Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Early Nabataean Bronze Coins
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="John Anthony, post: 1780728, member: 42773"]<font face="Times New Roman"> <b>Four Kings</b></font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman">Although type 3 is safely assumed to have been issued by Aretas II in Damascus, the remaining types could have been minted during the reigns of Aretas II, Obodas I, Rabbel I, and Aretas III, spanning a period between 120/110 BC to 62 BC. Since there is no evidence to assign the various types to various kings, I call them the “Four Kings” versions. The order of the remaining types does not constitute a chronological order. Thankfully, Aretas III eventually puts his name on a coin (Me 5, SK 9) and takes the guesswork out of dating all the Nabataean coins that come after.</font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman">4. </font><font face="Times New Roman">Four Kings <i>Obv</i>.: Stylized, helmeted head of Athena r. <i>Rev</i>.: Nike standing left, holding wreath. In field letter </font><font face="Georgia">Λ </font><font face="Times New Roman">with crescent above.</font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman">4a. Four Kings II <i>Obv</i>.: Stylized, helmeted head of Athena r. <i>Rev</i>.: Nike standing left, holding wreath. No letter or crescent.</font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman">4b. Four Kings <i>Obv</i>.: Stylized, helmeted head of Athena r. <i>Rev</i>.: Nike standing left, holding wreath. Letter </font><font face="Times New Roman">ח</font><font face="Times New Roman"> in field.</font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman">Athena changes aspect in this type. She takes on decidedly masculine facial features, the helmet shows a sharp rim, and there is no ball or hair brush. Meshorer suggests that these busts are modeled after certain issues of Alexander Bala, and there are indeed similarities. Was Athena transforming into a Nabataean deity here? Or does this type illustrate the first efforts of Nabataean die cutters to portray their kings? Is it a portrait of Aretas II? Those are questions I can’t answer, but these coins present a distinctive departure in style from type 3, and deserve their own category. I have yet to find an example of 4b on the market, but hope springs eternal.</font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://postimage.org/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://postimage.org/" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://s21.postimg.org/yvto43447/aretascoinproject.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></a></font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman">4b is a re-categorization of Me 4, which is in the stylized Athena version, but presents the intriguing letter </font><font face="Times New Roman">ח</font><font face="Times New Roman"> in the reverse field. This is the first letter of Aretas’s name spelled in Nabataean Aramaic, read from right to left : </font><font face="Times New Roman">חרחח</font><font face="Times New Roman">. One frequently finds the first initial of kings’ names on later Nabataean issues, so it’s probably safe to assume this letter is referring to Aretas II or III. Since early Nabataean coinage shifted from Greek inscriptions to Aramaic, is it also fair to assume that the letter </font><font face="Georgia">Λ </font><font face="Times New Roman">refers to Aretas on the other types? It seems likely, but there just isn’t enough evidence to say so definitively.</font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman">5. </font><font face="Times New Roman">Four Kings <i>Obv</i>.: Stylized, helmeted head of Athena r. <i>Rev</i>.: Nike standing left, holding wreath. In field letter </font><font face="Georgia">Λ </font><font face="Times New Roman">with crescent above. Careless style.</font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman">5a. Four Kings <i>Obv</i>.: Stylized, helmeted head of Athena r. <i>Rev</i>.: Nike standing left, holding wreath. No letter or crescent. Careless style.</font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman">Type 5 is distinguished from 4 by the careless style of the minting. These types are number two in Meshorer’s catalog, and of them he says, “Difficult to distinguish the details. Many of these coins are of a debased weight and struck on irregular flans”.</font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://postimage.org/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://postimage.org/" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://s24.postimg.org/f9fub7tz9/meshorer1crescenr1a.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></a></font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman">Of the early Nabataean types, these are numerous and readily available. The 1st-century BC was a time of tremendous growth in the empire, and doubtlessly many workers and soldiers needed to receive salaries. The careless style and abundance of these coins suggests that they were produced quickly and in large quantities to meet an urgent economic necessity, and art be damned.</font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman">6. </font><font face="Times New Roman">Four Kings <i>Obv</i>.: Unknown head r. <i>Rev</i>.: Nike standing left, holding wreath. No letter or crescent. Careless style.