Open this page in a new tab

Nahal Ze'elim

Aerial shot of Nahal Ze'elim from the east Aerial shot of Nahal Ze'elim from the east

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Panorama from Drone Photos by Jefferson Williams 11 Feb. 2023


Maps, Aerial Views, and Other Material
Maps and Aerial Views

Normal Size

  • Map of Gullies where Revital Bookman did her work in ZA-1
  • Nahal Ze'elim outcrop areas in Google Earth
  • Nahal Ze'elim outcrop area on govmap.gov.il
  • Aerial View of Nahal Ze'elim outcrop area by Jefferson Williams
  • DSW Site Map           

Magnified

  • Map of Gullies where Revital Bookman did her work in ZA-1
  • Aerial View of Nahal Ze'elim outcrop area by Jefferson Williams
  • DSW Site Map           

ZA-1

Lithosection

Lithosection with Added Dates - Ken-Tor et al. (2001a)

Figure 2

The lithology and chronology of a composite section exposed in Ze'elim Plain. The section is described from two outcrops exposed in different gullies 300 m apart. The correlation between the outcrops is based on the sedimentary sequence, laminae counting, and 14C dates. Ages presented in 14C years B.P. Deformed units (mixed layers and liquefied sands) are marked by capital letters.

slight modification by Williams

Ken-Tor et al. (2001a)


Lithosection (large size) - Ken-Tor et al. (2001a)

Figure 2

The lithology and chronology of a composite section exposed in Ze'elim Plain. The section is described from two outcrops exposed in different gullies 300 m apart. The correlation between the outcrops is based on the sedimentary sequence, laminae counting, and 14C dates. Ages presented in 14C years B.P. Deformed units (mixed layers and liquefied sands) are marked by capital letters.

Ken-Tor et al. (2001a)


López-Merino et al. (2016)

Figure 1d

Sedimentary scheme of the Ze'elim outcrop profile and radiocarbon chronology (modified from Bookman (Ken-Tor) et al., 2004). ZA11B2 sediment block represent the late 19th e early 20th centuries high-stand. ZA11B3R, ZA11B4L and ZA11B5L sediment blocks represent the Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand. Aragonite crusts were deposited in a coastal to terrestrial environment, while the aragonite laminae (discussed in this study) were deposited in a lacustrine environment. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)


Leroy et al. (2010)

Figure 2

The lithology and chronology of the section exposed at the Ze'elim site. Ages presented in 14C yr BP. Marked are the seismites dated to the 31 BC and AD 363 earthquakes. Calibrated dates of the seismites in Ken-Tor et al. (2001a, b).

click on image to open in a new tab

Leroy et al. (2010)


Correlated lithosections

Correlated Trench Logs used to produce composite ZA-1 litholog

The final lithosection of Bookman (nee Ken-Tor) is a composite lithologs derived from multiple sites as far as, I think, 300 meters apart. ZA-1 refers to the location where a large part of the composite lithosection was derived. More landward gullies were used to capture the most recent earthquakes - Events G (1834) and H (1927). Bookman referred to site ZA-1 as site 2.

Revital Bookman (nee Ken-Tor)


Age-Depth Plots, etc.

Agnon et al (2006)

Figure 8

A modified age model for Ze'elim section studied in outcrop (Ken-Tor et al., 2001a) and drill core (Migowski et al., 2004). A-H denote events discussed in the text. The present model was constrained by two rules

(1) each event horizon (top of each intraclast breccia) matches a historical earthquake of notice

(2) each continuous deposition segment shows a uniform deposition rate.

Two outcomes support the model: Two of the breccia layers match pairs of earthquakes (64-31 B.C.; 1202-1210 A.D.) such that the earlier event horizon is within the breccia layer and the later event matches the top. With these assignments for the event horizons, the model gives a uniform rate of sedimentation of 0.5 cm/yr during the three periods separated by hiatuses.

Agnon et al (2006)


Ken-Tor et al. (2001a)

Figure 3

Age Model for ZA-1.

(a) Chronology of the deformed units (seismites) in the Ze'elim section. Solid dots represent 14C ages in years B.P. Error bars represent the ranges in the calibrated ages (2σ) of all samples in each stratigraphic horizon. Vertical thin lines represent historical earthquakes in the Dead Sea area, which were correlated to the deformed units in the Ze'elim section. Horizontal dashed arrows are drawn from the deformed units (listed in capital letters) to the correlative earthquakes.

(b) Sedimentation rates calculated for the lower part of the composite section. The longest calibrated range was used for calculating the minimum sedimentation rate, and the shortest range for calculating the maximum sedimentation rate. Two clear unconformities are evident: the upper one is dated to 1290-1420 A.D. and the lower one to 1030-1210 A.D. The lower unconformity is marked by a sharp decrease in the sedimentation rate. Vertical dashed lines represent earthquakes that lie within the sedimentological hiatuses. Sedimentation rate of the upper part of the section was not calculated because datable samples were insufficient.

click on image to open in a new tab

Ken-Tor et al. (2001a)


Ken-Tor et al. (2001b)

Date Distributions

Figure 3

Calibrated date distribution for samples from the Ze'elim sequence (Tables I and 2). The samples are arranged in stratigraphic order from bottom to top. Samples collected from the seismite record are marked in capital letters (A-H). Correlated earthquakes are marked with arrows. The calibrated ranges of the samples collected from seismites E and F are very similar but show differences in their distribution. The distribution of the older samples from seismite E is larger in the older part of the range (in gray and labeled II), while that of the younger samples from seismite F is shifted towards the younger range (labeled I). The difference in the distribution of the samples is in accordance with the stratigraphic order of the samples and supports the correlation of the 1212 and 1293 AD earthquakes.

click on images to open in a new tab

Ken-Tor et al. (2001b)


Calibration Curve Event A

Figure 4a

The calibration curve from Stuiver et al. (1998) and the intersection of the 14C age of the samples collected from the seismites of the Ze'elim sequence. Thick dashed lines represent the 2σ error (68.2% confidence) and fine dashed lines the 1σ error (95.4% confidence). The uncertainty in the ages of samples collected from the seismites is reduced by overlapping calibrated ranges of stratigraphically lower samples and by correlating with historical earthquakes (in gray).

click on images to open in a new tab

Ken-Tor et al. (2001b)


Calibration Curve Event B

Figure 4b

The calibration curve from Stuiver et al. (1998) and the intersection of the 14C age of the samples collected from the seismites of the Ze'elim sequence. Thick dashed lines represent the 2σ error (68.2% confidence) and fine dashed lines the 1σ error (95.4% confidence). The uncertainty in the ages of samples collected from the seismites is reduced by overlapping calibrated ranges of stratigraphically lower samples and by correlating with historical earthquakes (in gray).

click on images to open in a new tab

Ken-Tor et al. (2001b)


Calibration Curve Event G

Figure 4e

The calibration curve from Stuiver et al. (1998) and the intersection of the 14C age of the samples collected from the seismites of the Ze'elim sequence. Thick dashed lines represent the 2σ error (68.2% confidence) and fine dashed lines the 1σ error (95.4% confidence). The uncertainty in the ages of samples collected from the seismites is reduced by overlapping calibrated ranges of stratigraphically lower samples and by correlating with historical earthquakes (in gray).

click on images to open in a new tab

Ken-Tor et al. (2001b)


Radiocarbon Tables

Master Radiocarbon Table - Ken-Tor et al. (2001b)

Table 1

AMS results of 14C dating. Calibrated dates according to Stuiver et al. (1998). The samples are listed units according to their stratigraphic height, top to bottom. In bold are samples collected from seismite units

click on image to open in a new tab

Ken-Tor et al. (2001b)


Master Radiocarbon Table - Ken-Tor et al. (2001a)

Table 1

AMS Results of Radiocarbon Dating

click on image to open in a new tab

Ken-Tor et al. (2001a)


Refined Radiocarbon Table - Ken-Tor et al. (2001a)

Table 2

The 14C Chronology of the Deformed Layers (Seismites)

click on image to open in a new tab

Ken-Tor et al. (2001a)


Seismite Assignment Tables

Nahal Ze'elim (ZA-2 and ZA-1(?)) and En Feshka

  • from Kagan et al. (2011)
  • these have been incorporated into the Master Seismic Events Tables for all sites
Table 3

Ze'elim and Ein Feshka Seismites with Model Ages and Historic Event Correlation

  1. LS, local source, moderate earthquake, not appearing in the historical catalogs, may have produced these seismites
  2. Gully depth below fan delta surface
  3. Seismite type

    A, Intraclast breccia layer
    B, Microbreccia (“homogenite” to the naked eye)
    C, liquefied sand
    D, Folded laminae
    E, Small offsets
    Q, Questionable as seismite. See Table 1 and Figure 2.

  4. Model ages of seismites extrapolated from deposition model (see section 5 for details)
  5. Fit of historical earthquake dates within 1σ or 2σ calibrated age ranges of seismites. Although model ages are tabulated here with 1 year precision for convenience, event fit considers the realistic precision of 10 years (see section 5.1)
  6. All other possible events within the age probability range (1σ or 2σ range) of the designated earthquake; 1068a refers to March 1068 A.D., and 1068b refers to May 1068 A.D. (see Table A1)
  7. Outside model range, extrapolated from model (Figure 4)
  8. Outside model range, estimated based on below and above radiocarbon ages (Figure 4)
  9. Alternately, this historic earthquake could have formed seismites below or above the one marked


Kagan et al (2011)


Nahal Ze'elim (ZA-1 and ZA-2), En Gedi, and En Feshka

Table

  • from Kagan et al. (2011)
  • these have been incorporated into the Master Seismic Events Tables for all sites
Table 4

Multisite Comparison of Holocene Seismites from four lacustrine sediments sites along the Western Dead Sea Basin

Kagan et al (2011)


Plot

Figure 7

Recurrence intervals and cumulative number of breccias in time.

  1. Ein Feshkha (EFE)
  2. Ein Gedi (EG)
  3. 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)


Nahal Ze'elim (ZA-1)

Ken-Tor et al. (2001a)

Table 2

The 14C Chronology of the Deformed Layers (Seismites)

Ken-Tor et al (2001a)


Ken-Tor et al. (2001b)

Table 2

Chronology of the seismite record

click on images to open in a new tab

Ken-Tor et al. (2001b)


Seismite Photos

Events B and C

Photo of Events B and C in ZA-1

Events B (Josephus Quake - 31 BCE) and C (Jerusalem Quake - 26-36 CE) at site ZA-1

Photo by Jefferson Williams (2000)


Thin Section Slide of Event C in ZA-1

Thin Section Slide from sample taken at site ZA-1

Jefferson Williams (2000)


Palynology

Leroy et al. (2010)

Photographs - Leroy et al. (2010)

Figure 3

Photographs of the location of samples in the wall of gully A in and above the seismites of 31 BC and AD 363 in the Ze’elim site

click on image to open in a new tab

Leroy et al. (2010)


Pollen Diagrams - Leroy et al. (2010)

Figure 5

Earthquake at 31 BC in the Ze’elim site (seismite B). Top: Pollen and spore diagram for selected curves. Bottom: geochemistry and magnetic susceptibility. Thin line: 10× exaggeration curve. Black dots: values <0.5%. Vertical axis: years after earthquake

click on image to open in a new tab

Leroy et al. (2010)


Figure 6

Earthquake at AD 363 in the Ze’elim site (seismite D). Top: Pollen and spore diagram for selected curves. Bottom: geochemistry and magnetic susceptibility. Thin line: 10× exaggeration curve. Black dots: values <0.5%. Vertical axis: years after earthquake.

click on image to open in a new tab

Leroy et al. (2010)


Post Quake Pollen Flux - Leroy et al. (2010)

Figure 4

Various hypotheses for calculating pollen influx after each earthquake (pollen concentration in varying numbers of years after the earthquake). Bottom is seismite B; top is seismite D. The thick line represents the best hypothesis because of the stable influx.

click on image to open in a new tab

Leroy et al. (2010)


Lopez-Merino et al. (2016)

Sample Location

Figure 1b

Photo of the Ze'elim gully outcrop sampled in this study (Photo by L. Lopez-Merino).

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)


Grain Size Distributions

Figure 2

Grain-size distribution in detrital samples from blocks ZA11B2 (A), ZA11B3R (B) and ZA11B5L (C). Grain-size distribution of detrital laminae C7 and C10 (numbers as in Supplementary Table S2) from block ZA11B2 showing upward fining pointing to graded bedding during flash-flood events are also shown (D)

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)


Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) in modern flash-flood samples

Figure 3

Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) in modern flash-flood samples. Black dots represent percentages below 0.5%. Flash-flood samples are grouped by months and ordered from North to South. Details on flash-flood samples are given in Supplementary Table S3.

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)
Figure 3

Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) in modern flash-flood samples. Black dots represent percentages below 0.5%. Flash-flood samples are grouped by months and ordered from North to South. Details on flash-flood samples are given in Supplementary Table S3.

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)


Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) of block ZA11B2 (late 19th early 20th century high-stand)

Figure 4

Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) of block ZA11B2 (late 19th early 20th century high-stand). Black dots represent percentages below 0.5%. Red lines separate non-contiguous samples. Detrital laminae are in grey and aragonite laminae in white. Numbers of the detrital-aragonite couplets are as in Supplementary Table S2. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)


Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) of block ZA11B2 (late 19th early 20th century high-stand)

Figure 4

Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) of block ZA11B2 (late 19th early 20th century high-stand). Black dots represent percentages below 0.5%. Red lines separate non-contiguous samples. Detrital laminae are in grey and aragonite laminae in white. Numbers of the detrital-aragonite couplets are as in Supplementary Table S2. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)
Figure 4

Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) of block ZA11B2 (late 19th early 20th century high-stand). Black dots represent percentages below 0.5%. Red lines separate non-contiguous samples. Detrital laminae are in grey and aragonite laminae in white. Numbers of the detrital-aragonite couplets are as in Supplementary Table S2. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)


Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) of block ZA11B3R (Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand)

Figure 5

Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) of block ZA11B3R (Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand). Black dots represent percentages below 0.5%. Red lines separate non-contiguous samples. Detrital laminae are in grey and aragonite laminae in white. Numbers of the detrital-aragonite couplets are as in Supplementary Table S2. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)
Figure 5

Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) of block ZA11B3R (Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand). Black dots represent percentages below 0.5%. Red lines separate non-contiguous samples. Detrital laminae are in grey and aragonite laminae in white. Numbers of the detrital-aragonite couplets are as in Supplementary Table S2. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)

Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) of block ZA11B4L (Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand)

Figure 6

Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) of block ZA11B4L (Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand). Black dots represent percentages below 0.5%. Red lines separate non-contiguous samples. Detrital laminae are in grey and aragonite laminae in white. Numbers of the detrital-aragonite couplets are as in Supplementary Table S2. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)
Figure 6

Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) of block ZA11B4L (Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand). Black dots represent percentages below 0.5%. Red lines separate non-contiguous samples. Detrital laminae are in grey and aragonite laminae in white. Numbers of the detrital-aragonite couplets are as in Supplementary Table S2. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)

Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) of block ZA11B5L (Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand)

Figure 7

Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) of block ZA11B5L (Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand). Black dots represent percentages below 0.5%. Red lines separate non-contiguous samples. Detrital laminae are in grey and aragonite laminae in white. Numbers of the detrital-aragonite couplets are as in Supplementary Table S2. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)
Figure 7

Percentage diagram of well-preserved pollen (air-borne) of block ZA11B4L (Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand). Black dots represent percentages below 0.5%. Red lines separate non-contiguous samples. Detrital laminae are in grey and aragonite laminae in white. Numbers of the detrital-aragonite couplets are as in Supplementary Table S2. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)

Factor scores of the three principal components (transposed matrix) obtained for the air-borne component of the late 19th early 20th centuries high-stand samples (block ZA11B2)

Figure 8

Factor scores of the three principal components (transposed matrix) obtained for the air-borne component of the late 19th early 20th centuries high-stand samples (block ZA11B2).

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)

Factor scores of the five principal components (transposed matrix) obtained for the air-borne component of the Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand samples (blocks ZA11B3R, ZA11B4L and ZA11B5L).

Figure 9

Factor scores of the five principal components (transposed matrix) obtained for the air-borne component of the Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand samples (blocks ZA11B3R, ZA11B4L and ZA11B5L).

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)

Percentage of explained variance (square of factor loadings x 100) of the principal components

Figure 10

Percentage of explained variance (square of factor loadings x 100) of the principal components extracted for the late 19th early 20th centuries high-stand samples (PC1Recent, PC2Recent and PC3Recent) and the Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand samples (PC1Hellenistic, PC2Hellenistic, PC3Hellenistic, PC4Hellenistic and PC5Hellenistic). Proportion of variance that can be explained by the extracted principal components (communalities) is shown for each lamina. The graphs can be read as a sequence of laminae deposition (detrital and following aragonite), with the percentage of the variance explained by the principal components with autumn palynological assemblages plotting to the right and by the principal components with spring palynological assemblages plotting to the left. Asterisks (*) highlight the laminae in which it is possible that more than one detrital-aragonite couplet have been deposited in one year. Question marks (?) highlight the eight couplets with an anomalous result likely due to contamination during sampling. Red lines separate noncontiguous samples. Numbers of the detrital-aragonite couplets are as in Supplementary Table S2. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)

Fig. 11

Figure 11

(A) Concentration of Total well-preserved pollen grains in the Ze'elim detrital-aragonite couplets. (B) Concentration of Total well-preserved pollen grains in modern flashflood samples. (C) Concentration of Total reworked pollen grains in the Ze'elim detrital-aragonite couplets. (D) Concentration of Total reworked pollen grains in the modern flashflood samples. Numbers of the detrital-aragonite couplets are as in Supplementary Table S2. Numbers of the flash-flood samples are given in Supplementary Table S3.

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)

Fig. 12

Figure 12

Concentration of Total reworked pollen grains (water-borne) versus Total fungal spores for detrital and aragonite laminae in the Ze'elim outcrop and contemporary flash-flood samples.

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)

ZA-2 and ZA-3

Orthophoto - ZA-2 and ZA-3

Orthophoto ZA-2 and ZA-3 Orthophoto of Site ZA-2 and ZA-3

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Drone photos by Jefferson Williams 10 Feb. 2023


Panoramas - ZA-2 (South Wall)

Panorama ZA-2 Panorama of Site ZA-2 (South Wall)

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Drone photos by Jefferson Williams 12 Feb. 2023


Panorama ZA-2 Panorama of Site ZA-2 (South Wall)

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Drone photos by Jefferson Williams 13 Feb. 2023


Panorama ZA-2 Panorama of Site ZA-2 (South Wall)

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Drone photos salvaged on iPhone by Jefferson Williams 22 Feb. 2023


Panoramas - ZA-3 (North Wall)

Panorama ZA-3 Panorama of Site ZA-3 (North Wall)

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Drone photos by Jefferson Williams 12 March 2023


Panorama ZA-3 Panorama of Site ZA-3 (North Wall)

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Drone photos by Jefferson Williams 12 Feb. 2023


Panorama ZA-3 Panorama of Site ZA-3 (North Wall)

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Drone photos by Jefferson Williams 13 Feb. 2023


Panorama ZA-3 Panorama of Site ZA-3 (North Wall)

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Drone photos salvaged from iPhone by Jefferson Williams 22 Feb. 2023


Amos Quakes - ZA-3 (North Wall)

  • Lat    N 31.33454°
  • Long E 035.40615°
Panorama

Panorama ZA-3 Amos Quakes at site ZA-3 (North Wall)
  • Lat    N 31.33454°
  • Long E 035.40615°


Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams 12 March 2023


Lidar Scan

  • Click on Scaniverse to open up a larger 3D Image in a New Tab

Seismite Assignment Tables

Nahal Ze'elim (ZA-2 and ZA-1(?)) and En Feshka

  • from Kagan et al. (2011)
  • these have been incorporated into the Master Seismic Events Tables for all sites
Table 3

Ze'elim and Ein Feshka Seismites with Model Ages and Historic Event Correlation

  1. LS, local source, moderate earthquake, not appearing in the historical catalogs, may have produced these seismites
  2. Gully depth below fan delta surface
  3. Seismite type

    A, Intraclast breccia layer
    B, Microbreccia (“homogenite” to the naked eye)
    C, liquefied sand
    D, Folded laminae
    E, Small offsets
    Q, Questionable as seismite. See Table 1 and Figure 2.

  4. Model ages of seismites extrapolated from deposition model (see section 5 for details)
  5. Fit of historical earthquake dates within 1σ or 2σ calibrated age ranges of seismites. Although model ages are tabulated here with 1 year precision for convenience, event fit considers the realistic precision of 10 years (see section 5.1)
  6. All other possible events within the age probability range (1σ or 2σ range) of the designated earthquake; 1068a refers to March 1068 A.D., and 1068b refers to May 1068 A.D. (see Table A1)
  7. Outside model range, extrapolated from model (Figure 4)
  8. Outside model range, estimated based on below and above radiocarbon ages (Figure 4)
  9. Alternately, this historic earthquake could have formed seismites below or above the one marked


Kagan et al (2011)


Nahal Ze'elim (ZA-1 and ZA-2), En Gedi, and En Feshka

Table

Corrected

Table 4

Multisite Comparison of Holocene Seismites from four lacustrine sediments sites along the Western Dead Sea Basin

Kagan et al (2011)

Table 4

Multisite Comparison of Holocene Seismites from four lacustrine sediments sites along the Western Dead Sea Basin

Kagan et al (2011)

Uncorrected

  • from Kagan et al. (2011)
  • these have been incorporated into the Master Seismic Events Tables for all sites
Table 4

Multisite Comparison of Holocene Seismites from four lacustrine sediments sites along the Western Dead Sea Basin

Kagan et al (2011)


Plot

Figure 7

Recurrence intervals and cumulative number of breccias in time.

  1. Ein Feshkha (EFE)
  2. Ein Gedi (EG)
  3. 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)


Age-Depth Plot

Age-Depth Model with Lithosection

Figure 4

Stratigraphic section of Ze’elim (ZA2) and (right) age-depth deposition model derived by OxCal 4.1. The top 7.5 m are modeled, while the bottom of the section is presented as single calibrated dates. Probability density functions (histograms) on the graph give model ages for radiocarbon samples (details are given in Table 3). The histograms give the distributions for the single calibrated dates while the darker center part of each histogram take into account the stratigraphic information (see Bronk Ramsey [2008] for model specifics). The depth model curves are envelopes for the 95% (outer, lighter, approximately 2σ) and 68% (inner, darker, approximately 1σ) highest probability density ranges. The dashed line near the top is the extrapolation of the model upward, while the ellipse represents the uppermost seismite.

Kagan et al (2011)


Age-Depth Model with added dates but without Lithosection

Figure 3.1.5

Correlation of historic earthquakes to age-depth model.

Ze' elim Gully outcrop.

Squares indicate historic earthquake ages correlated to ages of seismites. Some historic earthquake dates are shown.

Kagan (2011)


Annotated Photos of ZA-3 and a Gully to the north of ZA-3

ZA-3

Figure 3

ZA-3 outcrop section with main archaeological periods and elevations.

Kagan et al (2015)


North of ZA-3

Location Map

  • JW: This is north of ZA-3
Fig. 1.2a

Gullies of the Zeʾelim fan delta cut into terraces created by the recession of the Dead Sea (Google Earth); the red circle marks the sampling location

Langgut and Finkelstein (2023)


Annotated Section

Fig. 1.2b

The Zeʾelim sediment section where we conducted our palynological and sedimentological investigations, with main archaeological periods and elevations; presented in meters below msl

(photo: Dafna Langgut)

Langgut and Finkelstein (2023)


Seismite Photos

1927 CE Quake

Figure 8

Photograph of liquefaction structure >1 m thick at Ze’elim Gully, correlative to the 1927 earthquake at the northern Dead Sea.

click on image to open in a new tab

Kagan et al. (2011


ZA-4

Fieldwork 2015

Wide Shots of ZA-4 sections

Exposed Sections Labeled by Name

ZA-4 - Exposed Sections Labeled by Name

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

Exposed Bottom Left (Deeper) Sections Labeled by Letter

ZA-4 - Exposed Bottom Left (Deeper) Sections Labeled by Letter

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

Exposed Bottom Left and Middle Sections Outlined in Pink

ZA-4 - exposed sections outlined in pink

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

Top Right Section - 0 - 210 cm.

Top Right Section - Vertical Mosaic - 0 - 210 cm.

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

Middle Section - ~145 - 500 cm.

Middle Section - Top - ~145 - ~330 cm.

Middle Section - Top

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

Middle Section - Bottom ~350 - 500 cm.

Middle Section - Bottom

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

Bottom Left Sections - ~380 cm. - ~985 cm.

A - ~380 cm - ~495 cm

Bottom Left Section A

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

B - ~475 cm - ~725 cm

B Top - ~475 cm - ~575 cm

Bottom Left Section B - top

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

B Bottom - ~550 cm - ~725 cm

Bottom Left Section B - bottom

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

C - ~550 - ~710 cm.

Bottom Left Section C

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

D - ~650 cm. - ~845 cm.

D Top - ~650 cm. - ~710 cm.

Bottom Left Section D - Top

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

D Middle - ~690 cm. - ~775 cm.

Bottom Left Section D - Middle

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

D Bottom - ~775 cm. - ~845 cm.

Bottom Left Section D - Bottom

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

E - ~710 cm. - ~900 cm.

Bottom Left Section E

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

F - ~825 cm. - ~985 cm.

F Top - ~825 cm. - ~895 cm.

Bottom Left Section F - Top

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

F Middle - ~870 cm. - ~940 cm.

Bottom Left Section F - Middle

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

F Bottom - ~940 cm. - ~985 cm.

Bottom Left Section F - Bottom

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams in 2015

Fieldwork 2018

Middle Section - ~380 - 500 cm.

Middle Section

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photo by Jefferson Williams in 2018

Middle Section - 400 - 470 cm.

Middle Section

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photo by Jefferson Williams in 2018

Fieldwork 2023

Panorama

Panorama ZA-4 Panorama of Site ZA-4

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Drone photos by Jefferson Williams 04 Feb. 2023


Orthophoto

Orthophoto ZA-4 Orthophoto of Site ZA-4

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Drone photos by Jefferson Williams 03 Feb. 2023


East Sections

Long Shots

Description Image Source
Eastern Section Above Beach Ridge Jefferson Williams
Eastern Section Below Beach Ridge
Long Shot - Cleaned
Jefferson Williams
Eastern Section Below Beach Ridge
Long Shot
Less Clean but with Rulers and Scale
Jefferson Williams
Eastern Section Below Beach Ridge
Medium Shot
Less Clean but with Rulers and Scale
Jefferson Williams
Eastern Section Below Beach Ridge
Closeup on Woody Deposits
with Ruler and Scales
Jefferson Williams

Above Beach Ridge

Eastern Section at ZA-4 above Beach Ridge Eastern Section at ZA-4 above Beach Ridge

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams 10 Feb. 2023

Lateral Exploration of the Amos Quakes

Below Beach Ridge

Cleaned Section

Eastern Section at ZA-4 below Beach Ridge Eastern Section at ZA-4 below Beach Ridge

Cleaned Section

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams 10 Feb. 2023

Less Clean Section with Ruler and Scales

Eastern Section at ZA-4 below Beach Ridge Eastern Section at ZA-4 below Beach Ridge

Less Clean Section with Ruler and Scales

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams 14 Feb. 2023

Closeup on Woody Deposits

Eastern Section at ZA-4 below Beach Ridge Eastern Section at ZA-4 below Beach Ridge

Closeup on Woody Deposits

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams 14 Feb. 2023

Middle Section - 0 cm. - ~500 cm.

Entire Section - 0 cm. - ~500 cm.

Middle Section ZA-4 Middle Section at ZA-4

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams 04 Feb. 2023

Bottom Part of Middle Section - ~300 cm. - ~500 cm.

Bottom Middle Section ZA-4 Bottom of Middle Section at ZA-4

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams 04 Feb. 2023

Long Shots

Image Description Source
Entire Middle Section Jefferson Williams
Entire Middle Section Jefferson Williams
Bottom of Middle Section Jefferson Williams
Middle 01 of Middle Section Jefferson Williams
Middle 02 of Middle Section Jefferson Williams
Top of Middle Section Jefferson Williams

Western Sections

Western Section

Long Shots

Image Description Source
All 3 Western Sections Jefferson Williams
Entire Western Section Jefferson Williams
Entire Western Section
(view from below)
Jefferson Williams
Top Left of Western Section Jefferson Williams
Top Left and Top Right of Western Section Jefferson Williams
Above Top Middle of Western Section Jefferson Williams
Top Middle of Western Section Jefferson Williams
Mid Middle of Western Section Jefferson Williams
Bottom Middle of Western Section Jefferson Williams
Bottom of Western Section Jefferson Williams

Entire Western Section

Entire Western Section ZA-4 Entire Western Section at ZA-4

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Drone Photos by Jefferson Williams 11 Feb. 2023

Top Left Part of Western Section

Top Left Western Section ZA-4 Top Left of Western Section at ZA-4

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams 11 Feb. 2023

Top Right Part of Western Section

Top Right Part of Western Section Top Right Part of Western Section at Site ZA-4

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams 10 Feb. 2023

Top Middle Part of Western Section

Top Middle Western Section ZA-4 Top Middle of Western Section at ZA-4

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams 11 Feb. 2023

Bottom Middle Part of Western Section

Bottom Middle Western Section ZA-4 Bottom Middle of Western Section at ZA-4

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams 13 Feb. 2023

2nd Bench up of Bottom of Western Section

2nd Bench up of Bottom of Western Section 2nd Bench up of Bottom of Western Section at ZA-4

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams 10 Feb. 2023

Bottom Bench of Western Section

Bottom Bench Western Section ZA-4 Bottom Bench of Western Section at ZA-4

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams 10 Feb. 2023

Bottom Two Benches of Western Section

Bottom Two Benches of Western Section Bottom Two Benches of Western Section at Site ZA-4

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams 10 Feb. 2023

Western Section Connector

Long Shots

Image Description Source
All 3 Western Sections Jefferson Williams
Entire Western Section Connector Jefferson Williams

Western Connector Section at ZA-4 Western Connector Section at ZA-4

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams 05 Feb. 2023

Far Western Section

Long Shots

Image Description Source
All 3 Western Sections Jefferson Williams
Far Western Section Jefferson Williams

Far Western Section at ZA-4 Far Western Section at ZA-4

Click on Image for high resolution magnifiable image

Photos by Jefferson Williams 10 Feb. 2023

Bayesian Analysis

Field Expeditions by Jefferson Williams in 2018 and 2023

  • JW: needs to be redone with a 44 cm. thickness for the 192/193 cm. seismite and a label of 419 or ~500 CE
 Bayesian Analysis of a section at Site ZA-4 version 004

Click on image to open in a new tab

Run using BACON and BACONQuake on Radiocarbon samples collected by JW in 2018 and 2023. Lake Level Curve from Bookman et al. (2004)


 Bayesian Analysis of a section at Site ZA-4 version 003

Click on image to open in a new tab

Run using BACON and BACONQuake on Radiocarbon samples collected by JW in 2018 and 2023. Lake Level Curve from Bookman et al. (2004)


 Bayesian Analysis of a section at Site ZA-4 version 002

Click on image to open in a new tab

Run using BACON and BACONQuake on Radiocarbon samples collected by JW in 2018 and 2023. Lake Level Curve from Bookman et al. (2004)


  • BACONQuake
  • Bacon("RC_NZ_Will_and_Will_2018_Combined_TopAndBottomAndOutlierOldSamplesRemoved",20,BCAD=FALSE,ask=FALSE)
  • seismite_info_AllPossQuakes = read.table("SeismiteInfo_AllPossQuakes_ZA4_Will.csv", header = TRUE,sep = ",")
  • seismite_info_Depths = read.table("SeismiteInfo_Depths_ZA4_Will.csv", header = TRUE,sep = ",")
  • seismite_info_Picks = read.table("SeismiteInfo_Picks_ZA4_Will.csv", header = TRUE,sep = ",")
  • LakeLevels = read.table("LakeLevelCurvesBookman2004_ZeelimA.csv", header = TRUE,sep = ",")

Palynology Sampling 2024-2026

Pollen Work 2026

NZ423I Cutting Corner with Ruler Annotated and Pollen - 363 CE ?

 Sample NZ423I Annotated with Pollen Results - Green is Spring

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW - Nov. 2024


NZ423K Frontal View with Ruler - Annotated with Pollen - 419 CE ?

 NZ423K Resample Bottom Piece Annotated with Pollen Results - Green is Spring

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW - Nov. 2024


NZ15C Frontal View - Annotated with Pollen - 33 CE ?

 NZ15C in the Lab - Annotated with Pollen - Green is Spring

Click on Image to open in a new tab

Photo by JW


NZ15D Frontal View - Annotated with Pollen - 31 BCE ?

 NZ15D in the Lab - Annotated with Pollen - Spring is Green

Click on Image to open in a new tab

Photo by JW


NZ18F Frontal View - Annotated with Pollen - 31 BCE ?

 NZ18F in the Lab Annotated with POllen - Green is Spring

Click on Image to open in a new tab

Photo by JW


NZ15G Frontal View - Annotated with Pollen - 150 BCE ?

 NZ15G in the Lab - Annotated with Pollen - Spring is Green

Click on Image to open in a new tab

Photo by JW


Supporting Images

  • Entire Middle Section
  • Bottom Part of Middle Section
  • BaconQuake Bayesian Analysis

Seismite Samples

From the Field

2024 Samples

Seismite Samples
  RC
Depth
(cm)
Sample
Depth
(cm)
Thickness
(cm)
Quake Sample
 Name
InSitu Image Extracted Image Notes
195 192 ~44 419 CE NZ423K

195 192 ~44 419 CE NZ423K - resample

Top

Bottom
240 251 (2018)
249 (2023)
16 (2018)
16 (2023)
363 CE NZ423I
380 400 (2023)
389 (2018)
7.5 (2018)
7.5 (2023)
~31 CE NZ423A                                                                                                                                       

2015 and 2018 Samples

Seismite Samples
  RC
Depth
(cm)
Sample
Depth
(cm)
Thickness
(cm)
Quake Sample
 Name
InSitu Image Extracted Image Notes
387 12 NZ415C
406 8 NZ415D

405 7 NZ418F


466 in 2015
464 in 2018
10 in 2015
12-14 in 2018
31 BCE ? NZ415G




Lab Work

NZ423I

Before Palynology Sampling

Photos

Frontal View with Ruler

 NZ423I in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW - Nov. 2024


Frontal View without Ruler

 NZ423I in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW - Nov. 2024


Frontal View without Ruler - Annotated

 NZ423I in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW - Nov. 2024


Oblique View with Ruler

 NZ423I in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW - Nov. 2024


Side View with Ruler

 NZ423I in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW - Nov. 2024


Cutting Corner with Ruler Unannotated

 NZ423I in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW - Nov. 2024


Cutting Corner with Ruler Annotated

 Sample NZ423I Annotated

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW - Nov. 2024


Cutting Corner with Ruler Annotated and Pollen

 Sample NZ423I Annotated with Pollen Results - Green is Spring

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW - Nov. 2024


Sample Bottles

 NZ423I in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW - Nov. 2024


3D Lidar Scan



NZ423K Resample Bottom Piece

Before Palynology Sampling

Photos

Frontal View with Ruler - Unannotated

 NZ423K Resample Bottom Piece in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW - Nov. 2024


Frontal View with Ruler - Annotated

 NZ423K Resample Bottom Piece in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW - Nov. 2024


NZ423K Frontal View with Ruler - Annotated with Pollen

 NZ423K Resample Bottom Piece Annotated with Pollen Results - Green is Spring

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW - Nov. 2024


Sample Bottles

 NZ423K Resample Bottom Piece in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW - Nov. 2024


3D Lidar Scan

Initial Thin Sections of NZ423I and NZ423K

 Initial Thin Sections of NZ423I and NZ423K Resample Bottom Piece

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

from National Petrographic October 2025


NZ15C

Before Palynology Sampling

Photos

Frontal View - Unannotated

Normal View

 NZ15C in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Closeup

 NZ15C in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Frontal View - Annotated

 NZ15C in the Lab - Annotated

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Frontal View - Annotated

 NZ15C in the Lab - Annotated with POllen - Green is Spring

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Sample Bottles

 NZ15C Sample Bottles

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Thin Section Slide

Back Side

 Thin Section Slide of NZ415C

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Annotated

 Thin Section Slide of NZ415C

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Unannotated

 Thin Section Slide of NZ415C

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


NZ15C and NZ15D in the Field

 NZ15C and NZ15D in the Field

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


NZ15D

Before Palynology Sampling

Photos

Frontal View - Unannotated

Normal View

 NZ15D in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Closeup

 NZ15D in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Frontal View - Annotated

 NZ15D in the Lab - Annotated

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Frontal View - Annotated with Pollen

 NZ15D in the Lab - Annotated with Pollen - Spring is Green

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Sample Bottles

 NZ15D Sample Bottles

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Thin Section Slide

With Ruler

 Thin Section Slide of NZ415D

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Annotated

 Thin Section Slide of NZ415D

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Unannotated

 Thin Section Slide of NZ415D

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


NZ15C and NZ15D in the Field

 NZ15C and NZ15D in the Field

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


NZ15G

Before Palynology Sampling

Photos

Frontal View - Unannotated

Normal View

 NZ15G in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Closeup

 NZ15G in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Frontal View - Annotated

 NZ15G in the Lab - Annotated

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Frontal View - Annotated with Pollen

 NZ15G in the Lab - Annotated with Pollen - Spring is Green

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Sample Bottles

 NZ15G Sample Bottles

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Billet

 Billet of NZ415G

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Thin Section Slide

With Ruler

 Thin Section Slide of NZ415G

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Annotated

 Thin Section Slide of NZ415G

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Unannotated

 Thin Section Slide of NZ415G

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


In the Field

NZ15G

 NZ15G in the Field

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


NZ15G and others

 NZ15G and others in the Field

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


NZ18F

Before Palynology Sampling

Photos

Frontal View - Unannotated

 NZ18F in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Frontal View - Annotated

 NZ18F in the Lab

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Frontal View - Annotated with Pollen

 NZ18F in the Lab Annotated with POllen - Green is Spring

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Sample Bottles

 NZ18F Sample Bottles

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Thin Section Slide

With Ruler

 Thin Section Slide of NZ418F

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Annotated

 Thin Section Slide of NZ418F

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Unannotated

 Thin Section Slide of NZ418F

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


NZ18F in the Field

Medium Shot

 NZ18F in the Field

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Closeup

 NZ18F in the Field

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by JW


Radiocarbon Samples

Radiocarbon Samples
Sample In Situ
 Photo
Sample
 Photo
   Sample
Description
Depth
 (cm)
   Age
(yrs BP)
Uncertainty
 (± yrs BP)
RCNZ18109 JW: Big Twig, Old, Lab: Wood - in seismite 113 1419 24
RCNZ18040 JW: Big twigs looks old, Lab: Wood - not in seismite 153 1361 23
RCNZ18107 JW: Big Twig, some burning, Lab: Wood - in seismite 165 1637 25
RCNZ18200 JW: 3 big twigs no field photo just above RCNZ18118, Lab: Wood - in seismite 179 1664 30
RCNZ18106 JW: Huge looks recent some burning, Lab: Wood - in seismite 184 1666 28
RCNZ18119 Sample RCNZ18119

Sample 2
JW: Huge some burning, Lab: Wood - not in seismite 189 1301 26
RCNZ18035 JW : Big Twig looks old no field photo, Lab: Wood - not in seismite 225 1373 26
RCNZ18029B JW : Big Twig looks old, Lab : Wood - not in seismite 297 1831 25
RCNZ18111 JW : Huge Twig, Lab: Charcoal - not in seismite 300 1918 27
RCNZ18034 JW : Big Twig looks old - no field photo, Lab: Wood - not in seismite 315 1845 32
RCNZ18032 JW : nice twig, Lab: Charcoal - not in seismite 340 2033 27
RCNZ18020 JW : Big poss. recent, Lab: Charcoal - not in seismite 374 2144 39
RCNZ18013 JW : Twig - some burning, Lab: Wood - not in seismite 400 1781 33
RCNZ18016B JW : Twigs big Lab: Wood - not in seismite 423 1996 25
RCNZ18125 JW : Big Twig slightly burnt, Lab: Wood - not in seismite 441 1998 36
NZ_15_G JW : Middle Outcrop 450 mg, Lab: Charcoal - not in seismite 449 2173 33
RCNZ18123 JW : Big recentish some burning looks old, Lab: Wood - not in seismite 458 2020 36
RCNZ18021 JW : Big Twig, Lab: Charcoal - not in seismite 460 2118 32
NZ_15_C JW : Middle Outcrop 782 mg, Lab: Charcoal - at top of seismite 466 2198 34
RCNZ18201 JW : lots of material recentish, Lab: Wood - not in seismite 485 2152 34

Fence Diagram

 Preliminary Fence Diagram for ZA-2, ZA-3, and ZA-4

Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Constructed by JW - Nov. 2024


ZA-5

Long Shot



Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by Jefferson Williams - January 20214


Medium Shot



Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by Jefferson Williams - January 20214


Medium Shot



Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by Jefferson Williams - January 20214


Sampling



Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by Jefferson Williams - January 20214


Sampling



Click on Image to open high resolution version in a new tab

Photo by Jefferson Williams - January 20214


Lithology Profiles For the 3 GSI/GFZ 1997 Cores in En Feshka, En Gedi, and Nahal Ze 'elim (includes hiatuses)

Fig. 2

Lithology of the sediment cores and the established age-depth models of the different profiles. The Ze'elim coring profile is paralleled by the Ze'elim gully wall [16] . The Ein Gedi chronology is based on 20 radiocarbon dates and on the varve counted section (black line) in the upper part.

