I've been reexamining my Nabataean tesserae with the purpose of attribution. The primary scholarship on these coins comes from Oliver Hoover, "A Reassessment of Nabataean Lead Coinage in Light of New Discoveries," from Coinage of the Caravan Kingdoms, 2010. In it, he describes a tessera, A1, which is currently unique as: "Obv.: Crude head of Nike wearing crested Attic helmet r. Rev.: winged Nike standing l., holding wreath (?)." The coin was sold from the D. Pichler collection by CNG in 2003. I believe I've discovered a second example. Now I've posted a number of the early Athena/Nike imitative types, but this coin does not correspond to any of those pieces in style, fabric, or dimensions. Here is a casual shot with the piece next to other Nabataean issues. The top coins are the anonymous Athena/Nike types in Alexandrian and Seleucid style. The bottom left is another tessera, the last is the above pictured coin. The coin in question shares the same dimensions as all other Nabataean tesserae, and actually weighs the same as Hoover's example: 2.2g. The color is darker than other lead coins, but "lead" coins are made of various alloys anyway. If you could squish them like fishing weights, likely none of them would have survived the centuries. Perhaps my coin has a bit more copper alloyed with the lead than most. Neither does this coin fit into the barbarous imitations of the Athena/Nike types, which seem to depict busts with Arabian features, have better portrayals of Nike (however crude), and are generally around 3g in weight. (I believe these are the first coins minted in Petra, but I can't prove it.) Hoover comments on the stylistic differences between A1 and all other Athena/Nike types and concludes... "The image of Athena on the lead piece is far more crudely executed than on the bronze issues. Not only does she lack her characteristic curls of hair and the bulb attachment for her helmet crest, but she also seems to wear a different type of helmet. Because of these stylistic differences it is likely that the lead coin was not produced at the same time as the bronze series. Instead, it should probably be seen as a later imitation. Since the hoard evidence indicates that the imitative Athena/Nike bronzes continued to circulate into the first century AD there is no way to be certain when it was made." (CCK, p. 110) There also appears to be something above Nike's head, a star, or a cross symbol? There is no letter or numeral in the Nabataean alphabet which corresponds to such a mark. (The number 4 is a cross, but it is always rotated to look like the Roman X.) Is it just a deceptive anomaly of the flan? The only other alphabet which appeared on early Nabataean coins was Greek. Is it tau? Any thoughts welcome.
i con't really see the mark JA, i'm sure i wouldn't be much help anyway. but do you mean on the first coin you posted?
I purchased a couple a while back and haven't had time to have a good look at them. Identified by the seller as "barbaric", 1.80 grams, it is definitely not lead. I think the reverse has a similarity to yours. Something coming out of the top of the head?
I don't think the T above Nike's head is a flan anomaly. It looks like the engraver created it with three "strokes"? of the same tool. Another thing I notice is the flan shape. Your tesserae in the bottom left is well rounded and has a soft look to it. My tesserae has the same look as do Hoover's images. Are you sure it is lead? It definitely has a similar look to Hoover's coin though.
No. It was sold to me as a lead tessera, but if I were to see it without any preconceived notions, I would call it a bronze coin. Perhaps what we have here is not a tessera, but just another barbarous Athena/Nike bronze. These imitative coins date roughly to the time of Aretas II, late 2nd to early 1st centuries BC. My conjecture is that the Nabataeans conscripted trained minters to make the coins in the cities in which they were available, i.e., definitely Damascus, and possibly Gaza. (Aretas II's seat of power was in Damascus, and Gaza was the primary Nabataean seaport - both cities had long-standing mints.) In other locations within the kingdom, amateur die cutters did the best they could, hence the various barbarous issues. Is Hoover's coin A1 really a tessera? He tells us it is, but is it also more bronze than lead? It's impossible to say from the photograph, because as in so many numismatic works, the plates are in black-and-white... But it is stylistically in line with the coin I posted, and yours. You say you're certain yours isn't lead. Perhaps mine isn't either. When I look at it next to a bona fide Class B tessera, it doesn't look like lead at all...
I've never seen any of those coins before but then I don't know a lot about Nabataean coins. Nice new acquisition.
That's the comparison I was talking about. How the tesserae looks soft and rounded. Very nice tesserae you have by the way, do you have any others? Perhaps these barbarous issues were the first attempts at the Petra mint? I'd like to toss another couple in if you don't mind, perhaps you could give me your opinion. The first has an odd helmet almost looks like a bowler hat and a very stylized Athena. The second my only tesserae.
The mark over the head could be some kind of Modus like that used on Serapis head. The Nabataeans might have chosen their own form. The possibility of a cross cannot be excluded either, but I think we need first to check out when did these people adopt the Christian religion in the first century? I also wonder whether any Chistian symbols or traces were found after the invasion of the famous Nabataean city " Petra " by the Roman Emperor Trajan, nearly around the beginning of the second century AD.
The first is a Style 2 Athena/Nike bronze. The Nabataeans were imitating the Seleucid issues of Alexander Balas with these coins, more so than the Alexandrian staters. (Hence the bowler hat, which is a Boeotian helmet as opposed to Athena's Corinithian helmet.) I have a page on Style 2 coins here. Some of them were well-made, others, like yours, were carelessly produced. Your second coin is a Hoover Group B tessera. He describes these tesserae as "Obv.: Head of Nabataean ruler (Obodas III?) r., with hair in cascading rows of curls; dotted border. Rev.: Winged Nike standing l., holding palm branch (or cornucopia?) in l. hand and wreath in r.; dotted border." Here is a sample of his Group B plate coins... That's not Athena on these issues, but a Nabataean ruler. Looks like Obodas, but it could be Aretas IV - the busts on his early bronze have a similar, archaic style. I do in fact have another Group B tessera with a nice portrait, but the reverse is quite weak. Still, you can make out enough on the reverse to determine that it's Nike... The tesserae can't really be related typologically to the bronze Nike/Athena coins simply because they are different in too many ways.
Charles, the Nabataeans adhered to their ancient religion throughout their history as an empire, and well into Roman times. Christianity did not take hold in the area of Petra until well into the 4th and 5th centuries AD. There are no Christian symbols on any Nabataean coins. In fact, the ancient Arab religions were supplanted not by Christianity so much as Islam. Much as Christians scorned the pagan gods of the Romans, Muslims scorned the pagan gods of the Nabataeans.
