Featured What Was the Tribute Penny?

This is hardly a new topic and it has been addressed here before. The common consensus is that it was a denarius of Tiberius, the reigning emperor at the time of the ministry of Jesus of Nazareth, circa 28 AD. Many of these denarii are specifically marketed as "Tribute Pennies", the English term, penny, as the translation of the Latin denarius. It seems like common sense. Tiberius was Caesar at that time and his image was on the coin.

But there are some doubts that it was this coin. As a matter of fact that coin might not have been a denarius at all. The term used in the Synoptic Gospels is denarius (denarios in the original koine Greek versions) and the term drachma was also used in the parable of the woman who lost a coin labelled a drachma, so a distinction between denarius and drachma was understood by the authors of those three Gospels. They wrote denarius when they could have used drachma. But, some have argued that the use of denarius was not for the exact denomination but as a word for any generic small silver coin.

Also there has been advanced the theory that the coin was a didrachma of Tyre as the Jewish Temple tax was paid in these coins. That is true, but the tax being brought up by the Pharisees was the tax not to the Jewish authorities of the Temple in Jerusalem but for payment in Rome, the payment of the Tributum Capitis or poll tax which was one denarius per person (Coin Dictionary Guide by C.C. Chamberlain, p.238). It is unlikely that Roman tax gatherers would want Eastern coinage for this payment. But the author of the Dictionary of Ancient Roman Coins, John Melville Jones, p.307, thinks that those tax gatherers would accept silver from eastern mints, drachmas, if they had the image of a Roman emperor on them, perhaps similar to the drachmas of Caesarea in Cappadocia which did have the imperial bust at that time. David Sear in his Vol 2 of Roman Silver Coins, p.4. and p. 2 has pictures of drachmas of that city which very much resemble the Tiberius denarius. Sear also has some of these coins pictured in his Greek Imperial Coins p.26. especially Sear 289. So it is quite possible that the Tribute Penny was actually an Eastern Greek Imperial, or provincial issue.

For those who prefer to stick to the literal description of the Tribute Penny being a Roman imperial denarius, that's fine, but was it one of Tiberius? What kind of denarius, or more properly, which emperor's denarii, were to be found in circulation most commonly in the Holy Land circa 28AD? The Tribute Penny with Tiberius on the obverse and Livia seated on the reverse was first minted sometime after 16 AD, in large numbers and presumably some had made their way to that region. Roman troops in that area, which were mostly Syrian auxiliaries, may have been paid in these coins and would have put them into circulation. But Reinhard Wolterns on page 347 of chapter 18 of Selections from Numismatist Magazine thinks that the massive mintage of the Gaius and Lucius denarii put out by Augustus about the time of the birth of Jesus of Nazareth were far more commonly to be found in circulation than the more recent coinage of Tiberius. If you look at my two denarii pictured here on the obverse, they look very similar. By the way the Cappadocian drachma I have here would not be a Tribute Penny as it has the image of a Cappadocian ruler, probably Ariarathes, but I don't have one of the later imperil issues I mentioned above. In weight and fineness, however, it is quite similar to the denarius (this one is 3.9 grams, the same as the denarius of Tiberius I have pictured).

So bottom line is just what coin is the Tribute Penny of the Gospels? My own opinion is that the drachmas of Caesarea, the ones with the imperial image, with the same weight and fineness and image of either Augustus or Tiberius, in common circulation in the Levant, just might have been the coin. If it was a Roman imperial denarius from Lugdunum or Rome, I think it just as likely to have been an older coin of Augustus Caesar as one more recently minted of Tiberius Caesar. What think you? Please post your images, especially any of those Caesarea early imperials you might have so we can consider them a likely candidate and you opinion of what coin the Tribute Penny actually was.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Great summary!! Thanks for the post . I don’t have a strong opinion on the matter but suspect the coin held during that story may have been the Augustus denarius with Gaius and Lucius reverse.

 

Super write up!

I am more of the camp that it was the Augustus Denarius, due to many if the reasons you posited. However, I agree: many Silvers are good candidates.

I render unto Caesar my Vote:


RI Augustus AR Denarius struck 2 BC-14 AD Caius and Lucius Caesars stdg shield spear Sear 1578

 

One of these days I want to get an Augustus denarius with Gaisu and Lucius. They are super duper common but underrated in their coolness. The possibility of it being the "Tribute Penny" is just one of the interesting things about the type .

Last year I did finally pick a Tiberius denarius. It's trashy but one of only two coins in my collection that can be traced to the ground.