Migowski et. al. 2004


Nahal Ze'elim GFZ/GSI Core Photos

The GFZ/GSI core at Nahal Ze'elim was taken in 1997. Thin Section Slides do not currently have depths logged relative to surface but were created to examine the Jerusalem Quake and the Josephus Quake so that should provide an approximate depth. Depths for thin sections is what was written on photo blocks and does not correspond to core depths but likely depth in an individual core section. Depths are measured from bottom to top (i.e. downhole to uphole) so slide 1 is at the bottom and slide 4 is at the top. Top direction of all slides and images has been confirmed. Slides and images are oriented so the uphole direction is pointing up. Core Inventory for 1997 GFZ/GSI cores can be found here

Image Description Image Description Image Description Image Description
Thin Section
Slide 1

0-11
Thin Section
Slide 2

9-20
Thin Section
Slide 3

18-29
Thin Section
Slide 4

26.5-37.5
Resin Block
Slides 1-4
Thin Section
Slides 1-4
Overlapped

Paleoseismic Chronology
ZA-1

Event A - 200-40 BCE (most probable) and 360-40 BCE (2σ)

Discussion

Discussion

References
Ken-Tor et al. (2001a)

Abstract

A 2000 year paleo seismic record of the Dead Sea area was recovered from a lacustrine sedimentary section. The section is being exposed at the Ze'elim Terrace on the shores of the Dead Sea due to the fast retreat of the lake. The section consists of laminated detrital and chemical (mainly aragonite) sediments that were deposited in the Holocene paleo-Dead Sea. Eight layers in the section show deformed sedimentary structures and are identified as seismites. Their chronology was determined by radiocarbon dating on organic remains. The seismite ages are well correlated with the historically documented earthquakes of 64 and 31 B.C. and 33, 363, 1212, 1293, 1834 and 1927 A.D. The few historically documented earthquakes that have no correlatives in the Ze'elim seismite record occurred in times of sedimentary hiatuses at this site (e.g., 749 A.D.). Based on modern analogues and the association of similar disturbed layers with syndepositional faults, the Ze'elim Terrace seismites indicate M>5.5 earthquakes. The average recurrence interval is estimated as ~ 100-300 years and represents slip events on different faults in the Dead Sea area; The Ze'elim section provides a unique opportunity to correlate two independent and extensive data sets, the historical and sedimentary records. This study opens the way for better understanding of spatial and temporal distribution of earthquakes along the Dead Sea Transform and elsewhere.

1. Introduction

Paleoseismic records provide essential data for seismic hazard assessment, imposing important constraints on the temporal and spatial distribution of strong and harmful earthquakes. Information on pre-instrumental paleoseismic events is derived from historical and geological records. The historical information is mainly based on eyewitness reports and their preservation, the objectivity of the reporters, and the accessibility of the reports to historians. The quality of the geological information depends on the availability of suitable sedimentary sequences and the possibility of obtaining absolute ages on the paleoseismic events.

The Dead Sea is located along one of the major strike-slip fault systems in the world, the Dead Sea Transform (DST), which has been active since the Neogene [Garfunkel, 1981; Garfunkel and Ben-Avraham, 1996] (Figure 1). The DST is part of the 6000 km long Syrian-African rift system, which was a main route of travel for prehistorical mankind on its migration out of Africa, and since then, the locus of various historical communities. Thus, the DST and its surroundings contain numerous archeological remains that record human settlement since early prehistoric time, throughout the Bronze and Iron ages and the historical period. Some of the archeological sites were disturbed by earthquakes and, together with historical accounts of felt earthquakes, they provide a unique opportunity to monitor past seismic activity in the region [Ben-Menahem, 1991].

During the Pleistocene and Holocene, laminated evaporitic and detrital sediments were deposited at the bottom of a series of lakes that existed along the DST. The deposits contain suitable material for dating by U-series and radiocarbon [Schramm et al., 2000]. The well-exposed sedimentary record in the region represents a potentially rich source of paleoseismic information that has not been fully exploited. An excellent example of this potential is given by the Lisan Formation, which consists of ~ 50 kyr laminated sedimentary sequence that contains deformed units representing individual, datable seismic events [Marco and Agnon, 1995; Marco et al., 1996]. The present study focuses on the paleoseismic record of the last 2000 years in the Dead Sea basin. During this time the level of the Dead Sea has been low (at -400 m below sea level) and subjected to small lake level fluctuations. Continuous retreat of the Dead Sea during the past 40 years (-80 cm yr-1) has exposed the Holocene sediments, allowing the study of their structure and composition. In this study, the late Holocene sedimentary section exposed at the Ze'elim Terrace (Figure 1) is described. Several of the layers in this sequence contain features that are interpreted as seismically induced structures (seismites). The aim of this work is to document this paleoseismic record and to test its chronology against the historical earthquake record of the Dead Sea area.

2. The Ze'elim Formation

After the retreat of Lake Lisan at 17-13 kyr, the lake stabilized (for most of the time) at elevation of -400 mbsl [Frumkin et al., 1991; Neev and Emery, 1995; Kadan, 1997]. Sediments deposited in this post-Lisan water body (or paleo-Dead Sea) compose the Ze'elim Formation [Ken-Tor et al., 1998; Migowski et al., 1999; Yechieli, 1993]. The Ze'elim Formation records the sedimentological, limnological, and tectonic history of the lake during the Holocene. It is exposed along the periphery of the Dead Sea and was recovered in several boreholes along the western shore of the lake [Migowski et al., 1999]. The Ze'elim Formation consists of different lacustrine to fluvial sediments that reflect the lake-level fluctuations in the semiarid environment of the Dead Sea area. The thickness of the Holocene deposits reaches about 20-30 m at the western shore of the lake's northern basin [Kadan, 1997; Migowski et al., 1999; Yechieli et al., 1993], and about 80 m in the southern basin [Neev and Emery, 1995].

The Ze'elim Terrace (Figure 1) is incised by several gullies, up to a few meters deep and up to a few tens of meters wide (Plate 1a). Fieldwork was conducted in two gullies where approximately 7 m of the upper Ze'elim Formation are exposed. Figure 2 provides a composite section of the outcrops exposed in the two gullies. The depositional environment exposed in the northern gully is mainly lacustrine, while in the southern gully the depositional environments are shore and nearshore. The section was divided into several lithological units. The lacustrine sediments consist of alternating aragonite and detrital laminae (-1-2 mm thick) and thicker clastic layers (>10 cm).
The aragonite precipitated chemically from the water column as was described for the Lisan Formation (cf. Begin et al., 1974; Stein et al., 1997). The detrital layers consist of clay- and silt-size grains of Cretaceous rocks exposed in the catchment area and therefore represent flood input that entered the lake during rainy seasons. Well-sorted carbonate silty sand occurs in ripple marks or forms massive beds that were deposited in the nearshore environment. Aragonite crusts covering coarse carbonate sand or lacustrine clay and silt indicate that the deposits were exposed above lake level at the shore environment. The presence of alluvial sediments (pebbles) indicates relatively low lake level and shifting of the shoreline to the east. The section is disturbed by several unconformities, representing periods of lowering of the lake level and erosion.

3. Chronology of the Ze'elim Section

The chronology of the Ze'elim composite section is established by 24 radiocarbon ages on vegetation debris (Table 1). The detrital sediments from which the samples were recovered are rich in leaves, stalks, small branches, and seeds that were flushed into the lake with the seasonal floods and buried within the detrital units. The transport time of the analyzed material is probably very short [Ely et al., 1992]. Samples collected in recent fluvial channels in the Dead Sea area yield very high percent of modern carbon (PMC) values, indicating short residence time (<100 years) of the organic material in the channels [Yechieli, 1993].

In most cases, the radiocarbon ages are stratigraphically consistent (Figure 3A). The ages range from 390 B.C. to 1960 A.D. Radiocarbon analyses of samples from the same stratigraphic horizons yield very similar ages (Table 1). The chronology is discussed further in the context of the ages of the seismic events. The sedimentation rates vary along the section, ranging from 3 to 13 mm yr-1. In most of the section the sedimentation rate is significantly higher than the average rate in the late Pleistocene Lisan Formation (-0.8 mm yr-1 [Schramm et al., 2000]).
The higher rate in Ze'elim section reflects the proximity of the section to the Ze'elim Wadi fan-delta. Nevertheless, the Ze'elim section also contains several depositional hiatuses, which lower the average sedimentation rate (Figure 3B).

4. "Mixed layers": Soft Sediment Deformation Structures

The typical sequence of alternating aragonite and detritus laminae and thicker clastic units in the Ze'elim Terrace is interrupted by units that show evidence for soft sediment deformation (Figure 2). These deformed units typically consist of mixtures of fine-grained dark clay and silt, with tabular fragments of aragonite laminae (millimeters to centimeters long) (Plate 1b). The units are a few centimeters to about 20 cm thick, with sharp and flat upper contacts. Below and above each deformed unit the section is laminated and undisturbed. The lateral distribution of the deformed units is not uniform; several of them extend over a large distance and can be traced and correlated among exposures in different gullies and different facies, whereas some have limited distribution.

The origin of the deformed layers is intriguing in light of the flat topography of the Ze'elim Terrace. There is no obvious reason and no field evidence for gravitational slides. Furthermore, the aragonite laminae fragments within the disturbed units are scattered randomly in the dark detritus and show no lateral grading, imbrication, or other transport indicators and do not point to any oriented movement, as would be expected from slides or floods over the lake floor. More significantly, the disturbed units extend across sedimentary facies (lacustrine to shore facies) and show no evidence for turbidity currents or any other lateral flow.

Similar layers of fine detritus and tabular aragonite fragments in the Dead Sea basin sediments have been described in the Lisan Formation [Marco and Agnon, 1995; Marco et al., 1996]. The disturbed units (termed "mixed layers") were interpreted as seismites largely because of their association with syndepositional surface fault ruptures. It was suggested that each mixed layer represents an originally flat laminated aragonite and detritus unit which, during an earthquake, was fluidized, brecciated, suspended, and then resettled in its present structure at the water-sediment interface. The flat upper surface of each mixed layer and the undisturbed postseismic layers above them (Plate 1b) point to deformation on the surface of the lake floor during the earthquake events [Marco and Agnon, 1995, Figure 4]. The deformation occurred prior to the deposition above. Irregular surfaces of the mixed layers are observed locally where they overlie syndepositional fault ruptures. In these places, subaqueous scarps were created during the seismic event [Marco and Agnon, 1995]. Similar soft sediment deformation structures have been documented in several other localities worldwide and also interpreted as seismites [cf. Allen, 1986; Davenport and Ringrose, 1987; Hempton and Dewey, 1983; Sims, 1973, 1975]. For example, Doig [1991] describes a chaotic zone of organic-rich lake sediment mixed with partly tabular fragments of a previously laminated silt layer that was disturbed during the 1935 (M6.3) Temiscaming (Quebec) earthquake.

5. Distribution of Deformation in Different Depositional Environments

The sediments exposed at the Ze'elim Plain were deposited in a transition zone between two depositional environments of a lacustrine basin: the shore and near-shore environment and the lake water body. This setting is ideal for the purpose of analyzing the effects of simultaneous ground shaking on sediments with different properties (e.g., aragonite-detrital laminae versus sandy units) because it is possible to trace continuously the changes in deformation character along with the facies variations. Where the lacustrine lithology changes to silt and sorted sand of the shore environment, load-cast and flame structures are visible (Plate 1e). The thickness of the deformed unit changes within a short distance. It is clearly visible that the character of deformation is related to grain size and the thickness of the unit. When the sand units become too thin, the deformation disappears.

The change in the deformation pattern is illustrated here by the behavior of a prominent mixed layer (B in Figure 2). This mixed layer can be traced over the entire studied area, across the facies changes. Yet it exhibits different structures according to the type of the sediments.

The observation of simultaneous deformation in different sedimentary facies of the same stratigraphic horizon in Ze'elim outcrops supports the interpretation of the mixed layers as seismites
. No other process could have simultaneously affected the various depositional environments of the same stratigraphic horizon. Together with the juxtaposition of the mixed layers over surface ruptures (as observed in the Lisan Formation), the transformation of disturbance through various sedimentary facies strongly supports the interpretation of the mixed layers as seismites.

6. Dating and Correlation of the Seismites With Historic Earthquake

Introduction

The ages of the deformed layers were constrained by 14C dates derived from the layers themselves and by extrapolating between ages of layers directly beneath and above a particular mixed layer (Table 2). The radiocarbon ages of the mixed layers were calibrated to calendar years according to Stuiver et al. [1998]. The calibrated ages lie in ranges that are defined by the 2σ envelope error of the measured data. For example, the measured radiocarbon age of event A (2120±40 years B.P., Table 1) is calibrated to the range of 360 to 40 years B.C. Applying the superposition principle and rate of sedimentation further narrowed these ranges. Samples which are stratigraphically lower in the section, and thus older, reduce the calendar range of the samples above. This procedure allows us to resolve the calendar ages of samples that yielded analytical data that are statistically indistinguishable. The use of sedimentation rates allows determining ages of mixed layers that were not directly dated by radiocarbon because of lack of organic debris. The sedimentation rate is sensitive to depositional hiatuses in the section. Thus, different rates are used for different parts of the section (see varying slopes in Figure 3b).

The radiocarbon sample collected from a mixed layer is dating the deposition within the layer before it was disturbed. Hence the seismic event that caused the deformation is younger. The time elapsed between the deposition and the deformation by the earthquake was short relative to the uncertainty in the dating. Two lines of evidence support this assumption:
  1. Deformation of the mixed layer occurred at the sediment-water interface. This is indicated by graded bedding and by the juxtaposition of mixed layers with syndepositional faults in the Lisan Formation. Thicker accumulation above the mixed layer on the downthrown block is considered as evidence for a fault scarp. Some local mass transport near the scarp produced thicker mixed layers in the lower block [Marco and Agnon, 1995].

  2. In the Ze'elim section, two of the mixed layers, A and B, are separated by only about 75 cm and approximately 200 14C years (Figure 2). Thus, the time elapsed between the deposition and disturbance of unit A must have been shorter than 200 years.
Liquefaction is often attributed to subsurface deformation. In the Ze'elim section liquefaction seems to have occurred at the surface. This surface deformation is consistent with the absence of sand volcanoes and dikes.

A final assessment of the mixed layer ages and their identification as seismites is achieved by correlation with the chronology of the historical earthquakes. The concept used here is to assess whether all individual pieces of information (the structures, the ages, and the correlation to known chronology) fit an internally consistent framework.

6.1. Comparison With the Historical Earthquake Record

Introduction

The historical earthquake record of the last four millennia in the Middle East [Ben-Menahem, 1991] represents one of the longest seismic records on Earth. The dated paleoseismic record recovered from the mixed layers in the Ze'elim Terrace correlates with the last and best documented 2000 years of this record (see description of the relevant historical earthquakes in Table 3). Several reported historical earthquakes are not identified in the Ze'elim record but can be correlated with depositional hiatuses or periods of erosion. Conversely, it is possible to correlate all deformed units with particular historic earthquakes.

The correlation between the Ze'elim seismic record and the historical record is based mainly on reports from three sites in the Dead Sea region: Jericho, Karak, and the Darga fan delta (Figure 4). Jericho is located to the northwest of the Dead Sea adjacent to one of the major faults, the Jericho Fault (Figure 1) [Reches and Hoexter, 1981]. The site was settled in the Neolithic period and has been continuously populated during the time represented by the Ze'elim section. Karak is located on the eastern escarpment of the Dead Sea Graben, 1400 m above the Dead Sea shore. Its prominence peaked during the Crusader period, and it has been populated continuously during the last millennium. We also compare our data to the Darga fan delta (Figure 1), where a geological earthquake record was recently described [Enzel et al., 2000]. The historical and geological reports on earthquakes around the Dead Sea area are summarized in Figures 4 and 5.

The following events are identified in the Ze'elim section:

6.1.1. Event A

Event A was dated based on a mixed layer sample collected 73.5 cm above the bottom of the section. The age of the sample is 2120±40 radiocarbon years B.P. (Table 1), with a calibration range of 360-40 B.C. Below this mixed layer, at 14.5 cm, two samples were dated to 2190±30 and 2230±30 years B.P. (with calibration ranges of 380-160 B.C. and 390-200 B.C., respectively). At 51 cm, two other samples were dated to 2120±30 and 2050±40 years B.P. (350-40 B.C. and 170 B.C.-50 A.D., respectively). Taken together, the four samples constrain the age of Event A within the calendar range of 200 B.C.-40 B.C.

Mixed layer A, which is the oldest in the section, can be correlated to the historically documented 64 B.C. earthquake, which was felt strongly in Jerusalem and damaged the city walls and the Second Temple [Amiran et al., 1994]. A deformed unit in the Darga fan delta was also dated to this time range [Enzel et al., 2000]. The appearance of deformed units in both the Ze'elim Terrace and the Darga fan delta during the 64 B.C. earthquake may indicate that the epicenter was located in the Dead Sea area (Figure 5). The lack of independent reports from other places in the area probably reflects the event's antiquity and moderate intensity.

6.1.2. Event B

The time elapsed between events A and B was bracketed by four radiocarbon dates: 1910±40 and 1990±40 years B.P. (0 to 230 A.D., 50 B.C. to 80 A.D.) for samples at 107 cm, and 1930±50 and 1940±40 years B.P. (50 B.C. to 220 A.D. and 50 B.C. to 140 A.D., respectively) for samples at 132.5 cm. Based on the age of a sample collected from within the mixed layer itself at 146 cm, Event B was dated to 1950±60 years B.P. (100 B.C.-230 A.D.), a range which overlaps with that of the samples between events A and B. Nevertheless, the age range of Event B can be reduced to 50 B.C. to 230 A.D. according to its stratigraphic location above Event A. Moreover, the association of Event A with the 64 B.C. earthquake implies that Event B is younger and may be correlated with an earthquake that took place in the early spring of 31 B.C.

The 31 B.C. earthquake is described by Josephus Flavius in the "Jewish Wars" (Book I, Ch. XIX, 370-380) and in "Jewish Antiquities" (Book XV, Chapter V, pp. 121-147). The earthquake occurred during the Battle of Actium between Caesar and Antony in the seventh year of King Herod's reign. According to Flavius, the earthquake caused great destruction and many casualties, killing as many as 30,000 people. The Second Temple in Jerusalem, Herod's winter palace at Jericho, and structures in Masada and Qumran were damaged [Amiran et al., 1994; Ben-Menahem, 1991; Guidoboni et al., 1994]. The earthquake was strongly felt in Judea and the Galilee (Figure 4).

The mixed layer of Event B can be traced along all the outcrops in the study area and can also be identified in the Darga fan delta [Enzel et al., 2000]. On the Jericho Fault, a surface rupture that has also been related to the 31 B.C. earthquake [Reches and Hoexter, 1981] is located near the city of Jericho, about 60 km north of the Ze'elim Terrace (Figure 1). Local intensity is inferred to have reached MMS X in several places [Amiran et al., 1994]. Considering the geological evidence and trusting the extensive historical records, despite their antiquity, it can be concluded that the 31 B.C. event was a strong earthquake with an epicenter located on the main Jericho Fault, not far from the Ze'elim Terrace. The prominent thickness and regional distribution of mixed layer B further argue that it can be identified with the 31 B.C. earthquake. We will subsequently use this mixed layer as a chronological "anchor point", which is used in the assessment of the ages of other mixed layers.

6.1.3. Event C

Mixed layer C is a few cm thick and discontinuous. It is located at 178.5 cm, 32.5 cm above the sample that dates the previous event (at 146 cm). Since no organic debris was found in unit C, the event was dated according to the sedimentation rate at this part of the section (4-9 mm yr-1, Figure 3b) to a calendar range of 64 B.C. to 311 A.D. This range can be further reduced to 5-50 A.D. by using the 31 B.C. earthquake (Event B) as a chronological anchor point in the section. Mixed layer C is correlated with the earthquake of 33 A.D. that damaged the Second Temple in Jerusalem [Amiran et al., 1994; Willis, 1928]. The earthquake was not reported elsewhere in the Dead Sea area. The lack of documentation and the limited evidence for geological disturbance suggest a small magnitude earthquake in the Dead Sea area (Figure 4).

6.1.4. Event D



Mixed layer D contains no organic debris for radiocarbon dating; therefore the age of this event was estimated from the sedimentation rate in the underlying interval. The samples below and above mixed layer D were dated to 1630±40 years B.P. (340-540 A.D.) and 909±23 years B.P. (1030-1210 A.D.), respectively. The older sample was located at 381.5 cm and the younger at 430 cm from the bottom, yielding a sedimentation rate of 0.5-1 mm yr-1. This rate probably represents a minimum value because the younger sample was collected above a depositional unconformity. The unconformity is characterized by coarse sand and aragonite crusts that indicate lowering of the lake level, which is usually accompanied by erosion of the surface. The erosion is probably the reason for the low sedimentation rate (e.g., an order of magnitude lower than that in the previously studied interval). Therefore, for the interval including layer D we assign the mean sedimentation rate that characterizes the lower part of the section (4-9 mm yr-1, Figure 3b). This rate would yield a calibrated age for Event D in the range of 358-580 A.D. A similar result is achieved when the 31 B.C. earthquake (top of unit B) is taken as a chronological anchor point in the section.

Mixed layer D was probably deformed by the 363 A.D. earthquake. Documentary evidence concerning this earthquake is preserved in a letter originally composed and circulated in Cyril's name (the Bishop of Jerusalem) during the early years of the 5th century [Russell, 1980]. The destruction caused by this earthquake stretched from Banias in northern Israel through Petra and Elat in the south and from the Mediterranean coast through the Jordan Valley and eastward [Russell, 1985]. Damage in Karak and a seiche in the Dead Sea in response to the earthquake are reported [Amiran et al., 1994]. In the Darga fan delta, a liquefied unit [Enzel et al., 2000] is probably associated with the same event.

6.1.5. Events E and F

The timing of Event E is inferred from the ages of three samples from this mixed layer: 760±30, 700±30, and 690±30 years B.P. Event F is dated by three samples from the next mixed layer to 780±30, 680±30, and 660±30 years B.P. The 780 years B.P. sample (within unit F) is out of stratigraphic order and probably represents reworked material; thus it is excluded from the analysis. The calibrated ranges for E and F are 1220-1390 A.D. and 1270-1400 A.D., respectively. Statistically, these dates are indistinguishable, but their stratigraphic order suggests a correlation to the earthquakes of 1212 and 1293 A.D. The two mixed layers are separated by a 20-30 cm thick uniform detrital unit that represents approximately 20-100 years of deposition, based on the sedimentation rate in this part of the section (3-13 mm yr-1, Figure 3b). The calculated age difference between the two mixed layers is similar to the historical age interval between the two earthquakes.

The 1212 A.D. earthquake was strongly felt in Egypt, particularly in Cairo and Fustat. At al-Shaubak and Karak, towers and houses were destroyed, and casualties were reported. In the Sinai Peninsula, the shock caused severe damage to the Monastery of St. Catherine [Ambraseys et al., 1994]. Based on the distribution of damage, it was suggested that the earthquake's epicenter must have been located south of the Dead Sea [Ambraseys et al., 1994] (Figure 4).

The epicenter of the 1293 A.D. earthquake was probably located in the Dead Sea basin near Karak [Arieh, 1977]. This earthquake affected the region of Gaza, Ramla, Ludd, Qaqun, and Karak, where towers and many houses were destroyed [Ambraseys et al., 1994]. The 1293 A.D., as well as the 1212 A.D. earthquake, were not reported from Jericho, suggesting that their epicenters may be located south of the Dead Sea basin (Figure 4).

6.1.6. Events G and H

Events G and H. These events are recorded as liquefied sand layers in the uppermost part of the Ze'elim section (Figure 2). Thus, they may record the youngest reported earthquakes in the region, probably from the last two centuries. The most pronounced and well-documented earthquakes of that period are those of 1834 and 1927.

Events G and H are constrained by radiocarbon ages from three samples, which are arranged in the following stratigraphic order from bottom to top: 260±24, 135±31, and 279±20 years B.P. These correspond to calibrated ranges of 1520-1800 A.D., 1670-1960 A.D., and 1520-1670 A.D., respectively (Figure 3a). In addition, the liquefied layers G and H are separated by a few centimeters of lacustrine sediments (laminated aragonite and detritus), which mark a rise in lake level and may be related to the relatively high stand of the Dead Sea at the end of the 19th century [Klein, 1961]. It appears that the lower and middle layers are older than the 1890s lake level rise and the upper layer (H) is younger. The range of ages of the middle and lower layers is consistent with this interpretation, while that of the upper layer is out of stratigraphic order and inconsistent with the 1890s high stand. The discrepancy could reflect reworking of the organic debris, which occurs in the shore environment. If the lacustrine layer corresponds to the 1890s high stand, then the upper liquefied layer H can be correlated with the 1927 earthquake and layer G with the previous 1834 event. The identification of mixed layer H with the 1927 earthquake indicates that water depth was ~10 m above the deformed sediment (the Dead Sea elevation during 1927 was 392 mbsl [Klein, 1982] and the deformed unit is at about 402 mbsl).

Accounts of damage from the 1834 A.D. earthquake are reported from Jerusalem, where several churches and minarets and the city wall were damaged. At Bethlehem, several monasteries were damaged and many people were killed [Amiran et al., 1994]. Nablus and Gaza were also damaged. Large blocks of asphalt appeared on the Dead Sea [Ben-Menahem, 1991]. This earthquake damaged Karak, but it is neither visible in the Darga fan delta section nor reported to have damaged Jericho (Figure 5). Therefore, the epicenter was likely south of the Dead Sea basin (Figure 4).

The 1927 earthquake is the only relatively large (M=6.25) earthquake in Israel to be recorded instrumentally [Ben-Menahem et al., 1976]. Its epicenter was reinterpreted recently to have been located just north of the Darga fan delta (Figure 1) [Shapira et al., 1993]. Evaluations of the effects of this earthquake yield a maximum intensity MMS IX along the Jordan River, from the Allenby Bridge (southeast of Jericho) southward to the north coast of the Dead Sea [Avni, 1999]. The 1927 earthquake was correlated with the youngest deformed layer in the Darga fan-delta [Enzel et al., 2000].

6.2. Reported Historic Earthquakes That Are Not Visible in the Geological Record

Several earthquakes from the Dead Sea area that are reported in the historical catalogues have no correlative deformed units in the Ze'elim record (Figures 3b and 5). The absence of these earthquakes from the Ze'elim record may be due to a remote epicenter and/or small magnitude (<5.5), which was not sufficient to induce a disturbance in the Dead Sea area. Another obvious reason is the incompleteness of the geological record in the Ze'elim Terrace. During times of climatic change, the lake level dropped and the Ze'elim Terrace was exposed, resulting in depositional hiatuses.

Two major unconformities are identified in the section (Figures 3b and 5). To constrain the ages of the hiatuses we determined three ranges of calibrated ages for each unconformity. The first range is obtained from the closest samples below an unconformity; the second range represents samples obviously related to the unconformity (samples recovered from sand and aragonite crust); the third range is of samples collected from layers above the unconformity. The older unconformity has yielded the respective ranges of 340-540 A.D., 1030-1210 A.D., and 1220-1390 A.D. (Table 1). The younger unconformity has yielded the ranges 1270-1400 A.D., 1290-1420 A.D., and 1520-1800 A.D. (Table 1). The age ranges presented in Figure 3 are the samples obviously related to the unconformities (i.e., the second age range).

Nine earthquakes reported in historical documentation from the Dead Sea area do not appear in the Ze'elim seismite record and they all fall in the unconformities and depositional hiatuses discovered in the section (Figure 3b). This is consistent with the interpretation of the mixed layers as earthquake- induced structures in the Ze'elim record. If a strong earthquake that was reported broadly in the Dead Sea area were missing from a complete sedimentary record, it would have been difficult to explain the interpretation of the mixed layers as seismites.

The 419, 551, 659/660, 749, 1033/1034, 1068, and 1160 A.D. dates are correlative to the first major unconformity, and the 1458 and 1546 A.D. earthquakes are correlative to the younger unconformity (descriptions of the earthquakes are provided in Table 3). It is impossible to determine from the Ze'elim record whether these events were generated in the Dead Sea area. Probably, a few of the events were too remote or of moderate magnitude. However, the 749 A.D. earthquake caused regional damage along the Dead Sea Transform, destroyed the Hisham Palace in Jericho, and was identified as a fault rupture on the Jericho Fault [Ambraseys et al., 1994; Amiran et al., 1994; Ben-Menahem, 1991; Guidoboni et al., 1994; Reches and Hoexter, 1981]. This earthquake probably did affect the Ze'elim area, but the evidence was lost. We predict that this event will be identified in cores taken from deeper parts of the lake, where erosion due to lowering of the lake level is less frequent.

7. Recurrence Intervals of Earthquakes in the Dead Sea Area

The outcrops in the Ze'elim Terrace represent almost the entire last two millennia in the geological history of the Dead Sea region. Combined with the historical record, the evidence from these sediments provides constraints on the temporal and spatial distribution of earthquakes in the region.

In the Ze'elim Terrace eight deformed units have been identified as seismites. These are correlated to historical earthquakes that occurred in 64 and 31 B.C. and in 33, 363, 1212, 1293, 1834, and 1927 A.D. Other historical earthquakes probably occurred during the two periods of depositional hiatuses. Overall, the deformed units and the historical record indicate that a minimum of 8 to a maximum of 17 earthquakes affected the Dead Sea area within a period of about 2000 years, implying a recurrence interval of about 100-300 years. Based on reported earthquake damage, Ben-Menahem [1991] estimated that the recurrence time of strong earthquakes (e.g., M=7.3) in the southern half of the Dead Sea Transform is about 1500 years. The significantly shorter recurrence interval estimated from the Ze'elim record probably reflects its sensitivity to a broader range of earthquake magnitudes. The threshold intensity of these earthquakes is largely an unresolved question. We estimate it, however, as M>5.5 at epicentral distances smaller than 100 km, a figure that can accommodate the observation of liquefaction and fluidization in the deformed units of the Ze'elim section. Liquefaction of sand may occur during earthquakes of magnitudes as low as 5 [Audemard and Santis, 1991]; in most cases liquefaction and fluidization of sediments are associated with earthquakes of magnitude 6 and greater [Allen, 1982]. Liquefaction of sediments occurs within the first tens of kilometers from the epicenter [Ambraseys, 1988; Obermeier, 1996]. At distances exceeding 100 km, MS = 7 appears to be a minimum threshold for causing liquefaction. Based on this information and the previous estimates from the mixed layers in the Lisan Formation record [Marco et al., 1996], it is reasonable to suppose that the mixed layers observed in the Ze'elim outcrops document the seismicity in the Dead Sea area. The earthquake magnitudes were probably of M>5.5 and the epicenters of the earthquakes that caused them lie within several tens of km from their occurrence.

Reches and Hoexter [1981] estimated a recurrence interval of about 1000 years, based on ruptures on the Jericho Fault (Figure 1). The sediments in the Ze'elim Terrace record more earthquakes for two reasons: (1) Earthquakes that do not rupture the surface may still generate mixed layers. Moreover, even earthquakes that rupture the surface require significant slip for showing in coarse sediments such as those trenched by Reches and Hoexter [1981]. For example, the meizoseismal zone of the 1927 earthquake indicates rupture on the Jericho Fault [Avni, 1999], yet this rupture is not expressed in the trenches of Reches and Hoexter [1981]. (2) The sediments in Ze'elim Terrace were disturbed by ruptures on various faults in the Dead Sea area, and not only by ruptures on the Jericho Fault. The Ze'elim sediments record a regional and not a fault-specific recurrence interval; hence the recurrence interval calculated in this work cannot be compared with recurrence intervals calculated according to specific fault ruptures.

Liquefied layers identified in the Darga fan-delta sequence indicate a recurrence interval of approximately 600 years for earthquakes with M>5.5 [Enzel et al., 2000]. The reconstruction of the Darga fan-delta paleoseismic record is similar to that of Ze'elim, although the sediments in Ze'elim are of a more lacustrine nature. The fine laminae and the fewer and smaller depositional hiatuses and unconformities in the Ze'elim section make the paleoseismic record more sensitive. This may explain why more historical earthquakes are represented in the Ze'elim section and the recurrence period is somewhat shorter.

The temporal distribution of earthquakes was recovered from the ~50,000 years paleoseismic record of the late Pleistocene Lisan Formation (in outcrops located a few kilometers west of our study area) [Marco et al., 1996]. The Lisan paleoseismic record indicates that the events cluster at periods of ~10,000 years, separated by quieter periods of similar length. Within the clusters the rate of activity reported by Marco et al. [1996] is 8 earthquakes in 5000 years (recurrence interval of 400 years). Comparing the Ze'elim record with the long-term Lisan record suggests that the Dead Sea area has been in an active seismic cycle during the past 2000 years.

8. Location of Epicenters of Paleoearthquakes

The epicenters of the earthquakes that deformed the sediments in Ze'elim Terrace were probably within the Dead Sea basin, not more than a few tens of kilometers from the study area. A surface rupture and an epicenter are more precisely known for only two events recorded in the Ze'elim Terrace, the 31 B.C. event and the 1927 A.D. event, respectively. Both events were generated on the Jericho Fault [Reches and Hoexter, 1981; Shapira et al., 1993]. The 31 B.C. earthquake created a distinct mixed layer in the Ze'elim sequence, about 65 km from where the fault rupture was identified in a paleoseismic trench east of Jericho [Reches and Hoexter, 1981]. In the Darga fan-delta, the event is marked by very large slump structures located above the Jericho Fault [Enzel et al., 2000]. The location of the epicenters of other historical earthquakes can be approximately estimated from the historic reports on the distribution of damage. It should be noted, however, that in older historical periods, time acted as a "high pass" magnitude filter, and strong and harmful earthquakes were selectively preserved in the written documents [Ben-Menahem, 1991]. Thus, a reasonable assumption is that if an earthquake is reported widely in ancient historical records (e.g., the 31 B.C. earthquake), it was a high intensity earthquake. Reports on a small magnitude earthquake that did not severely affect the population probably faded away along with other unimportant historical events.

The reports of the 64 B.C. and 33 A.D. earthquakes are very limited. Compared to the 31 B.C. earthquake, these seem moderate and localized. Nevertheless, since most of the reports come from Jerusalem, a reasonable estimation is that the earthquakes occurred on the Jericho Fault (Figures 1 and 4). The 363 A.D. earthquake was probably a stronger earthquake because reports are more extensive, even though they originate only from Israel and western Jordan. However, the deformed unit that was correlated to this event is only a few centimeters thick, implying that the epicenter was probably not as close to the Ze'elim Terrace.

During and after the Crusader period, reports on earthquakes become more frequent [Ambraseys et al., 1994] and they are preserved better than older historical reports. From the distribution of the historical reports, it seems that the 1212, 1293, 1456, 1546, and 1834 A.D. earthquakes were generated by one of the southern faults of the Dead Sea Graben (Figure 4). Extensive damage from the 1212 A.D. and 1546 A.D. events, reported outside of Israel and Jordan, argues for magnitudes larger than those of the 1293, 1456, and 1834 A.D. events. The 1834 A.D. event is a relatively recent event and was reported only in southern Israel, indicating that it produced moderate ground shaking in the Dead Sea area but was strong enough to liquefy the sediments in Ze'elim Terrace. The Arava Fault, located on the eastern side of the graben (Figure 1), can be the source for earthquakes located south of the Dead Sea [Klinger et al., 2000].

Although the centers of earthquake damage can be approximately located, it is difficult to assign an earthquake to a particular fault segment. The Jericho and Arava segments of the Dead Sea Transform (Figure 1) are expected to be the source of the strongest shocks because they are the largest and most continuous faults in the area [Garfunkel et al., 1981]. However, the entire Dead Sea area is undergoing active deformation [Garfunkel and Ben-Avraham, 1996]. As evidence of this, intra-basin faults under the Dead Sea are active and displace the lake floor [Ben-Avraham et al., 1993]. In the Darga fan-delta, 30 km north of Ze'elim, surface ruptures have been related to late Holocene earthquake events [Enzel et al., 2000]. Post-Lisan deformation is also observed a few kilometers west of the study area on the Ze'elim Terrace, and south of the study area along the western shores of the southern basin of the Dead Sea [Agnon, 1982; Bartov, 1999]. It is likely that some of these ruptures act in the postseismic (aftershocks) or preseismic (foreshocks) periods of a large earthquake, hence they do not affect the paleoseismic record. While these and many other questions regarding the seismic activity in the Dead Sea region remain open, our correlation between historical earthquake records and the deformed units in the Ze'elim section provides a new approach in the assessment of paleoearthquakes.

9. Conclusions

The Ze'elim Formation provides an opportunity to reconstruct the paleoseismic record of the last two millennia in the Dead Sea area and to explore the temporal pattern of earthquakes in this part of the Dead Sea Transform. The following conclusions sum up our study:
  1. The paleoseismic record of the Dead Sea during the past two millennia was reconstructed based on the identification of deformed layers as seismites.

