Two very small coins, 13-14mm. They commemorate the marriage of Aretas IV to his second wife, Shuqailat. I bought two examples, simply on account that you need a few samples of any Nabataean type to accurately represent it. Meshorer thought these interesting enough to devote several paragraphs to them, so I'm just going to excerpt them in their entirety, just in case y'all are really, really bored today... Nabataean Coins, Ya’akov Meshorer, 1975, pp. 57-8
Is this what that little one in the group lot that I showed you was John? Looks like it. Mine looks pretty clear, with just Aretas a hair off-centered.
The very same, although you have a variant not listed by Meshorer - it's Schmitt-Korte 67, where the queen's name occurs on two lines as opposed to three. (The seller's pic of the reverse of that coin is upside-down.) You've got a nice, solid obverse on that piece. Beauty really is in the eye of the beholder. SK calls these coins crudely-styled and poorly-made, but that seems rather redundant. By Graeco-Roman standards, all Nabataean coins are crude and poorly-made. Most of the ancient coinage of the Levant is almost as bad, while we're at it. I have to repeat my mantra on this issue: that you collect certain coins for their historic and numismatic value instead of their aesthetic virtues.
I have to admit I am not up on my Nabateans. Are these marriage commemoratives the only Nabateans with standing figures? I know there are a few others in my sdb, but are all of them this issue? Btw, thanks a lot for the post. Your post just made that little $38 group lot much more interesting.
It certainly isn't your usual lot of Nabataeans. The eagle/wreath types are also scarce. The Rabbel issues are fairly common, though. Still, buying all those coins individually would probably have run you at least double what you paid. There are other types with the king or queen standing on one side of the coin, but this is the only type that has standing figures on both sides.
cool nabateans JA. i went and looked at a few at vcoins, your number 2 is i pretty very good specimen if my quick survey is any indication of what most of them look like.
Neat coins JA ... ummm, but a bit like you with my coins, I don't know a whole lot about them, other than "they're awesome!!" (congrats on your new babies!!)
Thanks Chris. It was the nicest one on the market. In fact, it's in better shape than the plate coins in Meshorer and SK. The one thing it lacks is the complete reverse inscription, which is why I needed number one.
I am basically in the dark about these as well, but they are interesting (almost picked one up a month ago). Cool coins John.
Someone needs to synthesize the material on Nabataean numismatics and present it on the web. Meshorer's Nabataean Coins is a rare and expensive book. I wouldn't have my copy if it wasn't for medoraman's keen eyes and a high bid. Older volumes of NC aren't terribly pricey, but they're scarce. Then you've got various sylloges and articles sprinkled around the web. I may do it someday, once I gain enough experience with the coins and literature.
I think a webpage about them would be terrific. I know Tom Mallon's website got me interested in Sassanid and Hunnic issues. I have no clue how I got wrapped up in Sogdia, but oh well.
I just joined FORVM and started posting there today. Being such a newbie, I'm concerned about being inaccurate, or flat-out wrong. Hopefully I can get some constructive criticism. No offense to my friends here, but as much as I like compliments, criticisms are much more instructive.
Moneta-L used to be where the best experts were. I haven't been there for a while, but you could try there as well.
One of these Aretas IV 2nd marriage commemoratives was in a small lot of Nabataeans recently purchased. Not in great shape (like that's a surprise...) but I'm happy to have a small lot of Nabataeans to study
I agree, for nabateans its very well struck. The main deficiency is the flan. Try to find a nabatean struck as well as most roman imperials and you have a great rarity.