Tiberius, CE 16-37
AR denarius, 20 mm, 3.46 gm
Obv: laureate head of Tiberius right
Rev:
Livia, as Pax, seated right, holding scepter and olive branch
Ref: RCV 1763 (I have not yet tried to confirm catalog numbers)
Found Quidenham hoard, Norfolk, 2014; purchased from Chris Rudd 26 July 2018

 

I'm of the opinion that they were referring to the current Caesar pictured Tiberius (traditional belief) as I can't see why they would refer to an ex-emperor, and Tiberius being unpopular at that time, would use this message as a Psuedo-snipe at him.

 

Here's another possible candidate you mention, a Tiberius drachm of Caesarea:

 

I believe that it was a Tiberius denarius. And for the following reason, the title of the coin stated:: TI CAESAR DIVI AVG F AVGVSTVS this was very offensive to the Jews here it is stated that Tiberius is the son of the god Augustus. Jesus himself also said that he was the son of God. so if he said that they had to pay taxes with which he thus accepted the emperor, he would not only incite the anger of the people, but he would indirectly say that he was not the only son of God.
So it seems logical to me that the Jews view this coin to tempt Jesus.

 

Yes, this has the option of being so similar in weight and fineness of the imperial denarii that they easily could have passed as one to people speaking Aramaic and who might not have been able to distinguish Greek from Roman script. By the time the evangelists put their Gospels into writing (several decades) later it was probably impossible to determine exactly what the coins was. In addition, coming from the Caesarean mint in Cappadocia they were much closer to where the coins had been minted. What we need is examine hoards in situ from Judaea and Galilee circa early First Century AD to see exactly what was circulating in that region at that time. I wonder if there have been any such discoveries and studies? In any event, I have to get one of these drachmas for my collection.

 

Perhaps, but few of the inhabitants in that region could have read and would have had no idea what the inscription actually said. Something like Westerners today collecting coins from the Middle East or the Far East written in scripts most can not read. Besides the contemporary population of the region seemed to be able to stomach Tyrian coins with Melkart on them and that for the upkeep of the Temple.

 

My avatar notwithstanding ...



... the archaeological evidence demonstrates that little Roman imperial coinage circulated in Judea during Jesus' lifetime. See Donald T. Ariel, A Survey of Coin Finds in Jerusalem, Liber Annus 32, 1982, pp. 273-326.

 

Well written and great coins!
Since we will probably never know (and IMHO the story is likely made up) with certainty, I'm just fine referring to Tib's as the tribute.

 

To be honest, whilst I would like a tiberius "tribute penny" I have always thought that the 30 pieces of silver would have contained examples of what was in circulation at the time.

 

Thanks. I just perused the article for the period we are considering. It does seem from these finds that Roman coinage was so,unusual, as to be rare. Tyrian shekels and Roman provincial tetradrachmas from Antioch seem to be more common but nothing on denarii at all, anybody's denarii. Hmm. I wish we actually had some of the original texts of the Gospels, especially that of Mathew which was apparently first composed in Aramaic. I wonder what that tribute coin is called in the Aramaic text?

 

If the story is accurate I agree that not all of the Thirty Pieces was composed of Good Melkart shekels on the Tyrian scales. Considering what was being paid for I would not be surprised if a few late lighter weight standard of Seleucid tetras wound up in that payment.

 

Honestly, if we haven’t figured it out after 2000+ years, I don’t think we will ever know, unless some startling archaeological discoveries come along. I’m fully okay with calling the Tiberius “Livia as Pax” denarius a “Tribute Penny,” because it probably reduces demand for other contemporary denarii.

 

SIX CAESARS OF THE TRIBUTE PENNY by Michael E. Marotta (“Five Caesars of the Tribute Penny,” originally was published Fall 1996 by The Mich-Matist. Previous versions of “Six Caesars” appeared online in Rec.Collecting.Coins and other sites. )

Sellers of ancient coins push out Roman denarii struck by Tiberius on the theory that these are the “tribute penny” mentioned in the Book of Matthew at 22:16 and Mark at 12:13 and Luke 20:22. They may well be. They are not the only candidates. In fact, they are not even the most likely.

Octavius struck coins with the inscription IMP CAES from 28 BC. He died in 14 AD, 42 years later. He struck hundreds of types of denarii, far more than Tiberius who was old when he took the office and who was politically conservative. Since Octavius Augustus struck much more silver than did Tiberius, it is more likely that the “tribute penny” carried the likeness of the earlier ruler.

The January, 1996, issue of The Celator, featured Harvey Shore's “The Real ‘Tribute Penny’.” His thesis was that the Caius/Lucius issue of Augustus was the most common type of denarius at the time of Jesus's ministry. This is not a new theory.