  2. The ground shaking accompanying earthquakes simultaneously affected layers that extended from the lacustrine environment (characterized by laminated aragonite and detritus) to the shore environment (characterized by sand). This induced the formation of mixed layers in the former and liquefied sand in the latter. Lake level is estimated to have been less than a few meters above the sediment surface during times of earthquakes.

  3. Eight layers identified as seismites were dated by radiocarbon at Ze'elim Terrace. These seismites are well correlated with the historical record of earthquakes from the area (64 and 31 B.C. and 33, 363, 1212, 1293, 1834, and 1927 A.D.). Other well-documented earthquakes that affected the Dead Sea area do not show up in the Ze'elim sequence. This could be related to destruction of the relevant layers during times of low lake level and erosion. Indeed, all missing earthquakes are correlated with depositional hiatuses in the section.

  4. The regional recurrence interval of earthquakes according to the record recovered from the Ze'elim sedimentary section is about 300 years, but when all earthquakes reported in historical records are considered, the recurrence interval is even shorter, about 100 years.

  5. The correlation of historical earthquakes with dated seismites provides a new approach in the assessment of paleoseismicity. It provides independent geologic documentation of the historical reports and their approximate location and magnitude. By these means, it may be inferred that the epicenters of the 64, 31 B.C. and 33 and 363 A.D. earthquakes were probably located north of the Dead Sea and along the Jericho Fault, while those of the 1212, 1293, 1456, 1548, and 1834 A.D. earthquakes were located to the south of the Dead Sea.

Ken-Tor et al. (2001b)

Abstract

The precise determination of the age of historical and geological events by radiocarbon dating is often hampered by the long intersection ranges of the measured data with the calibration curve. In this study we examine the possibility of narrowing the calibrated range of the 14C ages of earthquake-disturbed sediments (seismites) from the Late Holocene lacustrine section in the Dead Sea Basin. The calibrated ranges of samples collected from seismites were refined by applying stratigraphic constraints and tuning the calibrated ranges to known historical earthquakes. Most of the earthquakes fall well within the 1σ error envelope of the 14C age. This refinement demonstrates that the lag period due to transport and deposition of vegetation debris is very short in this arid environment, probably not more than a few decades. This assessment of seismite 14C ages attests to the validity of 14C ages in Holocene sediments of the arid area of the Dead Sea. Furthermore, it demonstrates our ability to achieve highly precise (correct to within several decades) 14C ages.

Introduction

Radiocarbon dating is one of the most widely applied dating methods for Late Quaternary geology and archaeology. The introduction of the Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) technique improved the possibility of dating small samples and refined the analytical results. Nevertheless, the possibility of achieving highly precise 14C dates is hampered by the need to transform the measured 14C age to its calibrated date. The intersection of the 14C age of the sample (within the 2σ analytical error envelope) with the calibration curve, which accounts for variations in atmospheric 14C content (Suess 1965), typically yields a large range of calendar years. This may hamper the geological evaluation of instantaneous catastrophic events such as earthquakes or floods.

Recently, we studied a Late Holocene geological section from the Dead Sea Basin that contains layers deformed by earthquakes (seismites). We established the chronology of this sequence using 25 14C measurements on organic debris collected throughout the section, including samples from the seismites themselves. The organic debris used to determine the age of the seismites reached their depositional site prior to the earthquake that formed the seismite. Here we address several fundamental questions: How reliable are these ages for precisely determining the timing of an earthquake? How long did the organic debris travel within the drainage basin before deposition? Moreover, how suitable for 14C dating are the organic debris collected from sediments in the arid Dead Sea region, where they may survive and be recycled for long periods of time? A comparison between the ages of debris from the seismites and reported historical earthquakes from the Dead Sea area (Ken-Tor et al. 2001) can help resolve these issues and assist in age determination of prehistoric sequences.

Here, we use the historical calendar dates of earthquakes to examine the potential for narrowing the 2σ range of calibrated 14C ages and to estimate the time elapsed between the 14C age of the organic samples and the earthquake event that disturbed the units from which they were collected.

Geological Background and Chronology

The samples for 14C analyses were collected from a sequence of Holocene deposits exposed along the shores of the Dead Sea at the Ze'elim Terrace (Figure 1). The sequence consists of lacustrine sediments composed of laminated aragonite and detritus, together with sandy beds representing shore and shallow nearshore environments. The sequence contains several unconformities that represent episodes of lower lake levels and erosion (see Ken-Tor et al. 2001 for a detailed description). The lateral extent of individual units is not uniform; several extend over large distances and can be traced and correlated among exposures in different gullies and across facies changes, whereas others have a more limited distribution.

The soft-sediment deformation structures in the Dead Sea Basin sediments are interpreted as seismites (Marco and Agnon 1995; Marco et al. 1996; Enzel et al. 2000; Ken-Tor et al. 2001). Seismites were observed in the Late Pleistocene Lisan Formation in association with syndepositional surface fault ruptures, supporting their seismogenic origin (Marco and Agnon 1995). Each deformed bed represents an originally flat-lying laminated unit that was fluidized, brecciated, and suspended during an earthquake, and then resettled into its present structure at the water-sediment interface on the lake bottom (Marco et al. 1996).

The chronology of the Ze'elim sequence was established by 14C ages obtained from vegetation debris (Ken-Tor et al. 2001). The detrital sediments from which the samples were recovered are rich in leaves, stalks, small branches, and seeds. These organic materials are debris from vegetation growing in the Dead Sea region along streams and around freshwater springs. They were flushed into the lake by seasonal floods, and wave action could subsequently transport them along the shoreline. Examination of both the samples and the collection area excludes the possibility of contamination by the sparse vegetation growing on top of the sequence.

Table 1 lists 25 samples from 16 distinct stratigraphic horizons, their 14C ages from youngest to oldest, the material dated, and their calibrated 14C ages. The oldest part of the sequence was dated to 2230 ± 30 BP, whereas the top of the sequence was exposed as a result of a lake-level drop approximately 30 years ago. To test the reproducibility of the results, multiple samples were collected from seven sedimentary horizons. This yielded overlapping error ranges that support the reliability of the dates. The measured 14C ages were converted to calendar dates according to their intersections with the calibration curve of Stuiver et al. (1998). Because intersection with the calibration curve may yield more than one possible calendar age, inclusion of the 2σ analytical error envelope produces a range of possible calendar dates (Table 1, Figure 3).

The ages of six seismites within the sequence were constrained by 14C dating of samples collected directly from the deformed layers (Table 2) (Ken-Tor et al. 2001). These ages were calibrated, and the older intersection of the 2σ range for each dated seismite unit was reduced by the younger intersection of the 2σ range of the sample located stratigraphically below it. This procedure makes it possible to resolve the calendar ages of units that yielded statistically indistinguishable analytical results (e.g., units 10 and 11; Figure 3b).

The younger intersection of the calendar ranges for the seismite units was further constrained by the historical dates of earthquakes correlated with them, because the calendar age of a sample collected from a seismite cannot significantly postdate the earthquake that produced the deformation. Comparison with historically dated earthquakes also provides a means of assessing the accuracy of 14C dating.

Correlation with Historic Earthquakes

The Dead Sea area has been affected by seismic activity throughout historical time. Reported damages to nearby sites have been used to produce a historical record of the last four thousand years (Ambraseys et al. 1994; Amiran et al. 1994; Ben-Menahem 1991), representing one of the longest earthquake records on Earth. Ken-Tor et al. (2001) demonstrated that all the seismites observed in the Ze'elim sequence correlate with historical earthquakes reported in catalogues. This correlation reduces the younger limit of the range of calibrated 14C ages that date the seismites. The 14C age of a sample collected from a seismite cannot be younger than the known year of the earthquake that created the seismite (Figures 4a-e). In the following sections we present the 14C data (2σ calibrated range) from seismites labeled A-H (excluding C and D, which were dated by extrapolating sedimentation rates between 14C dates) (Ken-Tor et al. 2001), their correlation with historically documented earthquakes, and the implications of this procedure for calibrated calendar ranges.

Seismite A. The lowest disturbed unit in the sequence. It was dated to 2120 ± 40 BP based on the age of sample KIA-3228, which was collected at 73.5 cm above the base of the sequence. The 2σ calibrated ranges are 360-290 BCE and 240-40 BCE (Table 2, Figure 3a). Two samples from the sequence below this seismite, at 14.5 cm, were dated to 2190 ± 30 and 2230 ± 30 BP (calendar ranges: 380-160 BCE and 390-200 BCE). At 51 cm, two other samples were dated to 2120 ± 30 and 2050 ± 40 BP (350-40 BCE and 170 BCE-50 CE) (Table 1, Figure 3a). These stratigraphically lower ages constrain the timing of Event A toward the younger calendar range of 200-40 BCE. Seismite A was correlated with the 64 BCE earthquake, which lies within the 1σ error calibration range of the sample collected from it. Because deposition of the sample cannot be younger than the earthquake deformation, the calibrated range of sample KIA-3228 is further reduced to 200-64 BCE (Figure 4a).

Seismite B. The time between Events A and B was bracketed by four 14C dates: 1910 ± 40 and 1990 ± 40 BP (0-230 CE and 50 BCE-80 CE) for samples at a height of 107 cm, and 1930 ± 50 and 1940 ± 40 BP (50 BCE-220 CE and 50 BCE-140 CE) for samples at 132.5 cm. Seismite B was dated to 1950 ± 60 BP (KIA-3223) (100-70 BCE and 60 BCE-230 CE) based on a sample collected at 146 cm (Table 1, Figure 3a). The reduced calibrated range derived from the stratigraphic order of the samples is 50 BCE-230 CE. The association of the lower Event A with the 64 BCE earthquake implies that Event B is younger and therefore can be correlated with an earthquake that occurred in the early spring of 31 BCE. This earthquake falls within the 1σ error range of sample KIA-3223 (Table 2). Since the sample date cannot be younger than the correlated earthquake, the correlation with the 31 BCE earthquake reduces the calibrated range of Event B to 50-31 BCE (Figure 4b).

Seismites E and F. The timing of formation of Seismite E is inferred from the ages of three samples (KIA-3219, KIA-3218, KIA-3217) dated to 760 ± 30, 700 ± 30, and 690 ± 30 BP (Tables 1 and 2). The combined calendar ranges of these samples are 1220-1330 CE and 1350-1390 CE (Figure 3b). Seismite F is dated by three additional samples (KIA-3216, KIA-3215, KIA-3214A) to 680 ± 30, 660 ± 30, and 780 ± 30 BP (Table 1), corresponding to 1270-1330 CE and 1340-1400 CE (Figure 3b). Although very close in age, the 780 ± 30 BP age from Seismite F is slightly out of stratigraphic order and probably represents reworked material. For the purposes of this study it is excluded from the seismite age analysis.

Statistically, the 14C ages from Seismites E and F are almost indistinguishable. Nevertheless, the probability distributions of the ages and their stratigraphic order indicate two separate events. The samples from Seismite E have a higher distribution probability in the older range (II in Figure 3b), whereas the samples from Seismite F are shifted toward the younger range (I in Figure 3b). This is consistent with the stratigraphic order of the samples and supports their correlation with historical earthquakes. Seismite E is possibly correlated with the 1212 CE earthquake, from which it is separated by only a few years (Figure 4c, Table 2). Seismite F was correlated with the 1293 CE earthquake, which falls within its 1σ error range. This correlation reduces the calendar range of Seismite F to 1270-1293 CE (Figure 4d, Table 2).

Seismites G and H. These were recorded as liquefied sand beds in the most recent part of the Ze'elim sequence. Seismites G and H are constrained by four 14C ages described here in stratigraphic order: 260 ± 24 BP (KIA-8259) from the bottom of the sequence, 135 ± 31 BP (KIA-8261) collected from Seismite G, 93 ± 36 BP (KIA-11651) from the uppermost laminated lacustrine unit, and 279 ± 20 BP (KIA-8260) from Seismite H.

The bottom sample is represented by three 2σ calendar ranges: 1520-1570 CE, 1620-1670 CE, and 1780-1800 CE. The sample from Seismite G corresponds to the calendar ranges 1670-1780 CE and 1790-1960 CE. The sample from the laminated lacustrine unit represents the calendar ranges 1670-1740 CE and 1800-1960 CE. The stratigraphically youngest sample corresponds to older calendar ranges of 1520-1580 CE and 1620-1670 CE (Tables 1 and 2, Figure 3c).

Limnological and depositional evidence resolves the chronology and stratigraphy of this sequence. The liquefied layers G and H are separated by a laminated lacustrine unit composed of alternating aragonite and detritus, marking a rise in Dead Sea lake level at the end of the nineteenth century (Klein 1961). It appears that the first two samples from the bottom of the sequence are older than the ca. 1890 CE lake-level rise (Figure 3c). The age of the sample collected from the lacustrine unit must therefore be restricted to its younger calibrated range, which corresponds to the period of lake-level rise. The upper sample in the sequence is stratigraphically younger but yields an older 14C age that is out of stratigraphic order, probably because of recycling. This interpretation allows Event G to be correlated with the 1834 CE earthquake before the high stand of the lake, and Event H with the 1927 CE earthquake immediately following the high stand.

The 1834 CE earthquake falls within the 1σ calibration range of the sample collected from Seismite G. Correlation with this earthquake reduces the calibration range to 1670-1834 CE (Figure 4e). The disagreement between the age of the upper sample and the 1927 CE event may reflect reworking of organic debris, as commonly occurs in the recent shore environment of the Dead Sea during periods of declining lake level. The difference between the sample age and the deformation of the unit by the 1927 earthquake reflects either a long transport time, possibly several centuries, along the shoreline or reworking of material from newly exposed sediments.

Discussion

In this study, the assessment of the precision of the calibrated 14C data relies on three considerations:
  1. Statistical treatment of the 14C data, including the probability distribution of the measured data and calibration ranges.
  2. Limitation of the 14C calibration ranges by stratigraphic considerations.
  3. Correlation with known dates of seismic events.
Thus, even in cases of small deviation from the historical earthquake date (e.g., the 1212 CE event), the structure of our analysis appears to be robust.

The stratigraphic order of deposition and the correlation with historically dated earthquakes recorded in the Late Holocene sediments of the Dead Sea Basin were used to refine the 14C dates of samples collected from the Ze'elim sequence (Ken-Tor et al. 2001). Comparison between the refined 14C ages and the dates of historical earthquakes enables examination of the accuracy of the 14C dates. The uncertainty associated with a 14C age determination contains both systematic errors arising from the analytical and calibration procedures and geological uncertainty related to transport and deposition processes. These two sources of uncertainty are not uniform.

The calibration ranges were significantly reduced through the use of overlapping stratigraphically older samples and correlation with known historical earthquakes (Figure 4, Table 2). The refined ages are reduced by amounts ranging from a few decades to more than two centuries. The uncertainty remaining for most cases (less than two decades) includes the maximum lag period of transport and deposition of the sample prior to the earthquake. The only 14C sample that significantly predates the correlated earthquake (by stratigraphic considerations) was collected from a coarse sand unit, a typical shore environment deposition. The organic samples probably represent reworked material yielding ages a few centuries older than the earthquake. This single result must be supported by more 14C dates, but our observation shows that samples collected from shore deposits can have a relatively long transport period.

Conclusions

  1. The calibration ranges of 14C ages of organic debris from earthquake-disturbed layers (seismites) in the Holocene sedimentary section at the Ze'elim Terrace (Dead Sea) were significantly reduced by:
    • using the stratigraphic order of dated samples in the section
    • correlation with historically dated earthquakes
  2. The corresponding historical earthquake for most seismites lies within the 1σ error envelope of the 14C-dated samples. In several cases, the reduced calendar range is less than a few decades.
  3. The reduced ranges represent the maximum possible lag period between the age of the sample collected from the seismite and the time of deformation, which constrains the upper limit of deposition. This lag period is typically:
    • a few decades to less than two centuries for samples collected from lacustrine facies
    • probably a few centuries for samples collected from shore facies
  4. The assessment of the 14C ages of the Ze'elim sediments attests to the reliability of organic debris for 14C dating of Holocene sediments in the Dead Sea area. It demonstrates the ability to achieve highly precise (within several decades) 14C ages. This result may have implications for age determination of older prehistoric sequences in this and other arid regions.

Williams (2004)

Event A

In the author’s opinion, Ken-Tor (2001a) incorrectly assigns Event A in Nahal Ze’elim to a 64 BC earthquake. Based on radiocarbon dating of organic matter above and below this layer, Ken-Tor (2001a) constrained the age of Event A to be between 200 BC and 40 AD. The 64 BC interpretation is based on radiocarbon dating constraints, a correlative seismite unit in nearby Nahal Darga7 (Enzel et. al., 2000) and the earthquake catalog of Amiran et. al. (1994) which reports damage in Jerusalem to the city walls and the Second Temple but does not assign an epicenter. This catalog lists as references Arvanitakis (1903), Willis (1928), and Ben-Menahem (1979). Willis (1928) reports this earthquake based on Arvanitakis (1903) alone who lists damage from this earthquake as occurring in Antioch, Syria and the temple and walls of Jerusalem. Arvanitakis (1903) lists his references in a somewhat cryptic fashion mentioning, among others, Flavius Josephus, Dio Cassius, and the Talmud8, 9.

Ben-Menahem (1979) reports an earthquake with a postulated local magnitude of 7.7 and an epicenter located near Antioch, Syria (36.2 N, 36.1 E). He reports that the earthquake destroyed Antioch, was felt in Cyprus, and damaged the temple walls during the siege of Jerusalem by Hurkanos and the Nabateans. He lists Willis (1928), Sieberg (1932), Amiran (1952), Plasard and Kogoj (1962), and the Talmud as references.

Sieberg (1932) reports an Earthquake in 69 BC with an epicenter near Antioch, Syria10. Amiran (1952) reports a 64 BC earthquake felt in Jerusalem based on Willis (1928) and Arvanitakis (1903). Plasard and Kogoj (1962) report an Earthquake in 69 BC that destroyed Antioch, Syria also based on Willis (1928) and Arvanitakis (1903).

Ben-Menahem later revised his earthquake catalogs to report this earthquake as occurring in 63 BC with an epicenter near Antioch and a postulated ML = 7.9 (Ben-Menahem, 1981) and as occurring in 64 BC with an epicenter near Antioch and a postulated ML = 7.5 (Ben-Menahem, 1991).

Guidoboni (1994) reports a 65 BC earthquake with an epicenter near Antioch, Syria based on the following four historical references :

1. Historiae Philippicae by Pompeus Trogus which survives as an abbreviated version in Epitoma Historiarum Philippicarum Pompei Trogi by Justinus (40.2.1)

2. Chronographia by Iohannes Malalas (211.16-19)

3. Roman History by Dio Cassius (37.11.4)

4. History of the Pagans by Orosius (6.5.1)

According to Guidoboni (1994), Trogus identified an earthquake in Syria which caused thousands of deaths. The date is difficult to determine but Guidoboni interprets it as roughly 65 B.C.

Malalas refers to Pompey rebuilding the bouleuterion11 for it had fallen down. Guidoboni (1994) interprets the context of Malalas to date the rebuilding to have occurred right after Pompey conquered Syria in 65/64 B.C.

Guidoboni (1994) found Dio Cassius’ difficult to interpret as did the author of this report. Dio Cassius refers to an Earthquake in the cities controlled by Mitridates who was fighting Pompey of Rome.

Orosius also records an earthquake in the cities controlled by Mitridates right before Mitridates death in 63 BC. Some historians have claimed that this passage refers to an earthquake in Crimea in 63 BC but Guidoboni (1994) disputes this. The details of this interpretation are beyond the scope of this report. The interested reader should consult Guidoboni (1994) for a more extensive discussion.

It appears that an earthquake occurred in Antioch, Syria sometime around the year 65 B.C.12 Based on Ben-Menahem (1979, 1981, and 1991) it had a probable local magnitude between 7.5 and 7.9. Antioch, Syria is ~530 km. from Nahal Ze’elim. Based on the largest magnitude reported (ML = 7.9) and the attenuation relationship of Ben-Menahem (1982), peak horizontal ground acceleration (aHmax) would be expected to be equal to 0.02g in Nahal Ze’elim due to the ~65 B.C. earthquake. This is significantly below the threshold aHmax value of 0.23 g at which deformation is first expected to occur. Thus, it seems unlikely that Event A observed in the Nahal Ze’elim outcrop was caused by the Antioch, Syria ~65 B.C. earthquake.

To the author’s knowledge, no plausible candidate exists in the earthquake catalogs for the cause of the soil deformation observed as Event A.

Based on the range of sedimentation rates estimated by Ken-Tor et. al. (2000) in this part of the section (0.4-0.9 cm./year), Event A likely occurred between 229 BC and 114 BC.
Footnotes

7. Presumably, this would be deformed unit 8 which was constrained by radiocarbon dating to have occurred between 400 BC and 0 AD. Ken Tor (2001a) does not mention the specific unit in her paper. Nahal Darga is about 37 km north of Nahal Ze’elim on the western shores of the Dead Sea.

8. The references are transcribed from a bad photocopy, to the best of the author’s ability, as follows : Fl. Jos., Dion. Cassius, XXXIV, 11, Trnlté Bérakoth, ch. IV, I, ód. Krotoshin, fol. 76, Netmayer “Geogr. De Talmuth”. The author believes his transcription contains some errors.

9. The author was unable to discover what some of the references refer to, could not find any mention of an earthquake in 64 BC in the writings of Flavius Josephus, and was unable to find the citation in the Talmud for a 64 B.C. earthquake.

10. The author could not find any reference citations in Sieberg’s text but did not read Sieberg’s catalog in its entirety (the catalog is in German).

11. Bouleuterion = a council chamber in Ancient Greece.

12. Guidoboni (1994) details how various researchers have dated this earthquake as occurring as early as 69 BC and as late as 63 BC.

Event B - Early Spring 31 BC

Ken-Tor (2001a) assigned Event B in Nahal Ze’elim to an earthquake reported to have occurred in the early Spring of 31 BC. Based on radiocarbon dates, the age of the Event B earthquake was constrained to 50 BC-230 AD.

The primary historical source for the 31 BC earthquake is Josephus Flavius, who wrote in The Jewish War (Book 1, Ch. XIX, 370)

"But as he [King Herod] was avenging himself on his enemies, there fell upon him another providential calamity; for in the seventh year of his reign, when the war about Actium13 was at the height, at the beginning of the spring the earth was shaken, and destroyed an immense number of cattle, with thirty thousand men; but the army received no harm, because it lay in the open air."

This was, apparently, a very powerful and destructive earthquake. Amiran et. al. (1994) believe that local intensities were as high as X in several places while Arieh (1993) assigns a maximum local intensity value of IX and ML = 7.0. Ben-Menahem (1991) estimated ML = 6.7 and places the approximate epicenter ~25 km north of where the Jordan River empties into the Dead Sea along the Jericho Fault14.

Ben-Menahem (1991) also reports there was damage in Jerusalem at the Second Temple, Masada15, Qumran, and Jericho at Herod’s Winter Palace. Unfortunately, he does not specifically cite the sources for the damage reports.

Guidoboni (1994) believes this earthquake is mentioned by Iohannes Malalas in Chronographia when he reported that a city in Palestine named Salamine (present day Lod, near to Tel Aviv) was destroyed and rebuilt by Augustus and re-named Diospolis.

Rahmani (1964) reports that Jason’s Tomb in Jerusalem was destroyed by this earthquake. Amiran et. al. (1994) note that earthquake damage was severe in Galilee and Judea while Ambraseys reports severe damage in Galilee and moderate damage in Jerusalem. Sieberg (1936) reports that Chammath (Tiberias) was destroyed.

De Vaux (1973) and others interpret the 31 BC earthquake to be coincident with and causative of the abandonment of Qumran and the top of strata Ib where a destruction layer (evidence of fire) is present. Guidoboni (1994) cautions that the 31 BC earthquake could have been one of a few possible causes of the abandonment at Qumran as there was a lot of military activity in the area at the time.

According to De Vaux (1973), the earthquake appears to have damaged two cisterns, the tower of the main building, the pantry of the assembly hall, and a corner of the second building. A conflagration left a thick layer of ash in the open areas near the buildings. The damage to the cistern may still be evident in cracked steps leading into the cistern mentioned by de Vaux (1973).

Karcz and Kafri (1978), however, caution that the cracked steps at Qumran do not necessarily reflect earthquake damage16.

Karcz and Kafri (1978) also report that at Tel Abu Alek (Jericho), the eastern wall of the Hasmonean Palace dips to the east, a tilt tentatively attributed to the 31 BC earthquake (Nezer, personal communication to Karcz and Kafri). They note that at the same time, it also appears that the wall of the adjoining Herodian Palace is distorted and tilted eastwards, thus allowing the possibility that the tilting occurred at a date later than 31 BC.

De Vaux (1973) interprets the 31 BC Earthquake to have caused damage at Masada and Jericho but not necessarily at nearby Fashkha where a break in occupation appears to be unrelated to any seismic shock.

The 31 BC earthquake appears to have ruptured the ground surface near Jericho and shows up in trenches excavated by Reches and Hoexter (1981). A composite trench log is shown in Figure 10.

Seismites from the 31 BC earthquake appear to be present in the outcrops at Nahal Darga where a seismite was labeled as stratigraphic unit 11 by Enzel et. al. (2000) and is radiocarbon dated to approximately 0 AD.

At Nahal Ze’elim, Event B forms a thick continuous layer and appears as shown in Figure 13.

The result of the modeling is shown in Figure 14. Here, the yellow circle is the postulated location of the nearest fault rupture to Nahal Ze’elim if the earthquake local magnitude was equal to 7.0. A postulated fault rupture is highlighted in yellow.

The modeling suggests that the Jericho fault was responsible for this earthquake and the southern extent of fault rupture was close to Nahal Darga. Based on proximity to the fault rupture, it would be expected that Qumran and Jericho would have suffered extensive damage.
Footnotes

13. Actium was the site of a naval battle in Greece between the forces of Mark Anthony and Caesar Octavianus who was later known as Augustus Caesar. King Herod of Israel allied himself with Anthony and fought a series of land battles with the Arabians at the same time. Herod’s army is believed to have been camped in the plains of Jericho at the time of the earthquake (de Vaux, 1973).

14. Ben-Menahem (1991) lists the epicenter latitude and longitude as 32 N 35.5 E.

15. Ben-Menahem (1991) lists archeological evidence for earthquake damage at Masada as tilted walls, fallen masonry, and collapse. Karcz and Kafri (1975) attributed earthquake damage at Masada to two separate earthquakes. Damaged and cracked floors were interpreted as being caused by a 1st century BC earthquake and tilted walls, oriented fallen masonry, and collapse of parts of buildings over the rock cliffs were interpreted as being caused by a 1st century BC earthquake and later shocks.

16. Karcz and Kafri (1978) state that difficulties in distinguishing earthquake-induced fractures from those due to geotechnical effects are well illustrated by the case of Khirbet Qumran. They argue that the prominent fracture in the staircase could be explained by instability of the Lisan Marl substrate, differential swelling, desiccation, compaction, seepage, percolation, or piping rather than tectonic displacement alone.

Event C - Fri. 3 April 33 AD ?

Ken-Tor et. al. (2000) assign Event C in Nahal Ze’elim to an earthquake reported to have occurred in 33 AD. Ken-Tor et. al. (2000) constrain the age of Event C to 5-50 AD based on a sedimentation rate determined by radiocarbon dating of organic matter throughout the outcrop and the assumption that Event B occurred in 31 BC. Event C is discontinuous in the Nahal Ze’elim outcrops and pinches out in some locations.

The primary source document for the 33 AD earthquake is the 27th chapter of the Gospel of Matthew in the New Testament
. It describes an earthquake occurring when Jesus of Nazareth died on the cross.

"50 But Jesus, again crying out in a loud voice, yielded up his spirit. 51 At that moment the curtain in the Temple was ripped in two from top to bottom; and there was an earthquake with rocks splitting apart."

The curtain referred to comes from the Aramaic word parokhet, which was a one foot thick piece of fabric covering the entrance to the holy of the holies in the Second Temple. The Gospels of Mark and Luke also mention the tearing of the temple curtain in the moments surrounding Jesus’ death but do not cite an earthquake as the cause of destruction17. In Chapter 28, The Gospel of Matthew goes on to describe another earthquake roughly 36 hours after the one described above:

"1 After the Sabbath, toward dawn on Sunday, Mary of Magdala and the other Mary went to see the grave. 2 Suddenly there was a violent earthquake, for an angel of God came down from heaven, rolled away the stone and sat on it."

In modern terms, this would be described as an aftershock event.

Determining the date of the crucifixion is not a simple task.

Arieh18 (1993) assigned a maximum epicentral Intensity of VI+ to this earthquake but did not postulate a magnitude. Arieh (1993) postulated that the epicenter was likely in the Dead Sea Fault Zone.

Willis (1928) using Arvanitakis (1903) as his only reference reports that this earthquake was felt in Bithynie, Judea, and Jerusalem. Arvanitakis (1903) reports that the earthquake was felt in Bithynie, Judea, and Jerusalem, using as references the gospels of Matthew and Mark and as well as Cyril of Jerusalem and Phlegon19. The author was unable to find 33 AD earthquake references in Cyril of Jerusalem. Willis (1928) appears to be used as reference in a number of modern day earthquake catalogs for the 33 AD earthquake.

Guidoboni (1994) does not record an earthquake in 30 or 33 AD but does mention one on 24 Nov. 29 AD that was felt in Nicea, Bithynia, and Pontus. Bithynia (one of the places mentioned by Willis (1928) and Arvanitakis (1903)) is a region in northern Anatolia (aka Asia Minor or modern day Turkey). Pontus and Nicea are nearby.

It is extremely unlikely that an earthquake from the Dead Sea could be felt in north Anatolia and vice-versa. There is too great of a distance between the two locations.

However, because the earthquake of 24 Nov. 29 AD occurred close in time to or coincident with a solar eclipse in north Anatolia, many writers (particularly early Christian ones20) have referred to this north Anatolian earthquake as the earthquake of the crucifixion. It appears that they did this because a solar eclipse was viewed as the cause of the "darkness over the land" reported between noon and 3 pm21 by the Gospels on the day of the crucifixion and the solar eclipse and earthquake were assumed to have been observed and felt all over the known world at the time, including Jerusalem.

As mentioned previously, it is extremely unlikely that an earthquake in that part of the world could cause damage in north Anatolia and Jerusalem at the same time. It is also not possible that a solar eclipse could have occurred during the crucifixion. Solar eclipses are not possible during a full moon and all gospel accounts agree that the crucifixion took place on the 14th or 15th of the month of Nisan in the Jewish calendar. The 14th or 15th of Nisan occurs 14 or 15 days after the new moon and is therefore a time of a full moon and solar eclipses22 cannot occur during the time of a full moon. Humphrey and Waddington (1983) propose that the most likely explanation for the darkness was a dust storm. Dust storms, known locally as khamsins, are fairly common in the spring time in Judea.

Unfortunately, parts of these erroneous ancient accounts have seeped into the earthquake catalogues and still persist today.

An example of the ancient accounts is contained in a fragment by Phlegon where the following is written :

"In accordance with the prophecies which had been made about him, Jesus Christ, came to the Passion in the 18th year of the reign of Tiberius at which time we also find in the memorials of other peoples these very words : 'There was an eclipse of the sun. Bithynia was shaken by an earthquake and many buildings collapsed in the city of Nicea and all of these things correspond to what happened during the Passion of the Saviour'"

Phlegon also writes

"... In the 4th year of the two hundred and second Olympiad [32/33 A.D.], there was a great eclipse of the sun which exceeded all previous eclipses: at the 6th hour [noon] day turned into such dark night that the stars could be seen in the sky, and an earthquake in Bithynia destroyed many buildings in the city of Nicea."

Boll (1909) was able to provide a correct date for this northwest Anatolian earthquake as 29 A.D. by relating it to the solar eclipse mentioned in the historical sources (Guidoboni, 1994).

By eliminating damage reports incorrectly associated with the Anatolian earthquake of 29 AD, one is left with the gospel accounts for damage reports on the 33 AD earthquake. Based on the gospel accounts, the author assigned a Modified Mercalli Intensity of VII to the damage to the Second Temple described in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. At MMI values of VII, everyone runs outdoors, damage is negligible in buildings of good design, slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures, and considerable in poorly built structures. Some chimneys are broken.

The Second Temple was razed to the ground by the Romans in August of 70 AD after suppressing the first Jewish rebellion against Rome. The temple is thought to have been located on the western side of what is now known as the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. This part of the Temple Mount is underlain by fill placed during Herodian times (probably laid between 19 BC and 4 BC) and is, therefore, likely to undergo site amplification during earthquakes.

In fact, the Second Temple and succeeding structures on the western side of the Temple Mount appear to have suffered frequent damage during earthquakes. Such site amplification lends some credence to the Gospel of Matthew describing an earthquake which caused damage to the temple but not enough damage to other buildings in Jerusalem to generate still extant extra-biblical historical reports of an earthquake in 33 AD.

For an MMI Intensity of VII, the estimated peak horizontal ground acceleration is presumed to be in the range of 0.1-0.15 g. In considering the likelihood of site amplification and the general uncertainty of attenuation laws, the author believes a reasonable bracket for non-amplified bedrock peak horizontal ground acceleration in Jerusalem due to the 33 AD earthquake to be from 0.05 to 0.2 g.

There is another possible clue about the intensity of this earthquake. It may have been observed in trenches excavated near Jericho (Reches and Hoexter, 1981 – the trench log is shown in Figure 10). The pottery fragments from that trench suggest that the soil rupture observed at Level A was either reactivated by a 1st century AD earthquake or reworked in the 1st century AD. If the 31 BC rupture was re-activated by another earthquake, it is possible that an earthquake in 33 AD caused the reactivation.

The Event C outcrop at Nahal Ze’elim is shown in Figure 13 and a thin section that includes the top of Event C is shown in Figure 16. The sedimentology is complicated.

The result of the modeling is shown in Figure 17. Here, the yellow circle is the postulated location of the nearest fault rupture to Nahal Ze’elim if the earthquake local magnitude was equal to 6.3. The green circles postulate the location of the nearest fault rupture to Jerusalem for a M = 6.3 earthquake for various values of peak horizontal ground acceleration (a) in Jerusalem. The values of a vary from 0.05 g to 0.20 g23. The modeling suggests two possible scenarios; fault slippage on one of the faults on the western side of the Dead Sea or fault slippage on one of the faults on the eastern side of the Dead Sea. Potential ruptures for both scenarios are highlighted in yellow in Figure 1724.

The trench location of Reches and Hoexter (1981) is also shown in Figure 17. This trench may contain evidence for reactivation of the fault rupture first created in the 31 BC earthquake. If this is the case, then the fault rupture should extend further north which would imply that the earthquake was of a larger magnitude than 6.3.
Footnotes

17. The curtain tearing incident described in Matthew, Mark, and Luke can also be interpreted allegorically.

18. Based on Turcotte & Arieh (1988).

19. The latter two references were listed as : Cyrille de Jerusalem Catechismes 13 Encycl. Theolog. Dict. De Bible t. 4 p. 481 and Phlegon.

20. Eusebius (Chronicon), Malalas (Chronographia), and Orosius (Seven Books of History Against the Pagans) as reported by Guidoboni (1994).

21. From the 6th to the 9th hour in the Jewish Day.

22. Solar eclipses can only occur when the moon is between the sun and earth.

23. The green circles were generated using the attenuation law of Ben-Menahem (1982) and reflect a spread of values due to uncertainty about site amplification at the Second Temple and a paucity of damage reports in Jerusalem.

24. For a magnitude of 6.3, the predicted rupture length would be 20 km based on Wells and Coppersmith (1994).

Event C - 47 or 48 AD ?

Although Event C in Nahal Ze’elim is currently interpreted by Ken-Tor et. al. (2000) as being a result of a 33 AD earthquake, the inherent inaccuracy of the dating of this Event indicates that other earthquakes must be considered. If one concurs with Ken-Tor et. al. (2000) that Event B is due to the very destructive earthquake of the Spring of 31 BC, six historically reported earthquakes become possible explanations for the soil deformation present in Event C; a presumed submarine earthquake with an epicenter off of the coast of Cyprus occurring sometime between 26 BC and 20 BC (Turcotte and Arieh, 1988), another presumed submarine earthquake with an epicenter off the coast of modern day Lebanon near the port city of Sidon in 19 AD (Turcotte and Arieh, 1988), the 33 AD earthquake reported in the Gospel of Matthew, a 37 AD and a 47 AD earthquake, both with epicenters close to Antioch, Syria (Guidoboni, 1994), and a 48 AD earthquake believed by Turcotte and Arieh (1988) to be caused by a rupture along the Arava Fault.

The profile in Nahal Ze’elim and attenuation relations indicate that the only earthquakes recorded in the Nahal Ze’elim sediments are those which were caused by earthquakes that were a result of fault ruptures within or near to the Dead Sea Rift Valley. Thus, the 26-20 BC earthquake off of the coast of Cyprus, the 19 AD earthquake off the coast of Lebanon, and the two earthquakes in Antioch, Syria (in 37 and 47 AD) are not likely candidates for the deformation present in Event C.

The 48 AD Arava Fault rupture earthquake however is considered a likely candidate and was, therefore, modeled in this study.

Turcotte and Arieh (1988) believe this earthquake was caused by a rupture along the Arava fault, a very long fault which runs from the Gulf of Aqaba to the southern terminus of the Dead Sea. Turcotte and Arieh (1988) assigned a Magnitude of 6.2 to this earthquake. Arieh (1993) estimated a maximum epicentral intensity of IX. Ben-Menahem (1979) also noted that there was archeological evidence25 that indicated an earthquake occurred in the Arava between 9 BC and 50 AD.

It is also possible that the 48 AD earthquake is misreported in the earthquake catalogs. Willis (1928), whose earthquake catalog forms a reference for many of the more recent earthquake catalogs, noted that an earthquake in 48 AD was felt in Palestine and Jerusalem and that damage was light. The only reference for this was Avranitakis (1903) who reports on a 48 AD earthquake felt in Jerusalem and Palestine where damage was light. Arvanitakis (1903) also mentions that there was the collapse of houses. The source for Arvanitakis (1903) is the Acts of the Apostles (8:24) in the New Testament. Although there is mention of an earthquake in the Acts of the Apostles around 47-48 AD in Philippi, Macedonia while Paul and Silas were imprisoned, this account is not in 8:2426.

In chapter 16 of The Acts of the Apostles, the following passage (16:25-26) can be found

"Around midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, while the other prisoners listened attentively. Suddenly there was a violent earthquake which shook the prison to its foundations. All the doors flew open, and everyone’s chains came loose."

It is very unlikely that an earthquake in Macedonia would cause damage in Jerusalem and it is, therefore, possible that the 48 AD earthquake in the Arava may be misrepresented as a Judean earthquake based on a misinterpretation of the Acts of the Apostles that then propagated through the earthquake catalogues.

Karcz and Lom (1987) concur that the 48 AD earthquake may be a misrepresentation of a Judean earthquake based on Paul and Silas’ release from prison in Macedonia
.

