tivity on the carmel faul

vertical offset. Dating of sand samples yielded an age of approximately 55ka (OSL
method). This age was interpreted to suggest a normal faulting at a rate of 0.2mm/y.
Zilberman et al. (2006) found evidence for two tectonically active periods in a trench
dug perpendicular to the Nesher fault (Fig. 1). Dating with the OSL method yielded the
following ages: (1) late, middle Pleistocene (ca. 176,000y) and (2) late Pleistocene
(between 75,000 and 27,000y). The evidence from the Nesher fault does not allow for a
determination of the age or magnitude of seismic events, but does provide evidence for
ac<strong>tivity</strong>. Since the trench was dug along a secondary fault, Zilberman et al. (2006) assumed
that their findings represent only part of the paleoseismic ac<strong>tivity</strong> along the main fault. No
evidence for Holocene ac<strong>tivity</strong> was found, but it is noted that during that period the
research area was subjected to human ac<strong>tivity</strong> which did not allow sediments to accumulate
and therefore preserve evidence of tectonic movements. In the same study Zilberman et al.
(2006) observed a shutter ridge across a stream valley between Yoqneam and Jalame that
was formed by a left lateral movement of the N-S segment of the CF. At the back of the
ridge evidence of a slow stage of sedimentation between the Late Pleistocene up until ca.
24,500y ago was found. Another, faster sedimentation stage is dated to 3,500-2,500y. Both
those ages were obtained using the OSL method as well. The authors considered the
movement of the fault as a possible cause for these sedimentation stages due to a temporary
blockage of the stream valley.
The site of Megiddo is situated close the the trace of the CF (Fig. 1) and has
reasonably well-dated archaeological strata. These attributes prompted an archeo-seismic
study of the site by Marco et al. (2006). They reported structural damage of potentially
seismic origin in several strata, two of which are particularly well dated. One is of the late
4 th millennium BCE, where monumental walls of an Early Bronze (EB) I temple are
fractured in several places along their strike as well as perpendicular to the strike. The
overlying walls of the EB III temple were no fractured, which constrains the age of the
earthquake. The other seismic event which caused structural damage is dated to the 9 th
century BCE. This observation is based on several findings throughout the site (e.g. tilted
pillars, tilted buildings) all dated to Iron II. They further concluded that biblical indications
for a major earthquake in ca. 760 BCE seem to coincide with the damage found for 8 th
century BCE buildings. All ages are based on accumulated evidence derived from chronocultural
identification of archaeological contexts determined from associated material
culture and 14 C assays. They are expressed in a conventional nomenclature for the sequence
of late prehistoric and historic cultures of the southern Levant (Stern et al., 2008). Specific
22