The dawn of Nabataean coinage.

According to Meshorer and others, this crusty little bronze piece represents the first coinage of the Nabataeans, minted in Damascus under the authority Aretas II.



Its devices are modeled after the gold Staters of Alexander the Great, the obverse depicting the helmeted head of Athena, and the reverse featuring Nike. As you can see, a number of significant details in the Stater are omitted from the Nabataean coin.



I can only conjecture as to why the Nabataeans chose this particular design for their first coinage, but I will offer two theories.

Firstly, the Nabataeans possessed their own elaborate pantheon, so it makes one wonder why Greek gods make an appearance on their first coins. But a Hellenization of the Near East had been taking place for several centuries prior to Aretas II, and perhaps by 110 BC, it wouldn’t have been considered apostasy to depict foreign gods on a local coin. In fact, some archeologists believe that the Nabataeans gradually associated their gods with the Greek pantheon, much as the Romans did. It’s entirely possible that the first Nabataean issues do not depict Athena or Nike at all, but rather that the portraits of Athena and Nike are borrowed to represent Nabataean gods – possibly Allat (a goddess of fertility), and Al-‘Uzza (a goddess of power).

If that’s true, it may represent the culmination of a gradual shift in the theology of the Nabataeans. Prior to the 1[SUP]st[/SUP] century BC, the culture had a long tradition of depicting gods in an abstract rather than personified form, a tradition found consistently throughout Arabian iconography. Deities were represented by stone blocks and pillars, rectangular baetyls, and sacred meteorites, occasionally enhanced by schematic facial features. But anthropomorphizing the stones was a practice that had been increasing in popularity over several centuries, and perhaps by the time Aretas II put his coins to the presses, it would have been entirely natural to depict gods in fully-fledged human form.



A second possibility as to the origin of the borrowed design may lie in the need to establish commercial confidence in the new issues. The Nabataeans were avid and successful traders throughout the Near East, and they certainly would have used the Staters of Alexander III in commerce. There is no doubt that they would have appreciated the value and beauty of these coins, as they were likely held in the highest esteem among merchants. It makes perfect sense that Aretas II would have modeled his new issues after a coin that was well-respected in commerce.

In fact, of all Nabataean coins, this first issue is consistently found with well-centered strikes on round flans - there was evidently a need to make a good first impression. As Nabataean minting progresses and the issues are widely accepted in commerce, the coins deteriorate in quality, particularly the bronzes. When the mint moves to Petra, it’s sufficient to the cause to create flans of the correct weight (never mind the shape) and to strike any bit of the die onto them. As the saying goes, it was good enough for government work.

One can perhaps accept the utilitarian motives behind striking bronze coins as quickly and efficiently as possible (the silver issues were of a higher quality), but it’s still ironic and puzzling that a culture that built an edifice like the treasury at Petra…



…should be satisfied with coinage like this.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

You have really taken a shine to Nabataean coinage! I am quite impressed that you found a specialty so quickly. Have you already found a copy of Meshorer?

 

Great lookin' coin John-A ... I absolutely love the earthen-patina look!! (very cool pick-up!!)

 

No Bill, I haven't, and I would gladly pay whatever anyone charged for a copy at this point. What I've managed to find on the web leaves a lot of holes.

 

It is hard to find. But if you can't find a copy, consider picking up Coinage of the Caravan Kingdoms and the Martin Huth Collection, both published by the ANS just last year. They are really high quality scholarly works on Nabataean, Sabaean, Himyarite, and other Arabian coinages.

 

Nice JA. Most either do not know or forget nabateans did not start minting in Petra.

 

I would man, but it took me quite a while to find mine. I have check my usual used book auctions without any luck. I will try to remember to check in the future, and let you know if any come up. I will also check at CICF this spring for you.

Btw, thanks for the reference Bill. I might have to pick this up also, looks interesting. Also, I find Meshorer's pics not the best.

 

But remember these were "small change". The nabateans were rich from controlling the trade routes. I am sure the Treasury contained a great deal of Greek and Roman gold coins. Why melt and restrike coins when they were already in very recognizable coinage? Also, the soil was not the greatest for preserving coins, and I find much fewer references to these being buried in pots like in other areas. So, if an ancient coin is not in a pot, its much less likely to survive well. There ARE high quality bronzes around, they are just scarce.

Btw, here is a RR you might like JA. It shows Aretas surrendering to the Romans. I need another copy, one to keep with my RR, the other to put in with my Nabatean coins.