The result of the modeling is shown in Figure 18. Here, the smaller yellow circle is the postulated location of the nearest fault rupture to Nahal Ze’elim if the earthquake local magnitude was equal to 6.3. The larger yellow circle postulates the location of the nearest fault rupture to Nahal Ze’elim for a M = 6.56 earthquake. Based on the modeling it is possible that the Arava Fault could have ruptured in its northern segments and caused the deformation observed in Nahal Ze’elim. Since the author was unable to find any original source documentation of damage reports due to this earthquake, it will not be discussed further.
Footnotes

25. The description in the catalog reads as follows : "Structures at the Nabatian Temple at Aram (Gebel-E-Ram, 40 km. East of Akaba, built ca 31-16 AD), fortified to withstand earthquakes. Same at Tel-El Haleife, near Eilat, and at Petra."

26. This part of Acts takes place in Samaria and depicts a conversation between the apostles Peter and John and a man named Simon. Acts 8:24 reads "and having answered, Simon said, you pray for me to the lord that nothing may come upon me of which you have spoken". There is no mention of an earthquake.

Event D - May 19, 363 AD ?

Ken-Tor et. al. (2000) assign Event D in Nahal Ze’elim to the 363 AD earthquake although Agnon (personal communication, 2004) relates that this assignment has been revised and a more likely candidate for Event D is an earthquake that occurred in 419 AD. Using sedimentation rates determined from radiocarbon dating throughout the outcrop, Ken-Tor et. al. (2000) constrained the age of Event D to between 358 and 580 AD.

Guidoboni (1994) found numerous sources documenting the 363 AD earthquake and produced a map of the felt area which is shown in Figure 19.

Russell (1980) investigated the historical background and archeological evidence surrounding the 363 AD earthquake in depth. The primary documentary evidence used by Russell (1980) is an apparently pseudonymous27 letter attributed to Cyril, the Bishop of Jerusalem from ca 350-388 AD. The letter appears to have been written during the early years of the 5th century (Russell, 1980). The letter cites damage in 21 localities including the following : Baishan, Caesarea, Gophna, Tiberias, Paneas, Ashqelon, Azotas, Beit Gubrin, Samaria (the region), Petra, Jerusalem, Hada (suburb of Jerusalem), Lydda, Japho, Sebastia, Nikopolis, Sepphoris, Antipatris, and es-Salt (modern town in Jordan Valley)28.

Russell (1980) also interpreted archeological evidence of earthquake damage in Petra and other localities due to the 363 AD earthquake.

Amiran et. al. (1994) described the 363 AD earthquake as a strong earthquake affecting most of Palestine and Judea. Severe damage was reported at

1. Banias

2. Capernaum

3. Tiberias

4. The thermal baths of Hammat Gader (Hirshfeld, 1994)

5. Sippori

6. Beth She’arim

7. Beth She’an

8. Sebaste

9. Nablus - Bull and Campbell (1968) interpreted that three cisterns in the Zeus temple at Balath (Nablus) were destroyed by this earthquake. The dating is based on numismatic finds.

10. Gophna

11. Jerusalem - damage to the temple area, some workmen killed. Russell (1980) thinks the latter assertion is based on religious exaggerations and considers it doubtful.

12. Caesarea

13. Aphek

14. Jaffa

15. Petra

16. Avdat (Fabiani, 1994).

17. A seiche was reported in the southern part of the Dead Sea (Shaelm, 1956).

Russell (1980) interpreted tsunami reports (in later accounts only) to belong to the earthquake of 365 AD (in the Northern Mediterranean) and not the 363 AD earthquake. Russell (1980) also argued that the 362 AD date reported in some earthquake catalogs is incorrect and should be 363 AD.

Arieh (1993) estimated a maximum epicentral intensity of IX, located the epicenter in the Jordan Valley (east of the Lisan peninsula), and assigned a magnitude (ML) of 6.4 or 7.0. Arieh (1994) based this on previous work by Ben-Menahem (1979) and Turcotte & Arieh (1988). Ben-Menahem (1981) estimated ML = 6.4 and placed the epicenter on the Arava Fault.

Galli and Galadani (2001) estimated that the magnitude was greater than or equal to 6.5 and placed the epicenter in the central-northern Wadi Arava. This was based on work by Abou Karaki (1987). Abou Karaki’s postulated epicenter is shown in Figure 20.

Ben-Menahem (1979) reports an earthquake in 362 AD which appears to be the same earthquake as the one in 363 AD. Reports indicate a seiche was observed in the Dead Sea, and that Rabbath-Moab (Aeropolis) and Kir-Hareset (Kerak) were destroyed. Estimated magnitude was ML = 6.4.

There appear to be two schools of thought regarding this earthquake. Some researchers (Russell, 1980 or Guidoboni, 1994) appear to place the epicentral region in the Jordan Valley north of the Dead Sea and others (Galli and Galadini, 2001, Abou Karaki, 1987, or Ben-Menahem, 1981) place the epicentral region in the Arava south of the Dead Sea.

The result of the modeling is shown in Figure 21. The smaller yellow circle is the postulated location of the nearest fault rupture to Nahal Ze’elim if the earthquake local magnitude was equal to 6.5. The larger yellow circle postulates the location of the nearest fault rupture to Nahal Ze’elim for a local magnitude 7.0 earthquake. If one accepts that the epicentral region is in the Jordan Valley, the modeling suggests the earthquake was of a magnitude around 7.0. From Wells and Coppersmith (1994), one can estimate a fault rupture length of 27 km. for a ML = 6.5 earthquake which is too short of a rupture to explain damage further north. Rupture length is 57 km. for the ML = 7.0 earthquake and a postulated rupture for this size of earthquake is highlighted in yellow in Figure 21. This fault rupture fits nicely with the towns where damage was reported (Russell, 1980) which are labeled in Figure 21.

Because the author was unable to obtain sources which discuss detailed reasons to postulate an epicenter in the Arava (particularly Abou Karaki, 1987), this possibly will not be discussed in this report.
Footnotes

27. writing under a false or fictitious name.

28. Russell (1980) referenced a translation from Syriac by Brock (1977) of Cyril’s letter. A relevant passage is quoted:

"Now we should like to write down for you the names of the towns which were overthrown: Beit Gubrin – more than half of it; part of Baishan, the whole of Sebastia and its territory, more than half Lydda and its territory, about half of Ashqelon, the whole of Antipatris and its territory, part of Caesarea, more than half of Samaria, part of NSL, a third of Paneas, half of Azotus, part of Gophna, more than half of Petra (RQM), Hada, a suburb of the city (Jerusalem) ... Part of Tiberias too, and its territory, more than half RDQLY, the whole of Sepphoris (SWPRYN) and its territory. Aina d'Gader, Haifa (? HLP) flowed with blood for three days, the whole of Jappho (YWPY) perished, (and) part of DNWS. This event took place on Monday at the third hour, and partly at the ninth hour of the night. There was great loss of life here. (It was) on 19 Iyyar of the year 674 of the kingdom of Alexander the Great." (Brock 1977:276)

Event D - 419 AD ?

Agnon (personal communication, 2004) relates that Event D was likely caused by an earthquake that is reported to have occurred in 419 AD.

Ben-Menahem (1979) estimated this earthquake had a magnitude ML = 6.2 and an epicenter near Safed (in the Galilee area)29. Destruction was reported at Khirbet-Shama and Aphek (Antipatris) and the earthquake was felt in Jerusalem (Avi-Yonah, 1975). Russell (1985) examined the source historical documents and concluded that there was damage in Palestine and Jerusalem and that the damage was likely more extensive than was indicated in the historical texts. The event is described in Marcelli’s Chronicon.

"Many cities and towns in Palestine were thrown down by an earthquake." (Rolfe, 1956)

Russell (1985) reports that the earthquake of 419 AD was used to date the collapse of Synagogue 2 at Khirbet Shena (Meyers, Kraebel, and Strange, 1976:36-38) and that 419 AD destruction was identified at Antipatris (Kochavi, 1976:52, 1981:84, Karcz and Kafri, 1978:245). Other more speculative possibilities of archeologically observed earthquake damage due to the 419 AD event are contained in Russell (1985).

The result of the modeling is shown in Figure 22. The small yellow circle is the postulated location of the nearest fault rupture to Nahal Ze’elim if the earthquake local magnitude was equal to 6.2. A postulated fault rupture for this model is highlighted in yellow.

It appears that the conclusion of various researchers is that this earthquake had an epicentral region to the north of the Dead Sea. Ben-Menahem (1979) placed the epicenter in Safed. This contradicts the modeling which suggests an epicenter closer to Nahal Ze’elim. It is the author’s opinion that Event D was not caused by a 419 AD earthquake.
Footnotes

29. Approximate location in terms of latitude and longitude was listed as 33.0 N 35.5 E.

Event E - May 20 1202 AD ?

Ken-Tor et. al. (2000) did not assign the 1202 AD earthquake to Event E.

The epicenter of the earthquake of 1202 AD was estimated by Arieh (1977) to be in the Jordan River Valley between the Dead Sea and the Sea of Galilee. Arieh (1977) based the epicenter estimate on isoseismals (Figure 23) reconstructed from analysis of Arabic manuscripts by Sharon (1976). Arieh (1977) placed the epicenter near to the modern town of Nablus (known in ancient times as Shechem), which was completely destroyed by the earthquake.

Sieberg (1936) also created a isoseismal map for this earthquake. It Is shown in Figure 24.

Ambraseys, Melville, and Adams (1994) dated the earthquake as occurring on May 20 1202 AD30. The earthquake is described as a major one with an epicentral region in the Upper Jordan and Litani Valleys. Ambraseys, Melville, and Adams (1994) further state :

"[The earthquake] was responsible for tens of thousands of casualties. The shock occurred in early morning and was felt throughout Egypt causing great concern but little damage. In Cairo, the shock was of long duration and aroused sleepers. Three violent shocks were reported but only tall or vulnerable buildings were affected along with those on high ground, which threatened to collapse. A lesser shock was felt about midday the same morning31. The main shock was felt from Sicily to Azerbaijan in NW Iran and from Constantinople to Aswan32."

Ambraseys and Melville (1988) did an extensive study of this earthquake drawing on Muslim and Christian historical documents and earthquake catalogs. They demonstrated how a number of errors seeped into the earthquake catalogs. They estimated the magnitude at ~7.6 and postulate that the earthquake of May 20 1202 AD was possibly followed by a large magnitude aftershock 4-5 months later. The four earthquakes that appear in the catalogs in the years 1201, 1202, 1203, and 1204 are all likely echoes of the May 20 1202 AD earthquake and its possible aftershock. They reported that the epicentral region was in Southern Syria/Northern Israel.

The felt area for the 1202 earthquake is shown in Figure 25 (Ambraseys, Melville, and Adams, 1994).

By using the formula of Ben-Menahem (1982) relating Peak Intensity to Magnitude.

ML = 0.49 Io + 1.80

one can estimate a magnitude of 6.2 to 6.7 based on a peak intensity (Io) of IX-X estimated by Arieh (1977). If one uses the formula of Gutenberg and Richter (1956)

M = 2/3 Io + 1

one can estimate a magnitude between 7.0 and 7.7.

Arieh (1993) estimated the magnitude at 6.8 based on Ben-Menahem’s Earthquake Catalog (1979).

The result of the modeling is shown in Figure 26. The yellow circle is the postulated location of the nearest fault rupture to Nahal Ze’elim if the earthquake local magnitude was equal to 7.2. A postulated fault rupture is highlighted in yellow33. While the postulated fault rupture is somewhat south of the suggested rupture from the isosiesmal maps shown in Figures 23 and 24, there is enough congruence between the modeling and isosiesmal maps to suggest that event E was likely caused by the 1202 AD earthquake.
Footnotes

30. Monday 26 Sha'ban 598 AD.

31. Abd al-Latif pp 264-73 trans. DeSacy pp 414-5.

32. Ambraseys and Melville (1988).

33. Based on Wells and Coppersmith (1994), the rupture length for a Magnitude 7.2 earthquake should be 78 km.

Event E - May 1212 AD ?

Ken-Tor et. al. (2000) assign Event E in Nahal Ze’elim to the 1212 AD earthquake.

Ambraseys, Melville, and Adams (1994) report that this earthquake was strongly felt in Egypt, particularly in Cairo and Fustat. At al-Shaubak and al-Karak, towers and houses were destroyed, and casualties were reported34. In the Sinai peninsula, the shock caused severe damage to the monastery of St. Catherine (Ambraseys et. al., 1994). Based on the distribution of damage, it has been suggested that the earthquake’s epicenter should be sought in the Gulf of Aqaba or south of the Dead Sea (Ambraseys et. al., 1994). The earliest account says that it was strongest in the port of Aila (Eilat) by the sea35. Ambraseys et. al. (1994) date the earthquake as occurring on May 1, 1212 AD36 with a postulated magnitude of MF = 6.7.

Amiran et. al. (1994) estimated MMS Intensities of VIII in Kerak and VIII-IX in Elat37..

Arieh (1993) dated the earthquake as occurring on May 2, 1212 AD and estimated a maximum epicentral intensity of VIII. The epicentral region was postulated as being in South Central Sinai. Arieh (1993) based this on Ben-Menahem (1979). Arieh (1993) estimated an MMS Intensity of VIII in Cairo38.

Klinger et. al. (2000) estimated the epicenter to be near to Elat as is shown in Figure 2739.

The result of the modeling is shown in Figure 28. The smaller yellow circle is the postulated location of the nearest fault rupture to Nahal Ze’elim if the earthquake local magnitude was equal to 6.7. The larger yellow circle postulates the location of the nearest fault rupture to Nahal Ze’elim for a M = 7.0 earthquake. The modeling suggests that the fault rupture responsible for the 1212 AD earthquake was likely located near the Gulf of Aqaba and northern Arava. The postulated rupture location is generally consistent with the epicentral estimates of Ambraseys, Melville, and Adams (1994), Arieh (1993), and Klinger et. al. (2000).

The distribution of reported damage and the results of the modeling suggest that the earthquake was centered south of the Dead Sea, probably in the Gulf of Aqaba or northern Arava region. It is the author's conclusion that Event E was caused by the 1212 AD earthquake.
Footnotes

34. Ibn Kathir XIII 62; al-Maqrizi, I/I, 175; al-Suyuti p. 49/35 as cited in Ambraseys, Melville, and Adams (1994).

35. Abu Shama, Dhail p. 78; also Taher (1979) p. 137/82, 238 as cited in Ambraseys, Melville, and Adams (1994).

36. 27 Dhu’l-Qa’da 608.

37. Based on Poirier, Romanowicz, and Taher (1980).

38. Based on Poirier, Romanowicz, and Taher (1980).

39. This estimate appears to be based on either Abou Karaki (1987) or Ambraseys, Melville, and Adams (1994).

Event F - 1293 AD

Ken-Tor et. al. (2000) assign Event F in Nahal Ze’elim to the 1293 AD earthquake.

Arieh (1992) estimated the Magnitude of the 1293 AD earthquake to be 6.2 ± 0.3. Arieh (1977) estimated the epicenter to be near the crusader fortress of Karak in modern day Jordan based on isoseismals generated from historic reports. His isosiesmal map is shown in Figure 29. The epicentral region shown in Figure 29 is in general agreement with the epicentral location in Figure 27.

Ambraseys et. al. (1994) place the epicenter at 31.0 N 35.6 E which is in broad agreement with other epicentral estimates. The magnitude (MF) was estimated at 6.6.

Arieh (1977) noted a maximum intensity of VIII at Kerak. Although Arieh (1977) estimated the epicenter to be near to Karak, he noted that it is difficult to explain the absence of reported damages in other cities such as Nablus, Jerusalem, Hebron, etc. which generally suffer from such earthquakes.

Some other reported intensities are listed in Table 2.

Kerak — Three fortress towers destroyed — VIII.

Ramleh — Mosque's minaret cracked — VII.

Lydda — No damage reported — VI.

Ghaza — Mosque's minaret cracked — VII.

Amiran et. al. (1994) noted that the earthquake was felt in Qaqun, Ramle, Lod, Gaza, and Kerak where three towers of the citadel collapsed.

The result of the modeling is shown in Figure 30. The smaller yellow circle is the postulated location of the nearest fault rupture to Nahal Ze’elim if the earthquake local magnitude was equal to 6.5. The larger yellow circle postulates the location of the nearest fault rupture to Nahal Ze’elim for a M = 6.8 earthquake. The modeling suggests fault slippage near the eastern shores of the Dead Sea and agrees with other researchers' assessments of epicenter and magnitude for the 1293 AD earthquake. It is the author's conclusion that Event F was caused by the 1293 AD earthquake.

Agnon et al. (2006)

Abstract

Observations of intraclast breccia layers in the Dead Sea basin, formerly termed "mixed layers," provide an exceptionally long and detailed record of past earthquakes and define a frontier of paleoseismic research. Multiple studies of these seismites have advanced our understanding of the earthquake history of the Dead Sea and of the processes that form the intraclast breccias. In this paper, we describe a systematic study of intraclast breccia layers in laminated sequences.

The relationship of intraclast breccia layers to intraformational fault scarps has motivated the investigation of these seismites. Geophysical evidence shows that the faults extend into the subsurface, supporting their potential association with strong earthquakes.

We define field criteria for the recognition of intraclast breccias, focusing on features diagnostic of a seismic origin. The field criteria stem from our understanding of the mechanisms of breccia formation, which include ground acceleration, shearing, liquefaction, water escape, fluidization, and resuspension of the originally laminated mud.

Comparison between a dated record of breccia layer and the record of historical earthquakes provides an independent test for a seismic origin. The historical dating is significantly more precise and accurate than the radiocarbon dating of breccia layers. Yet, assuming that the lamination of the sediments shows an annual cycle, the precision of counting laminae may approach the precision of the historical record. A similar accuracy is then expected for the intervals between earthquakes. We review our work based on counting laminae representing the historical period, mutually corroborating the seismic origin and the annual lamination.

The correlation of documented historical earthquakes with individual breccia layers provides quantitative estimates for the threshold of ground motion for breccia formation in terms of earthquake magnitude and epicentral distance.

The investigation of breccia layers and the associated historical earthquakes has underscored cases in which a breccia layer represents a pair of earthquakes. We consider the resolution of individual events in records of breccia layers. A thick breccia layer can account for multiple events, biasing the paleoseismic record. The resolution of an interseismic time interval is no better than the ratio between the thickness of a breccia layer and the rate of sedimentation.

We use revised age data for the Lisan Formation and reassess temporal clustering of earthquakes during the late Pleistocene. The variation of recurrence interval corroborates significant clustering. During periods of clustered earthquakes, of order of 1000-5000 yr, the interseismic interval becomes short, and the resolution diminishes, so the peak rate of recurrence may be underestimated.

Recurrence intervals inferred from the Dead Sea record of Holocene breccia layers do not feature the extreme variation encountered in the late Pleistocene record. Yet the Holocene record shows marked transitions between periods, each with relatively uniform recurrence interval. Two of the transitions are contemporaneous with transitions in the recurrence intervals of the Anatolian faults, implying broad-scale elastic coupling.

Introduction

The young discipline of paleoseismology applies geological methods to two aspects of destructive earthquakes: geological faults as earthquake sources and the recognition of geological evidence of strong ground shaking (McCalpin, 1996; Yeats et al., 1997). Earthquake sources are studied by on-fault investigations, typically excavating trenches across and along fault traces and analyzing geomorphology controlled by the fault zone. Ground shaking studies, not necessarily conducted on fault traces, are based on analyzing liquefied sands, landslides, slumps, rock-falls, and sediments deposited in water bodies (Obermeier, 1996). Rock-falls inside caves, associated with damage and growth of speleothemes, can be dated precisely by U-Th analysis of these cave deposits (Kagan et al., 2005). Water waves generated by earthquakes (tsunami and seiche) can disrupt sedimentary structures at considerable distances from the earthquake source (Cita et al., 1996; Kastens and Cita, 1981), and lacustrine seiche waves can produce slump deposits that preserve a record of past earthquakes (Chapron et al., 1999; Siegenthaler et al., 1987). While such sediments can offer evidence for past earthquakes, the disruption might also be attributed to nonseismic processes that involve high mechanical energies (e.g., Li et al., 1996). In this paper, we present recent advances in off-fault paleoseismological studies related to our ongoing research of Dead Sea sediments.

Faulted sediments in the Dead Sea basin have long been used to locate the Sinai-Arabia plate boundary (Garfunkel et al., 1981; Neev and Emery, 1967; Zak and R. Freund, 1966) and related secondary fault traces (Agnon, 1982, 1983; Bowman, 1995; Gardosh et al., 1990) (Fig. 1). A pioneering paleoseismic study of the Jericho fault trace near the Dead Sea constrained recent activity and related surface ruptures to the historical earthquakes of 31 B.C. and 749 A.D. (Reches and Hoexter, 1981, Gardosh et al., 1990). More recent paleoseismic studies outside the Dead Sea basin have added information related to the long-term behavior (Amit et al., 2002) and its slip rate for the past two millennia (Klinger et al., 2000; Meghraoui et al., 2003; Niemi et al., 2001). A unique collaboration of archaeology, history, and geology has resolved individual slip events with considerable accuracy on the Jordan Gorge segment of the Dead Sea fault (Ellenblum et al., 1998), and further studies of offset stream channels have defined a lower bound for the long-term slip rate of 3 mm/yr (Marco et al., 2005). A variety of indicators give a similar value for the Arava Valley (Fig. 1), south of the Dead Sea (Avni et al., 2000; Klinger et al., 2000). A 2000-year-old aqueduct in Syria (350 km north of the Dead Sea) is displaced 14 m, yielding a maximum slip rate of 7 mm/yr (Meghraoui et al., 2003).

The past decade has brought a surge of paleoseismic studies in the Dead Sea basin. Active fault traces have been identified as much as 3 km away from the proposed location of the master faults (Fig. 1) (Bartov, 1999; Gluck, 2001). This corroborates earlier findings by Agnon (1982, 1983) expanded by Gardosh et al. (1990). Seismic potential of main faults was also established by studying sedimentary structures away from fault traces. Liquefied sands and convoluted beds indicative of earthquake shaking (seismites) have been reported in several locations (Bartov, 1999; Bowman et al., 2000; Enzel et al., 2000; Ken-Tor et al., 2001a). Along with these earthquake-related sedimentary structures, another kind of seismites unique to laminated sediments has been recognized: intraclast breccias (previously termed "mixed layers") that punctuate sequences of uniformly laminated late Quaternary lacustrine sediments (Marco and Agnon, 1995). Intraclast breccias formed by earthquake shaking have been reported from elsewhere (e.g., Davenport and Ringrose, 1987), and in places convincingly related to earthquakes (Doig, 1991).

Expansive outcrops of late Quaternary sediments in the Dead Sea region establish direct links between on-fault and off-fault observations. Intraclast breccias derived from laminated chalks in the Dead Sea basin are associated with surface faulting, which provides a stratigraphic test for temporal relationships between homogenization of the laminated sediment and surface faulting (Marco and Agnon, 2005). Moreover, the Dead Sea sediments are radiometrically datable (Haase-Schramm et al., 2004; Stein and Goldstein, this volume), and independent historical evidence for earthquakes is abundant (Ambraseys et al., 1994; Amiran et al., 1994; Guidoboni, 1994). Therefore, the Dead Sea intraclast breccias hold promise for a deeper understanding of soft-sediment deformation, earthquake shaking, and the seismotectonics of the Dead Sea fault, a model continental transform (Freund, 1965; Garfunkel, 1981; Quennell, 1956; Wilson, 1965).

Spectacular examples of convoluted sediments in the laminar Lisan Formation in the Dead Sea basin have attracted the attention of sedimentologists and overshadowed the less remarkable intraclast breccias. Early works ascribed the convoluted bedding to decollement structures, implying contortion at some finite depth in the sediment (Pettijohn et al., 1987). El-Isa and Mustafa (1986) postulated that the structures formed when the deformed sedimentary layer was at the lakebed. These authors pioneered attempts to extract quantitative information on earthquake return intervals from the stratigraphic distribution of convoluted beds in a section of the Lisan Formation. Slump structures identified in a seismic reflection survey at the Jordan delta were attributed to the 1927 A.D. earthquake (Niemi and Ben-Avraham, 1994). Uncertainty regarding the burial depth of the sediment and the source of energy for deforming the soft sediments have hindered the use of these sedimentary structures to decipher the Late Quaternary seismicity in the Dead Sea.

The discovery of syndepositional faults juxtaposed to intraclast breccias in the Dead Sea basin (Marco and Agnon, 1995) created an opportunity to constrain the lake bottom conditions during homogenization of the originally laminated sediment. During the decade since the recognition of fault-related intraclast breccias, we have established a hypothesis that such layers are seismites; i.e., layers recording seismically-triggered deformation. Our investigation includes a direct correlation of intraclast breccia with synsedimentary faults, the temporal correlation with historical earthquakes, laboratory experiments, and mechanical analyses. Here we review our geological studies related to the original work and present additional results.

Intraclast Breccia Layers

Terminology

The following terms have been used in the literature to describe various types of deformed unconsolidated sedimentary layers associated with earthquakes:
  • mixed layers (Marco and Agnon, 1995; Marco et al., 1996b): this term may cause confusion with a number of unrelated uses in the earth sciences;

  • mixtites (Jackson and Bates, 1997): this term describes any clastic layer regardless of composition or origin; any flood deposit may fall in this category;

  • homogenites (Kastens and Cita, 1981): the term stresses uniform composition of the deposit, yet does not account for systematic variations across the layer;

  • seismites (Seilacher, 1969): this term is interpretative; and

  • intraclast breccias (Marco and Agnon, 2005): we use this descriptive term to separate observations from interpretations: "intraclast" refers to the origin of the clasts being reworked from within the sedimentary section (Jackson and Bates, 1997), and "breccia" refers to the texture of the deposit.

Character of Intraclast Breccias

Intraclast breccias are distinctive in sequences that are otherwise well-bedded or, better yet, laminated. Lamination is typical in the lacustrine facies of the Dead Sea deposits and makes recognition of intraclast breccias practical because of the conspicuous alternation between chemically precipitated white aragonite and darker detritus (Fig. 2) (Katz et al., 1977).

In the present context, intraclast breccias within a laminated sequence can be distinguished by the following criteria:
  1. The primary mineralogical composition of an intraclast breccia is identical to the underlying strata (and typically the overlying layers also). Thus, the intraclast breccia appears similar to the enclosing deposits. The absence of fine-scale lamination observed from a short distance helps to recognize the intraclast breccia in the field.
  2. Fragments of laminae may vary in distributions of size. Tabular fragments of competent laminae (with the long dimension commonly 1-5 mm) float in a fine-grained matrix. Graded bedding is common, either fining or coarsening upward.
  3. Intraclast breccia layers are typically several centimeters thick, but can be as thin as a few laminae (viewed under a microscope; cf. Fig. 2B).
  4. The upper contact of an intraclast breccia is invariably sharp and is typically overlain by laminated beds.
  5. Basal contacts can be gradual, but occasionally are sharp. In the former case, folded and torn packets of laminae are abundant (Figs. 2A, 2C).
  6. The verified lateral extent of individual intraclast breccias is on the order of 100 m. Over lateral distances of several tens of meters, the layers vary little in thickness, except where they onlap local paleorelief that formed during earthquakes (Fig. 3).
Jones and Omoto (2000) suggest the following criteria for the identification of seismic triggering of soft sediment deformation:
  1. geological setting,
  2. extent of the deformed units,
  3. absence of evidence indicating other potential trigger mechanisms, and
  4. presence of evidence of other potential trigger mechanisms elsewhere in the stratigraphic section associated with undeformed sediment.
Intraclast breccia layers in the sediments studied satisfy all these criteria.

Other Reports of Seismites and Intraclast Breccias

The Dead Sea intraclast breccias have many similarities to seismites described from the lacustrine environment as well as from glacial deposits and volcanic terrains. Breccia layers associated with microfaults and intraformational folds in glacial deposits were reported in Scotland (Davenport and Ringrose, 1987). Earthquake-induced soft sediment deformation in Late Pleistocene lacustrine beds associated with activity at the Narugo Volcano, Japan, has been reported by Jones and Omoto (2000), who suggest the above-mentioned criteria to identify seismic triggering agents.

Most of the paleoseismic studies focus on Pleistocene to Recent deposits, but seismites have been reported in significantly older rocks, including Silurian strata (Kahle, 2002) and laminated Neogene deposits in Spain (Rodriguez-Pascua et al., 2003). In the area of the Dead Sea Rift, intraclast breccia layers are also present in Senonian chert (Mishash Formation), which crops out near the Lisan Formation (Fig. 2B). Similar fabrics in the breccias in these formations prompted Kolodny et al. (2005) to suggest a similar mechanism of formation.

Interpreting the origin of ancient seismites often relies on intuition and on understanding models of the mechanism of their formation. Features interpreted as ancient seismites should resemble those formed by modern earthquake deformation. Soft sediment deformation associated with strong earthquakes is documented by observations of recent seismic events (Allen, 1974; Sims, 1973). Earthquakes have caused silting and resuspension of sediments in Canadian lakes in association with earthquakes and in turbid water observed in lakes <10 km from the epicenter of the 1935 Temiskaming, Canada, M 6.3 earthquake (Doig, 1990, 1991). Piston cores from the bottom of that lake recovered a 20-cm-thick chaotic layer composed of tabular fragments derived from a preexisting silt layer. Graded bedding has been suggested as a criterion for subaqueous liquefaction based on observations in Kobe, Japan, following the 1995 earthquake (Kitamura et al., 2002).

Earthquake-induced historical homogenites are reported in Lake Lucerne, Switzerland (Siegenthaler et al., 1987). Lake Le Bourget, France, has homogenites that correlate with the A.D. 1822 earthquake (local intensity VII-VIII), the strongest known historical earthquake of the French outer Alps (Chapron et al., 1999). Historical accounts of this earthquake report violent lake water oscillations, which were probably a seiche, and an earthquake-induced subaqueous slide may have formed the homogenite layer.

Formation of Intraclast Breccias

The formation of intraclast breccias involves five stages (Fig. 3). First, layered deposits at the lakebed (Fig. 3A) are disrupted and deformed by ground shaking, motion of the water column, and water escape from the underlying uncompacted sediment (Fig. 3B). During this stage, the pressure of pore fluids in the sediment exceeds the confining pressure of the overlying lake brine, resulting in liquefaction of the sediment. Subsequently, the top of the sedimentary succession becomes fluidized and suspended at the bottom of the water body; fault ruptures can create topographic steps at the lake bottom (Fig. 3C). Seismic waves can trigger mechanical instability in the sediment, expelling pore fluid into the overlying suspension (Hamiel, 1999; Heifetz et al., 2005). Long water waves that oscillate the entire lake (seiche) carry significant momentum at the bottom of the lake, keeping the sediment suspended. After the waves have dispersed and attenuated, an intraclast breccia is deposited from the suspension by grain settling and water escape (Fig. 3D). After settling, the intraclast breccia is capped by the continuing deposition of laminated sediments that gradually bury any fault-related topography (Fig. 3E).

The intraclast breccia's texture attests to the interplay between forces in the sediment; namely, the pressure of the pore fluids, the contact forces between solid particles, and gravity. The clasts were originally part of laminae, and rupture of the laminae is a precursor of a liquefied state, where pore pressure exceeds cohesive forces and drives cracks through the sediment. As long as the pore pressure exceeds the lake pressure head, fluids that escape the liquefied bed exert drag stress on particles in the top part of the layer. When this drag exceeds gravitational forces, particles are suspended and the sediment is fluidized.

The formation energy of seismites in general is supplied by seismic shaking, but gravitational energy contributes on slopes, where the disturbed bed slides downhill, expending potential energy. Gravitational energy can also contribute to the formation of seismites where the density profile of the undisturbed sediment is inverted (dense on top): overturning the sediment releases the gravitational potential for overcoming resistance. There is no evidence that gravitational energy was a factor in the formation of common Dead Sea intraclast breccias. The seismites were deposited on flat surfaces, and no evidence for density inversion was found. Some gravitational energy is involved when pore fluid is injected upward, but most of the formation energy is of seismic origin. Three agents of seismic energy for disruption can be considered: the shaking of the ground below, the motion of the water above, and the injection of pore water from below.

Fragments of laminae in upward-fining intraclast breccias indicate that the lake-bottom sediment was compacted and cohesive before the earthquake. During the event, laminae shattered, and fragments were suspended into the fluid. Liquefaction of sediments under earthquake shaking is well documented and is traditionally related to the passage of shear waves (e.g., Allen, 1982). Yet observations of liquefaction features from recent large earthquakes highlight the role of P-waves (Lin, 1997), and engineering design based on resistance to cyclic shear loading has occasionally failed (Hatanaka et al., 1997). Observations of intraclast breccias in the Dead Sea basin have stimulated new theoretical and experimental studies of liquefaction (Bachrach et al., 2001; Hamiel, 1999; Lioubashevski et al., 1996).

An alternative mechanism is the Kelvin-Helmholtz Instability (KHI) mechanism, in which stably stratified layers undergo a shear instability during relative sliding, which is set off by earthquake shaking (Heifetz et al., 2005). Analysis suggests a threshold for ground acceleration increasing with the thickness of the folded layers. The maximum thickness of folded layers, on the order of decimeters, corresponds to ground accelerations of up to 1 g. The application of the KHI model to earthquakes is based on a translation of the instrumentally measurable ground accelerations to pressure gradients. The KHI model is at a preliminary stage and does not provide precise correspondence between field observations and the actual driving ground accelerations. Moreover, it does not rule out alternative sources for pressure gradients, such as surface and internal waves in the depositing water body. Since water depth of Lake Lisan above the investigated area was several tens of meters (Bartov et al., 2002), ground acceleration waves might have dominated over water waves.

Association with Intraformational Faults

Several authors have cited criteria to distinguish between the seismic and nonseismic origin of soft sediment deformation features (for reviews, see Jones and Omoto, 2000; Obermeier, 1996). Marco and Agnon's (1995) studies of seismites were originally motivated by intraclast breccias juxtaposed to intraformational faults in the vicinity of Masada (Fig. 1), where a terrace capped by laminated sediments is present between the Dead Sea and the western fault escarpment (Agnon, 1983; Sagy et al., 2003). Similar exposures of fault zones juxtaposed to intraclast breccias are also present in the Lisan Peninsula. Analysis of the microstratigraphy at these sites shows simultaneity between two processes acting at the lake bottom; namely, faulting and homogenization of the lake bed (Marco and Agnon, 1995, 2005). The time interval between intraclast breccia formation and lake bottom faulting is shorter than the time it took to deposit a lamina, which is likely less than one year (see evidence below for varve-like lamination). This association is perhaps the strongest evidence for attributing datable sedimentary structures to earthquakes, hence naming them seismites. The geological observation that deformation occurred at the water-sediment interface makes intraclast breccias excellent markers to determine the times of past earthquakes, if the time of sedimentation can be determined.

The Subsurface Masada Fault Zone

The Masada fault zone has repeatedly ruptured the surface along several km (Fig. 1). In order to examine the subsurface continuity of the faults, Marco et al. (1996a) carried out ground penetrating radar (GPR) and high-resolution seismic reflection surveys to image the fault zone (Figs. 4-7).

The 275-m-long GPR survey shows fault planes extending several meters below the surface (Fig. 5). A parallel calibration profile runs at the top surface of the Lisan Formation above a buried fault whose location and dip are known from exposures (Fig. 4).

The 450-m-long seismic reflection line across the Masada fault zone overlaps the GPR profile but extends farther east and west (Fig. 6). In addition to conventional reflection data, we present diffraction data analyzed using the method proposed by Landa et al. (1987) and Kanasewich and Phadke (1988). The diffracted waves are sensitive to the discontinuities in beds due to faulting, providing an independent support for the interpretation of the reflection profile.

Three zones of discontinuous reflectors on the processed profile represent faults that extend from <0.05 s down to 0.25 s (two-way traveltime [TWTT]) at shot points 50-60, 80-95, and 125-135. The faults are also the sources of diffractions that are shown in the diffraction section from 0.05 s to 0.15 s (TWTT) at shot points ~60, 95, and 125-135 (Fig. 6).

The coincidence of the faults in the geological, radar, and seismic reflection sections shows that every outcropping fault can be traced down to ~250-300 m (Fig. 7). Eyal et al. (2002) reported similar results in another study of a fault zone in an alluvial fan. Several faults evident in the seismic section are not expressed in outcrops, which may be evidence for syndepositional faulting, or alternatively, faults that did not rupture the surface.

Shaking Intensity Required to Brecciate Sediments

Based on correlations with historical earthquakes, Migowski et al. (2004) concluded that local intensity is a critical factor in the formation of intraclast breccia layers. We review this work below and define the conditions required to form intraclast breccias.

The Dead Sea region has not experienced strong earthquakes during the instrumentally recorded twentieth century (Fig. 1). Therefore, to assess the intensity required to brecciate laminated sediments, we must rely on historical records of earthquakes. The Dead Sea region has a long, rich record of historical earthquakes, which consists of information on shaking in settlements nearby (Ambraseys et al., 1994; Amiran et al., 1994; Guidoboni, 1994). Recent retreat of the Dead Sea shorelines has exposed sediments deposited in the past millennia, where the effects of known historical earthquakes can be seen in the sediments. Exposures revealing historical deposits are limited to where the lake level was higher than the level during the past decade. Even for these intervals, the sediments may lack fine bedding or may have been eroded during times of low water levels. Drill cores in lacustrine laminated facies overcome these limitations.

Another analysis, which considers both the thickness of the breccia beds and the lithology of beds directly overlying them, is applied in order to identify the stronger (M > 7) earthquakes within the record recovered from the Lisan Formation (Begin et al., 2005). The analysis is based on the occurrence of gypsum immediately above 11 breccia layers between 54 and 16 ka, a coincidence that is explained by the triggering of a strong seiche, which mixed the stratified waters of Lake Lisan. Mixing of the sulfate-rich upper water layer with the calcium-rich lower water layer could trigger the deposition of gypsum (Stein et al., 1997a). The resulting time series of earthquake recurrence interval is similar to the M ≥ 7.2 recurrence interval in the Dead Sea basin, as extrapolated from present seismicity; therefore, Begin et al. (2005) suggest that the present seismic regime in the Dead Sea basin, as reflected in its magnitude-frequency relationship, has been stationary for the past ~40 k.y.

Exposures of Intraclast Breccias Caused by Historical Earthquakes

Ken-Tor et al. (2001a) studied Holocene outcrops of Dead Sea sediments in Ze'elim fan, east of Masada (Fig. 1), where eight late Holocene seismites are exposed due to the accelerated recess of the Dead Sea during the past decades (Fig. 8). Six intraclast breccia layers (A-F) are identified in the lacustrine laminated facies. The uppermost part of the section exposes only the near-shore sandy facies, showing two liquefied sand units (G and H). Some intraclast breccias in the lower section grade laterally into liquefied beds showing flame structures as these beds change facies into beach sands. Twenty-four radiocarbon ages of plant debris are largely consistent with the stratigraphic order in the section sampled. Ken-Tor et al. (2001a) were able to fit a model of moderately varying deposition rates (3-9 mm/yr) between hiatuses by assuming that all intraclast breccias were formed during historically recorded earthquakes (Fig. 8). Significant uncertainty remained only regarding event D (~4 m above the base of the section, Fig. 8) that could correspond to either of two historical earthquakes: 363 or 419 A.D. Ken-Tor et al. (2001a) have considered both events (compare their Figures 3 and 4).