The December 1987 issue of WORLD COINS (Amos Press), carried Robert Leonard's “A Numismatic Illustration of the Bible.” Speaking of the Tiberius/Livia, he said, “This coin) is usually considered to be the Tribute Penny denarius simply because it is the commonest denarius of this reign...A more probable candidate is the denarius of Augustus with reverse Caius and Lucius Caesars...it has been found frequently in Israel, while at one time the Tiberius denarius was thought to be almost unknown. there....”

The historian Michael Grant also agrees that the Caius/Lucius denarius of Augustus is the best guess for the Tribute Penny of the Bible.

In the July 1999 issue of The Australian Journal of Numismatics, Peter E. Lewis marshals a case for a tetradrachm of Antioch cataloged as SNG Copenhagen 144 (Syria). This coin has “Caesar” on both sides: Augustus and Tiberius. The inscription for Augustus calls him “theos” or “god” a clear abomination to the Jews. Also, this coin was about twice the diameter of a denarius and made a good demonstration piece for an encounter on the street.

In the ancient world all silver coins passed by weight. There is no reason to assume that only the coins of the current ruler were accepted as good metal. Money changers worked in the Temple because so many types of coins circulated on the streets. In addition to shekels of Tyre and drachmas from Antioch and Pontus, there were many kinds of Roman denarii.

Tiberius issued coins with the portrait and inscription of Augustus Caesar, Drusus Caesar, and Germanicus Caesar. In fact, all of these types were struck by the imperial mint at Caesaria (Eusebeia) in Cappadocia and would be more likely to be current in and around Jerusalem.

Caius Caesar was the adopted son of Agrippa Lucius and Julia, the daughter of Julius Caesar. Caius was formally adopted by Octavius Augustus in 17 BC. Among his coins is one catalogued as Sydenham 38 (Cohen 2). The obverse shows the head of Caius facing right inside an oak wreath. The inscription reads CAESAR. On the reverse is the word AVGVST and an altar. Sydenham says that these denarii are “not of Roman fabric” and were probably “struck in the East.”

Germanicus was another “Caesar” who was active in the East immediately before the ministry of Jesus. A nephew of Tiberius, Germanicus served at Antioch in Syria. He was poisoned in 19 AD.

Of all the many Caesars whose image and superscription appeared on coins, Julius Caesar must not be forgotten. Once he was dead, he was immensely popular with everyone. He coined tons of denarii to pay his troops. He was active across the entire empire, especially, of course, at Alexandria where he involved Rome in the politics of Egypt.

Marc Antony's coins are also a possibility for the “tribute penny.” While not a “Caesar”, Antony definitely had imperial aspirations. Unlike Brutus, he was not a republican, but an opportunist. He issued denarii to pay his troops with the inscriptions ANTONY IMP, ANTONY AVG, and ANTONY AVG IMP. Among his issues are coins struck during his alliance with Octavian Caesar. With these coins (Crawford 517/8 and Sydenham 1188), it possible for one person to see the image of Antony while another person sees the superscription of Caesar and vice versa.

Coin dealers let Christians bid up the prices on the Livia-as-Pax denarii of Tiberius. However, there is no such thing as a “real tribute penny.” In fact, a set of possible tribute pennies would include the coins of six Caesars. If you only want one that is statistically likely, then the coin you need is the Caius/Lucius of Augustus.

 

I used to believe in the Koine New Testament. Unless you can provide some other scholarship, what we call the Greek New Testament is recreated backwards from modern texts and translated by scholars into Koine Greek, as it was used at that time.

It is a point of Biblical scholarship way deeper than I care to dive that the "oldest" manuscripts are not theologically correct and that more "recent" texts are true copies of the best sources.

As I said, I bought a Koine New Testament when I was teaching myself ancient Greek in support of numismatics. It never occured to me then that the work was a recreation, but so it seems.

"The translation was largely the work of Jerome who in 382 had been commissioned by Pope Damasus I to revise the Vetus Latina("Old Latin") Gospels then in use by the Roman Church. Jerome, on his own initiative, extended this work of revision and translation to include most of the books of the Bible; and once published, the new version became widely adopted; and over succeeding centuries eventually eclipsed the Vetus Latina, so that by the 13th century it had taken over from the former version the appellation of versio vulgata (the "version commonly used") or vulgata for short." -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate

There was no such thing as a Greek Bible, except, of course, among the modern Greeks... But in ancient times, their official language was Latin. They called themselves "Romans" right up to the Fall of Constantinople in 1453. (See: "What (if Anything) is a Byzantine?" here: http://www.romanity.org/htm/fox.01.en.what_if_anything_is_a_byzantine.01.htm

 

...what most call a 'tribute penny'..2nd Augustus of the empire at any rate..(and one of the 12)

 

I have too many of these, this one is my favorite.