Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;John Anthony, post: 1701456, member: 42773&quot;]As long as Jerry opened the door to non-Roman empresses, there is a fascinating aspect to later Nabataean coinage, in that queens are very prominent. The coins of Aretas IV, Malichus II, and Rabbel II exhibit frequent and consistent references to the queens. The most common type among these rulers is the jugate portrait of the king and queen. Below are examples of Aretas IV and Rabbel II...</p><p><br /></p><p><a href="http://postimage.org/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://postimage.org/" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://s10.postimg.org/g4xptgla1/both.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></a></p><p><br /></p><p><a href="http://postimage.org/" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://postimage.org/" rel="nofollow"><img src="http://s11.postimg.org/7hdo0n53n/021a.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></a></p><p><br /></p><p>Even when queens are not portrayed on these rulers&#039; coins, they are almost always mentioned by monograms. This seemingly high level of importance has led some writers to conjecture that women enjoyed a much more egalitarian role in Nabataean society, but I find that conclusion dubious. It&#039;s entirely possible to have prominent female rulers in a patriarchal society, as evidenced by several examples in British history.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

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