By combining radiocarbon dating with the precise dates of historical earthquakes and with field evidence suggesting subaerial exposures, Ken-Tor et al. (2001a) determined that two unconformities exist in the section between 400 (or 420) and 1200 A.D., and between 1300 and 1750 A.D. (Fig. 9). This interpretation is remarkable in that the eight major historical earthquakes that are missing from the Ze'elim fan section have all happened during the hiatuses thus dated (551, 559, 749, 1033, 1068, 1160, 1456, 1546 A.D.). This suggests that the Ze'elim earthquake record is complete for the periods of deposition, with the exception of either 363 or 419 A.D., for which only a single intraclast breccia is found. We return to this dilemma after reanalyzing the outcrop data, and again after presenting the results from drill cores.

Subsequently, Ken-Tor et al. (2001b) used the historical earthquakes to refine calibration of their radiocarbon dates and to infer that the time between death of the plant and burial in the sediment is 50 yr or less.

Figure 8 offers a revised correlation scheme between the Ze'elim stratigraphic record and the historical earthquake record that satisfies two conditions:
  1. All model dates match event horizons with historical earthquakes.
  2. A uniform sedimentation rate between successive event horizons and a slowly varying sedimentation rate between hiatuses. This allows interpolation between event horizons and determination of ages based on historical dates exceeding the precision of radiocarbon.
We used 24 calibrated radiocarbon ages (Bookman et al., 2004; Ken-Tor et al., 2001a) to guide the matching of the sediment height-age model. Nineteen ages are compatible with the model in that the higher bound on the age is older than the model age. For most cases, the model line goes through the calibrated age range. Five calibrated ages are younger than the model by several decades. Some incongruence can be resolved by considering low-probability ranges in the calibrated date distributions. Discrepancy may also result from sampling of roots debris that might have deteriorated in situ. Alternatively, our uniform deposition rate may be an oversimplification for this arid climate featuring irregular flash floods.

Our model indicates a strikingly uniform mean sedimentation rate during the three periods of continuous sedimentation: 5-6 mm/yr. Where data is ample, we note that the deposition rate may fluctuate by 50% around that mean rate: at the short period before the Christian era (between the events of 140 and 31 B.C.), we see an anomalously high rate of deposition (7 mm/yr). Subsequently, between 31 B.C. and 33 A.D., the rate declines to 3 mm/yr, maintaining an average of ~5 mm/yr.

This uniform deposition rate model results in breccia layer A in the section of Ken-Tor et al. (2001a) correlating with the 140 B.C. earthquake.
The 64 B.C. earthquake, which was originally correlated with breccia layer A, cannot be distinguished from the 31 B.C. breccia layer. We prefer this correlation to the correlation of breccia layer A with the 64 B.C. earthquake because the latter correlation implies an excessive deposition rate of 24 mm/yr.

Our model correlates breccia layer D with the 419 A.D. earthquake, noting that this results in the 363 A.D. earthquake being uncorrelated. Our reconstruction agrees with lamina counting data (Migowski et al., 2004) reviewed in the next section.

Historical Earthquakes and Intraclast Breccias in Drill Cores

Continuous cores from three sites along the Dead Sea shore were drilled during the fall of 1997 (Migowski et al., 2004), including cores from Ze'elim fan and Ein Gedi Spa (Fig. 1). The staggered-pair drilling technique recovered a continuous record of the subsurface sediments. We chose the Ze'elim fan site to correlate subsurface strata with the outcrops (Ken-Tor et al., 2001a, 2001b) and verify that both surface and drill core methods agree. The two other boreholes were drilled very close to the contemporary shoreline to avoid hiatuses due to lake level drops beyond the current level (Bookman et al., 2004) and to obtain data from very recent sediments. The 20-m-long Ein-Gedi core provides a continuous sedimentation record that spans the past 10,000 yr (Migowski et al., 2004). Above a 10 ka salt layer, the core contains two alternating principal facies: laminated fine-grained chalk (laminites) and bedded to massive silt. The laminated chalk contains aragonite laminae, resembling the lacustrine facies of Lisan Formation (Bartov et al., this volume).

The Ein Gedi core has penetrated 53 deformed intervals (Migowski et al., 2004, their Table 2). Many of the 53 deformed intervals in the core resemble the intraclast breccia beds of Marco and Agnon (1995). Migowski et al. (2004) focused on a 2.25-m-long interval of aragonite-rich laminites for a detailed inspection under an optical microscope. They counted couplets of detritus and chemically precipitated laminae as single depositional cycles. In some cycles, laminae of gypsum added to form triplets. They identified 1500 deposition cycles and suggested that a cycle represented one year of sedimentation. One way to test the annual depositional cycle hypothesis is to evaluate the lamina chronology with intraclast breccia events to see whether the time intervals match the historical record. Within that microscopically analyzed interval, Migowski et al. (2004) found 22 intraclast breccia layers and developed a chronological model for the sequence in which each cycle represents one year.

Migowski et al. (2004) constrained their chronological model to minimize the number of breccia beds for which no historical earthquake is known and found only one model that matched as many as 20 out of 22 breccia layers with historical earthquakes since ca. 150 B.C. (e.g., Fig. 10). They found that four additional earthquakes correspond to periods in which the record was destroyed by brecciation associated with subsequent earthquakes, postdating the missing events by several years (and, in a single case, by 33 yr). Figure 10 shows a unique situation where the contact between two breccia layers is preserved, so two earthquakes separated by 10 yr may be resolved.

The chosen matching, leaving out two subcentimeter breccia layers at 90 A.D. and 175 A.D., is significantly better than any other chronology model. The chosen model also minimizes the number of historical earthquakes for which no disturbance is shown in the sediment: six historical earthquakes from the entire region are missing. Clearly, some of these missing historical earthquakes were too distant or too weak to generate significant shaking in Ein Gedi
.

While direct historic information on local shaking intensity at Ein Gedi is rare, empirical formulas can evaluate the historic data and estimate the magnitude of a given earthquake, as well as its location (Ambraseys, 1988). In a recent compilation of Middle East intensity data, Ambraseys and Jackson (1998) develop a formula that relates mean earthquake magnitudes to the intensity of shaking at given source distances:

M = -1.74 + 0.66I + 0.0015R + 2.26 log R,   (1)
where R is the distance from the earthquake focus (assumed at 7.4 km depth), I is the local intensity, and M is the magnitude. Formulas of this form, known as attenuation relations, estimate the local intensity at a site if both the earthquake magnitude and its location are known. A sufficiently close earthquake source with sufficiently large magnitude should generate intraclast breccia layers; sources that are too weak or too distant would not generate intraclast breccia layers. Figure 11 shows a compilation of all historical and instrumental earthquake sources in terms of magnitude and distance from Ein Gedi. The diagonal bold curves separate three domains: strong and close sources on the lower right, all matched with breccia layers; weak and far sources on the upper left, all unmatched; a median domain where about half of the events are matched by intraclast breccia layers. These lines can be fitted to equations of the form of equation (1). The straight line is given by:
M = 1.9 log R + 2.8.   (2)
The dotted and dashed lines in Figure 11 mark intensities V and VI, respectively. Note that for distances R > 50 km and magnitudes M > 5.5, we can consider the isoseismal I = V as a domain boundary. At lower distances and magnitudes, a higher intensity seems to be required for generating breccia layers.

As shown in Figure 11, all historical earthquakes with calculated local intensity at Ein Gedi I > V are matched with intraclast breccia. The earthquake of 363 A.D. may constitute an exception to that rule.

The unique match of the two independent records, namely the historical and the one derived from the core, supports three assumptions used to develop the chronological model:
  1. breccia layers form by seismic shaking,
  2. strong shaking results in breccia layers, and
  3. the lamination is seasonal with a detectable annual cycle.

Recurrence Patterns of Breccia Events

Introduction

Different paleoseismic and historic studies have indicated different recurrence intervals ranging from a century (Amiran et al., 1994) to ten millennia (Kagan et al., 2005). In some cases, the discrepancy is attributed to the threshold for detection (see Kagan et al., 2005); in others, the discrepancy may arise from the different time window studied (see Ken-Tor et al., 2001a, 2001b). The variation of recurrence interval with time is a manifestation of clustering (Marco et al., 1996b), and it can arise from the complex mechanics of the fault system (Lyakhovsky et al., 2001). Here we consider the influence of the rate of deposition on the resolution of events and discuss the effect of resolution on the apparent recurrence patterns.

Temporal Resolution of the Paleoseismic Record

Sedimentation rate influences the ability to detect individual events in the paleoseismic record. Migowski et al. (2004) discussed the "masking" of an earthquake by a subsequent earthquake as inferred for the Ein Gedi core, and Figure 8 shows possible examples from the Ze'elim outcrop (the pairs of 64-31 B.C. and 1202-1212 A.D.). Figure 10 shows how the breccia layers associated with the 1202 and 1212 A.D. pair are barely resolved from each other in the Ein Gedi core (Migowski et al., 2004).

The temporal resolution (Tres) of individual earthquakes in well-stratified lacustrine deposits depends on the rate of sedimentation, Rs, and the thickness of the breccia formed by the subsequent earthquake, Hb. The resolution limit for an individual earthquake is the critical time interval that can be resolved in a record:
Tres = Hb / Rs   (3)
Equation (3) defines the resolution of a breccia layer with regard to its predecessor based on field observations.

For example, consider the doublet of 1202 and 1212 A.D. earthquakes. In the Ze'elim outcrop, these earthquakes correspond to a single 13-cm-thick breccia layer, whereas in the Ein Gedi core, the events are recorded as two breccia layers, 1.6 and 2.6 cm thick, respectively (Fig. 10, Table 1). The average deposition rate in the Ein Gedi core is about one third of the rate in the Ze'elim section, yet the respective thickness is only one fifth. Indeed, in Ein Gedi we can resolve an interseismic interval of a decade, whereas in the Ze'elim section, the resolution is three decades. The data for the estimate is given in Table 1. The recurrence interval 1202-1212 A.D. is 10 yr. The deposition rate is given by the thickness of the sediment between the event horizon and the predecessor (or successor) divided by the respective time interval. This definition, applicable only for continuous deposition, neglects possible changes of thickness caused by the breccia formation (redeposition of suspension is likely to fill small-scale bottom topography, some of which may form coseismically).

In the Ein Gedi core, the rate of deposition at the time of the 1212 event is 0.2 cm/yr, and the thickness of the 1212 A.D. breccia is 2.6 cm (Fig. 10). According to Equation (3), Tres is thirteen years. This suggests that it is not possible to resolve a decade-long interval between earthquakes, and indeed Migowski et al. (2004) considered the 1202 A.D. event to be "masked." Close inspection of Figure 10 shows that a pair of aragonite-detritus laminae seems to separate the two events, suggesting that the brecciated interval corresponds to 9 yr. If correct, this indicates a deposition rate of ~0.3 cm/yr, slightly higher than the ratio between the breccia thickness and the interseismic interval. Note that all these estimates neglect lateral transport of sediment, yet this assumption is not valid in the presence of local topography. Indeed, Figure 10 indicates that small-scale topography is filled by the laminae postdating 1202 A.D. and by the breccia layer corresponding to the 1212 A.D. earthquake.

The breccia layer corresponding to the 1202-1212 A.D. doublet in Ze'elim section has Hb = 13 cm, corresponding to 26 yr of deposition at a rate of 0.5 cm/yr (Fig. 9). The calculated resolution limit is 26 yr, significantly longer than the actual recurrence interval of 10 yr. The subsequent earthquake of 1293 A.D. corresponds to an 18-cm-thick breccia layer (Fig. 9), with a resolution limit of 36 yr, about half the historical recurrence interval. This is why the 1212 and 1293 A.D. earthquakes are resolved in the Ze'elim outcrop.

As we saw for the breccia layer associated with the 1212 A.D. earthquake in the Ein Gedi core, the measured thickness of a breccia layer in the field is only a proxy for the thickness of the sediment that brecciated during an event. Inaccuracies in this proxy may result from differential compaction, suspended sediment in the breccia layer filling local topography, and inclusion of earlier unresolved events. Due to these inaccuracies, we use the mean values of observational data for analyzing resolution in the Lisan Formation.

Evidence of Long-Trem (>10 k.y.) Clustering

Temporal clustering of earthquakes has been long recognized in the short term covered by instrumental seismicity records (e.g., Ni and Wallace, 1988) and in catalogues of historical seismicity (e.g., Swan, 1988). Mechanical explanations for clustering include interaction between adjacent fault segments with possible evolution of the mechanical properties of the crust (Lyakhovsky et al., 2001; Lynch et al., 2003). The Dead Sea basin is situated between two segments of the transform (Fig. 1) and the long-term sedimentary records can potentially provide data on long-term clustering.

The recognition of intraclast breccias as earthquake indicators is rather new, and more work is required on the influence of local conditions on breccia formation. Yet tentative conclusions on the behavior of the sources for earthquakes can be offered. The main observation afforded by the long paleoseismic records from the Dead Sea basin's lacustrine deposits is that strong earthquakes are clustered over a variety of time scales, at least as long as 104 yr (Marco and Agnon, 2005; Marco et al., 1996b; Migowski et al., 2004).

To assess the extent of clustering in interval population, Marco et al. (1996b) used a simple statistic: the standard deviation normalized by the mean (SDN) (also known as the coefficient of variation). For a periodic series with a constant interval (vanishing variance), this ratio vanishes. When the standard deviation is larger than the mean, the population is considered clustered (Kagan and Jackson, 1991).

Marco et al. (1996b) analyzed the temporal distribution of intraclast breccia in three columnar sections of Lisan Formation. In all three sections, the standard deviation of the thickness intervals exceeded the mean. So, assuming a constant deposition rate, the three sections indicate a temporal clustering of large earthquakes in time. In the PZ1 section, Marco et al. (1996b) went beyond the constant deposition rate approximation: the 36-m-thick section was dated at nine stratigraphic levels using the U-Th method. The age determinations implied a sedimentation-age model with three periods, each with a different rate of sedimentation. More recent field work and additional U-Th dating have modified the sedimentation-age model (Haase-Schramm et al., 2004; Stein and Goldstein, this volume). The present sedimentation-age model, based on a total of 22 age determinations, also accounts for a hiatus required by field observations (Machlus et al., 2000). Using the new deposition-age model, the SDN is 1.6, comparing with 1.8 according to the earlier deposition-age model (Table 2). The SDN is not sensitive to the hiatus between 44 and 49 ka or a possible hiatus between 67 and 62 ka (Haase-Schramm et al., 2004). We verified this by calculating statistics for synthetic records in which additional hypothetical earthquakes are introduced in the hiatuses separated by the mean interval.

Calculating the mean and standard deviation of thickness intervals between event horizons amounts to assuming a uniform rate of sedimentation. Doing this, we approximate the SDN of PZ1 at 1.5 (Table 2). If this is the case for the other sections, then SDN ≥ 1, suggesting that all sections have clustered time series. Similar clustering has been reproduced in a mechanical model that accounts for fault network evolution including rupture and healing (Lyakhovsky et al., 2001).

The mean rate of recurrence of intraclast breccia layers inferred from the late Pleistocene Lisan Formation is 2-3 events per five millennia, varying between nine and zero events per five millennia (Fig. 12). The average thickness of breccia layers in PZ1 is 15 cm. The late Pleistocene earthquake clusters show a peak rate of nine events per five millennia, between 50 and 55 ka (Marco et al. 1996b). This recurrence rate corresponds to an average interval of 500-600 yr. Two additional clusters are evident ca. 40 and 20 ka, respectively. The averages of thicknesses of breccia layers formed during the three clusters are 17, 19, and 8 cm, respectively (Table 3). The typical resolution limit for an earthquake is three hundred years for the second cluster and a hundred years for the other two (two hundred for the entire PZ1 section). This estimate suggests that resolution is not a limiting factor in detecting long-term earthquake clusters in the late Pleistocene lacustrine sections. During the cluster ca. 52 ka, the recurrence rate might exceed the estimate from our data due to lack of resolution.

The recurrence interval for the cluster between 55 and 50 ka is similar to the results of Enzel et al. (2000) from a fan delta in the Dead Sea basin for the past 6 k.y. This is consistent with the suggestion of Enzel et al. (2000), based on a comparison of their mean recurrence interval with that of the entire Lisan Formation, that their late Holocene data represent a cluster of earthquakes.

Another factor that affects the resolution of earthquakes in the lacustrine record is the detection limit of individual breccia layers, Hd. The recognition of a breccia layer depends on the thickness of individual laminae and color contrast between neighboring laminae, which vary from section to section and within sections. Moreover, the method of inspection of the section controls Hd: the detection limit under the microscope is a few millimeters (Fig. 2B), whereas in outcrop it is 2 cm at best. We approximate the detection limit for a given section by the thickness of the thinnest breccia layer, allowing for variations in exposure, color contrasts, and rate of sedimentation.

The variable Hd is useful for the comparison of seismicity recorded by different sections. The recurrence rate in PZ1 peaks ca. 52 ka (Fig. 12) with a recurrence interval of 170 yr. For a similar time span, the recurrence rate inferred for the Ein Gedi core peaks in the past 2 k.y. with a mean recurrence interval of 50 yr (Table 2). The thinnest breccia layer reported in PZ1 is 2 cm, and in the 52 ka cluster it is 3 cm, compared with 2 mm in the Ein Gedi core (Migowski et al., 2004, their Table 2). It is likely that microscopic inspection of the Lisan sediments would reveal additional breccia layers that could not be confidently detected in the field and were classified as clastic layers. Even with such a microscopic study, one would need to account for the threefold ratio between the rates of sedimentation (compare Rs in Tables 1 and 3).

Short-Term (102 yr) Recurence

The normalized standard deviation of the historic section in the Ein Gedi record is 0.75, whereas for the entire section SDN = 0.9 (Table 2). Hence, the statistics do not indicate clustering. Migowski et al. (2004) noted variation in the rate of recurrence in the Dead Sea paleoseismic-historical record, with recurrence rates changing drastically on a time scale of half a millennium. This behavior is reminiscent of the historical record of the Anatolian Faults during the first millennium and half of the second millennium A.D. Ambraseys (1971) has pointed out that the historical record of the North and East Anatolian faults show alternation of activity on a 0.5 k.y. time scale. We further this comparison by seeking intervals of uniform rate of seismicity in all three records. We were able to define uniform rates, such that for each of the Anatolian faults, the rate of seismicity fluctuates between two levels of intervals. Figure 13 reproduces Ambraseys' (1971) representation of the cumulative number of earthquakes versus calendar years in the North and East Anatolian faults together with our data from Dead Sea breccia layers.

Figure 13 is striking in two aspects: The first is the uniformity of recurrence rates during several centuries, with rather abrupt shifts. This is clear on the upper panel that shows box-car functions describing the shifting rates in terms of recurrence intervals. The second striking aspect is the timing of the shifts, simultaneous in pairs of faults. At the fifth century A.D., the East Anatolian fault shows an order of magnitude decrease in recurrence interval from 70 yr to 8 yr. At about that time, the recurrence interval of Dead Sea breccia layers decreases from 300 yr to 95 yr. Shortly afterward, the recurrence interval recorded in the North Anatolian fault increases by an order of magnitude from a decade to a century. This quiescent period ends in the tenth century A.D., when the recurrence interval decreases back to a decade. Shortly before the end of the tenth century, the recurrence interval inferred from the Dead Sea breccias decreases from 95 to 50 yr. The recurrence interval increases back to a medium level of 74 yr at the fourteenth century A.D., simultaneously with the order of magnitude increase in the East Anatolian Fault that returns to a recurrence interval of 70 yr.

It is tempting to draw conclusions from these records on the behavior of the plate boundaries. One should keep in mind that these records may be biased as they record ground shaking on the site of the recorder (Dead Sea sediments or Old World chroniclers). Even so the periods of frequent activity are reminiscent of the twentieth century in the North Anatolian Fault, where a series of ruptures have propagated along the plate boundary from east to west (Toksoz et al., 1979; Stein et al., 1997b). Similarly, the series of earthquakes recorded in the Dead Sea from the beginning of the second millennium A.D. seems to follow a similar propagation pattern from north to south (Marco and Agnon, 2000, 2005). If the record indeed indicates shifts in activity along the plate boundary, the concerted transitions may indicate a mechanical coupling.

Conclusions

The systematic approach to accumulating observations on intraclast breccia layers permits their analysis as recorders of paleo-earthquakes. Such breccia layers, previously called "mixed layers," are abundant in sedimentary sections of Quaternary lakes from the Dead Sea basin. The finding of intraclast breccia layers juxtaposed against surface faults has driven a wide range of studies focused on these long-term seismic recorders. The fault scarps form a fault zone, traced to the subsurface by high-resolution geophysical surveys. This fault zone is a subsidiary structure to the master fault bounding the Dead Sea basin from the west and extending north to the transform plate boundary. While the record of displacement of the fault zone is limited to particular slip events that activate this secondary structure, the record of breccia layers may be complete for events that rupture the plate boundary.

We define field criteria for the identification of intraclast breccias, focusing on features that can indicate a seismic origin. The wealth of data for such earthquake indicators collected in natural outcrops within the Dead Sea basin offers insights into the phenomenology and systematics of earthquakes on time scales that are not obtainable elsewhere.

Cores from the receding shore of the Dead Sea contain continuous sedimentary records of the past 10 k.y., undisturbed by lowstands. The Ein Gedi core features 3 m of alternating seasonal laminae. The two independent earthquake records—historical and sedimentary—offer a simultaneous test regarding two hypotheses: the earthquake origin of breccia and the annual cycle of laminae. The likelihood of matching historical earthquakes with an arbitrary time series that corresponds to the breccia layers in the core is negligible. The observation that the breccia layers match earthquakes from the historical catalogues that are strong and/or close to the coring site supports both hypotheses (Fig. 11). Changes in the rate of recurrence of earthquakes in the Dead Sea record during the historical period seem to correlate with changes in the Anatolian Fault system. If the rates of recurrence could be taken as indicators of activity of the plate boundaries, then these plate boundaries might be coupled on the time scale of 500 yr.

The brecciation from an earthquake that succeeds another strong earthquake might obliterate the breccia layer of the predecessor. This hampers the potential that lies in the laminated sediment to resolve pairs of earthquakes. The resolution of an interseismic interval is no better than the ratio of the thickness of a breccia layer to the rate of deposition. But the resolution limit of individual earthquakes does not affect the observation of clustering in the record, which is evident in the long periods of quiescence alternating with periods of recurrence of earthquakes. During most of the period recorded, we find that the apparent recurrence interval is significantly longer than the resolution limit. During a cluster of earthquakes ca. 52 ka, the interseismic interval becomes shorter than 200 yr, which is close to the resolution limit for the Lisan outcrops.

Leroy et al. (2010)

Abstract

The Dead Sea region holds the archives of a complex relationship between an ever-changing nature and ancient civilisations. Regional pollen diagrams show a Roman-Byzantine period standing out in the recent millennia by its wetter climate that allowed intensive arboriculture. During that period, the Dead Sea formed laminites that display mostly a seasonal character. A multidisciplinary study focused on two earthquakes, 31 BC and AD 363, recorded as seismites in the Ze'elim gully A unit III which has been well dated by radiocarbon in a previous study. The sampling of the sediment was done at an annual resolution starting from a few years before and finishing a decade after each earthquake. A clear drop in agricultural indicators (especially Olea and cereals) is shown. These pollen indicators mostly reflect human activities in the Judean Hills and coastal oases. Agriculture was disturbed in large part of the rift valley where earthquake damage affected irrigation and access to the fields. It took 4 to 5 yr to resume agriculture to previous conditions. Earthquakes must be seen as contributors to factors damaging societies. If combined with other factors such as climatic aridification, disease epidemics and political upheaval, they may lead to civilisation collapse.

Introduction

The Dead Sea region (Near East, Fig. 1) has been intensively studied for its complex and fascinating story of interaction between nature and past human societies. The region has been very dynamic over the recent millennia, both in terms of its natural (climatic fluctuations and geohazards) and societal modifications. The influence of environmental changes on humans has often been recognised as paramount. Drastic fluctuations of the Dead Sea (DS) water level have been measured (e.g., 28-m drop in the last century) and also reconstructed over the late Pleistocene and Holocene (Bookman et al., 2006). Over the last 2500 yr, repetitive shifts of vegetation belts along the relatively steep slopes of the rift valley occurred with changing precipitation (Enzel et al., 2003; Neumann et al., 2009b). Movements of the DS fault are suggested to have also had an influence on the course of history of this region (Ben-Avraham et al., 2005; Nur and Burgess, 2008). In the Middle East, during the transition from the Roman Empire to the Islamic period via the Byzantine period (63 BC-AD 638), a series of combined factors have rendered past societies fragile. These factors include, for example, climatic change, natural hazards, disease epidemics, and political and economical collapses leading to a deep crisis in the 6th century AD followed by a sharp decline in population in the following century (Hirschfeld, 2006).

The potential role of earthquakes as a catalyst in the collapse of arboriculture at the end of the Byzantine period is examined in the DS region for an earlier period with mainly earthquake hazards. This allows isolating the effect of earthquakes from other damaging factors. Two seismites resulting from the earthquakes of 31 BC and AD 363 and the following years of sedimentation are analysed for the first time at a seasonal resolution by palynology, geochemistry and magnetic susceptibility. Here, the negative impact of past earthquakes on agriculture and the duration of that impact are shown by palynology.

Modern settings

Regional setting

The Dead Sea is the lowest water body in the world (e.g., Niemi and Ben-Avraham, 1997), 423 m bsl in 2009. This water body is the Holocene surviving trace of a much larger late Pleistocene lake, Lake Lisan (Bookman et al., 2006). Until 1931 (when a dam on the outlet of Lake Kinneret was constructed), lake levels were changing according to rainfall on the watershed (approximately 43,000 km2). Now with the added withdrawal of water for agriculture, the level drop is ca. 1 m per year (e.g. Dayan and Morin, 2006). Anati et al. (1995) have analysed the evolution of the DS water column stratification over the period of 1977-1995. Until 1978, the DS was mostly meromictic. However, from February 1979, it became holomictic with a December overturn and is only stratified and meromictic when there is a higher freshwater input due to either higher rainfall or a large release of water by the Degania dam (Gertman and Hecht, 2002). Moreover, a drastic change in the sedimentation in the DS took place in 1983 when the annual lamination was replaced by massive halite precipitation; this phenomenon therefore followed the first complete mixing by only a few years (Anati, 1993).

The average annual rainfall over the DS itself is ~90 mm, but most of the water entering the lake comes from a zone of relatively high rainfall in the upper Jordan River watershed, with an annual precipitation in excess of 600 mm (Dayan and Morin, 2006). Rain occurs between October and May, often with more rainfall at the transitional seasons (autumn and spring) and mostly in the form of rainstorms. The mean annual temperature east of Jerusalem (at Ma'ale Adumim, 330 m asl) is 19 °C, whereas near the DS's northern tip it rises to 23 °C (at Kalia, 60 m bsl) (Kutiel et al., 1995). Winds, a consequence of depressions during winter and spring, are mostly westerlies.

The main tributary to the DS is the Jordan River. A few perennial streams like Wadi el Mujib (Arnon), opposite Ein Gedi, discharge into the lake (El-Naqa 1993). Most of the wadis draining the hills are dry with the exception of winter floods from October to May. Springs such as Ein Feshkha, fed by aquifers from the Judean Mountains, emerge along the flanks of the DS (Ben-Itzhak and Gvirtzman, 2005).

Vegetation

The Dead Sea is surrounded by three altitudinal phytogeographic belts (Zohary and Orshansky, 1949; Rossignol, 1969). First, along the DS itself, the Saharo-Sindian (= Saharo-Arabic) vegetation (dry hamada dominated by Chenopodiaceae) reaches north up to 50 km from the DS, with rare enclaves of Sudano-Deccanian vegetation (with tropical elements such as Acacia) linked to freshwater springs. Higher up, Irano-Turanian vegetation is found on the slopes: a steppe with dwarf shrubs where Artemisia herba-alba then dominates. At higher elevations, the Mediterranean vegetation is developed to the west on the Judean hills (1020 m asl) and to the east on the Moab hills (1065 m). The summits of these hills are more than 1400 m higher than the present DS level. Where the vegetation climax is reached, the semi-steppe is then replaced by evergreen maquis with Quercus calliprinos (evergreen oak) and Juniperus. Neither oaks nor olive trees now grow in the DS trough.

Over the millennia, the cultivated surface has gone through periods of extension and contraction. During the Roman-Byzantine times (from 63 BC to AD 638), large farmsteads and intensive production for exportation of olive oil, dates, opobalsam (an unspecified tree growing in Gilead) and spices have developed in addition to production for local use (Harland, 2002).

The strongly contrasted rainfall pattern is reflected by the period of flowering of many plants (Zohary and Orshansky, 1949). The vegetation around the DS therefore produces a pollen rain, which has a strong seasonal character (Feinbrun et al., 1959; Kantor et al., 1966; Horowitz 1979; Al-Eisawi and Dajani, 1988). This influences the pollen assemblages found in the sediment's sublaminae (Leroy, 2010). The strongest signal, however, remains the pollen concentration, which is high in autumn-winter-spring (dark laminae) when most plants bloom and low in summer (light laminae) when most plants are suffering from lack of humidity (Leroy, 2010).

Ze’elim canyon and fan delta

The Ze'elim sampling site is located on the southwestern shore of the present-day DS on a flat plain at an elevation of ca. 400 m bsl (Bookman et al., 2004). The Ze'elim River flows into the southern part of the DS north basin from the west and has a catchment area (250 km2) that is located mainly in the southern Judea desert. Presently, water flows through the canyon only several days a year, associated with storm events in the high-elevation Judea Desert (Magaritz et al., 1991). The Nahal Ze'elim delta is the largest of the active deltas located along the western margin of the depression. In terms of the morphometry of fan deltas worldwide, Nahal Ze'elim is relatively small (~6 km2), its slope is steep (2.5°) and its catchment is quite large for the size of the sediment lobe (Warren, 2006).

Past settings

Past lake levels, climate and vegetation

One of the best records so far for sea level changes over the last 2500 yr has been obtained from exposed sedimentary sequences along the western shores of the DS. The sea level change curve is based on identification of buried shoreline deposits within their sequences and their associated radiocarbon ages on organic debris (Enzel et al., 2003; Bookman et al., 2004, 2006). The Hellenistic and Byzantine high stand at ≥395 m bsl (ca. 250 BC to AD 500) is interrupted by a brief low level at ca. AD 270 down to 404 m bsl. The final end of this high stand, however, comes after the 5th century AD (Bookman et al., 2004, 2006).

Six pollen diagrams from sites along the west shore of the Dead Sea north and south basins have been compiled by Neumann et al. (2009b) in order to provide the history of vegetation change over the last 3500 yr. Reference will be made here especially to the deep-sea core taken offshore Ein Gedi (Heim et al., 1997; Leroy, 2010). Vegetation and agriculture changed roughly synchronously with lake levels, with the exception of the brief lake level drop around AD 270, which is not well recorded in the six pollen diagrams so far.

Lamination and earthquakes

A large part of the Pleistocene sediment of the Lisan formation and most of the non-halite facies of the Holocene sediment of the Dead Sea are laminated. The usual, but not mandatory, succession of three facies in a year is the following: (1) clastics from river inflow in winter or runoff floods in the transition seasons (allochthonous origin), (2) gypsum and (3) aragonite, the last two by chemical precipitation (autochthonous origin) (Bentor and Vroman, 1960; Reid and Frostick, 1993; Migowski et al., 2004). More complicated laminations have been observed too: for example, light evaporitic ones with one or more thin detritic beds that could perhaps represent more than a year (Heim, 1998), or thick massive clastic units that may represent high frequency flashflood event(s) during relatively wet years.

The Dead Sea lies in a pull-apart basin within a continental transform plate boundary (Garfunkel, 1981; Niemi and Ben-Avraham, 1997). The distribution of earthquake epicentres suggests that the DS is one of the most active sections, north of Red Sea. Earthquakes caused by fault motion on the transform fault and associated structures have been felt throughout historical times. Several catalogues are available (e.g., Amiran et al., 1994; Guidoboni et al., 1994; Guidoboni et al., 2004) as well as surveys of earthquake-damaged structures (e.g., Reches and Hoexter, 1981; Ben-Menahem, 1991; Ellenblum et al., 1998; Zilbermann et al., 2005; Haynes et al., 2006; Thomas et al., 2007; Marco 2008).

Breccia layers composed of broken and mixed lacustrine seasonal laminae in the DS basin were interpreted as seismites (layers that exhibit earthquake-triggered deformation) (Marco and Agnon, 1995; Ken-Tor et al., 2001a; Agnon et al., 2006). The DS sediment in the Ze'elim gully is unique as it is extremely well dated owing to a detailed chronology and correlation of seismites to historical earthquakes (Fig. 2) (Ken-Tor et al., 2001a, 2001b). The organic debris used for dating comes from vegetation growing along streams and springs around the DS. Ken-Tor et al. (2001a) show a remarkable agreement between similar breccia layers, ages and historical earthquakes in the last 2000 yr in the Ze'elim fan delta. Two seismites from this record were investigated in detail; seismite B correlated to the 31 BC earthquake and seismite D correlated to the AD 363 earthquake. These seismites were chosen for the following reasons. Both can be traced along the outcrops continuously and were dated previously in high accuracy. They were correlated to seismic events that left significant information in historical documentation and occurred during periods with relatively high population compared to following centuries.

For the two Roman-Byzantine earthquakes, physical characteristics followed by societal consequences are now briefly summarised. The earthquake of 31 BC has been described by the contemporary historian, Josephus Flavius, in a very detailed account (Flavius, 1982). According to him, 30,000 persons were killed. There was severe damage in the DS area, Galilee and Judea. In Jerusalem, the earthquake damaged the second temple (see references in table 3 of Ken-Tor et al., 2001a). The earthquake caused confusion and fear. This paved the way for the expansion of the kingdom of Herod (Ben-Avraham et al., 2005). The earthquake was strong, with an estimated magnitude of 6.7 (Migowski et al., 2004, and reference therein) with an epicentre located on the main Jericho fault, north of the Dead Sea.

For the earthquake of AD 363, reports are available from Baniyas in the north through to the Red Sea in the south and from the coastal littoral through the Jordan Valley and beyond (Thomas et al., 2007). In Jerusalem, the Temple area was damaged. A seiche was reported in the DS (see references in table 3 of Ken-Tor et al. 2001a). More specifically for the earthquake of AD 363, Russell (1980) suggested that major demographic shifts occurred in the Jewish populations of Galilee. Ken-Tor et al. (2001a) estimated that this was a strong earthquake whose epicentre was, however, not close to Ze'elim. This earthquake was part of an "earthquake storm," which may have caused the destructions of the middle 4th century AD when a series of significant earthquakes during a 30-yr period between AD 350 and 380 resulted in much damage at sites in Israel, Cyprus, NW Turkey, Crete, Corinth, Reggio Calabria, Sicily and northern Libya (Nur and Cline, 2000).

Palynology and earthquakes

Coseismic uplift or subsidence may alter vegetation formation, which in turn may be registered in pollen assemblages and concentrations within sediments (Mathewes and Clague, 1994; Mirecki, 1996). Exposure of new land has also been detected in pollen diagrams by the presence of pioneer plants (Cowan and McGlone, 1991). In the case of Lake Sapanca (NW Turkey), located on the North Anatolian Fault (Schwab et al., 2009; Leroy et al., 2009), palynology was used as a taphonomic indicator of changes in sedimentation type into the lake centre, especially sources (local vegetation versus altitudinal, shore versus deep lake) and accumulation rates (rapid inwash of pollen-depleted soils and river sediment following earthquakes). An assessment of the impact of earthquake activity on regional vegetation has been attempted in the Dead Sea's oasis of Ein Feshka (Neumann et al., 2009a). The investigation focused on blocks of sediment (including 1 to 3 yr of sedimentation according to a laminite count) taken in three Holocene seismites and above them. The conclusions indicate that after the seismite in the Roman period there was no fluctuation. For the seismite at the Hellenistic to Roman transition, a weak signal is found in a decrease of Olea but not in the other cultivated plants. Finally, in the Byzantine period, a possible weak signal was found but only perhaps aggravating a trend started before the earthquake.

Effects of earthquakes on vegetation and agriculture

In the dry eastern Mediterranean region, earthquakes may damage the infrastructure necessary for agriculture, such as irrigation structures, and therefore cause a more or less long-lasting change in the pollen indicators of such activity. In the Near East, archaeological records show that ancient earthquakes have affected farm animals, water resources and agricultural infrastructure. In 31 BC, "an earthquake shock killed an infinite number of cattle" (Flavius, 1982). After the AD 1202 earthquake, many sources mention abandonment of villages and deadly pestilence that affected livestock animals (Guidoboni et al., 1994). After the earthquake of AD 749, "the spring of water near Jericho was moved six miles from its place" (Michael the Syrian in Guidoboni et al., 1994). In the city of Sagalassos, Turkey, during the first half of the 6th century, an earthquake caused a lot of damage, amongst others destroying the aqueduct and causing severe water shortage to the town (Waelkens et al., 2000; Similox-Tohon et al., 2006). After reconstruction, a further earthquake in the 7th century may have been the cause of the final abandonment of the city. Water conduits in Iran, locally called "qanats," were also displaced by earthquakes, probably causing disruption in agricultural work (Ambraseys and Jackson, 1998). A 2000-yr-old aqueduct in Syria was found to have been repeatedly damaged by movements on the DS fault (Meghraoui et al., 2003). Haynes et al. (2006) described historical earthquake damage to a water reservoir and some aqueducts, one of them feeding an irrigation system in the archaeological site of Qasr Tilah in the Wadi Araba basin (Jordan).

Archaeological excavations at the site of Umm el Kanatir, east of the Sea of Galilee, revealed that the ancient village was abandoned after the AD 749 earthquake, which triggered a landslide that damaged most of the houses, the main water reservoir and the synagogue (Wechsler et al., 2008). The qanat system north of the Red Sea has been damaged by earthquakes on the Dead Sea Transform (Zilberman et al., 2005).

Ze’elim canyon

The Ze'elim canyon was already inhabited in the Neolithic period. Hirschfeld (2004) has proposed that the spring of Ein Aneva as known from hagiographical literature was located in the Ze'elim Wadi. Although this spring is now dry, it flowed abundantly in the Byzantine period. Byzantine terraces and a farmhouse indicate plentiful supplies of water. No signs of settlement were found dating of the period after the Byzantine one. In the oasis of Ein Gedi, a few kilometres to the north, irrigated agriculture with palm trees and barley was practised (Hadas, 2008). This collapsed in the middle of the 6th century.

Material and methods

Subsampling of the outcrop of Ze’elim

During our fieldwork in the Ze'elim fan, samples were taken in gully A unit III of Bookman et al. (2004) (Fig. 2). The same sampling location, however, does not exist anymore because the walls of the gullies erode very rapidly with each flash flood (Ben Moshe et al., 2008) in response to the drop of lake level. Two seismite layers, B and D, dated respectively to 31 BC and AD 363, have been selected (Ken-Tor et al., 2001a) (Fig. 2). An alternative age has been suggested for event D in Ein Gedi, AD 419 (Agnon et al. 2006), which is unlikely because fewer earthquake damages are known and based on a less likely chronology. These two seismites have been subsampled at a quasi-seasonal resolution by hand in the field directly from the gully wall (Fig. 3). The subsampling focused on the dark layers, i.e. autumn to spring, avoiding the white aragonitic and orange oxidised laminae in order to maximise the pollen concentration and to obtain in each sample most of the annual pollen influx. A few samples were taken in the seismite itself, representing a mix of the few years before the earthquake. Then, following the seismites, 9 to 10 consecutive samples were selected, representing most likely 9 to 10 yr of sedimentation. The influx of pollen per ml per winter (roughly equivalent to year) is also in this present case taken as being identical to the annual pollen concentration.

