Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;John Anthony, post: 1649087, member: 42773&quot;]According to Meshorer and others, this crusty little bronze piece represents the first coinage of the Nabataeans, minted in Damascus under the authority Aretas 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://s1.postimage.org/nk3g130xb/nabatean1a.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></a></p><p><br /></p><p>Its devices are modeled after the gold Staters of Alexander the Great, the obverse depicting the helmeted head of Athena, and the reverse featuring Nike. As you can see, a number of significant details in the Stater are omitted from the Nabataean coin.</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://s1.postimage.org/sk0w916jz/stateralexandergreat.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></a></p><p><br /></p><p>I can only conjecture as to why the Nabataeans chose this particular design for their first coinage, but I will offer two theories.</p><p><br /></p><p>Firstly, the Nabataeans possessed their own elaborate pantheon, so it makes one wonder why Greek gods make an appearance on their first coins. But a Hellenization of the Near East had been taking place for several centuries prior to Aretas II, and perhaps by 110 BC, it wouldn’t have been considered apostasy to depict foreign gods on a local coin. In fact, some archeologists believe that the Nabataeans gradually associated their gods with the Greek pantheon, much as the Romans did. It’s entirely possible that the first Nabataean issues do not depict Athena or Nike at all, but rather that the portraits of Athena and Nike are borrowed to represent Nabataean gods – possibly Allat (a goddess of fertility), and Al-‘Uzza (a goddess of power).</p><p><br /></p><p>If that’s true, it may represent the culmination of a gradual shift in the theology of the Nabataeans. Prior to the 1[SUP]st[/SUP] century BC, the culture had a long tradition of depicting gods in an abstract rather than personified form, a tradition found consistently throughout Arabian iconography. Deities were represented by stone blocks and&nbsp; pillars, rectangular baetyls, and sacred meteorites, occasionally enhanced by schematic facial features. But anthropomorphizing the stones was a practice that had been increasing in popularity over several centuries, and perhaps by the time Aretas II put his coins to the presses, it would have been entirely natural to depict gods in fully-fledged human form.</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://s4.postimage.org/oo0r0bpbx/block_gods.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></a></p><p><br /></p><p>A second possibility as to the origin of the borrowed design may lie in the need to establish commercial confidence in the new issues. The Nabataeans were avid and successful traders throughout the Near East, and they certainly would have used the Staters of Alexander III in commerce. There is no doubt that they would have appreciated the value and beauty of these coins, as they were likely held in the highest esteem among merchants. It makes perfect sense that Aretas II would have modeled his new issues after a coin that was well-respected in commerce.</p><p><br /></p><p>In fact, of all Nabataean coins, this first issue is consistently found with well-centered strikes on round flans - there was evidently a need to make a good first impression. As Nabataean minting progresses and the issues are widely accepted in commerce, the coins deteriorate in quality, particularly the bronzes. When the mint moves to Petra, it’s sufficient to the cause to create flans of the correct weight (never mind the shape) and to strike any bit of the die onto them. As the saying goes, it was good enough for government work.</p><p><br /></p><p>One can perhaps accept the utilitarian motives behind striking bronze coins as quickly and efficiently as possible (the silver issues were of a higher quality), but it’s still ironic and puzzling that a culture that built an edifice like the treasury at Petra…</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://s14.postimage.org/7eur3wwcx/petratreasury.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></a></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>…should be satisfied with coinage like this.</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://s18.postimage.org/6m8p86bvd/nabateanlot.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" /></a>[/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