Jewish History Ancient Numismatics

In this report, Samuel Zinner examines the controversial ‘Jordan codices,’ addressing the complex ethical and legal issues involved in undocumented, non-provenanced artefacts. There is much to be wary of in enthusiasts’ and naysayers’ claims, both of whom fall prey to emotionalism. Aligning his position with that of André Lemaire, Zinner cautiously leaves open the possibilities of ancient authenticity (for a core group) and an elaborate pre-modern fake, carefully weighing the evidence for each. Zinner demonstrates that at least some of the artefacts are modern copies of older exemplars.

If ancient, the Jordanian artefacts are apotropaic grave objects designed to afford protection to the deceased and information relevant for their afterlife. Their contents would date from the immediate post-Bar Kokhba period to the time of Julia Domna and beyond (ca. 136-217 CE). Ancient or modern, the artefacts’ contents retrospectively view Jewish history from the Maccabees to Bar Kokhba principally through the prism of the latter’s revolt and its demise.

The artefacts’ main inspirations were ancient Jewish and Greco-Roman coinage, which naturally suggested to their creators the choice of a metal medium. The sheet format was dictated by apotropaic grave precedents such as Orphic tablets. With some exceptions, each Jordanian ‘book’ consists of a large image-text design that has been arbitrarily cut down to smaller-sized individual sheets subsequently bound together in order to retain the separate leaves’ association. ‘Book’/‘codex’ is not the most fitting terminology for these artefacts. The closest comparative parallels are the Martin Schøyen/Würzburg ancient Greek alphabet copper plaques, the Orphic lamellae, the Gnostic lead book in the National Museum at Rome, and the Mandaeans' lead books.

ENDORSEMENTS:
Philip R. Davies (University of Sheffield):
"The validation of the Jordanian lead books has faced three challenges: the determination of the age by means of testing the lead, the decipherment (if possible) of the writing and images, and the investigation of the find site. The unwanted attention of ignorant bloggers has been an additional distraction, but one that deterred many potentially interested scholars and may have adversely affected the investigation of the site.

With the tests on the lead at least ruling out a modern forgery, the major obstacle to an understanding of the purpose and significance of these books remained the apparent lack of any meaning to the images and the letters. Thanks to a monumental effort of considerable ingenuity, Samuel Zinner has now provided an answer that makes possible a second century CE dating. He has also exhaustively demolished arguments against their antiquity based on letter forms. His work now opens up the historical investigation of these objects: let us hope that it leads the way to a serious effort at resolving the mystery of where these objects originated and what was their use."

Robert Gordon (University of Cambridge):

"I think there is a touch of the genius about Zinner. It is very clear that the sophistication is not all imposed by his clever brain: there does indeed appear to be a great deal going on in the texts, whatever the individual details. That makes the project so very important, whatever the ultimate conclusion may be on date and provenance."

Charles Häberl (Rutgers University; Director, Center for Middle Eastern Studies):

"It seems to me that after entering what was a rather contentious debate, Zinner has marshalled an impressive and wide-ranging array of evidence to bolster his claims, which cannot (and undoubtedly will not) be discounted. Such scholarship requires an elevated level of caution and painstaking thoroughness that, prior to his entry into the field, none of the authorities who had weighed into this debate have thus far achieved. While I doubt very much that his contribution will be the last word on the subject, it is destined to be the first word for all future discussions. Well done!"

Bernhard Lang (University of Paderborn, Aarhus University):

"A very, very good piece of work. Breathtaking scholarship."

John F. A. Sawyer (Durham University):

"I’ve greatly enjoyed looking through Zinner’s book and am convinced that he has made good sense of many of the texts. I was particularly impressed by his use of ancient parallels such as the Bar Kokhba coins and weights. Zinner has coordinated the material so brilliantly. Over and over again I had the impression that he has discovered what is going on. I hope his work is soon given the international recognition it deserves."

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms mation concerning area-specific phasing designations and comprehensive phasing based upon correlations as they become available. In the later stratigraphical reports the locus lists will be viewed as the final phasing proposal for each area; in the ceramic analyses, phasing correlations between the excavation areas will be given, employing Roman numerals.

After Antiochus VII Sidetes’ siege of Jerusalem was lifted (133 or 132 BCE), the first mint of bronze coins (SC 2123) in that city was inaugurated. Based upon the distribution of provenanced finds of another coin of that king (SC 2122), a second attribution to the mint is proposed. Analysis of the siege’s chronology makes it likely that the Jewish High Priest John Hyrcanus I, the Seleucid king’s vassal after the city’s capitulation, had a major role in minting both coins. The aniconic and non-figural iconography on the coins and numerous other numismatic considerations are garnered in support of this idea.