Radiocarbon dating

The ages of the seismites were constrained by 14C dates on organic debris derived from the deformed unit itself (seismite B) or by extrapolating between ages directly beneath and above the deformed unit (seismite D) (Ken-Tor et al., 2001a). The 14C ages were calibrated to calendar years defined by the 2σ envelope error (Stuiver et al., 1998). The time elapsed between the deposition of the organic debris and the correlated historical earthquake was short relative to the uncertainty in the dating (Ken-Tor et al., 2001b).

Palynological methods

The samples were treated at the University of Bangor with the following sequence: pyrophosphate, 10% HCl, 40% hot HF, 10% HCl and sieving at 125 and 10 µm. The concentration in number of pollen grains and spores per ml of wet sediment was obtained with the initial addition of Lycopodium spore tablets. The counts reach a base sum of at least 600 grains per sample for the calculation of reliable percentages for the less abundant taxa. Outside of the base sum are the rare aquatic elements, the spores and the varia (unknown and indeterminable grains). Pollen diagrams are plotted using the program Psimpoll 2.27 (Bennett 2007). The pollen zones (pz) of the selected taxa diagrams are based on lithology and on a CONISS analysis after square-root transformation. The detailed diagram of the two seismites is presented in the Supplementary material.

Other methods

Samples for geochemical analysis were taken at exactly the same levels as for the pollen analysis. The geochemistry data (10 oxides and two trace elements) were obtained at Gloucester University with inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES). Dried powder (0.25 g) mixed intimately with 0.75 g of lithium metaborate was fused at 1050 °C for 30 min, then dissolved in 10% nitric acid and made up to volume to 250 ml with distilled water. The ICP-AES data were calibrated against 10 international reference rock materials. The magnetic susceptibility was obtained by measurement by mass on the Bartington MS2 magnetometre. The dry samples were measured with the MS2B Dual Frequency Sensor for discrete samples. For a limited number of samples just after seismites B and D, mineralogy was tested by X-ray. At the Geological Survey of Israel, a Philips X-ray diffractometer (17130/1710) was operated with 40 kV and 30 mA, CuKα radiation, 1°, 0.1 mm, 1° slits and sealed proportional detector. The APD software controlled the running, calculated and printed peak locations and relative intensities, and controlled the diffractogram printout. Bulk mineralogical composition was determined by the highest reflections of each mineral.

Results and interpretation

Laminite origins and duration estimates

The field observation of the thickness and colour of lamination following seismites provide clues to the environmental changes caused by the earthquake events. After the 31 BC earthquake, alternating dark and light lamination did not return until 5 yr afterwards. Instead of alternating dark detrital and aragonitic laminae, we observe four grey clay-rich layers separated by thin dark layers; whereas after the AD 363 earthquake, a visually massive deposition of 1.7 cm occurs that could have been deposited over several years (Fig. 3). The mineralogy of the first cm above seismite D is dominated by calcite, whereas above seismite B it is co-dominated by calcite and quartz. The secondary minerals were respectively quartz and clays or clays only. Minor traces of dolomite and aragonite were found. This conforms with a river inflow- or runoff-flood type of deposition.

Whereas the number of years after seismite B is obtained by counting the number of black (or winter) layers, a field estimation for seismite D was taken as 3 yr, following on a common rule that an unclearly varved segment is equal to the average sedimentation rate of that above and below (Lotter, 1991). Moreover, for both seismites, a simple exercise has been done with the pollen concentration which should be roughly similar from year to year. If the massive deposition (divided in three adjoining samples of similar volumes in the field) is taken as formed in 1 yr (by adding the concentration values of the three samples together), then the influx of pollen becomes extremely high (Fig. 4, top). If it is taken as forming in increasingly more years, the influx decreases. Finally, the best fit (alignment of the values with those earlier and later) is 4 yr for seismite D, suggesting one more year than the number of samples. For seismite B, the best fit is with 5 yr, confirming these laminites as yearly formed (Fig. 4, bottom).

The stable geochemical and magnetic susceptibility data indicate very little change in soil in-wash at the sampled locality (Figs. 5 and 6). Two samples after the 31 BC seismite, however, contain a clear peak in both Sr and Ba. This could reflect a brief and late (after 6 and 7 yr) influence of hydrothermal activity. The magnetic susceptibility indicates that in both cases the earthquakes had no effect on the values measured. There are, however, distinctively lower overall values for the seismite D samples than for the seismite B ones (Figs. 5 and 6).

The lack of clear variation in geochemistry and in the magnetic susceptibility indicates that the changes of pollen taxa percentages are not due to a different taphonomy such as a dilution of the lacustrine sediment by additional soil, nor to an accretion by unusual flash floods. The laminites just after the earthquakes therefore were probably deposited under the same processes than before the earthquake. Hence, the high-resolution pollen diagrams may be interpreted in terms of changes in vegetation cover rather than taphonomic change (Figs. 5 and 6).

Interpretation of the pollen diagrams

The pollen zonation closely follows the lithology in both seismites. In the 31 BC diagram (seismite B), the pre-earthquake and post-earthquake pollen assemblages (pz ZB1 and 3) show signs of intense agriculture such as Cerealia-t. pollen grains and arboriculture with pollen of Olea (olive) and curve of other potentially cultivated trees/bushes: Pistacia-Juglans-Vitis (pistachio, walnut and grape vine) (Fig. 5). However, the laminites following the earthquake (pz ZB2) show a significant decline of human activities and an increase of desert plants (Amarantaceae-Chenopodiaceae) during the 5-yr interval. The olive groves would have produced less for a while (less blooming, fewer pollen grains) because of a temporary lack of management (ploughing and weeding of inter-tree soil, fertilisation and pruning) (Makhzoumi, 1997; Terral, 2000), whereas many cereal fields were not planted or suffered from the lack of maintenance of irrigation canals.

In the AD 363 diagram (seismite D), the vegetation (pz ZD1 and 3) is already clearly less modified by human activities than for the time of the 31 BC earthquakes: cereal fields are still there but the olive groves have been partially replaced by a wooded steppe and an open woodland (evergreen forest with oaks and pistachios with steppic elements such as Sarcopoterium (thorny burnet)), showing already in the area at that time a decline of human activities or a shift to other activities in that century (Fig. 6). About 4 yr after the seismite (pz ZD2), a further temporary decline of human activities is nevertheless noticed: less Olea, less cereals and perhaps also less other cultivated trees/shrubs. The regional vegetation is affected with clearly more desertic/ruderal plants colonising the fallow lands.

Discussion

Introduction

Other pollen analyses elsewhere in lake sequence with seismites show characteristic soil inwash or river inflow leading to widely different pollen concentrations. In Lake Sapanca (Turkey), pollen assemblages are different in turbidites and reworked horizons caused by earthquakes and, even more clearly, show much lower pollen concentrations due to dilution of the lake sediment by pollen-barren soils (Leroy et al., 2009). In other settings, it has been demonstrated that lakes with river inflow receive more pollen grains (higher influx) than lakes without rivers (Pennington, 1979). Therefore, here the atypical sediment above the seismites is most likely not attributable to single flood event(s) with an instantaneous duration(s). In conclusion, the impact of these earthquakes is estimated to have lasted for about 4-5 yr.

Impact of earthquakes on DS agriculture and society

The pollen spectra of the 31 BC (seismite B) and the AD 363 (seismite D) earthquakes (Figs. 5 and 6) indicate that the two seismites most likely belong respectively to the beginning of pz DS2 (high Olea, some Juglans and Vitis) and to the end of pz DS2 (presence of Sarcopoterium and Pistacia but still low Pinus (pine) and reworked pollen) in core DS7-1SC (Leroy, 2010). The concentration values in the two seismite diagrams are much higher than those of the same period in core DS7-1SC (pz DS2 with only 6000 to 18,000 grains per ml; Leroy, 2010) and in the Ze'elim outcrop ZA-2 (Neumann et al., 2007). This is explained by the origin of pollen grains in a near-shore site, which is closer to plants and more affected by river sediment. In the ZA-2 pollen diagram (Neumann et al., 2007), seismite B is towards the beginning of the zone of maximal olive cultivation related to the Roman period (LPAZ 5), and seismite D is at the beginning of the increase of Pinus related to the transition from the Byzantine to the early Islamic period (LPAZ 6). Bookman et al. (2004) placed seismite B clearly in a period of high lake levels, whereas seismite D is at it the end of one.

During the time of the two studied earthquakes, there were only isolated areas of agriculture along the shores of the Dead Sea. This was taking place in oases surrounded by desert. Hirschfeld (2004) described farmhouses, terraces and vegetable gardens in Ein Aneva and Ein Gedi. Archaeological digging in Ein Gedi showed barley growing (Hordeum vulgare) in irrigated fields but the clear absence of olive trees (Hadas, 2008). Moreover, it is likely that owing to the higher rainfall of that period, the boundaries between the Mediterranean vegetation, the steppe and the desert would have shifted southwards and downwards. More land was devoted to agriculture than nowadays and a larger portion of land with olive groves (Leroy, 2010).

The length of the impact on agriculture on local society implies that people had to move away temporarily and that agriculture was deeply disrupted both in the oases along the coast and higher on the slopes of the rift valley (the two main sources of pollen indicators of human activities). The lack of maintenance decreased the production of the Olea trees. The Olea biennial alternation of pollen production cannot be the cause as the observed changes are >2 yr (Fernandez-Mensaque et al., 1998). More decisively for the cereals, the disruption of irrigation and the absence of people would have stopped plantation in the fields. It is also not impossible that the earthquake caused a drop of the level of the water table and a modification (decrease?) of the spring flow. In 31 BC, Palestine was under the reign of King Herod. This was a relatively stable period; although in that year, Herod won a battle against the Nabateans but after a brief war only (about one year long). The 4th century AD Palestine knew a period of political stability (Hirschfeld, 2004). It was then still under Roman rule. Therefore, it is not unlikely that rural life was restored quickly, perhaps more easily than after the 31 BC earthquake.

The AD 363 earthquake was followed in the succeeding centuries by a period with an accumulation of damaging factors to the society. There was not only a progressive aridification of climate (falling DS levels) from AD 550 onwards, a radical change in modes of food production (agriculture to pastoralism) in the late 6th and early 7th centuries, deep social/religious changes, the Justinian plague in AD 541 and invasions into the Roman Empire, but also an earthquake storm causing devastation to a large part of the east Mediterranean world in the 4th to 6th centuries (Stiros, 2001; Hirschfeld, 2006). Under those conditions, past societies may have suffered from a "ratchet effect" of vulnerability. This occurs when each succeeding event reduces the resources that a group, or individual, has to resist and recover before the next environmental shock or stress (Ford et al., 2006). In extreme cases, it may lead to societal collapse (Leroy, 2006). Earthquakes must be seen as part of a larger ensemble of hazards that affected the population leading to collapse at or close to the transition between the Byzantine period and the Islamic period, a time of the dramatic decrease of agriculture in the DS basin and its surroundings (Hirschfeld, 2006; Neumann et al., 2009b; Leroy, 2010).

Conclusions

The impact of earthquakes on the environment is studied for the first time at an exceptionally high time resolution for most proxies (e.g., magnetic susceptibility). In the sedimentary record of Ze'elim (Dead Sea), the influence of two earthquakes (31 BC and AD 363) on agriculture has been shown to last 5 and ~4 yr, respectively, which was a disaster for the sparse local settlements on the western shores (e.g., the oases of Ein Aneva, Ein Gedi and Ein Feshkha) and the marginal agriculture on the western rift slopes. The drastic reduction in agriculture for a few years in the DS rift (and probably in other regions affected by the earthquakes) is not sufficient, however, to cause a civilisation collapse unless it takes place in combination with other damaging factors over larger areas such as aridification of the climate, political instability, population displacements and plagues (Hirschfeld, 2006; Leroy, 2006). This combination of factors may, however, have taken place a few centuries later at the end of the Byzantine period.

López-Merino et al. (2016)

Abstract

Lacustrine laminated sediments are often varves representing annual rhythmic deposition. The Dead Sea high-stand laminated sections consist of mm-scale alternating detrital and authigenic aragonite laminae. Previous studies assumed these laminae were varves deposited seasonally. However, this assumption has never been robustly validated. Here we report an examination of the seasonal deposition of detrital-aragonite couplets from two well-known Late Holocene laminated sections at the Ze'elim fan-delta using palynology and grain-size distribution analyses. These analyses are complemented by the study of contemporary flash-flood samples and multivariate statistical analysis. Because transport affects the pollen preservation state, well-preserved (mostly) air-borne transported pollen was analysed separately from badly-preserved pollen and fungal spores, which are more indicative of water transport and reworking from soils. Our results indicate that
  1. Both detrital and aragonite laminae were deposited during the rainy season.
  2. Aragonite laminae have significantly lower reworked and fungal spore concentrations than detrital and flash-flood samples.
  3. Detrital laminae are composed of recycled local and distal sources, with coarser particles that were initially deposited in the Dead Sea watershed and later transported via run-off to the lake.
This is in line with previous carbon balance studies that showed that aragonite precipitation occurs after the massive input of TCO2 associated with run-off episodes.
Consequently, at least for the Holocene Ze'elim Formation, laminated sediments cannot be considered as varves. Older Quaternary laminated sequences should be re-evaluated.

1. Introduction

Fine-laminated lacustrine sequences have commonly proven to be annually deposited. Thus, varve-based chronologies of these sequences can be obtained (e.g. Ojala and Alenius, 2005; Zolitschka et al., 2015). Large portions of the Dead Sea Basin (DSB) Late Quaternary sediments are laminated (Neev and Emery, 1967; Begin et al., 1974), i.e. the Lisan Formation (70–13 ka BP; Stein and Goldstein, 2006; Torfstein et al., 2013) and the Ze'elim Formation (<10 ka BP; Migowski et al., 2006). These laminated sections consist of mm-scale alternating detrital and authigenic aragonite laminae. Based on age-depth models and lamina counting, these laminae were assumed to be varves in most studies, i.e. rainy season-detrital versus summer-aragonite deposition (Neev and Emery, 1967; Begin et al., 1974; Heim et al., 1997; Migowski et al., 2004; Prasad et al., 2004; Neumann et al., 2009; Leroy et al., 2010; Neugebauer et al., 2015). However, the exact seasonal character of the Dead Sea laminae has not been confirmed in a robust manner. This is of extreme importance for the accurate use of the DSB laminated sediments as palaeoenvironmental and palaeoclimate archives. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to re-address the nature of these laminated sediments in order to aid accurate interpretations of environmental change in the region.

Dead Sea detrital laminae are composed of a mixture of regional dust inputs and local run-off erosion products from the catchment area (Belmaker et al., 2011; Haliva-Cohen et al., 2012). In numerous lakes, carbonate deposition is closely related to biological activity (e.g. Thompson et al., 1997; Salmaso and Decet, 1998). In contrast, carbonate deposition in the Dead Sea is inorganic and results from the interaction between freshwater run-off and Dead Sea hypersaline brine (Katz and Kolodny, 1989; Stein et al., 1997). The primary origin of aragonite from the diluted upper water mass is confirmed by the excellent state of preservation of the crystals and their concentration within specific layers in the laminated sequences. This supports non-overlapping times of deposition between aragonite and detrital laminae (Heim et al., 1997; Stein et al., 1997). The commonly presumed season for aragonite precipitation is summer. The trigger is attributed to evaporation and warming of the high bicarbonate surface waters that entered via run-off during the wet season ("whitening" events) (Neev and Emery, 1967; Stein et al., 1997). On the other hand, Barkan et al. (2001) measured carbonate system parameters in the upper water mass that formed after the heavy flooding during the extreme winter of 1992 and showed that, at least in the modern Dead Sea, aragonite precipitation occurs just after the massive input of TCO2 during the wet season. Research so far, on geochemical and palaeolimnological parameters, has not established the exact timing of the aragonite deposition and its relation to detrital input events.

Based on the observations of Barkan et al. (2001), we hypothesise that aragonite may have not been deposited during summer as is commonly interpreted, but instead the detrital-aragonite couplets may represent flash-flood events rather than an annual cycle. Thus, laminated sequences could be formed by flash-flood events delivering sediments into the lake followed by aragonite deposition in a climate-controlled lacustrine environment, i.e. precipitation in the drainage basin. To examine this hypothesis we performed grain-size and palynological analyses of detrital-aragonite couplets from two well-dated high-stand laminated sequences in the Ze'elim Formation: the Hellenistic-early Roman and the late 19th–early 20th centuries (Bookman (Ken-Tor) et al., 2004). Grain-size distribution provides information on sediment source (i.e. dust or watershed erosion), while palynology provides information on both seasonality (well-preserved, air-borne pollen) and sediment transport (reworked, water-borne pollen). In addition, palynological analysis was carried out on fine mud deposits collected immediately after modern flash-flood events, assuming that these deposits represent flood suspended matter.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Study area and selected laminated sediments

The Dead Sea (Fig. 1A) is a closed, inland hypersaline lake (e.g. Niemi and Ben-Avraham, 1997) and the descendant of the larger Late Pleistocene Lake Lisan (e.g. Bookman et al., 2006; Stein, 2014). Its main fresh water tributaries are the Jordan River and flash-floods that flow west from the Jordanian Mountains and east from the Judean Mountains. Long-term fluctuations of the Dead Sea lake level are caused by rainfall fluctuations over the watershed (Enzel et al., 2003; Bookman (Ken-Tor) et al., 2004). Rain occurs between autumn and spring and it can be either spatially localised or widespread (Dayan and Sharon, 1980). The main synoptic conditions triggering rain and dust transport to the Dead Sea area are the east Mediterranean cyclones and the Red Sea trough. The former is responsible for most winter rain and dust transport, while the latter is more related to autumn and spring dust storms (Ganor and Foner, 1996; Dayan et al., 2007). Because the Dead Sea is located on the border between semiarid and arid climates, rainfall varies seasonally and annually and is often concentrated in intense showers that cause flash-flood events and erosion (Dayan and Morin, 2006; Greenbaum et al., 2006).

The Ze'elim Formation consists of the lacustrine Holocene deposits in the DSB (Fig. 1B). Extensive outcrops of the formation were described at the Ze'elim Plain, one of the largest fan deltas along the western margin of the Dead Sea (Fig. 1C). Outcrops of the Ze'elim Formation were used for palaeoclimate and palaeoseismicity reconstructions (Ken-Tor et al., 2001a, 2001b; Bookman (Ken-Tor) et al., 2004; Kagan et al., 2011). The reconstructed lake-level curve revealed two high-stand periods characterised by relatively continuous stable high water-levels of at least a few decades. These periods of high-stand enabled the formation of alternating detrital and aragonite laminae sequences. The two periods correspond to the Hellenistic-early Roman and the late 19th–early 20th centuries high-stands (Bookman (Ken-Tor) et al., 2004; Fig. 1D). In order to eliminate the long-term climatic influence on the pollen record and to have regularly laminated sediments, these two relatively stable high-stand periods were chosen to be the focus of this study.

2.2. Air-borne pollen calendars

Although several aerobiological studies are available for the Israel-Jordan area, most of them do not provide data regarding the Dead Sea region. Thus, we focussed on pollen calendars prepared in areas under semiarid to arid conditions close to the Dead Sea. Surveys of allergenic airborne pollen data collected on the roof of Tsell Harim hotel (Ein Bokek) at the western coast of the southern Dead Sea and on the roof of the Megilot Regional Council building (Kalya) at the northern part of the Dead Sea (Fig. 1A; Waisel, unpublished report 1, unpublished report 2) were chosen for comparison purposes, as the Ze'elim Plain is located in between and shares semi-arid features with both. Additionally, a flowering calendar (Supplementary Table S1) was composed using the information contained in the Handbook of Wildflowers of Israel (Shmida and Darom, 2000, 2002), paying special attention to the desert and steppe flora, along with the more frequent Mediterranean types in the pollen data.

Reported Ein Bokek and Kalya air-borne data present low total pollen concentrations during the entire year although with a well-defined spring peak. A dominance of Amaranthaceae pollen during the whole year is obvious. Poaceae pollen is also present throughout the year, peaking in spring (March-June). Another characteristic pollen type with large abundance is Olea, recorded in April-May at Kalya and in April-May (-June) at Ein Bokek. Pinus peaks in March-April in both stations. Plantago, another spring bloomer, peaks in March at Kalya and in April at Ein Bokek. An interesting difference between Kalya and Ein Bokek is related to Artemisia, which is abundant in Kalya in October-November but almost absent in Ein Bokek, likely because Artemisia is a steppe plant and although both Ein Bokek and Kalya are located in the desert, the latter is closer to the steppe area.

Other interesting pollen types that give information on specific flowering periods are infrequent or absent in the aerobiology studies performed in stations close to the Dead Sea. However, they are common in the palaeopalynological studies on Dead Sea Holocene sediments (Baruch, 1993; Heim et al., 1997; Neumann et al., 2007, 2009, 2010; Leroy, 2010; Leroy et al., 2010; Litt et al., 2012; Langgut et al., 2014, 2015a). Brassicaceae and Asteraceae have been identified in March-April in Arad, a town located in the southern Judean Desert (Kantor et al., 1966). Additionally, Brassicaceae species start their flowering period in February in Jerusalem, while Asteraceae species extend their blossom up to May and a few species also bloom in autumn (September-December) (Feinbrun et al., 1959). In fact, the number of Asteraceae and Brassicaceae species is large in Israel, and although many bloom in spring, some of them also flower in autumn (Supplementary Table S1). Arboreal pollen types are representative of long-distance transport to the Dead Sea region. Nonetheless, they are equally informative. Quercus is recorded during spring, in March-April mainly (Keynan et al., 1989). Finally, Pinus blooming peaks during spring (March-April) as well (Feinbrun et al., 1959).

The use of flowering calendars and palynological analysis to resolve the season in which an event occurred, i.e. a historical earthquake at central Israel (Langgut et al., 2015b), has proven to be reliable in a similar Dead Sea climate context.

2.3. Sampling

The level of the modern Dead Sea is the result of a large human induced retreat linked to the damming of its northern tributary (Sea of Galilee) and water pumping for industrial purposes. This retreat has triggered the formation of several meter deep gullies in the Ze'elim Plain (Ben Moshe et al., 2008). Late Holocene laminated sequences are exposed in these gullies (Fig. 1B). The two aforementioned high-stand periods were identified in the radiocarbon-dated outcrop (Bookman (Ken-Tor) et al., 2004; Fig. 1D) in February 2011. One block of laminated sediments from the late 19th–early 20th centuries high-stand (ZA11B2), and three blocks of laminated sediments from the Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand (ZA11B3R, ZA11B4L, ZA11B5L) were collected (Fig. 1D). Sampling of individual, mm-scale laminae was done at the sedimentology laboratory of the University of Haifa using a scalpel. Only consecutive detrital and aragonite laminae with no suspicion of contamination or mixing with the upper and lower layers were considered. Overall, 65 detrital-aragonite couplets (130 samples) were analysed: 13 in block ZA11B2 (couplets 1 to 13), 11 in block ZA11B3R (couplets 14 to 24), 17 in block ZA11B4L (couplets 25 to 41) and 24 in block ZA11B5L (couplets 42 to 65) (Supplementary Table S2).

Figure 1d

Sedimentary scheme of the Ze'elim outcrop profile and radiocarbon chronology (modified from Bookman (Ken-Tor) et al., 2004). ZA11B2 sediment block represent the late 19th e early 20th centuries high-stand. ZA11B3R, ZA11B4L and ZA11B5L sediment blocks represent the Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand. Aragonite crusts were deposited in a coastal to terrestrial environment, while the aragonite laminae (discussed in this study) were deposited in a lacustrine environment. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

click on image to open in a new tab

López-Merino et al. (2016)


Additionally, fine mud carried in suspension in flash-floods that occurred between February 2009 and June 2012, was collected from drying puddles immediately after the events. A total of 28 flash-flood samples were analysed (Fig. 1C; Supplementary Table S3).

2.4. Grain-size distribution analysis

Grain-size analysis of the Ze'elim detrital laminae was performed at the University of Haifa using a Beckman-Coulter LS 230 laser particle size analyser over the particle size range of 0.02–2000 μm. Five replicate samples were measured for each detrital lamina. Grain-size was determined after dissolution of carbonate minerals. In block ZA11B4L and in a few samples of block ZA11B2 it was not determined due to low sample mass available (Supplementary Table S2). Additionally, for two thicker detrital laminae, grain-size distribution was measured in sub-samples from the top and bottom parts in order to identify settling patterns.

2.5. Palynological analysis

Palynological extraction was carried out at Brunel University London. Around 0.5–4 ml (usually ~2 ml) of detrital material (detrital laminae and flash-flood samples) and 0.5–12 ml (usually ~5 ml) of aragonite laminae were deflocculated with a Na4O7P2 solution (10%). Carbonate dissolution was done with concentrated HCl (35%). Elimination of silicates was obtained by HF (48%) followed by HCl. The residue was sieved through 125 and 10 μm nylon meshes and mounted on slides with glycerol. Concentration estimates (number of palynomorphs/ml of sediment) were calculated based on the addition of Lycopodium tablets at the beginning of the chemical treatment (Stockmarr, 1971). Palynological identification and counting was completed on light microscopes at ×400, and at ×1000 using immersion oil for more delicate identifications, and complemented by the Brunel University London pollen reference collection and atlases (Reille, 1992, 1995, 1998). Where possible, a minimum of 200 well-preserved (air-borne), non-reworked, pollen grains were counted per sample (average = 242). Palynological diagrams were elaborated using Psimpoll 4.27 (Bennett, 2009).

As pollen found in southern Dead Sea sediments could be transported by both wind and water run-off (Horowitz et al., 1975; Baruch, 1993), it is necessary to be sure about the air-borne component to be able to detect the timing of laminae deposition. Hence, reworked pollen grains (water-borne) were counted separately from well-preserved (air-borne) pollen grains and classified into different categories: broken, corroded, crumpled, degraded and other reworked (when two or more features were present) (Supplementary Table S1). Broken stamina were grouped with the reworked material. On average, 618 reworked pollen grains were counted per sample. Fungal spores had a significant presence and thus were also quantified. On average, 195 fungal spores were counted per sample. Full counts of reworked pollen grains and fungal spores are given in Supplementary Figs. S2–S6.

The concentration of Total well-preserved pollen grains, Total reworked pollen grains and Total fungal spores were calculated separately. The first includes the well-preserved pollen grains only (number of well-preserved pollen grains per ml of sediment), the second one includes the reworked pollen grains only (number of reworked pollen grains per ml of sediment), and the third includes the fungal spores only (number of fungal spores per ml of sediment).

2.6. Numerical analysis

In order to unravel the seasons in which the laminae could have been deposited, Principal Components Analysis (PCA) was applied to the well-preserved palynological dataset. This approach has been confirmed as valid for detecting seasonality in palaeoenvironmental studies (i.e. Festi et al., 2015). In this case, the PCA has been performed on the transposed well-preserved pollen data matrices (samples in columns as variables, and taxa in rows as cases). This approach enables us to summarise the main palynological assemblages of co-existing taxa and their importance in each sample. Thus, the palynological composition of the samples can be compared based on co-variation patterns (Lopez-Merino et al., 2012). Taxa showing large factor scores (i.e. larger abundances) in a given principal component explain most of the variation of the palynological dataset in samples with large factor loadings. This enables quantitative expression of the proportion of variance explained by each principal component for each sample (Lopez-Merino et al., 2012).

Baruch (1993) presented the palynological analysis of 35 surface samples distributed along four vegetation zones of Israel: Mediterranean, transitional and steppe, desert, and the Dead Sea shore. The Mediterranean zone was dominated by arboreal taxa (Quercus calliprinos, Pinus and Sarcopoterium spinosum), the transitional zone was characterised by Sarcopoterium spinosum, Brassicaceae and Artemisia, while the desert area was dominated by Brassicaceae and Asteraceae. In the pollen rain in the Dead Sea shore, Amaranthaceae pollen was overrepresented. Therefore, in order to reduce background noise and detect the main characteristic palynological associations, Amaranthaceae pollen was excluded from the analysis. Many species belonging to this pollen type bloom all year long and very locally. Therefore, its pollen is overrepresented and dominates the pollen assemblages regardless of the season (Baruch, 1993; Waisel, unpublished report 1, unpublished report 2). After the exclusion of Amaranthaceae and prior to the statistical analysis, data-set proportions were recalculated. Correlation matrices and varimax rotation solutions were applied to constrain the co-variation in the components. PCA was done using the IBM SPSS Statistics 20 software.

3. Results

3.1. Grain-size

The siliciclastic fraction of the detrital laminae showed at least three different grain-size modes. Most samples had two grain-size modes, a first fine mode of 3–10 μm and a second coarser mode of 20–90 μm (Fig. 2). A ~10 μm mode was obtained on samples from collectors installed on a buoy on the Dead Sea surface during three years (1997–1999) (Singer et al., 2003). This grain-size distribution represents dust deposited over the Dead Sea similar to that of long-range transported Harmattan dust (Stahr et al., 1994) and is comparable to the grain-size distribution of air-borne dust in the Sde Boker area (Negev) (Offer et al., 1992). Thus, the fine grain-size mode in the detrital laminae siliciclastic fraction is consistent with fine dust largely wind-transported from medium to long range. Although a bimodal distribution is in accordance with Haliva-Cohen et al. (2012), the average grain-size measured for the second mode in this study is coarser, possibly due to the carbonate dissolution stage. Few samples included a minor third mode of 100–200 μm (Fig. 2) consistent with the contribution of loess (Haliva-Cohen et al., 2012), likely representing a local source.

Left

Figure 2

Grain-size distribution in detrital samples from blocks ZA11B2 (A), ZA11B3R (B) and ZA11B5L (C). Grain-size distribution of detrital laminae C7 and C10 (numbers as in Supplementary Table S2) from block ZA11B2 showing upward fining pointing to graded bedding during flash-flood events are also shown (D)

Right

Figure 1d

Sedimentary scheme of the Ze'elim outcrop profile and radiocarbon chronology (modified from Bookman (Ken-Tor) et al., 2004). ZA11B2 sediment block represent the late 19th e early 20th centuries high-stand. ZA11B3R, ZA11B4L and ZA11B5L sediment blocks represent the Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand. Aragonite crusts were deposited in a coastal to terrestrial environment, while the aragonite laminae (discussed in this study) were deposited in a lacustrine environment. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

click on either image to open in a new tab

Both images from López-Merino et al. (2016)


The general grain-size distribution measured from detrital laminae suggests it is composed of recycling of local and distal sources as demonstrated in previous studies (e.g. Belmaker et al., 2014). Additionally, grain-size distribution within thicker detrital laminae shows graded bedding that suggests sediment deposition during flash-flood events. This phenomenon was shown with upward fining of the grain-size distribution in specific laminae (Fig. 2D) and was also described in petrographic thin-slides (Haliva-Cohen et al., 2012). The understanding that the detrital laminae consist of both air-borne particles and recycled local (mostly Quaternary sequences) material leads to the conclusion that the palynological analysis should separate air-borne from reworked pollen. This approach is practiced in the Dead Sea sediments at a very fine detail here for the first time.

3.2. Palynology

Introduction

Two prerequisites are necessary to validate the timing of laminae deposition: (i) detecting features indicative of seasons and (ii) identifying features suggestive of a link between detrital laminae and flash-flood events. These prerequisites were achieved by counting separately poorly-preserved pollen grains (reworked), mainly indicative of water transport and reworking from soils, from well-preserved pollen grains, mostly derived from air-borne transport, hence providing blooming period information.

3.2.1. Air-borne: detecting seasonal features

Well-preserved pollen grains were present in both flash-flood samples (Fig. 3) and detrital-aragonite couplets (Figs. 4-7). Although the number of pollen types identified is high (81 types in the flash-floods, 67 types in ZA11B2, 65 types in ZA11B3R, 70 types in ZA11B4L, and 73 types in ZA11B5L), few pollen types dominate the pollen assemblages. As expected due to the location of the Ze'elim Wadi and fan delta under semi-arid conditions, one of the main pollen types in both detrital and aragonite layers is Amaranthaceae (Baruch, 1993). Other abundant pollen types are Asteraceae liguliflorae, Asteraceae tubuliflorae, Artemisia, Brassicaceae, Quercus calliprinos t., Pinus, Olea and Poaceae (Figs. 4-7). Pollen assemblages from recent flash-flood samples show the current highly anthropised landscape with low presence of long-distance Mediterranean arboreal pollen types such as Quercus and Olea, as well as larger percentages of Pinus pollen due to anthropogenic afforestation (Fig. 3). Hence flash-flood samples have not been included in the statistical analysis. A preliminary PCA included samples from both high-stand periods (Hellenistic-early Roman and late 19th-early 20th centuries). PCA results separated the two periods on the basis of Olea (ZA11B2 versus ZA11B3R, ZA11B4L, ZA11B5L, data not shown). This is consistent with the intense olive tree cultivation during Hellenistic-early Roman times, a period dominated by intense arboriculture, which has no equivalent in the present (Baruch, 1993; Neumann et al., 2007, 2010; Leroy, 2010). Therefore, in order not to conceal differences among detrital and aragonite laminae due to the impact of the higher presence of Olea during the older high-stand period, the two high-stand periods were explored separately.

The PCA of the late 19th-early 20th centuries high-stand transposed data matrix resulted in three principal components explaining 93.6% of the total variance in the dataset (Fig. 8). PC1Recent explains 46.9% of the variance, with Artemisia commanding the largest positive factor score (Fig. 8). Artemisia species in the steppe area bloom in autumn (Supplementary Table S1), particularly in September-October (-November). Hence, PC1Recent seems to be a strong autumn indicator. PC2Recent explains 32.3% of the variance. Asteraceae liguliflorae, Asteraceae tubuliflorae and Brassicaceae present large positive factor scores. Artemisia also has a positive score, although moderate. On the other hand, Pinus, Olea, Quercus calliprinos t. and Typha-Sparganium t. have negative scores (Fig. 8). Asteraceae and Brassicaceae species are abundant in Israel. Although many of them bloom in spring, some bloom all year-long (Supplementary Table S1) particularly in autumn-winter. The observation that for PC2Recent spring (Pinus, Olea, Quercus calliprinos t.) and late spring-early summer (Typha-Sparganium t.) bloomers present negative scores, while the autumn indicator Artemisia has a positive score, could be indicative of this principal component as an autumn indicator as well. This is perhaps more related to the direction of winds. Horowitz et al. (1975) pointed out that the origin and routes of winds (e.g. due to dust and rain storms) are an important factor in the pollen provenance. As mentioned above for the surveys of allergenic airborne pollen data at Ein Bokek (southern Dead Sea) and Kalya (northern Dead Sea) (Fig. 1), Artemisia is important in autumn at Kalya only, representing the Artemisia-dominated steppe (PC1Recent). However, Artemisia is almost absent at Ein Bokek, representing a more desert-like vegetation like the assemblage separated by PC2Recent. PC3Recent explains 14.4% of the variance. Pinus, Quercus calliprinos t. and Olea present large positive factor scores, while Asteraceae tubuliflorae, Asteraceae liguliflorae and Typha-Sparganium t. have more moderate scores (Fig. 8). The flowering period of Pinus, Quercus calliprinos t. and Olea extends from March to May. Typha-Sparganium t. flowers in June-July, while most Asteraceae species have their peak period of pollen release from March to June (Supplementary Table S1). Thus, PC3Recent is a strong indicator for spring.

The PCA of the Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand transposed data matrix resulted in five principal components explaining 92.0% of the total variance (Fig. 9). PC1Hellenistic explains 40.8% of the variance, with Artemisia accounting for the largest positive factor score (Fig. 9), likely indicating that samples dominated by PC1Hellenistic have an autumn-dominated pollen assemblage as indicated by PC1Recent for the 19th-early 20th centuries sequence. PC2Hellenistic explains 33.3% of the variance, with Olea presenting the largest positive factor score, whereas Poaceae, Quercus calliprinos t. and Plantago show more moderate scores (Fig. 9). The species included within these pollen types are spring bloomers (Supplementary Table S1). Thus, PC2Hellenistic seems to indicate spring in assemblages with large percentages of olive tree, i.e. olive tree crops. PC3Hellenistic accounts for 9.6% of the variance. Asteraceae liguliflorae, Asteraceae tubuliflorae, Brassicaceae and Centaurea present large positive factor scores, while Apiaceae, Artemisia and Tamarix have more moderate positive scores. Poaceae and Quercus calliprinos t. present moderate negative scores (Fig. 9). Similar to PC2Recent, this palynological assemblage could be related to autumn. PC4Hellenistic explains 5.2% of the total variance, with Pinus, Poaceae and Quercus calliprinos t. showing large positive factor scores and Asteraceae tubuliflorae, Apiaceae and Quercus boissieri t. more moderate positive scores. On the other hand, Olea has a negative factor score (Fig. 9). Similar to PC2Hellenistic, PC4Hellenistic likely reflects spring, although with an assemblage without olive tree crops. Finally, PC5Hellenistic, which accounts for 3.1% of the total variance only, is directed by Urticaceae (Fig. 9). This principal component, indicative of spring (Supplementary Table S1), is important in few samples only. Although for the late 19th-early 20th centuries high-stand, some couplets present an autumn-detrital (PC1Recent and PC2Recent) and a spring-aragonite (PC3Recent) deposition, most of the variance of the detrital-aragonite couplets is explained by PC1Recent and PC2Recent, pointing at an autumn deposition of the entire couplet (Fig. 10). For the Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand, many detrital-aragonite couplets present an autumn-detrital (PC1Hellenistic, PC3Hellenistic) and a spring-aragonite (PC2Hellenistic, PC4Hellenistic and PC5Hellenistic) deposition, while many other couplets present deposition in either autumn or spring (Fig. 10). Furthermore, eight couplets suggested a spring-detrital and a following autumn aragonite deposition. This result appears in 12.3% of the couplets only (8 out of 65), and it is difficult to explain, likely pointing to an anomalous result that may be related to contamination from adjacent laminae that was introduced during the difficult sampling of the mm-scale alternating laminae. Further deliberation on the meaning of seasonal deposition will be presented in the discussion.

3.2.2. Water-borne: linking detrital layers with flash-flood events

The concentration of well-preserved pollen grains is usually higher in detrital laminae and flash-flood samples than in aragonite laminae, although the differences are much larger when comparing the concentration of reworked grains (Fig. 11). Aragonite laminae have considerably much lower concentration of reworked pollen grains than detrital laminae and flash-flood samples (Fig. 11; Supplementary Figs. S2-S6). This suggests that water-transported reworked pollen is more significant than wind-transported reworked pollen (which can be the main source of reworking in aragonite layers). The concentration of fungal spores is also lower in aragonite than in detrital and flash-flood samples (Supplementary Figs. S2-S6). The combined concentrations of reworked pollen and fungal spores can be used to assess the link between the formation of detrital laminae and flash-flood events (Fig. 12). Flash-flood and detrital samples present similar log-log distributions with a stronger overlap than flash-floods and aragonite laminae, the latter having lower reworked and fungal spores concentrations and no clear distribution pattern (Fig. 12).

