I don't hunt prutoh as I find them notoriously problematic - you can look through a thousand coins before you find one that has any appeal, and the ones with any appeal cost a small fortune. The matter is compounded by the fact that they are notoriously doctored: stripped, tooled, and re-patinated. It seems to have become a common practice, especially among Israeli dealers, but on one level, I can't say I blame them as the coins are generally so crappy you can't really expect anyone to want them in their as-found conditions. Good article on wiki here concerning John Hyrcanus. I love how this coin is so well-centered, and how clear the Paleo-Hebrew lettering is. I spent a goodly amount of time learning to read this script last year but I won't bore you with the details - it translates to Yehonanan the High Priest and the Council of the Jews. This coin also has original dirt, as far as I can tell, no monkey business. That's a pomegranate between the cornucopias.
That is a really nice example, and I agree, no monkey business. I don't have a Hyrcanus II but I do have a Hyrcanus I. Mine has what I believe might be a fake sand patina but as far as I can tell, is not tooled and in fact, the actual patina on it is quite thick as evidenced by the patina nicks. Hasmoneian Kingdom of Judaea, John Hyrcanus I AE Prutah. 135-104 BC. Obverse: 'A' monogram, YHO(HH)NN("Yehochanan") H("the") KHN("Priest") H("the") GDL("high") W("and") (HH)BR("Council") H("the") YHWDYM("Jews") Paleo-hebrew within wreath. Reverse: Double cornucopia adorned with ribbons, pomegranate between horns, border of dots. Jerusalem mint. Hendin 1131. Meshorer TJC A
It looks perfectly natural, @red_spork . That's exactly the sort of fabric I look for in Judaean coins. A superb example!
Not bad for one of these. I only have the one Prutah ANTIOCHUS VII (Seleukid Kingdom) Prutah OBVERSE: ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ΑΝΤΙΟΧΟΥ ΕΥΕΡΓΕΤΟΥ ; Anchor, date below, ΑΠΡ (year 181) REVERSE: Lily Struck at Jerusalem, Judea 132-130 BC 5.2g, 16mm
This is a very interesting type because it was actually struck by Hyrcanus I in the name of Antiochus VII. Hyrcanus I had no choice but to accept Seleucid sovereignty after Antiochus' siege of Jerusalem. It's conjectured that the Seleucids allowed the Judaeans to use a lily on these types instead of the king's bust, to comply with their prohibition against graven images. Hyrcanus I would eventually expel the Seleucids and engage in an expansionist program of his own, particularly against his Samaritan neighbors to the north.
I'll show what I believe to be a Hyrcanus II but different in several ways. I do not read Paleo-Hebrew. Note the pomegranate is hollow unlike the ribbed of of R-S or the solid of the OP coin. I bought the coin from David Hendin several years ago mostly because I was attracted to the miscut when these were separated. If these were struck first and then separated from the strings afterward the cut would be before the coin was struck but if the coins were struck individually then this cut was not erased by the striking (or even minimized). Opinions? My other mite (Mattathias Antigonus. 40-37 BC) interested me because it shows that it was struck on a blank made in a two part mold that was not well aligned rather than an open top one as used in the above coin. Centering could be better. I understand this issue was struck with retrograde legends to avoid the appearance of a religious impropriety. Can someone clarify this matter?
Two very interesting coins for a minting techniques collection! I've seen flans that were made from offset molds, but never one as dramatic as your second coin. Very cool.
I do have one example I picked up a few months ago, typical for the type ----a prutah of the 2nd Jewish revolt:
