DSEn Section A4 300-397 cm. GFZ/GSI	Section A4 300-397 cm.
Figure 9 Photo of breccia layer from the Ein Gedi drill core that matches the historical earthquake of 1458 A.D. (Migowski et al., 2004). Agnon et al (2006)	1458 CE Quake 65-80 cm.	Figure 10 Photo of a section of the Ein Gedi core containing three breccia layers with the respective dates of earthquakes. The 1202 A.D. event is barely determined because the 1212 event almost obliterated the 10-yr-old breccia. Nonetheless, a few laminae (arrow) can be resolved above event horizon 1202 A.D. Migowski et al. (2004) have inferred five unresolved events by correlation of the lamina-counting record of breccia layers with the historical record of destructive earthquakes. Agnon et al (2006)	1202, 1212, and 1293 CE Quakes 90-115 cm.	Figure 9 Photo of breccia layer from the Ein Gedi drill core that matches the historical earthquake of 1033 A.D. (Migowski et al., 2004). Agnon et al (2006)	1033 CE Quake 131-143 cm.
Thin Section A3_3_1a Flatbed Scan 259.7-269.9 cm. 2597-2699 mm.	Thin Section A3_3_1a 259.7-269.9 cm.	Thin Section A3_3_2 2.5x Magnification Polarized 271.5-273.7 cm. 2715-2737 mm.	Thin Section A3_3_2 271.5-273.7 cm.	Thin Section A3_3_3 2.5x Magnification Polarized 273.5-283.5 cm. 2735-2835 mm.	Thin Section A3_3_3 273.5-283.5 cm.	Thin Section A3_4_1 Flatbed Scan 283.3-293.4 cm. 2833-2934 mm.	Thin Section A3_4_1 283.3-293.4 cm.
SEM Image 250x Magnification Sample EG13 Very bottom of Dark Clastic layer above Jerusalem Quake 5-7 mm. Sample taken in En Gedi Trench by Jefferson Williams	SEM Image 250x Magnification Sample EG13 from En Gedi Trench	Photo showing location of 1997 GFZ/GSI core at En Gedi Spa (DSEn) Photo taken by Jefferson Williams in 2010	Photo showing location of 1997 GFZ/GSI core at En Gedi Spa (DSEn) Lat = 31° 25.176' N Long = 35° 23.136' E Inaccurate Elevation

Description	Flight Date	Pilot	Processing	Downloadable Link
En Gedi Trench (includes location of 1997 GSI GFZ Core)	11 Feb. 2023	Jefferson Williams	ODM - no GCPs	Right Click to download. Then unzip

Description	Scan Date	Scanned with	Scanned by	Processing	Format	Downloadable Link
En Gedi Trench - Entire Section	23 Feb. 2023	iPhone 14 Pro	Jefferson Williams	Scaniverse - Photogrammetry	.las	Right Click to download
En Gedi Trench - Top East	23 Feb. 2023	iPhone 14 Pro	Jefferson Williams	Scaniverse - Photogrammetry	.las	Right Click to download
En Gedi Trench - Bottom East	23 Feb. 2023	iPhone 14 Pro	Jefferson Williams	Scaniverse - Photogrammetry	.las	Right Click to download
En Gedi Trench - Top of Middle	23 Feb. 2023	iPhone 14 Pro	Jefferson Williams	Scaniverse - Photogrammetry	.las	Right Click to download
En Gedi Trench - Bottom of Middle	23 Feb. 2023	iPhone 14 Pro	Jefferson Williams	Scaniverse - Photogrammetry	.las	Right Click to download
En Gedi Trench - Top of Bottom Middle	23 Feb. 2023	iPhone 14 Pro	Jefferson Williams	Scaniverse - Photogrammetry	.las	Right Click to download
En Gedi Trench - Middle of Bottom Middle	23 Feb. 2023	iPhone 14 Pro	Jefferson Williams	Scaniverse - Photogrammetry	.las	Right Click to download
En Gedi Trench - Bottom of Bottom Middle	23 Feb. 2023	iPhone 14 Pro	Jefferson Williams	Scaniverse - Photogrammetry	.las	Right Click to download
En Gedi Trench - Top West	23 Feb. 2023	iPhone 14 Pro	Jefferson Williams	Scaniverse - Photogrammetry	.las	Right Click to download
En Gedi Trench - Bottom West	23 Feb. 2023	iPhone 14 Pro	Jefferson Williams	Scaniverse - Photogrammetry	.las	Right Click to download

Agnon, A., et al. (2006). "Intraclast breccias in laminated sequences reviewed: Recorders of paleo-earthquakes." Geological Society of America Special Papers 401: 195-214.

Kagan, E., et al. (2011). "Intrabasin paleoearthquake and quiescence correlation of the late Holocene Dead Sea." Journal of Geophysical Research 116(B4): B04311.

Kagan, E., et al. (2011). "Correction to “Intrabasin paleoearthquake and quiescence correlation of the late Holocene Dead Sea”." Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 116(B11): B11305.

Kagan, E. J. (2011). Multi Site Quaternary Paleoseismology Along the Dead Sea Rift: Independent Recording by Lake and Cave Sediments, PhD. Diss. Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

López-Merino, L., et al. (2016). "Using palynology to re-assess the Dead Sea laminated sediments – Indeed varves?" Quaternary Science Reviews 140: 49-66.

Migowski, C., et al. (2004). "Recurrence pattern of Holocene earthquakes along the Dead Sea transform revealed by varve-counting and radiocarbon dating of lacustrine sediments." Earth and Planetary Science Letters 222(1): 301-314.

Migowski, C. (2001). Untersuchungen laminierter holozäner Sedimente aus dem Toten Meer: Rekonstruktionen von Paläoklima und -seismizität.

Neugebauer, I., et al. (2015). "Evidences for centennial dry periods at ~3300 and ~2800 cal. yr BP from micro-facies analyses of the Dead Sea sediments." The Holocene.

Neugebauer, I. (2015). Reconstructing climate from the Dead Sea sediment record using high-resolution micro-facies analyses, Universität Potsdam. PhD.

Neugebauer, I., et al. (2014). "Lithology of the long sediment record recovered by the ICDP Dead Sea Deep Drilling Project (DSDDP)." Quaternary Science Reviews 102(0): 149-165.

Williams, J. B., et al. (2011). "An early first-century earthquake in the Dead Sea." International Geology Review 54(10): 1219-1228.