4. Discussion

4.1. The timing of detrital-aragonite deposition

If Dead Sea laminae were varves in the way assumed by some authors, pollen spectra in aragonite laminae would correspond always to summer bloomers, while in detrital layers would have to correspond to autumn-winter-spring pollen assemblages. However, our palynological analysis shows that the air-borne component presents a more complex picture for the timing of aragonite deposition. Furthermore, the detailed palynological examination of the deposition season of detrital-aragonite couplets suggests three possible scenarios (Fig. 10):
  • Scenario (i): both detrital and the following aragonite lamina have autumn palynological assemblages (27 out of 65 couplets, 41.5%),

  • Scenario (ii): both detrital and the following aragonite lamina have spring palynological assemblages (9 out of 65 couplets, 13.8%), and

  • Scenario (iii): the detrital lamina has an autumn palynological assemblage and the following aragonite lamina a spring one (21 out of 65 couplets, 32.3%).
These scenarios show no summer pollen assemblages in the aragonite laminae. One may argue that the lack of summer pollen results from the relatively low dust flux during this season (Singer et al., 2003). However, considering the rapid deposition of aragonite laminae along with the abundance of autumn pollen assemblages this argument does not stand. Thus, we conclude that the deposition of aragonite did not depend exclusively on evaporation and warming of surface waters (Neev and Emery, 1967). This indicates that aragonite precipitation occurred always during the rainy season, either at the same season of the detrital laminae deposition (scenarios i and ii) or during the following spring (scenario iii). These scenarios suggest that the deposition of aragonite laminae requires higher carbonate alkalinity in the flash-flood, hence enabling aragonite saturation without evaporation (Barkan et al., 2001).


Several of the consecutive couplets analysed showed a deposition within the same season (Fig. 10). On the one hand, consecutive autumn pollen assemblages were observed in the following couplets of the late 19th-early 20th century high-stand (block ZA11B2): couplets 13, 12 and 11; couplet 9 and the detrital layer of couplet 8; couplets 6, 5 and 4 and the detrital layer of couplet 3; and couplets 2 and 1. In the Hellenistic-early Roman high-stand consecutive autumn pollen assemblages were observed in a) couplets 19, 18 and 17 in block ZA11B3R; b) couplets 39 and 38; couplet 36 and the detrital layer of couplet 35; and couplets 30 and 29 and the detrital layer of couplet 28 in block ZA11B4L; and c) couplet 50 and the detrital layer of couplet 49; and couplet 43 and the detrital layer of couplet 42 in block ZA11B5L (Fig. 10). On the other hand, consecutive spring pollen assemblages were observed in the aragonite layer of couplet 35 and couplet 34 in block ZA11B4L; and in the aragonite layer of couplet 48 and couplet 47 in block ZA11B5L (Fig. 10).

These short deposition sequences do not allow us to determine whether they were deposited during the same year (i.e. a year with more flash-flood events) or during consecutive years in the same season. The compilation of the annual distribution of flash-floods in five Dead Sea stations (Supplementary Fig. S7) shows the occurrence of flash-flood events from October to May mainly, with few events in June and September. Thus, the modern flash-floods record shows that both situations are possible. However, more than one event a season is highly probable in the large drainages (Supplementary Fig. S7). In fact, the palynological assemblages obtained in this study for both detrital and aragonite laminae are those of the rainy season, i.e. when flash-floods are more likely to occur.

Scenario (iii), when a detrital lamina is deposited in autumn and the following aragonite one in spring, agrees with an aragonite precipitation due to mixing of flood freshwater with Dead Sea brine during the rainy season. However, in contrast to scenarios (i) and (ii), the laminae from the same couplet are deposited in different seasons within the rainy period. This scenario may also indicate a longer lag period between the freshwater arrival to the Dead Sea and the chemical deposition. The lacustrine conditions that can lead to this situation are only estimated at this stage. However, the need for sufficient accumulation of dissolved bicarbonate in the lake surface water or the effect of turbulence on chemical deposition is hypothesised as possibly critical in this interpretation.

The analyses performed in this study present for the first time direct evidence for the timing of laminae deposition in the DSB. The abovementioned scenarios suggest that both detrital and aragonite laminae were deposited in varying seasonal patterns rather than in a strict annual cycle. Detrital layers present grain-size distributions composed of sediment recycling of rock and sediment outcrops in the Dead Sea watershed and distal sources by aeolian transport. These recycled sediments reach the Dead Sea via run-off or as direct dust deposition from the atmosphere. Run-off sediment transport as the main process is confirmed by the large presence of reworked pollen grains and fungal spores (water-borne component) in the detrital laminae compared to the aragonite laminae (Fig. 12). Erosion of soils delivered reworked pollen and fungal spores with the sediments that deposited within the detrital laminae. Aragonite precipitates from the upper surface water layer due to mixing of flood-water with Dead Sea brine (Stein et al., 1997; Barkan et al., 2001).

This study indicates that, in contrast to previous assumptions, detrital-aragonite couplets were deposited during the rainy season as a result of flash-flood events, hence Dead Sea laminated sediments cannot be considered as varves. This result is of great importance for the accurate use of the DSB laminated sequences as palaeoenvironmental and paleoclimate archives (e.g. the ICDP Dead Sea Deep Drilling Project), and it delivers exciting new information to the Dead Sea scientists and the palaeoclimate community alike.

4.2. Palaeoenvironmental implications and further research

During a flood event, water entering the Dead Sea is dispersed in a plume that floats over the dense saline waters (Nehorai et al., 2013). The suspended sediment in the plume ultimately deposits on the lake bottom. Plume sediment dispersal is a function of flood discharge, wave energy and distance from the shore. Consequently, the central deep part of the basin will record fewer flash-flood events as compared to the margin. In addition, the potential problem of reworking of deposited sediment destroying depositional laminations has to be taken into account. This may prevent, with the uncertainty of having more than one couplet deposited per year, the use of the detrital-aragonite couplets for laminated-based chronologies, i.e. if the laminated-based chronology of a studied sediment core is of long duration the number of couplets per time-unit may vary due to variations in the shore distance or/and flash-flood discharge. In addition, larger discharge carrying more sediment will deposit thicker and coarser detrital laminae. On the other hand, the higher the lake level the further the deposition location from the shore. This yields thinner and finer grain-size laminae. In brief, both parameters are climatically controlled, but result in a reverse effect on the deposition character of the detrital laminae, preventing the use of the thickness and grain-size of the laminae as a direct climatic indicator.

Barkan et al. (2001) pointed out that the aragonite precipitation rate calculated by Stein et al. (1997) for the laminated sediments of the Lisan Formation required a run-off influx six-fold higher than the contemporary run-off influx. Thus, indicating that the Lisan period was more humid than nowadays and that flash-flood events could have been more pronounced. Stein et al. (1997), however, based on previous reports (Neev and Emery, 1967; Begin et al., 1974), interpreted the aragonite formation as precipitation due to increased evaporation in summer. Therefore, understanding the deposition processes of the laminated sediments is of considerable importance for palaeoenvironmental reconstructions. This work has provided the first palynological evidence for unravelling the timing of aragonite laminae deposition, which has been identified as occurring during the rainy season rather than summer, but further research is necessary.

5. Conclusions

This research attempts to identify by palynology the timing of the Dead Sea laminae deposition. Our results demonstrate that:
  1. Couplets are not necessarily deposited with annual cyclicity. The air-borne component is more complex than a rainy season-detritus versus a summer-aragonite deposition, as all laminae presented pollen assemblages representative of the rainy season.

  2. The concentration of reworked pollen grains in detrital layers and flash-flood samples is similar and much higher than in aragonite layers. Palynological concentration of reworked grains compared with fungal spores, which represent erosion and soil products, separated detritus and flash-flood samples from aragonite ones.

  3. Grain-size distribution indicates that detrital laminae are composed of recycling of local and distal sources, with coarser particles deposited in the Dead Sea watershed and later transported via run-off to the lake.

  4. Aragonite precipitation from the upper surface water layer does not necessarily require evaporation and warming of surface waters.
The conclusions drawn above suggest that detrital-aragonite couplets in the Dead Sea laminated sediments are most likely not varves and that the laminae deposition is related to the occurrence of flash-flood events. Whether for specific rainfall patterns (i.e. one flood a year, which is very unlikely) those laminae could provide annual information or not is something that needs to be further tested in other Dead Sea contexts, likely in long and undisturbed laminated sections with many continuous laminae such as the Lisan upper member (i.e. Prasad et al., 2004) and the Ein Feshkha sequences (Kagan et al., 2011).


Further research is necessary to understand whether the number of couplets formed due to flash-flood events depends on the distance from the shoreline, meaning that sediment sections covering the same chronology from different parts of the DSB (shoreline versus deep basin) could have different numbers of laminations. Hence, laminae counting as a dating tool of Dead Sea sediments should be re-evaluated. However, these laminated sequences should be used for the reconstruction of palaeo-flash-flood records that will have a significant impact on understanding the palaeo-hydrology of the DSB and its implication to high-resolution climatic interpretation.

Haliva-Cohen et al. (2012)

Abstract

The sources and routes of transport of fine detritus material (FDM) to the lakes filling the late Quaternary Dead Sea basin were studied by petrographic, mineralogical, grain size, chemical and Sr–Nd isotope analyses on sediments of the late Quaternary lacustrine formations, including river flood material, dust, and loess from the lake watershed. The lacustrine formations comprise two sedimentary facies: one that consists of alternating laminae of primary aragonite and silty-detritus material (aad facies), and another that consists mainly of laminated detritus particles and generally lacks aragonite (ld facies). The aad facies characterizes the glacial intervals (e.g. MIS2 and 4) when lake levels were high, while the ld facies characterizes interglacials (e.g. MIS1, 5) and warmer glacial intervals (e.g. MIS3), when lake levels were low. The detritus of both aad and ld facies show similar mineralogy: mainly quartz and calcite grains with minor feldspars and clays, but distinct grain-sizes (8–10 μm and 50–60 μm, respectively), and distinct 87Sr/86Sr and εNd (0.711–0.712 and ∼−7 to −8, versus 0.709–0.710 and ∼−5, respectively). The aad and ld FDM comprise desert dust of mixed granitic – basaltic composition that was blown from the Sahara desert and from the Nile delta to the northern Negev desert (e.g. the loess deposits) and the Judean Mountains bordering the Dead Sea basin, mainly during glacial intervals along with enhanced Mediterranean rain fronts. The aad FDM reflects an enhanced transport of Saharan granitic dust to the vicinity of the lake mainly during glacials. The ld FDM was recycled from the loess surface cover of the Negev desert mainly during interglacials and warm glacial intervals.

Event B - 50 BCE - 230 CE (most probable) and 100 BCE - 230 CE (2σ)

Discussion

Discussion

Event C - 5-50 CE (most probable) and 64 BCE - 311 CE (2σ)

Discussion

Discussion

Event D - 358-580 CE (most probable) and 358-580 CE (2σ)

Discussion

Discussion

Event E - 1220-1390 CE (most probable) and 1220-1390 CE (2σ)

Discussion

Discussion

Event F - 1270-1400 CE (most probable) and 1210-1400 CE (2σ)

Discussion

Discussion

Event G - 19th century CE (most probable) and 1670-1960 CE (2σ)

Discussion

Discussion

Event H - 20th century CE (most probable)

Discussion

Discussion

ZA-2

Seismite at 32 cm depth -

Discussion

Discussion

References
Kagan et al. (2011)

Abstract

A comprehensive multisite paleoseismic archive of the late Holocene Dead Sea basin (past 2500 years) is established by constructing two age‐depth chronological models of two sedimentary sections exposed at the retreating shores of the modern Dead Sea. Two new paleoseismic study sites studied are the Ein Feshkha Nature Reserve outcrop located at the northern part of the basin and close to an active underwater transverse fault and the east Ze’elim Gully outcrop at the southern part of the basin. Age‐depth regression models are calculated for these sections based on atmospheric radiocarbon ages of short‐lived organic debris calibrated with a Bayesian model. The uncertainties on individual model ages are smaller than 100 years.

The new chronological records are compared to a laminae‐counting study of the Ein Gedi core (Migowski et al., 2004) located at the central Dead Sea basin. The Ein Feshkha outcrop yielded the largest number of seismites in the studied time interval (n = 52), while lower numbers of seismites are recovered from the Ze’elim outcrop and Ein Gedi core (n = 15 and 36, respectively). The seismites show no strong dependence on the limnological‐sedimentological conditions in the particular sampling sites (they coappear in both shallow and deep water environments and in different sedimentary facies). During time intervals when the chronologies are comparable it appears that the number of seismites is significantly larger in the northern part of the basin (Ein Gedi and Ein Feshkha).

Seismic quiescence intervals are apparent at all three sites from 2nd–4th century A.D. and at 500–150 B.C. at Ze’elim and Ein Gedi. Several synchronous seismites appear in all sections (termed here the intrabasin seismites (IBS)). Among them: 1927, 1293, 1202/1212, 749, 551 [JW: should be late 6th century CE], 419, and 33 A.D. and 31 and mid‐2nd century B.C. The recurrence time of the IBS from the 2nd century B.C. to the 14th century A.D. is ∼200 years, compared with ∼100 years for all earthquakes.

On a diagram of epicentral distance versus magnitude, historic earthquakes that are correlated with IBS plot in a field of high local intensity. The farther and stronger IBS earthquakes require lower local intensities to be recorded. This study demonstrates that a painstaking effort is still needed for unraveling the seismic history of the Dead Sea basin. The results also indicate that such a study will likely be highly rewarding.

1. Introduction

[2] The Dead Sea Rift zone, extending from the Red Sea in the south to the Taurus Mountains in the north (Figure 1, inset), has been a major source of historic earthquakes [Ben‐Menahem et al., 1976; Garfunkel, 1981]. The fault system can potentially cause earthquakes that would affect a large number of people in the adjacent countries. Different types of paleoseismic evidence along the Dead Sea Transform (DST) show that large earthquakes have occurred in the past tens of thousands of years, [e.g., Reches and Hoexter, 1981; Marco et al., 1996; Amit et al., 1999; Klinger et al., 2000a; Niemi et al., 2001; Meghraoui et al., 2003; Shaked et al., 2004; Kagan et al., 2005; Matmon et al., 2005; Ferry et al., 2007]. The pioneering works of El‐Isa and Mustafa [1986] and Marco and coauthors [Marco and Agnon, 1995; Marco, 1996; Marco et al., 1996] on the intraclast breccia layers (originally termed “mixed layers”) in the late Pleistocene Lisan Fm. have set the stage for extensive lacustrine paleoseismic research in the Dead Sea basin. Intraclast breccias are temporally associated with surface faulting in places, strongly suggesting a genetic relationship between brecciation of the laminated lacustrine sediment and surface faulting, attesting to the earthquake origin of the deformation [Marco and Agnon, 2005]. Therefore, the intraclast breccia layers were interpreted as seismites. This identification was subsequently supported by the studies of Ken‐Tor et al. [2001a] and Migowski et al. [2004] who enabled correlations between dates of historic earthquakes (derived from historical charts) and radiocarbon ages of intraclast breccias and other seismites (e.g., liquefied sands) recovered from the exposures and drillholes of the late Holocene Ze’elim Fm. Katz et al. [2009] have reported geochemical anomalies in intraclast breccia layers, carried by microcrystals of barium‐strontium‐sulphate. They suggest that precipitation of these microcrystals from a supersaturated brine was triggered by exposure of gypsum nucleation centers, formed on the bottom sediments and suspended during earthquake shaking.

[3] The presence of seismites in late Quaternary sedimentary sections in the Dead Sea basin allows reconstruction of earthquake recurrence patterns. Establishment of such patterns was attempted by Marco et al. [1996] for the Lisan Fm. comprising the sedimentary sequences of Lake Lisan that filled the Dead Sea basin during the last glacial period (∼70–14 ka). They determined an average recurrence interval (RI) of 1600 years with a coefficient of variation larger than unity, expressed as alternation of periods of 10–15 kyr with earthquakes occurring in relatively rapid succession, versus ones with relative quiescence (clustering [see Kagan and Jackson, 1991]). Subsequently, Ken‐Tor et al. [2001a] and Migowski et al. [2004] established the RI for the last ∼2000 years (RI = 100–300 years) and ∼10,000 years (RI = 100–1000 years, clustered), respectively.

[4] The seismites are probably the result of turbulence in the soft sediment [Heifetz et al., 2005]; the threshold for triggering can be affected by water depth at the site (mass of water above sediment), lithology, sediment compaction, and sedimentation rate. The intensity of shaking depends on earthquake magnitude, distance from source, and position with respect to basin structure (“basin effects”). None of these factors controlling the intensity and its threshold was evaluated rigorously. Early efforts in quantifying the “basin effect” were conducted by Begin et al. [2005] who argue that site effects due to basin topography may have caused seismite thickness differences between two Pleistocene lacustrine sections. On the other hand, Ken‐Tor et al. [2001a] and Migowski et al. [2004] found no relationship between seismite thickness and historical earthquake intensity. On outcrop scale, Marco and Agnon [2005] found lateral thickness variations of seismites across faults at the Massada Pleistocene seismite site. This illustrates that seismite thickness can be dictated by the local bathymetry that moderates postseismic transport. At the Wadi Darga outcrop thickness changes were reported in association with faults, while in some beds internal deformation disappears as a layer thins and reappears when the layer returns to its more characteristic thickness [Enzel et al., 2000]. These authors suggest that bedding or laminae thickness may be one control on seismite formation. Heifetz et al. [2005] assert that compaction profile, ground acceleration, and wave period all determine the threshold for onset of deformation. Therefore the thickness of the deformed sequence may be sensitive to the details of the wave train, and not necessarily to the local intensity.

[5] Most of the paleoseismic studies in the Dead Sea basin, as of yet, based the evaluation of the data (e.g., recurrence intervals) on the individual sections. Nevertheless, an important result of the study done by Migowski et al. [2004] on the Ein Gedi core, was their comparison with the existing Ze’elim Gully chronology [Ken‐Tor et al., 2001a], showing that historic earthquakes that lack in the Ze’elim archive occurred during depositional hiatuses, while they do appear in the more continuous Ein Gedi core.

[6] In this paper, we expand the effort to integrate multisite paleoseismite information. We analyze and date two new seismite‐bearing outcrops: Ein Feshkha Nature Reserve section and an eastern Ze’elim Gully section. We then compare the patterns of seismite appearance with the previously dated Ein Gedi core and western Ze’elim Gully exposure. This integrated study allows us to compose a picture of the spatial and temporal distribution (e.g., the recurrence intervals (RI)) of earthquakes that affected part of or the entire Dead Sea basin (as monitored in the three recording stations). Specific issues dealt with in this study are: sedimentary characterization of the seismites (namely, the dependence of the seismite appearance on the sedimentary facies and environment of deposition), the temporal (RI) and spatial patterns of seismites at the late Holocene Dead Sea basin, and identification of earthquakes that formed seismites along the entire basin.

2. Geological Background

[7] The Holocene Dead Sea is a terminal lake filling a deep tectonic depression along the boundary between the Sinai subplate and the Arabia plate, the Dead Sea Transform (DST). The DST has a total left‐lateral offset of about 105 km since about 18 Ma [Freund et al., 1968]. Over 1100 km long, it trends from the spreading center in the Red Sea to the Taurus collision zone in Turkey. The Dead Sea basin is likely the largest pull‐apart basin along the DST and one of the largest pull‐apart basins on Earth [Mechie et al., 2009]. Recent comprehensive geophysical investigations have illuminated the structure of the lithosphere and crust across pure transform and basinal segments (Wadi Araba and Dead Sea, respectively) [ten Brink et al., 2006; Mechie et al., 2009; Weber et al., 2009]. The Dead Sea straddles the strike‐slip duplex fault structure [cf. Woodcock and Fischer, 1986]. Three transverse faults have been mapped in the Dead Sea basin (Figure 1): the Kalia fault, the Ein Gedi fault, and the Amatzyahu fault. Details of the Dead Sea basin fault system are given in Figure 1. Two GPS campaigns 6 years apart at seventeen stations straddling Wadi Araba yielded ongoing slip rate calculations of 4.9 ± 1.4 mm/yr [Le Beon et al., 2008]. Slip rates calculated by geological and archeological markers, on varying time scales, yielded slip rates of 1.5–8.5 mm/yr [Freund et al., 1968; Garfunkel, 1981; Ginat et al., 1998; Klinger et al., 2000b; Niemi et al., 2001; Gomez et al., 2003; Meghraoui et al., 2003; Marco et al., 2005; Gomez et al., 2007].

[8] Frequent seismic activity along the DST has been detected instrumentally in the past century and recorded historically and archeologically over the past 4000 years [Ben‐Menahem, 1991; Ambraseys et al., 1994; Guidoboni et al., 1994; Ellenblum et al., 1998; Guidoboni and Comastri, 2005; Haynes et al., 2006; Marco et al., 2006; Ambraseys, 2009]. Other faults in the region are much less active and distant to the Dead Sea and are therefore less likely candidates for earthquake sources of the sediment deformation at the Dead Sea.

[9] The first major earthquake on the DST to be recorded instrumentally was M6.2 on 11 July 1927 in the northern Dead Sea (Figure 1) [Avni, 1999]. The location of the event is given by an error uncertainty ellipse in Figure 1 which is based on best estimate of seismological data [Shapira et al., 1993] and our tectonic considerations [cf. Niemi and Ben‐ Avraham, 1994]. On 11 February 2004 a M5.1 earthquake ruptured the northeast corner of the pull‐apart, with an aftershock sequence demarcating a transverse fault [Lazar et al., 2006; Hofstetter et al., 2008] (Figure 1). This fault is termed the Kalia fault [Lazar et al., 2006].

3. Ze’elim Gully and Ein Feshkha Nature Reserve Sites

Introduction

[10] The sediments of the Holocene Dead Sea comprise the Ze’elim Fm. of the Dead Sea Group. The sediments represent various depositional environments: fluvial, fan deltas, shores, and lacustrine (see detailed description given by Bookman (Ken‐Tor) et al. [2004]). The current (2009) lake level is 422 m below sea level (mbsl), reflecting mainly anthropogenic diversion of freshwater inflow, while during the Holocene the natural (climate related) level varied from ∼370 mbsl (e.g., ∼6000 years ago) to lower than ∼430 mbsl around 8000 years ago [Bookman (Ken‐Tor) et al., 2004; Bookman et al., 2006; Migowski et al., 2006; Bartov et al., 2007]. The drop of the current lake level (12 m from 1980 to 2000 [Bookman (Ken‐Tor) et al., 2004]) has caused the formation of deep gullies along the retreating shores. These gullies provided an excellent opportunity to study the late Holocene sedimentary sections in detail. The paleoseismic data in the current study was derived from the outcrops of the Ze’elim Gully and the Ein Feshkha Gully. Another site used for comparison, the Ein Gedi core site, was studied by Migowski et al. [2004].

[11] The study site of Ein Feshkha Gully (at the Ein Feshkha Nature Reserve) is located at the northwestern shore of the Dead Sea, 60 km north of the Ze’elim Gully (Figure 1). Ein Feshkha is an oasis of brackish streams and pools. Nearly exclusively lacustrine sediments are exposed in the Ein Feshkha site by a ∼6.5 m deep gully (as of 2008). The site is close to the Jordan Valley segment of the DST and may be located on the WNW continuation of the Kalia transverse fault mentioned in section 2.

[12] The Ze’elim gullies (site ZA) are dissected into the Ze’elim Plain east of the ancient fortress of Massada (Figure 1). Currently (as of 2009) the ZA Gully is ∼11 m deep (approximately at lake level, to slightly above). The gully exposes a stratigraphic sequence of lacustrine, shore environment, and fluvial sediments. The ZA site is closer to the Arava segment of the DST, about 50 km away, than to the Jericho fault. The active eastern normal boundary fault of the DST is at a similar distance to all sites, less than 5 km away (Figure 1).

3.1. Seismite Description

[13] El‐Isa and Mustafa [1986] used intraformational folds to generate an earthquake archive. Subsequent studies presented more complete archives recognizing that folds might present the weakest events. “Mixed layers” were renamed “intraclast breccia layers” [Agnon et al., 2006].

[14] Agnon et al. [2006] define field criteria for the recognition of intraclast breccias, focusing on features diagnostic of a seismic origin. The field criteria reflect the mechanisms of breccia formation, which include ground acceleration, shearing, liquefaction, water escape, fluidization, and resuspension of the originally laminated mud.

[15] In the current study we recognize deformed structures such as intraclast breccias, liquefied sands, folded laminae, and small faults (centimeter scale) (Table 1). Figure 2 displays photographs and photo tracings of seismites from the study sites. In addition we recognize another type of deformation termed microbreccia or homogenite. This type of mid‐gray‐color sedimentary layer ranges in thickness from a few mm to 1–2 cm and appears homogenous in the field. Thin‐section investigation under a polarizing microscope shows that these are actually brecciated laminae, and include a mixture of detritus, aragonite, and in places gypsum fragments.

[16] In the more fluvial Ze’elim section there are instances of seismites with a combination of lacustrine breccia and sand liquefaction. For example (see Figure 2c), ZA seismite III is the product of the deformation of a lower sandy layer and an upper laminated marl layer, resulting in brecciated marl laminae (near top of Figure 2c) with injection of sand fingers (near bottom of Figure 2c) from below.

3.2. Fieldwork

[17] Fieldwork included the detailed description and sampling of subvertical to vertical outcrops in the Ein Feshkha and Ze’elim gullies. Columnar sections were prepared with emphasis on measurement and description of the deformations. Adjacent outcrops were examined in order to describe spatial variations in lithology and seismites. Sediment blocks (∼10 × 10 × 10 cm in size) were collected for further analysis in the lab. At Ein Feshkha, 58 continuous blocks of wet sediment were retrieved from the gully wall at the columnar section site, from the surface plain down to 40 cm below the autumn 2005 water level of the spring outflow (see our previous paper, Neumann et al. [2007]). At the Ze’elim Gully sediment blocks were retrieved from the various lithological units. In addition, organic debris (typically short‐lived leaves or twigs), found in the two outcrops, were sampled for radiocarbon dating.

3.3. Stratigraphic Sections

3.3.1. Ein Feshkha

[18] The Ein Feshkha section was documented in an outcrop in the gully incising into the nearshore surface of elevation 413 mbsl. The stratigraphic section of Ein Feshkha, down to a depth of 5.9 m below plain surface, is given in Figure 3. The section spans approximately 3000 years. The sediments are mainly laminated lacustrine calcitic silts and clays and sequences of laminated primary aragonite and fine detritus. Fifty‐two layers in this laminated sequence display disturbed sedimentary features. Organic debris, mainly twigs, are common and are often found within breccia layers. The base of the outcrop is characterized by 5–50 cm thick domelike structures consisting of aragonite crusts, marl, and commonly driftwood encrusted with concentric hard gypsum [Neumann et al., 2007]. The occurrence of dome structures is a localized phenomenon, which is known from the nearshore fan‐delta surface (1400 A.D. or younger). These structures probably represent lake lowstands.

3.3.2. Ze’elim Gully

[19] We investigate a 10.75 m deep section in the Ze’elim A Gully, which shows both lacustrine and fluvial fan delta sediments (Figure 4). The section (ZA2) spans approximately 6500 years and consists mainly of laminated calcitic marls with some aragonite laminae, gypsum, silt, sand, and pebbles. Sediment features include beach ridges, cross‐bedded carbonatic sands, aragonite crusts, brecciated marls, and liquefied sand [see Bookman (Ken‐Tor) et al., 2004]. The laminae are interrupted by deformed sedimentary structures (Figure 4). A prominent beach ridge that was dated to ∼1200 B.C. appears at a section depth of 8–9 m. The beach ridge marks a significant drop in lake level that was associated with abrupt aridity in the Dead Sea drainage region [Kushnir and Stein, 2010]. A 2‐m‐thick section below this beach ridge shows several deformed layers, including breccias and “ball and flame” sand liquefaction structures. They laterally change their thickness, their appearance, and their position relative to the beach ridge. There are many on‐laps, angular and erosional unconformities, and facies changes in this unit below the beach ridge and therefore a detailed study of the seismites there is not attempted. This ZA2 section is a few tens of meters east (lakeward) of the section studied by Ken‐Tor et al. [2001a] (termed here ZA1).

4. Radiocarbon Dating: Method and Results

Introduction

[20] The chronologies of the Ein Feshkha and Ze’elim sections were constructed by radiocarbon dating of terrestrial organic debris (mainly small pieces of wood and twigs). All the recovered wood in Dead Sea sections can be considered driftwood, however their transport time is relatively short. We made an effort, where possible, to date only short‐lived organic debris. Nine samples from EFE and twelve samples from ZA2 were prepared for radiocarbon dating at the Radiocarbon laboratory, Weizmann Institute, Rehovot, Israel. The samples were then measured by accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) or liquid scintillation counting (LSC) at the NSF radiocarbon facility in Arizona. Eight additional organic debris samples from EFE were taken from a core drilled a mere few meters away, on the cliff bounding the gully, and analyzed at the AMS facility in Kiel. The core was correlated with the outcrop by Marcus Schwab at GFZ‐Potsdam. Radiocarbon ages are reported (Table 2) in conventional radiocarbon years (BP = before present; present defined as 1950 A.D.) in accordance with international convention [Stuiver and Polach, 1977]. Calibrated ages (=cal BP) were calculated by applying the INTCAL04 calibration scheme of Reimer et al. [2004] by means of the OxCal v4.1 program of Bronk Ramsey [1995, 2001, 2008]. Age‐depth models (Figures 3 and 4) and seismite model ages (see Table 3) were also created with OxCal (v4.1) [Bronk Ramsey, 1995, 2001, 2008].

[21] Radiocarbon data are listed in Table 2. Table 2 presents the measured ages, calibrated ages, and deposition model ages applying the Bayesian statistics of the OxCal v4.1 program. The depositional model ages were used to establish an age‐depth chronological model for the seismites. The fundamental assumption in Bayesian modeling of stratigraphic sequences is that age increases with depth. This requires use of a function usually termed “Boundaries” in OxCal. The boundaries separate different sedimentary units that may have different sedimentation rates, grain sizes, and facies. They are also placed on the top and bottom of the entire series to constrain the model to a specific time interval. With no other information, this would be treated by what is usually termed the “Sequence” model by OxCal. A uniform sedimentation rate would be treated with the “U_Sequence” type model. Depth and other dating information can be included in a less rigid way using Poisson distribution priors, termed “P_Sequence” models, where the time gap between deposition of grains varies, and the events are basically random but deposition is given approximate proportionality to depth. This requires the estimation of the uniformity of the deposition (given as the k parameter), which signifies the increment size (conceptually the grain size, or size of deposition events) and indicates the relation between the events and the stratigraphic process [Bronk Ramsey, 2008].

[22] In this study a P_sequence (Poisson distribution) Bayesian depositional model was used, with a k factor value of 1 (see Bronk Ramsey [2008] and Kagan et al. [2010] for details of Bayesian factors used). In the work of Kagan et al. [2010] the main objective was to test the Bayesian model with and without historical earthquake anchor points. The conclusion of the work was that the “known‐earthquake‐anchors” do not significantly improve the age model. For that reason, and due to the complexity in choosing definite historical anchors, in this study no anchors are used and the models are based solely on radiocarbon data, stratigraphic data, and the P_sequence and k factor constraints discussed in this section and by Kagan et al. [2010].

4.1. Ein Feshkha Chronology

[23] For the EFE section the chronological model is based on the treatment of seventeen radiocarbon ages of which five were excluded as outliers (Table 2). In the last 2500 years, the period with historic earthquake correlations and implications, there were only two outliers, both of which were too old and probably represent long‐lived organic debris from the shores. One of these two outlier samples also appeared in the work of Neumann et al. [2007] (169 cm depth) and was considered an outlier. One interval, from 230 to 390 cm, is slightly anomalous: the sediment is much darker than the rest of the section and has less aragonite layers. Within this interval, between 230 and 330 cm, we did not recognize any deformed layers (Table 3). No organic debris was found from 220 to 410 cm depth (Table 2 and Figure 3).

[24] Several different models were run: (1) No internal boundaries from 0 to 500 m depth; 500 cm to base modeled separately. (2) Two internal boundaries in the 0–537 cm interval, at 230 and at 500 cm depth, which allow, but do not force, the model to have sediment rate changes. (3) The 0–230 cm and 390–500 cm deep segments run separately. (4) Various other options with different boundaries and various outliers.

[25] We choose option 2 from the above list (Figure 3). This curve yields the best “agreement indexes” for the Bayesian model, with one index value under 60% (at 17%) while the other models have lower agreement indexes. Alternative models give seismite ages (from at least the 5th century B.C. and on) that are very similar to the chosen model and do not change the paleoseismic conclusions (for an example, see option 1 in Figure S1).1 The slight facies change at 230 cm depth is allowed a degree of freedom to coincide with sedimentation rate change, but in the resulting model shows no significant rate change (see Figure 3).

[26] The chronology of the top 537 cm of the section is Bayesian‐modeled as one space with two internal boundaries at 230 cm and 500 cm, implying continuous sedimentation and allowing, but not forcing, sedimentation rate change at these boundaries. Agreement values are found to be well above 60% at most depths of the model. The resulting model ages of the section indicate a maximum range of 1261 B.C. to 1383 A.D., but more likely from ∼1100 B.C. to 1312 A.D. (Table 2 and Figure 3). The top unit, from 0 cm (surface) to 500 cm, shows ages that range from the 5th century B.C. to the 14th century A.D., with a 0.27 ± 0.03 cm/yr sedimentation rate (based on 2s age ranges). The age range of the lower unit (500 to 537 cm) is from approximately 11th–5th century B.C. (0.07 ± 0.03 cm/yr sedimentation). The base of the seismite‐bearing investigated section is at 590 cm, however in the bottom 53 cm no organic matter was found and therefore the age was not modeled. The sedimentation rate of the top 500 cm calculated here (0.27 cm/yr) is approximately constant, in comparison to that stated for the same section by Neumann et al. [2007] (0.14, 0.51, and 0.11 cm/yr for three stratigraphic units within the same depth interval). The rates presented here, based on the new Bayesian model, are more similar to published Holocene rates (e.g., Migowski et al. [2004]: ∼0.15 cm/yr for the entire Holocene Ein Gedi core) and more congruous with homogeneous pollen concentrations [Neumann et al., 2007], which are normally closely linked to sedimentation rate [Horowitz, 1992].

[27] The truncation of the last six centuries from the studied EFE section eliminates recording the key instrumental earthquake M6.2, 7 November 1927, the source zone of which spans the site (Figure 1). Macroseismic evidence for the 1927 A.D. instrumentally recorded earthquake was reported along the Jordan River [Hough and Avni, 2011]. Niemi and Ben‐Avraham [1994] interpreted large submarine slumps in the northern Dead Sea basin to have been caused by this earthquake. For the purpose of the discussion (section 5), this event will be considered recorded in the northern Dead Sea basin.

4.2. Ze’elim Gully Chronology

[28] Twelve organic debris samples from the 10.7 m deep Ze’elim (ZA2) outcrop were measured. Their calibrated radiocarbon ages range from 1056 to 1276 A.D. to 4843–4583 B.C. (95% probability). A deposition model is calculated for the top 8 m of this section. Model ages of samples are given in Table 2. The more western ZA1 section (∼100 m away) was dated by Ken‐Tor et al. [2001a, 2001b] and revised by Agnon et al. [2006]. In the Ze’elim Gully previous studies infer the sedimentation rate to range between 0.28 to up to ∼1.3 cm/yr [Ken‐Tor et al., 2001a; Agnon et al., 2006; Neumann et al., 2007] reflecting the additional detrital‐clastic sediments that are more abundant in the fan delta environment. The lower sedimentation rate (0.3 ± 0.03 cm/yr) at the ZA2 section of Ze’elim (current study) reflects the proximity of this section to the lacustrine environment. The ZA2 outcrop is interpreted to show continuous deposition according to the age‐depth model (Figure 4), as opposed to the numerous unconformities at the more landward ZA1 outcrop. However, at ZA2 there is the possibility of short hiatuses compensated by additional sediments at sandy facies which therefore are not manifested in the age‐depth diagram.

5. Discussion

5.1. Seismite Chronology and Historic Earthquakes

[29] Ages of seismites (Table 3) are interpolated from the radiocarbon age‐depth data using Bayesian stratigraphic constraints. The ages and their uncertainties are interpolated using the OxCal program and take into consideration the asymmetrical probability distribution of radiocarbon ages. Each seismite is assigned a probability distribution histogram with a 68% (∼1s) and 95% (∼2s) probability age range (Figures 3 and 4). Model ages are presented (Table 3) with a nominal precision of a single year, however due to the Bayesian statistical modeling each model run produces slightly different age ranges and therefore ages could be rounded off by 10 years. Although the annual dates are shown, they are dealt with as if rounded off; for example, when giving the historical “fit” in Table 3, the age ranges are considered in decades.

[30] Seismite ages have been compared to historical catalogs as a major component in the assessment of the validity of the interpretation of the breccia layers as seismites [e.g., Ken‐Tor et al., 2001a; Migowski et al., 2004]. At the same time, seismites can be used for the corroboration of individual earthquakes in the historical record. Ken‐Tor et al. [2001a, 2001b] used the radiocarbon ages of the individual breccia layers or liquefied sands for direct comparison with the historical records and noted that notorious historic earthquakes unrepresented in the geological record lie within sedimentary hiatuses in the western Ze’elim Gully section (termed here ZA1). Migowski et al. [2004] positively identified these “missing” earthquakes in the continuous lacustrine section of the Ein Gedi core, supporting the hiatus‐hypothesis. Moreover, by counting the laminae in the intervals between seismites they were able to correlate almost the entire historical and Ein Gedi core records.

[31] Table A1 presents the historic earthquakes in the region with information regarding damage, casualties, sources of historical data, and, in the footnotes, selected archeological and paleoseismic data. Table A1 is based on earthquake catalogs, whereas the information in the catalogs is derived from historical sources. Table A1 is reliable mostly during the past two millennia (from the Roman period and onward), but less information is available for the time interval 750–1100 A.D. (when the Muslim empire center moved from Damascus to Baghdad). The historical accounts in the pre‐Christian era are rare and if they do exist tend to be vague [Karcz, 2004]. A mid‐8th century event and its paleoseismological and historical implications are discussed in detail in Appendix C. Local source moderate earthquakes are probably missing in the historical catalogs. For seismite ages where only very distant correlative historic earthquakes exist, we propose small local source events as possible sources of seismite genesis (marked LS on Table 3). A map of historical locations is given in Appendix B (Figure B1).

[32] For the past two millennia we correlated almost all of the seismites in the Ze’elim and Ein Feshkha records to historic earthquakes (details in Tables 3 and 4). All historic earthquake dates that correspond to the 95% probability range of each seismite age are given in Table 3 (right column). Those that correspond to the 68% probability range are in bold.

