DOI issue:
Artykuły
DOI article:Cieciela̢g, Jerzy: Ascalon coins and the roots of the Herodian Dynasty
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.22229#0035
ASCALON COINS AND THE ROOTS OF THE HERODIAN DYNASTY
est friend and adviser, who claimed that the Herodians, before they came to Judea,
had been a prominent Jewish family in Babylonia9. Of course this version does not
merit our fuli trust, sińce Nicholas wrote his history in the interest of Herod, and
thus his attributing the dynasty Jewish roots, especially in Babylonia, could only be
expected. It should be remembered that even if we accept the theory of their Idu-
maean descent, from the Jewish point of view Herod could at best be seen as half-
Jewish (although the Idumaeans had accepted Judaism long before).
By contrast, records originating in the early Christian church are greatly in-
teresting (they were used to build the hypothesis of the Ascalon background of the
Herodian dynasty). The tradition was first passed down by Justin the Martyr10, who
writes that Herod the Great was Ascalonian (notably, Herod’s Ascalonian roots were
mentioned by Ptolemy of Ascalon in his History of Herod, a work that Justin must
have known)11. Yet the fullest version of this tradition we owe to Sextus Julius Afri-
canus12, according to whom the Idumaeans attacked Ascalon, capturing Antipater, the
son of Herod, a priest in a tempie to Apollo. The same Antipater stayed in Idumaea for
good, as his father could not afford the ransom. Later he became the closest associ-
ate of John Hyrcanus II (64-40 BC), king and then etnarch and high priest of Judea
from the Hasmonean dynasty. A somewhat different version of the same tradition was
handed down by Epiphanius13, who wrote that the office of Apollo’s hierodoulos was
33
served by Antipater of Ascalon, the father of Herod the Great. Let us notę that both ver-
sions misname the grandfather of the Judean king who was really called Antipas, not
Herod. While it is difficult to decide which of the three traditions is true, it is a striking
fact that the theories of the Idumaean and Ascalonian roots of the Herodian dynasty,
despite their differences (in the earlier, Herod the Great was a Judaized Idumaean, in
the latter a Hellenized Phoenician), are highly similar. At any ratę, the Ascalon-issued
coins presented in this paper perhaps lend support to the latter theory.
In 112/111 BC, Ascalon coins first featured the words lepa and aankoę14. In
the same year, Antiochus VIII Giypos regained the power he had lost. It is not in-
9 Joseph. AJ. XIV, I, 3, 9 (Josephus definitely rejected Nicholas’s version); Herod’s court chronicler is partly
defended by B. Z. WACHOLDER, “Josephus and Nicolaus of Damascus”, [in:] L. H. FELDMAN and G. HATA
(eds.), Josephus, the Bibie, and History, Detroit 1989, p. 164.
10 Justin the Martyr, Dialogus cum Tryphone 52, 3.
11 KOKKINOS, The Herodian Dynasty..., p. 103.
12 Euseb. His.Eccl. I, 7, 11-12.
13 Epiphanius, Panar. 1, 20, 1, 3-5.
14 BRETT, “The Mint of Ascalon...”, p. 51, Nos. 20-21; A. SPAER, “Ascalon: From Royal Mint to Au-
tonomy”, [in:] A. HOUGHTON ET AL. (eds), Studies in Honor of Leo Mildenberg: Numismatics, Art History,
Archaeology, Wetteren 1984, Nos. 18-22 and C. Even though it has not been confirmed, it seems that the coin
of Demetrius II Nikator (from his second reign), dated at 127/126 BC, bears an inscription IE[PAZ], but without
AZYAOY (BRETT, “The Mint of Ascalon...”, p. 49, No. 11, tab. 8.9; cf. BMC/Ascalon, No. 13, tab. 11.15, a smali,
undated bronze with an inscription IEPAZ). At any ratę we can State that both inscriptions appear regularly from
112/111 BC.
est friend and adviser, who claimed that the Herodians, before they came to Judea,
had been a prominent Jewish family in Babylonia9. Of course this version does not
merit our fuli trust, sińce Nicholas wrote his history in the interest of Herod, and
thus his attributing the dynasty Jewish roots, especially in Babylonia, could only be
expected. It should be remembered that even if we accept the theory of their Idu-
maean descent, from the Jewish point of view Herod could at best be seen as half-
Jewish (although the Idumaeans had accepted Judaism long before).
By contrast, records originating in the early Christian church are greatly in-
teresting (they were used to build the hypothesis of the Ascalon background of the
Herodian dynasty). The tradition was first passed down by Justin the Martyr10, who
writes that Herod the Great was Ascalonian (notably, Herod’s Ascalonian roots were
mentioned by Ptolemy of Ascalon in his History of Herod, a work that Justin must
have known)11. Yet the fullest version of this tradition we owe to Sextus Julius Afri-
canus12, according to whom the Idumaeans attacked Ascalon, capturing Antipater, the
son of Herod, a priest in a tempie to Apollo. The same Antipater stayed in Idumaea for
good, as his father could not afford the ransom. Later he became the closest associ-
ate of John Hyrcanus II (64-40 BC), king and then etnarch and high priest of Judea
from the Hasmonean dynasty. A somewhat different version of the same tradition was
handed down by Epiphanius13, who wrote that the office of Apollo’s hierodoulos was
33
served by Antipater of Ascalon, the father of Herod the Great. Let us notę that both ver-
sions misname the grandfather of the Judean king who was really called Antipas, not
Herod. While it is difficult to decide which of the three traditions is true, it is a striking
fact that the theories of the Idumaean and Ascalonian roots of the Herodian dynasty,
despite their differences (in the earlier, Herod the Great was a Judaized Idumaean, in
the latter a Hellenized Phoenician), are highly similar. At any ratę, the Ascalon-issued
coins presented in this paper perhaps lend support to the latter theory.
In 112/111 BC, Ascalon coins first featured the words lepa and aankoę14. In
the same year, Antiochus VIII Giypos regained the power he had lost. It is not in-
9 Joseph. AJ. XIV, I, 3, 9 (Josephus definitely rejected Nicholas’s version); Herod’s court chronicler is partly
defended by B. Z. WACHOLDER, “Josephus and Nicolaus of Damascus”, [in:] L. H. FELDMAN and G. HATA
(eds.), Josephus, the Bibie, and History, Detroit 1989, p. 164.
10 Justin the Martyr, Dialogus cum Tryphone 52, 3.
11 KOKKINOS, The Herodian Dynasty..., p. 103.
12 Euseb. His.Eccl. I, 7, 11-12.
13 Epiphanius, Panar. 1, 20, 1, 3-5.
14 BRETT, “The Mint of Ascalon...”, p. 51, Nos. 20-21; A. SPAER, “Ascalon: From Royal Mint to Au-
tonomy”, [in:] A. HOUGHTON ET AL. (eds), Studies in Honor of Leo Mildenberg: Numismatics, Art History,
Archaeology, Wetteren 1984, Nos. 18-22 and C. Even though it has not been confirmed, it seems that the coin
of Demetrius II Nikator (from his second reign), dated at 127/126 BC, bears an inscription IE[PAZ], but without
AZYAOY (BRETT, “The Mint of Ascalon...”, p. 49, No. 11, tab. 8.9; cf. BMC/Ascalon, No. 13, tab. 11.15, a smali,
undated bronze with an inscription IEPAZ). At any ratę we can State that both inscriptions appear regularly from
112/111 BC.