The Abraham and Marian Sofaer collection consists of 4,000 coins and related objects produced by the peoples who inhabited the Holy Land from the Persian period in the 5th and 4th centuries BCE through the Crusader Kingdom in the 13th century of the modern era. Assembled over more than 30 years, the collection contains gold, silver and bronze coins of the Persians, Greeks, Samarians, Jews, Nabataeans, Romans, Byzantines, Arabs, and Crusaders.

Highlights of the collection include a rich selection of the fractional silver coinage of Samaria; a comprehensive assemblage of the coins of the Hasmonaean and Herodian Jewish dynasties; superb examples of coinage issued during the Jewish revolts from Rome; fully representative runs of the coinages of the cities of Galilee, Samaria, Judaea, Idumaea and the Decapolis under Roman rule; and rare examples of the Umayyad and Abassid coinages produced in Jerusalem and elsewhere.

All coins are fully described and illustrated on 238 plates. These volumes will serve as standard reference works for archaeologists, historians and numismatists studying two millennia of the history of the Holy Land.

Sixteen bronze coins minted by the Bar Kokhba administration were identified scattered in Europe by H. Eshel, B. Zissu and G. Barkay in their fundamental article published in the Israel Numismatic Journal in 2010. The coins were found in Londinium (one), Vindobona (one), Carnuntum (nine), Brigetio (two), and three others from three different Roman sites in Dacia, including the capital city of Sarmizegetusa. Since most of the coins were found in Roman military contexts, the authors as-sume that “many if not all of them were brought back to Europe by Roman soldiers after the Bar Kokhba Revolt ended in Judea”. As a matter of fact, the number of Bar Kochba coins can be raised up to 20–21, because 6 or 7 coins have been found at Brigetio (Szőny, Hungary) thus far. Two of these are held in the Numismatic Gallery of the Hungarian National Museum, four are owned by private collectors, and one is in the so-called Sárközy collection. (Interestingly, a bronze prutah minted by Pontius Pilate was also found in the Brigetio area.) Another question is who and why brought these Jewish coins to military bases ranging from Londinium to Sarmizegetusa? As early as in 1960, Alexander Scheiber suggested that these coins might have been brought by Roman sol-diers from Iudea/Palaestina as souvenirs. This opinion was widely accepted, even though the Talmud records that the Romans banned the use of the coins minted by Bar Kokhba. At least two of the 20–21 coins were pierced, and seemingly have been used as a pendant: a custom also commemorated in the Talmud. In my opinion, it is a much more plausible explanation if we consider that these perforated coins—and maybe other ”souvenir” coins as well—may have been used by Jews who got there as slaves or merchants after the Bar Kokhba revolt had been suppressed. The number of Jews rose significantly in Pannonia in the second‒fourth century C.E. as it was proven by the Jewish amulet found in a villa rustica close to Vindobona, and by the epitaph of a Jewish merchant, which came to the light at Carnuntum in 2009.

Of more than a dozen recorded sieges of Jerusalem during its history, four took place from the second half of the first millennium BC until 70 CE, during what is called the Second Temple Period.  Despite the inordinate amount of military activity during the second century BC in the southern Levant in general and Judea in particular, the only siege of Jerusalem in that century was mounted by Antiochus VII Euergetes, nicknamed Sidetes (138¬–129 BC). The Seleucid success in holding Jerusalem, however, was shortlived.

A series of 12 coins from Roman Judaea dating from the period between A.D. 6/9 and A.D. 59 have been analyzed chemically and metallographically. By that the type of alloy should be characterized as precise as possible to find out, if there was a certain control of the quality of the metal especially with respect to the content of tin. A debasement of the coin metal in the course of time should also become obvious by these analysis. Further the analytical data should provide a basis to find out whether a fresh metal or a remelted material was used. The analysis revealed that as well pure tin bronzes as tin bronzes with a high amount of lead were used. The analytical data provided a reliable base for the discussion of the historical questions. New questions about the chronology of Valerius Gratus (15-26 AD) and Pontius Pilate (26-36 AD) are raised.

An old, bloodthirsty tyrant hears from a group of Magi about the birth of the Messiah, king of the Jews. He vengefully sends his soldiers to Bethlehem with orders to kill all of the baby boys in the town in order to preserve his own throne. For most of the Western world, this is Herod the Great — an icon of cruelty and evil, the epitome of a tyrant.

Adam Kolman Marshak portrays Herod the Great quite differently, however, carefully drawing on historical, archaeological, and literary sources. Marshak shows how Herod successfully ruled over his turbulent kingdom by skillfully interacting with his various audiences — Roman, Hellenistic, and Judaean — in myriad ways. Herod was indeed a master in political self-presentation.

Marshak's fascinating account chronicles how Herod moved from the bankrupt usurper he was at the beginning of his reign to a wealthy and powerful king who founded a dynasty and brought ancient Judaea to its greatest prominence and prosperity.