[33] The protocol for assigning a particular historic earthquake to a seismite in the sedimentary section is the following: (1) We consider all known earthquakes within a time segment of the age‐depth model pertaining to the seismite depth (segment = within 1–2s uncertainty of the radiocarbon model age); this step is given in column titled “all possible events” in Table 3. (2) Among the earthquakes within this time segment, we select the one that is most consistent with age‐depth models of Figures 3 and 4 (preserving the sedimentation rate); see the correlation in Figure 5. We also considered the local intensity for the earthquakes estimated for the study area when deliberating, in certain cases, between the various earthquakes.

[34] Table 4 and Figure 5 present the results of the correlation of the paleoseismic evidence (Table 3) with the historical record (Appendix A) and the comparison of these results from four sections: EFE, EG, ZA1, and ZA2. In Figure 5 the historical dates of seismites are superimposed on the age‐depth models to display the matching of the two models; the deposition model and the historical correlation model.

[35] There are two possible sources of errors in a comparison between two archives, such as the historic earthquakes and the radiocarbon dated seismites. As noted in Table 3 the uncertainty in the age‐depth model is variable but typically less than 100 years (2s). This reflects the errors derived from the age‐depth Bayesian model. The uncertainty in the “historic ages” of specific seismites reflects the spread of all historic earthquakes that lie within the 2s model age range of the specific seismite depth (the right‐hand column of Table 3). Thus, the errors on the Bayesian curve are the reasonable estimate of errors in the historical ages–seismite comparison. In other words, we say that the maximum error in our comparison is less than 100 years and, as Table 3 shows, typically lower than 50 years.

[36] A special case is the couplet of earthquakes at 1202 and 1212 A.D. that, with the typical temporal resolution in Dead Sea sediments, are not resolvable. We chose to present them as a pair of events as 1202/1212 A.D. The seismite at 28 cm depth at EFE has a 1s model age of 1199–1240 A.D. Both the 1202 and 1212 A.D. events are large M >7 earthquakes that ruptured far from the Dead Sea (north of the Sea of Galilee to Lebanon, minimum 130 km [Marco et al., 2005] and south of the Arava, minimum 250 km, respectively). Agnon et al. [2006] show two adjacent seismites at this time in the EG core record and interpret these to represent both the 1202 and 1212 A.D. events. Both are candidates for this EFE seismite.

[37] The Ein Gedi core was dated by 20 radiocarbon ages and by laminae‐counting of ∼1500 years, from 200 B.C. to 1300 A.D. [Migowski, 2001; Migowski et al., 2004]. The laminae‐counted floating chronology of the seismites was matched with the historic earthquake catalog. The best‐fit history of Migowski et al. [2004] gave ages younger than their radiocarbon ages by 50–200 years, consistent with reworking of organic debris (e.g., wood) in the nearshore environment before settling to the bottom of the dense saline lake. In our analysis, the chronologies of the Ze’elim and Ein Feshkha section indicate no long reworking time of the organic debris before settling in the sediment. When referring to the seismites from the Ein Gedi (EG) core only we use the shifted laminae‐counted chronology of Migowski et al. [2004] for the EG section.

[38] Note in Table 3 that the type B seismites, “homogenites,” clearly correlate with important historic earthquakes, which supports their interpretation as seismites.

[39] The recording of earthquakes by seismites, as well as by historical documents, requires intensity above respective thresholds. In this study our data suggest that these two thresholds are similar. Quiescence intervals are more robust than specific earthquakes, because they are less sensitive to individual date correlation. Specifically there is a quiescence interval in the seismite archive of the three sites from the end of the 2nd to the beginning of the 4th century A.D. (Figure 7). This correlates to an historical earthquake quiescence period noted without a single historically documented earthquake in the region from 127 to 306 A.D. (Appendix A).

5.2. Summary of Multisite Seismite Distribution

[40] Here we summarize the occurrence of seismites at the three sites presented in section 5.1 and in Table 4: Ein Feshkha (EFE), this study; Ein Gedi (EG core; after Migowski et al. [2004]); and the two Ze’elim Gully subsites: ZA1 (western, landward; after Ken‐Tor et al. [2001a] and Agnon et al. [2006]) and ZA2 (eastern, lakeward; this study), considered henceforth as one site. We limit the comparison to the historical period starting at the 2nd century B.C.

[41] 1. Seismites that appear in all three sites (termed here intrabasin seismites (IBS)): Mid‐2nd century and 31 B.C. and 33, 419, 551, 749, 1202/1212, 1293, and 1927 A.D.

[42] 2. Seismites that appear only in Ein Gedi: 76, 90, 112, 500/502, 1042, 1546, 1588, 1656, 1712, 1759, and 1822 A.D.

[43] 3. Seismites that appear only in Ein Feshkha: 64 B.C., 349, 363, 634, 847, 859, 956, 1063, 1170, and 1312 A.D., and numerous older prehistoric seismites.

[44] 4. Seismites that appear in Ein Gedi and Ein Feshkha but not in Ze’elim: 92 B.C. and 660, 757, 873, 991*, 1033*, 1114/1117*, and 1068* A.D. Stars indicate dates at which time there is no archive at Ze’elim.

[45] 5. There is one quiescence interval at ZA and EG ∼500–150 B.C. and another at all three sites from the end of the 2nd to the middle of the 4th century A.D.

[46] The new chronologies of the seismites in the Ze’elim (ZA) and Ein Feshkha (EFE) sedimentary sections are integrated with the high‐resolution seismite chronology of the Ein Gedi (EG) core to produce a comprehensive archive of late Holocene paleoseismic earthquakes from the entire Dead Sea basin. The paleoseismic archives also provide an opportunity to reevaluate a number of earthquake histories with timing and patterns that were not well established (e.g., single or several episodes).

5.3. Site Comparison

[47] The chronologies that were established for the Ein Feshkha and Ze’elim sections combined with that of the Ein Gedi core [Migowski et al., 2004] allow us to compare the recurrence time of the seismites in these sites and to produce an integrated picture for the appearance of seismites in the northern Dead Sea basin (Table 4 and Figure 6). The number of seismites in the Ze’elim Gully sections is significantly smaller than at Ein Feshkha and Ein Gedi for the same time interval. Ken‐Tor et al. [2001a] and Agnon et al. [2006] recognized that the missing seismites at ZA1 (explained in section 1) relate to sedimentary hiatuses in the section. The new section we described at ZA2 yielded an apparently continuous age‐depth profile, and the hiatuses in the ZA1 section can be correlated with clastic‐sandy sequences in the ZA2 section. One of the missing (sedimentary hiatus) earthquakes (in the landward ZA1 section) does appear in the continuous ZA2 section as liquefaction in a sandy unit (correlative to the historical earthquake of 551 A.D.). In two instances the situation is reversed, where two seismites, correlated to 1293 and 1212 A.D. appear in the more landward ZA1 outcrop, and do not appear in the more lakeward ZA2 section. This specific period is characterized by a sandy facies at ZA2 (Figure 4) and detailed detection is also inhibited by difficult access at this part of the section.

[48] The EFE section has 52 seismites, while for the same time period the EG section shows ∼30 seismites. A quiescence period at EFE at around mid‐1st to 3rd century A.D. is concurrent to a period in EG with microscopic seismites (Type III of Migowski et al. [2004]). This could reflect the higher detection resolution of the Ein Gedi study. Despite this resolution difference, the situation is reversed in the pre‐2nd century B.C. period where EFE has 25 seismites (<1 cm to >9 cm) compared to 7 at EG. The recurrence of earthquakes in each one of these sections is illustrated as a cumulative function in Figure 7.

[49] A quiescence at ZA and EG during a period of enhanced seismicity in the north (EFE) at ∼500–150 B.C. (Figure 7) may suggest a period of moderate earthquakes concentrated north of the Dead Sea (i.e., Kalia fault). Additionally, there is a quiescence interval in the seismite archive of the three sites from the end of the 2nd to the middle of the 4th century A.D., which correlates to an historical earthquake quiescence period 127–306 A.D. (Appendix A). This is in line with the low‐seismicity interval during this period along the DST, the high‐seismicity period on the North Anatolian Fault, and the mechanical coupling and alternation of activity of the two faults suggested by Migowski et al. [2004] and Agnon et al. [2006].

[50] The comparison of EFE versus both EG and ZA clearly suggests higher activity in EFE. This can be explained by a difference in sensitivity between the sites, or the proximity of EFE to the Kalia transverse fault bounding the Dead Sea basin from the north (Figure 1). The EFE site is located on the continuation of this fault to the WNW, and has likely recorded local earthquakes of magnitude ∼5.5 that were too far to affect EG and ZA. Also, several seismites (during the time interval of the historical charts) were recorded only at the northern site of Ein Feshkha (e.g., 64 B.C. and 349, 363, 634, 847, 859, 956, 1063, 1170, and 1312 A.D.). Most of these events have destruction documented mainly in the northern Holy Land or further north (Antioch, Tyre, Turkey; see Appendix A), 1312 A.D. being the main exception. Since the work of Russell [1980], the 363 A.D. earthquake is often considered as one that ruptured from the north to the Arava. We suggest that this interpretation congeals two earthquakes, one northern and another southern (see Appendix A). The lack of documentation of earthquakes in the south can reflect bias due to population density, the south being more arid. However, the excess of recorded earthquakes at Ein Feshkha may corroborate higher seismic activity in the north. First let us consider the local setting of the Ein Feshkha Nature Reserve site: it is positioned at the edge of both the Jericho fault and the Kalia transverse fault (Figure 1). Ze’elim Gully, on the other hand, is several tens of kilometers from both Jericho and Arava faults, the likely sources of M > 6.5 events. Therefore, earthquakes rupturing the northern part of the Jericho segment will record at Ein Feshkha but not at the southern sites. Likewise, magnitudes 5.5–6 from the Kalia fault may be recorded locally but not at the southern sites.

[51] Our sites are located on the western shore of the lake, close to the western strand of the transform duplex. This observation may suggest an alternative explanation to the excess of earthquakes in the northern site EFE: The site is close to the Jordan (aka Jericho) fault that might act as a waveguide, a property documented for the plate boundary south and north of the Dead Sea [Haberland et al., 2003; Shtivelman et al., 2005]. Guided earthquake waves have been invoked to explain anomalous accelerations and damage in instrumentally recorded Dead Sea events [Wust‐Bloch, 2002]. The seismite sites in the south (EG, ZA) are farther from the Jordan fault, and disconnected from the Araba/Arava fault. This explanation can be tested by a similar research on the eastern shore: it would predict that the southern sites there will show more frequent events.

5.4. Basin Distribution

[52] In this section we discuss the temporal distribution of seismites that are recorded at all of our sites (intrabasin seismites (IBS)). Eight seismic events are recorded in all three sections, north, center and south. In addition we add to this list the 1927 A.D. instrumentally recorded event that formed seismites at the EG and ZA1 sites for which macroseismic evidence was found along the Jordan River [Avni, 1999] and caused slumping under the Dead Sea waters (interpreted by Niemi and Ben‐Avraham [1994]) near the EFE site. The 1927 A.D. event also produced the most pronounced sedimentary structure (in the ZA Gully) with sand liquefaction reaching >1 m in thickness (Figure 8). In addition, two seismites that were recovered from the Ze’elim and Ein Gedi sections and correlated to the 1458 and 1834/1837 A.D. historical events are not represented in Ein Feshkha since this part of the section is missing. However, we predict that processing of the upper part of the section preserved east of our EFE study site will recover these events. Note that the age of the seismite at ZA2 correlated to 1458 A.D. is above the dated and modeled part of the section and its age is extrapolated from the deposition model (see Figures 4 and 5). Part of this group of IBS seismites (mid‐2nd century and 31 B.C. and 33, 419, 1212, and 1293 A.D.) appears in sedimentary sequences of the lacustrine facies indicating clearly offshore conditions of at least 10–20 m of water above the sediment. Other IBS seismites (551, 749, and 1927 A.D.) were at nearshore conditions (hiatus at ZA1, sand and lacustrine sediments at ZA2, lacustrine sediments at EFE and EG). Thus, we see no clear correlation between lacustrine conditions and the three‐site seismite appearance. This observation is corroborated by the lack of seismites in intervals of the lacustrine section at Ze’elim while they appear in Ein Feshkha and Ein Gedi (e.g., between 830 and 1200 A.D.; see Table 4). The conclusion that we can draw from these observations is that the temporal and spatial appearance of the seismites does not depend strongly on the limnological‐sedimentological conditions. Seismites appear in both sandy facies and clay‐evaporite (marly) sequences. The Ze’elim sections contain prominent sand layers that were clearly affected by earthquakes, producing liquefied structures. Significant earthquakes, such as 1927, do appear in all lithological units. This does not imply that low‐magnitude or remote earthquakes have no effect on sandy layers. The topic clearly requires more investigation. If sediments were deposited in the lake they are affected by the earthquakes whether they comprise sands or marls. Figure 10 indicates that soil liquefaction and lacustrine brecciation have apparently similar thresholds. Hence, the archives we documented provide a reasonable picture of the earthquake activity and its effects in the lake basin, not filtered by the lacustrine environment. This conclusion opens the way for using the seismite spatial and temporal distribution to evaluate basin effects and recurrence patterns.

[53] All seismites in the Dead Sea basin are marked on an epicentral distance versus magnitude diagram along with the field of instrumental earthquake data (Figure 9). This diagram highlights domains of intensity, which is a function of magnitude and distance of epicenter from the recording site. In Figure 9 the intensity lines are plotted according to the equation proposed by Ambraseys and Jackson [1998] (here termed A&J):

Ms = 1.54 + 0.65 Ii + 0.0029 Ri + 2.14 log Ri + 0.32p     (1)

where

Ri = (ri2 + 9.72)0.5

ri, in kilometers, is the mean isoseismal radius of intensity I, and p is zero for mean values and one for 84 percentile values. This attenuation relationship is based on 123 instrumentally recorded shallow (depth <26 km) earthquakes from the eastern Mediterranean from a period of 85 years and ∼9000 intensity points. Different coefficients may be more appropriate for the magnitude‐distance field of the earthquakes associated specifically with Dead Sea Rift seismicity. The earthquakes plotted are mainly after the similar diagram by Migowski et al. [2004] and Agnon et al. [2006], where modified input data are explained below and in Appendix A. Each symbol represents a historical earthquake documented in the region, most matched to seismites (open squares), and some matched to seismites at all three sites in the study, the intrabasin seismites (IBS, solid squares). Distances are from the Ein Gedi site, for consistency with previous publications. A field corresponding to earthquakes not matched to seismites is demarcated by the thick gray curves (solid gray curve: earthquakes from historical catalogs; dashed gray curve: instrumentally recorded events). The magnitude‐distance data for each historic earthquake has significant uncertainties (for examples, see Figure 10); however this type of diagram has been shown to be useful [Migowski et al., 2004] for portraying a pattern in the presence of a large sample, barring any systematic bias. Figure 10 depicts only the IBS with estimated uncertainties. Each earthquake shows as a rectangle. We were especially cautious when estimating the upper left corner for each IBS rectangle. This corner, minimum magnitude and maximum distance, corresponds to the minimum intensity at the seismite site, which may be a threshold for intrabasin seismites. The considerations we applied when defining the IBS positions and uncertainties in Figure 10 are given here:

[54] Mid‐2nd century B.C.: Guidoboni et al. [1994] cite one event or more recorded at Antioch (for a summary of historic earthquakes in the region, see Appendix A; for locations of historical cities and towns, see Appendix B). The only traceable historical record for an earthquake comes from the cultural and political center at Antioch, where buildings were reportedly damaged, and Sbeinati et al. [2005] assign local intensity I = VII. For comparison, the 1202 A.D. event was only felt in Antioch, no damage reported [Ambraseys and Melville, 1988; Ambraseys, 2009; Guidoboni and Comastri, 2005]. Therefore if the magnitude of the mid‐2nd century B.C. event is smaller than M7.5 assigned for 1202 A.D., then the source was closer to Antioch and farther from the Dead Sea. Hence for the mid‐2nd century B.C. event we assign an uncertainty rectangle constrained by a bottom left corner coinciding with the 1202 A.D. position. The rectangle represents a range of local intensities spanning V–VII at Antioch, where the distance is calculated to the closer end of the respective rupture (consistent with the magnitude) along the DST. For this specific earthquake we cannot, at present, constrain the top left corner.

[55] 31 B.C.: The magnitudes of 31 B.C. and 749 A.D. are set at 7.2 assuming similarity in rupture length, both reported to have ruptured 110‐km‐long Jordan Valley segment [Reches and Hoexter, 1981]; the sites of damage attributed to the 31 B.C. event demarcate that segment. Ambraseys [2009] points out that 3.5 m dip‐slip displacement reported by Reches and Hoexter [1981] would correspond to an earthquake too large comparing with the historical reports. However, the displacement is measured locally on unconsolidated sediments. Reches and Hoexter [1981] explicitly avoid rejecting the possibility that a part of the slip occurred during several centuries following the event. Moreover they are aware of local complications in the strike of the fault that amplify dip‐slip. Hence we tentatively adopt the identification of the surface rupture with the 31 B.C. event. Gardosh et al. [1990] reevaluated the trench data in light of a newer geomorphic surface faulting study in the Dead Sea area. They conclude that slip accumulation reaches 1.2 m for two events in the past 2000 years on the trench strand. The uncertainty range of the magnitude of this event (Figure 10) is projected from a minimum given by Karcz [2004] and a maximum given by the rupture length discussed here.

[56] 419 A.D.: Damage from this event was reported for Jerusalem and “many cities and towns” and “all great cities” (sources in the works of Russell [1985] and Guidoboni et al. [1994]). Archaeological damage from Antipatris (central Holy Land) has been attributed to this earthquake [Karcz and Kafri, 1978] suggesting a Jordan Valley rupture. We think that it is feasible that the source of this event was similar to that of 1927 A.D. earthquake (see below). We assume a 6 ≤ M ≤ 6.5, with a maximum distance of 50 km.

[57] 551 A.D.: The event was updated to a larger magnitude offshore Lebanon earthquake, as is more widely accepted in the literature (Appendix A). Magnitude estimation is based on sonar imaging of seafloor morphology [Elias et al., 2007] and historical account compilation [Sbeinati et al., 2005].

[58] 749 A.D.: The historical sources are consistent with a rupture event or two in the Jordan Valley (between the Dead Sea and Sea of Galilee). The range of magnitude (M6.6–7.7) in Figure 10 reflects either a single event or a double event with a cumulative rupture of that 110‐km‐long segment (calculated using the results of Wells and Coppersmith [1994], Marco et al. [2003], and Karcz [2004]; see Appendix A).

[59] 1202/1212 A.D.: A single event brecciated the sediments in the EFE section in the early 13th century. Two events are recorded in EG. ZA recorded one or two events. Therefore only one of them is an IBS and the dating cannot rule which. For the 1202 event we use M7.4–7.6 based on historical analysis of Ambraseys and Melville [1988] and Ellenblum et al. [1998]. Paleoseismic and archaeoseismic trenching corroborate these assessments [Ellenblum et al., 1998; Marco et al., 2005; Daeron et al., 2007; Nemer et al., 2008]. The distance of the rupture edge from the farthest seismite site is 165 ± 10 km, based on rupture uncovered in trenching at the northern shore of the Sea of Galilee [Marco et al., 2005]. For the 1212 event, Ambraseys et al. [1994] suggest a rupture south of the Dead Sea or in the Gulf of Eilat (Red Sea). In severity of damage and aftershock occurrence it is seemingly similar to the 1995 modern event [Hofstetter, 2003], or could have been closer to the Dead Sea, according to the high level of damage at Aila and Karak. This similarity prompts us to give a best estimate of 7.2 magnitude and 300 km distance.

[60] 1293 A.D.: Based on evidence at an archeological site built on the Arava segment of the DST, the northern Arava did not rupture during this event [Haynes et al., 2006]. We consider the 12‐km‐long Amatzyahu fault (Figure 1) as the source for this event. This rupture length is consistent with a 6.2–6.7 magnitude earthquake. The maximum intensity recorded for this event was recorded at Karak (eastern Dead Sea), 45 km from the Amatzaya fault [Ambraseys et al., 1994; Guidoboni and Comastri, 2005], consistent with a magnitude of 6.7 according to the A&J equation (equation (1)). Taking into account poor construction and site effects this intensity could be achieved at a somewhat lower magnitude.

[61] 1927 A.D.: This event was recorded instrumentally [Shapira et al., 1993] (M6.2) and its distance uncertainty range is based on the distance from the ZA site to the Kalia transverse fault in the northern Dead Sea (Figure 1). It is also a possible scenario that the main fault of the DST ruptured along a limited length causing the 1927 earthquake.

[62] We have excluded the 33 A.D. IBS event from Figure 10 for lack of reliable historical evidence [see Ambraseys, 2009].

[63] In addition to the IBS magnitude‐distance discussion in this section (above), other modifications (Figure 9) made to the published magnitude‐distance diagrams are explained here. Regarding the 363 A.D. event, our review of the evidence indicates two or more separate earthquakes from ∼362 and 363 A.D., with damage in geographically disparate regions (see Appendix A). Also, symbols were added (in Figure 9) for 331 and 199 B.C. and 835 and 847 A.D. historic earthquakes, which are matched to seismites in this study, but not in previous studies at the Dead Sea basin. For the 331 B.C. event, Sbeinati et al. [2005] give intensity VI in the general region of “Syria.” For this ancient and not well‐covered event only a rough calculation is possible. An isoseismal distance of 70 km is consistent with a M6.5 earthquake using the attenuation relation of A&J. This is a relatively ancient event, population density was low, and a distance of ∼70 km from seismic source to historic source is reasonable. For the 199 B.C. event, assuming the intensities documented are from the same event (VII and VIII in “Syria,” probably Damascus, and Sidon, respectively [Sbeinati et al., 2005]), the magnitude is estimated in the same way to Ms6.8. For 847 A.D. the magnitude is taken from the analysis of Sbeinati et al. [2005]. The 873 and 956 A.D. events [Ambraseys et al., 1994; Guidoboni et al., 1994], matched to seismites in this study, are not on the distance‐magnitude diagram for lack of sufficient information.

[64] Second earthquakes were added at ∼mid‐2nd century B.C. and at 362/363 and 747/749 A.D. The location and magnitude of these added events are not known, each appearing in the diagram as a small circle on the symbol of the previously published single event.

[65] The intrabasin seismites that were recorded in all three sites (EFE, EG, ZA) define a well‐constrained field in the magnitude‐distance diagram, which cuts the A&J intensity lines plotted (Figures 9 and 10). Of the earthquakes matched to seismites on this diagram, 60% occupy the field of intensities larger or equal to IV. Eighty‐nine percent of the IBS seismites occupy the field of intensities larger or equal to V (or 100% if 1202 is chosen over 1212 A.D.; see above discussion), as opposed to 46% of all seismites.

[66] Figures 9 and 10 suggest that farther and stronger earthquakes require lower local intensities for being recorded in the entire basin (IBS). If we accept that 1212 A.D. is the IBS (as opposed to 1202 A.D.) at the beginning of the 13th century then it is the farthest (300 km) with M7 and I = IV. Otherwise the 551 A.D. earthquake and the mid‐2nd century B.C. earthquake are the farthest. The intensity threshold for magnitude 6.2 seems to be VII (419 and 1927 A.D.). A possible explanation for this observation is sensitivity to long‐period waves. The frequency content of the wave train is biased to long periods in earthquakes from large and remote sources. A Ms6 earthquake shows a corner frequency fc ∼ 0.1 Hz (period ∼10 s), whereas Ms7 shows fc ∼ 0.04 (period 25 s) [e.g., Geller, 1976]. Attenuation of the wave during travel, where the waves are damped according to the number of cycles between the source and the site in question, results in further bias toward lower frequencies.

[67] The sensitivity to low frequency may indicate that the critical condition for brecciation may depend on ground velocity rather than ground acceleration, where the frequency equals the ratio of the latter to the former. Heifetz et al. [2005] and Wetzler et al. [2010] suggest a Kelvin‐Helmholtz instability mechanism for the disturbances in the sediments (intraformational folding leading ultimately to brecciation). In this scenario the sediment bed is considered to have a gradient in the horizontal velocity (due to a density decrement). If the duration of the wave cycle is sufficiently long (or the frequency sufficiently low), a disturbance can be sustained: the growth rate of a disturbance must be larger than the driving frequency.

[68] The thick gray curve on Figure 10 represents the farthest epicentral distance of liquefaction of soil caused by modern earthquakes in the Aegean region [Papathanassiou et al., 2005]. Note that if 1202 A.D. is the date of the early 13th century IBS (as opposed to 1212 A.D.) then the threshold for intrabasin seismite genesis is very similar to this soil liquefaction curve.

[69] The average recurrence time of IBS is ∼200 years, which is significantly longer than the ∼50–95 years based on all seismites in the Ein Gedi core during the past 1600 years [Migowski et al., 2004] or ∼50 years at EFE since 525 B.C. The possibility to establish a high‐resolution comparison between distinct sedimentary sections located in different sites of the Dead Sea basin opens the way to further explore the response of the lacustrine system to various sources of seismic activity and thus extends the paleoseismic study to older sections such as those of the last glacial Lake Lisan. Such a comparison is currently under investigation.

6. Conclusions

[70] 1. This study established for the first time an integrated chronology of spatially distributed paleoearthquakes (seismites) in the late Holocene Dead Sea basin. Radiocarbon chronologies based on Bayesian statistics were constructed for two new stratigraphic sections at the northern and southern parts the basin (at the Ein Feshkha Nature Reserve and at the Ze’elim Gully, respectively). The ages of the seismites were compared with the paleoseismic chronology proposed for the Ein Gedi core [Migowski et al., 2004] located at the central part of the basin and with catalogs of historic earthquakes during the past 2000 years.

[71] 2. Temporal and spatial appearance of the seismites shows no strong dependency on the limnological–sedimentological conditions in the specific sections (representing lake conditions of up to several tens of meters depth). Sediments of various sedimentary facies were affected simultaneously by the earthquake’s activity (e.g., liquefied sands and disturbed lacustrine marly sequences). Thus, the documented records provide a reasonable picture of the earthquake activity in the vicinity of the Dead Sea basin without being filtered by the sedimentary environment.

[72] 3. Several seismites (1927, 1293, 1202/1212, 749, 551, 419, and 33 A.D. and 31 and mid‐2nd century B.C.) were recorded in all three stratigraphic sections (termed IBS). The recurrence interval of the IBS during the period of continuous deposition is ∼200 years. Compiling the IBS record filters the shorter recurrence intervals of the individual records.

[73] 4. Several seismites (during the time interval of the historical catalogs) were recorded only at the northern site of Ein Feshkha (64 B.C. and 349, 363, 634, 847, 859, 956, 1063, 1170, and 1312 A.D.) This may be due to the northern source of these events or to wave guiding along the main plate boundary.

[74] 5. Quiescence intervals in seismite appearance are apparent at ∼500–150 B.C. at the two southern sites and from the end of the 2nd to the beginning of the 4th century A.D. at all three seismite sites. These are correlative to historical earthquake quiescence periods and suggest similar intensity thresholds for both types of data sets in this region.

[75] 6. The IBS define a steep diagonal array in the magnitude‐distance diagram that lies in the sector of high‐intensity lines that were established by Ambraseys and Jackson [1998]. This is similar to the soil liquefaction threshold calculated for modern earthquakes in the Aegean region. Thus, the IBS provide a pattern of temporal behavior of relatively strong earthquakes that are associated with the Dead Sea Transform.

Appendix A: Earthquakes Occurring in the Region in the Last Three and a Half Millennia According to Historical Reports

[76] Historical documentation is mostly reliable in the last two millennia. Some archeological and paleoseismic evi- dence for the events is given in the footnotes. A location map of many of the sites mentioned in Table A1 is given in Appendix B.

Appendix B: Map of Historical Locations Mentioned in the Manuscript and in Appendix A

[77] Figure B1 provides a map of historical locations mentioned in the manuscript and in Appendix A, based on Google Earth (http://www.google.com/earth/index.html), Guidoboni and Comastri [2005], Guidoboni et al. [1994], and Ambraseys [2009].

Figure B1

Key to map numbers; modern location names are given in parentheses:
  1. Aila (Aqaba)
  2. Aleppo (Halab)
  3. Amman (Philadelphia)
  4. Antioch
  5. Antipatris (Tel Afek)
  6. Asclon (Ashkelon)
  7. Baalbek
  8. Beirut
  9. Bet Shean
  10. Bethlehem
  11. Caesarea
  12. Cairo
  13. Capernaum
  14. Damascus
  15. Damietta
  16. Dead Sea
  17. Gaza
  18. Gush Halav–Jish
  19. Haifa
  20. Hamat Gader
  21. Hebron
  22. Jaffa
  23. Jerash
  24. Jericho
  25. Jerusalem
  26. Karak
  27. Kasrin (Qatzrin)
  28. Khirbet Shema
  29. Kition (Larnaca)
  30. Lydda (Lod) (Ramla is adjacent to Lydda)
  31. Nablus
  32. Nazareth
  33. Nicopolis (Imwas‐Latrun)
  34. Palmyra (Tudmor)
  35. Paneas (Banyias)
  36. Paphos
  37. Pelusium
  38. Petra
  39. Ptolemais (Acre‐Akka‐Akko)
  40. Qaqun (Netanya)
  41. Safed
  42. Samaria
  43. Scandelion (Iskandarouna)
  44. Sea of Galilee
  45. Sidon
  46. St. Catherine monastery (Sinai)
  47. Tiberias
  48. Tripoli
  49. Tyre (Sur)
  50. Ugarit
  51. Yavne

click on image to open in a new tab

Kagan et al. (2011)


Appendix C: Paleoseismic Considerations Regarding the Mid‐8th Century B.C. Earthquakes

[78] An earthquake at this time has been linked historically to the prophecy by Amos of Teko’a mentioned numerous times in the bible (e.g., Amos 1:1, dated to 760 B.C.). In the rigorous historical work by Guidoboni et al. [1994] this event is considered the “only Biblical earthquake with sound and direct historical evidence.” Previous discussions in the literature regarding the occurrence of one or two earthquakes [Austin et al., 2000] can now be resolved by the paleoseismic evidence here. The Ein Feshkha (EFE), Ein Gedi (EG), and Ze’elim (ZA2) seismite records show two seismites at around this time. At EG the two seismites are separated by 4 cm while at ZA2 by 10 cm, and at EFE by 6 cm, which is comparable to a few decades.

[79] The apparent southward decrease in extent of damage at archeological sites in the region led Austin et al. [2000] to suggest an epicenter in Lebanon with local magnitude estimated at about 8. They argued that the recurrence interval of earthquakes during historical times was around a century and merged all damage observed in 8th century B.C. sites to one event. This argument has no basis in fact since there is a plentitude of evidence for couplets of earthquakes, for example the 1202 and 1212 A.D. [Guidoboni et al., 1994; Amiran et al., 1994; Guidoboni and Comastri, 2005]. Paleoseismological as well as historical evidence summarized by Agnon et al. [2006, Figure 13] points to recurrence intervals of 50–73 years for the period of 1000–1800 A.D. Archaeological evidence of events is abundant throughout the area (see map of Austin et al. [2000, Figure 1]). Additional support of two events includes studies at Megiddo archeological site [Marco et al., 2006] also show two deformation events, one postdating 800 B.C. and the other postdating 700 B.C. The archeological dating of the strongest evidence for shaking has a resolution of approximately 100 years, so it could correlate with the Dead Sea seismites. Paleoseismic trenches at the Tel Rehov archeological site near Bet She’an revealed a fault scarp created by two seismic events, one in the 7th and 6th century B.C. [Zilberman et al., 2004]. Our results, in addition to those of other paleoseismological and archaeological studies, support two earthquakes during the mid‐8th century B.C.

Master Seismic Events Tables
ZA-1

ZA-2

ZA-4

Surveys
Drone Surveys

Description Flight Date Pilot Processing Downloadable Link
ZA-4 3 Feb. 2023 Jefferson Williams ODM - no GCPs Right Click to download. Then unzip
ZA-2 and ZA-3 10 Feb. 2023 Jefferson Williams ODM - no GCPs Right Click to download. Then unzip

Lidar Scans

Description Scan Date Scanner Processing Downloadable Link
ZA-4
Lateral tracing of Amos Quakes
12 March 2023 Jefferson Williams Photogrammetry Right Click to download
ZA-3
Amos Quakes
12 March 2023 Jefferson Williams Photogrammetry Right Click to download

References
References

Articles and Books

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

Haliva-Cohen, A., Stein, M., Goldstein, S. L., Sandler, A., & Starinsky, A. (2012). Sources and transport routes of fine detritus material to the Late Quaternary Dead Sea basin. Quaternary Science Reviews 50, 55–70. – at ResearchGate

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.

Kagan, E. J., et al. (2015). Dead Sea Levels during the Bronze and Iron Ages. Radiocarbon 57(2).

Ken-Tor, R., Agnon, A., Enzel, Y., and Stein, M. (2001a). High Resolution Geological Record of Historic Earthquakes in the Dead Sea Basin. Journal of Geophysical Research 106(B2): 2221-2234.

Ken-Tor, R., Stein, M., Enzel, Y., Agnon, A., Marco, S., and Negendank, J. (2001b). Precision of Calibrated Radiocarbon Ages of Historic Earthquakes in the Dead Sea Basin. Radiocarbon 43(3): 1371-1382.

Klein, C. (1961). On the Fluctuations of the Level of the Dead Sea Since the Beginning of the 19th Century. Hydrological Paper No. 7. Jerusalem, Israel Hydrological Service.

Langgut, D., and Finkelstein, I. (2023). Paleo-environment of the Southern Levant during the Bronze and Iron Ages: The Pollen Evidence, in From Nomadism to Monarchy?: Revisiting the Early Iron Age Southern Levant, O. L. I. Koch and O. Sergi, eds., Tel Aviv, The Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University: 7-27.

Leroy, S. A. G., Marco, S., Bookman, R., and Miller, C. S. (2010). Impact of Earthquakes on Agriculture during the Roman–Byzantine Period from Pollen Records of the Dead Sea Laminated Sediment. Quaternary Research 73(2): 191–200.

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

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

Williams, J. B. (2004). Estimation of Earthquake Source Parameters from Soft Sediment Deformation Layers Present in Dead Sea Muds. M.S. Thesis, California State University - Long Beach.

Notes
Date of the Late Bronze Age East Mediterranean Drying Event

Textual Sources

Jodell Onstott

Jodell Onstott (personal correspondence, 2023) notes that

My dating is c. 1206. ... I associate the famine in Judges 6, Ruth, and the Hittites/Ramesses as the same event. The language in Egyptian texts is almost identical to Judges.
Excerpts
Judges Chapter 6 - English and Hebrew (sefaria - Masoretic text)

  • Chapter 6
  • from sefaria.org
  • Jodell Onstott (personal correspondence, 2023) relates the following:
    My treatment of Judges 6 understands the Midianites to have invaded due to famine. They specifically targeted agricultural products (6:3-4). Also telling is that the Midianites were immigrating, which I attribute to famine (v. 5). It also seems that Israel moved its grain stores to caves and other hidden places (v. 2). Israel being delivered into Midian’s hand for 7 years parallels the famine under Joseph1 and could be the duration of the Hittite and Ruth famine as well.
    Footnotes

    Jodell Onstott (personal correspondence, 2023) clarified the famine under Joseph as follows:

    That famine occurred c. 1750 [BCE]. It is retold in Genesis 41. It specifically affected Egypt and Canaan (the reason Jacob migrated). ..and the reason the Hyksos/Asiatics migrated as well.



Ruth - English and Hebrew (sefaria - Masoretic text)

  • Ruth 1:1 - In the days when the chieftains ruled, there was a famine in the land ...
  • from sefaria.org


Notes
Email from Jodell (April 2023)

Title : Messy and wholly incomplete excerpt from Jodell Onstott's forthcoming book on Chronology

See Chart 11.5 on p. 570 of YHWH Exists vol. 1 for dating Merneptah.

I am not sure on my dating, below. It will fall between 1240-1210. It has been a few years since I’ve worked on this project. I do have some of the sources you recommend incorporated, below.

Jodell



Climate, Geology, and Chronology

The chronology supporting a 16th century Exodus-Conquest date is also supported by climate studies. Scripture records three major famines within the land of Canaan. The first during Abraham's days (Gen 12:10, 26:1), which a contextual approach places c. 2190. In one study, a group of scholars led by Yale University's H. Wiess, have argued that a "markedly dry event" occurred in this area c. 2300-2200 BCE. Another team led by Neil Roberts focus on the eastern Mediterranean and lowered the date to 2250-2300. What both studies confirm is that a drying period occurred in the surrounding Mediterranean territories during the same time that a 16th century Exodus allows. The second significant famine mentioned in Scripture occurs when Joseph is vizier in Egypt (). This event, according to a contextual reconstruction, dates to c. 1980 BCE. In another study Dafna Langgut, Israel Finkelstein, and Thomas Litt found pollen samples during this era indicate that this dry period continued from around 2000 BCE until about 1800 BCE in Canaan. This again supports the a 16th-century Exodus chronology. As the Middle Bronze Age passes into the Late Bronze Age, vegetation such as olive tree production, moisture and humidity continue to increase and reach their greatest fertility c. 1350 BCE. The authors observe that the "settlement crisis" during this period was "man-induced rather than a result of environmental change." This evidence accurately reflects the chronological model of a 16th century Exodus date where the judge Ehud's campaigns and the Hapiru's assaults on Canaan's villages are contemporary with the Amarna Tablets. The authors cite the Amarna tablets and note that no famines or droughts are mentioned in the hundreds of correspondences between Canaan and Egypt. Thus, the disruption of settlement, according to a 16th-century Exodus model is due to Israel's ongoing Conquest campaigns, not climate.

In the above mentioned climate study in which Finkelstein participated, the most striking feature of any point in Holocene history was the dry period that occurred between 1250-1100 BCE. Eric Cline has argued that this vast famine caused a collapse of the entire civilization. From northern Turkey to the Nile Delta, society fell prey to the ravages of famine. The Hittites vanish. ?????

During the reign of Merneptah, famine ravaged the Levant. The Hittites invoked their treaty with Egypt and Merneptah's records record that he shipped grain "to keep alive the land of Hatti." This famine provoked the Midianites and Amalekites raids on Israel's southern farmlands as recorded in the book of Judges. The chronology that I have reconstructed based on the contextual approach, places the Midian and Amalekite raids between 1234-1227 BCE. It is quite likely that famine had begun at least two to seven years before the tribes began to raid Judah and only after food stores had been exhausted. Thus, the context within the book of Judges places this famine beginning around 1240 BCE.

This chronology is supported by archaeological studies on the climate in the Levant c. 1250 BCE. Core soil samples drilled from the Sea of Galilee demonstrate famine of epic proportions from 1250-1100 BCE, at the end of the Late Bronze Age. In a recent article, Dafna Langgut, Israel Finkelstein, and Thomas Litt found pollen samples during this era indicated the driest event throughout the Bronze and Iron Ages.

Archaeology indicates that the crisis in the eastern Mediterranean at the end of the Late Bronze Age took place during the same period—from the mid-13th century to ca. 100 BCE. In the Levant the crisis years are represented by destruction of a large number of urban centers, shrinkage of other major sites, hording activities and changes in settlement patterns. Textual evidence from several places in the Ancient Near East attests to drought and famine starting in the mid-13th and continuing until the second half of the 12th century.

The Amalekite raids are not the only evidence in Scripture for this famine. In the book of Ruth, Elimelech emigrated from Judah to Moab due to this same famine.

Insta 360 Test