</font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman">The prior types I’ve listed are simply a reorganization of coins cataloged by Meshorer and Schmitt-Korte. Type 6 is my own concoction, and I believe it can be distinguished from Type 5 in several ways. I’ve seen a handful of these coins on the market, and I own two which illustrate the possibility that the obverse design is an intentional attempt to portray a specific person.</font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://postimage.org/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://postimage.org/" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://s7.postimg.org/u0oeqevdn/arabheads.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></a></font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman">Despite the barbarous character of the reverse, these coins exhibit a certain amount of artistry not evident in type 5. The busts are clearly trying to portray someone, likely one of the four kings. Hoover assigns such a coin with an Arabian bust to Aretas III, which is highly likely, but unprovable. Unless he has information not expounded in CCK (which is entirely possible) I think it’s safer to assign these coins to the “Four Kings” category.</font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman"><b>Addendum</b></font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman">When Meshorer published “Nabataean Coins” in 1975, he was in the possession of two lead tesserae, one of which he thought was silver. They were both placed in his catalog of early Nabataean coins, as Me 3 and Sup 1, as they both exhibited the Bust/Nike designs. Schmitt-Korte submitted Me 3 to an X-ray fluorescence analysis, and it was discovered to be made of an alloy of 60% lead and 40% tin, making it the second known Nabataean tessera. SK, however, interpreted the coin as a test piece, as Meshorer did Sup 1. Since then, approximately 60 tesserae have appeared on the Israeli antiquities market, and they’ve been carefully categorized by Hoover as a separate species, taking Me 3 and Me Sup1 out of the family of early Nabataean bronze issues.</font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman">I have two such tesserae, which in the past would have been attributed as Me 3 and Me Sup 1…</font></p><p> </p><p><font face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://postimage.org/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://postimage.org/" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://s8.postimg.org/x3d07qg7p/leadboth.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></a></font></p><p> </p><p>If you actually read this whole post, PM me your address and I will mail you a cookie. <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie2" alt=";)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="John Anthony, post: 1780728, member: 42773"][FONT=Times New Roman] [B]Four Kings[/B][/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman]Although type 3 is safely assumed to have been issued by Aretas II in Damascus, the remaining types could have been minted during the reigns of Aretas II, Obodas I, Rabbel I, and Aretas III, spanning a period between 120/110 BC to 62 BC. Since there is no evidence to assign the various types to various kings, I call them the “Four Kings” versions. The order of the remaining types does not constitute a chronological order. Thankfully, Aretas III eventually puts his name on a coin (Me 5, SK 9) and takes the guesswork out of dating all the Nabataean coins that come after.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman]4. [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman]Four Kings [I]Obv[/I].: Stylized, helmeted head of Athena r. [I]Rev[/I].: Nike standing left, holding wreath. In field letter [/FONT][FONT=Georgia]Λ [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman]with crescent above.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman]4a. Four Kings II [I]Obv[/I].: Stylized, helmeted head of Athena r. [I]Rev[/I].: Nike standing left, holding wreath. No letter or crescent.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman]4b. Four Kings [I]Obv[/I].: Stylized, helmeted head of Athena r. [I]Rev[/I].: Nike standing left, holding wreath. Letter [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman]ח[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman] in field.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman]Athena changes aspect in this type. She takes on decidedly masculine facial features, the helmet shows a sharp rim, and there is no ball or hair brush. Meshorer suggests that these busts are modeled after certain issues of Alexander Bala, and there are indeed similarities. Was Athena transforming into a Nabataean deity here? Or does this type illustrate the first efforts of Nabataean die cutters to portray their kings? Is it a portrait of Aretas II? Those are questions I can’t answer, but these coins present a distinctive departure in style from type 3, and deserve their own category. I have yet to find an example of 4b on the market, but hope springs eternal.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman][URL='http://postimage.org/'][IMG]http://s21.postimg.org/yvto43447/aretascoinproject.