It looks better in hand, what looks like weakness is more from toning, so the photo didn't pick it up well.

 

It's not a criticism, just an observation. On the other end of the spectrum you have the Romans churning out millions upon millions of AE3s in the third and fourth centuries with considerable precision and meticulous record-keeping, while they were worth almost nothing. Sound familiar? US cents...ahem.

I looked at a handful of those RRs with Aretas kneeling and I'm sure I'll add one to my collection in time. It would be a good corollary piece in a Nabataean collection. Well, so would an Alex III Stater for that matter, but let's start simple.

 

They are still much better made than ancient Jewish coins, their nearest neighbor.

 

I really want that Aretas Surrendering denarius. Everytime I go to find one I am either outbid or broke, in the end both end up being the same problem.

 

When I was doing unclean lots, I actually received a couple of low grade silver coins. One of these was an Aretas Surrendering:

M. AEMILIUS (POMPEY Victory v ARETAS ); GENS AEMILIA AR Denarius
OBV: M . SCAVR / AED CVR above king Aretas kneeling beside a camel r., EX on ,S . C on right, REX ARETAS in ex.
REV: HYPSAE (vs) / AED CVR above Jupiter in quadriga left, CAPTVM on right, c. HYPSAEVS cos PREIV (ER) in ex. scorpion below horses
Struck at Rome, 58 BC
3.1g, 17mm
Cr422/1a

 

What is cool about this coin, (Doug Smith pointed this out, so I am not taking the credit), is this coin was the first RR to actually brag about something the moneyer did, and not an ancestor. Also, it supposedly shows the person who did it, riding in the chariot. As such, it paved the way for JC to do the same a decade later, and also to put his portrait on a coin. Many have said the outrage of putting his own face on the coin is what tipped the scales and led to his assasination, so in effect this coin has a direct bearing on the Ides of March.

Lots of coll history in one little piece of silver, both for RR and Nabatean collectors.

 

Indeed. Since you bring it up, I think first Nabataean bronzes may have been a response to a shortage of small change after Gaza became less of a commercial center in the 1st century BC. There were a number of reasons for that, not the least of which was Jannaeus' expansionist ambitions, but the Nabataean traders may not have had access to as many prutahs as they had had in the past. There's no way to prove that though.

 

Nice analysis.

I have to ask a question: after all of this fun in ancients and reading you have been having lately, how much are you still pursuing your high grade Kennedy's?

 

Well for starters, only a few of my Kennedys are in high grades, and those are the cheapies with high pops. Mostly I'm pursuing coins that have great eye appeal, regardless of the grade on the slab. But I'm not sure the registry route is right for me - I haven't decided. I find it more satisfying to put coins in an album and leaf through the pages as opposed to fondling slabs, although I have some very nice coins in slabs that I'm proud of.

The appeal of ancients is something very different - not better or worse, but different. Apples and oranges I suppose. I don't see any fundamental conflict between the two - it's like playing two different games with two very different sets of rules.

 

I can see that. I still buy some modern stuff, like 19th century thai and the like. So, I can see what you are saying.

I was just thinking with all of this current emphasis on ancients, modern coins might have dimmed in importance.

Its fun, right? Reading about ancient cultures, researching things maybe 100 other Americans give a crud about, if that.

 

The ancient cultures are fascinating, yes, and I've always considered myself a man of letters, so the aspect of research is a bonus. It's decidedly more satisfying for me to discover the particulars of history than to study census reports and memorize die varieties. That's why I say the registry may not be for me.

But some of my modern collecting strategy applies to ancients. Most of my Kennedys are mid-grade MS pieces with attractive toning. I find myself drawn to similar kinds of ancients - coins in VF with distinctive colors. I definitely like and admire a well-struck, uncirculated coin with pristine surfaces, but I'm more apt to pull the trigger on a piece with eye-catching desert patina. Or blue - I need me some blue!

 

Lol. Be careful, I saw a seller of coins on Ebay and it showed the LRB were blue, but after looking at his other auctions his silver coins were blue too.

Its a scarce color, and a hard blue patina will always be in demand. Be careful not to get a "dusty" blue patina, since that can be corrosion of copper, and not a stable patina.

I am with you though. That coin with the blue patina was just stunning. I am with you on a VF coin as well. While a few of my ancient coins are high grade Sassanids, like Shapur I, Ardashir I, and Hormizd II, I do appreciate a nice, mellow VF coin as my most common grade.

 

medoraman => man, I absolutely love that coin ... I happen to have my own copy