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman]4b is a re-categorization of Me 4, which is in the stylized Athena version, but presents the intriguing letter [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman]ח[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman] in the reverse field. This is the first letter of Aretas’s name spelled in Nabataean Aramaic, read from right to left : [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman]חרחח[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman]. One frequently finds the first initial of kings’ names on later Nabataean issues, so it’s probably safe to assume this letter is referring to Aretas II or III. Since early Nabataean coinage shifted from Greek inscriptions to Aramaic, is it also fair to assume that the letter [/FONT][FONT=Georgia]Λ [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman]refers to Aretas on the other types? It seems likely, but there just isn’t enough evidence to say so definitively.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman]5. [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman]Four Kings [I]Obv[/I].: Stylized, helmeted head of Athena r. [I]Rev[/I].: Nike standing left, holding wreath. In field letter [/FONT][FONT=Georgia]Λ [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman]with crescent above. Careless style.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman]5a. Four Kings [I]Obv[/I].: Stylized, helmeted head of Athena r. [I]Rev[/I].: Nike standing left, holding wreath. No letter or crescent. Careless style.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman]Type 5 is distinguished from 4 by the careless style of the minting. These types are number two in Meshorer’s catalog, and of them he says, “Difficult to distinguish the details. Many of these coins are of a debased weight and struck on irregular flans”.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman][URL='http://postimage.org/'][IMG]http://s24.postimg.org/f9fub7tz9/meshorer1crescenr1a.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman]Of the early Nabataean types, these are numerous and readily available. The 1st-century BC was a time of tremendous growth in the empire, and doubtlessly many workers and soldiers needed to receive salaries. The careless style and abundance of these coins suggests that they were produced quickly and in large quantities to meet an urgent economic necessity, and art be damned.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman]6. [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman]Four Kings [I]Obv[/I].: Unknown head r. [I]Rev[/I].: Nike standing left, holding wreath. No letter or crescent. Careless style.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman]The prior types I’ve listed are simply a reorganization of coins cataloged by Meshorer and Schmitt-Korte. Type 6 is my own concoction, and I believe it can be distinguished from Type 5 in several ways. I’ve seen a handful of these coins on the market, and I own two which illustrate the possibility that the obverse design is an intentional attempt to portray a specific person.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman][URL='http://postimage.org/'][IMG]http://s7.postimg.org/u0oeqevdn/arabheads.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman]Despite the barbarous character of the reverse, these coins exhibit a certain amount of artistry not evident in type 5. The busts are clearly trying to portray someone, likely one of the four kings. Hoover assigns such a coin with an Arabian bust to Aretas III, which is highly likely, but unprovable. Unless he has information not expounded in CCK (which is entirely possible) I think it’s safer to assign these coins to the “Four Kings” category.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman][B]Addendum[/B][/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman]When Meshorer published “Nabataean Coins” in 1975, he was in the possession of two lead tesserae, one of which he thought was silver. They were both placed in his catalog of early Nabataean coins, as Me 3 and Sup 1, as they both exhibited the Bust/Nike designs. Schmitt-Korte submitted Me 3 to an X-ray fluorescence analysis, and it was discovered to be made of an alloy of 60% lead and 40% tin, making it the second known Nabataean tessera. SK, however, interpreted the coin as a test piece, as Meshorer did Sup 1. Since then, approximately 60 tesserae have appeared on the Israeli antiquities market, and they’ve been carefully categorized by Hoover as a separate species, taking Me 3 and Me Sup1 out of the family of early Nabataean bronze issues.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman]I have two such tesserae, which in the past would have been attributed as Me 3 and Me Sup 1…[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman][URL='http://postimage.org/'][IMG]http://s8.postimg.org/x3d07qg7p/leadboth.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/FONT] If you actually read this whole post, PM me your address and I will mail you a cookie. ;)[/QUOTE]
Your name or email address:
Do you already have an account?
No, create an account now.
Yes, my password is:
Forgot your password?
Stay logged in
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
Early Nabataean Bronze Coins
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...