DOI issue:
Artikuły / Articles
DOI article:Ariʾel, Donald Tsevi: The circulation of locally minted Persian-Period coins in the Southern Levant
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.41338#0016
DONALD T. ARIEL
zachowania ostrożności w kwestii przypisania emisji mennicom. Przedstawione
ogólne wnioski dotyczące obiegu monetarnego wskazują na potrzebę używania
mniej precyzyjnej terminologii przy atrybueji niektórych monet do momentu,
aż będzie ona oparta na bardziej pewnych argumentach.
SŁOWA KLUCZOWE: okres perski, obieg pieniężny, Samaria, Yehud, Filistia
INTRODUCTION
In the morę than three-century old field of ancient numismatics, the locally
minted Persian-period coins of the Southern Levant are relatively new.1 While
Persian-period coins minted in Phoenicia have been known for centuries, the first
more-or-less successful identification of Philistian (“Philisto-Arabian and Egypto-
-Arabian”) coins was madę in HilPs monumental work froin 1914 on the coins
of Palestine.2 1934 is the year the first Yehud coin was identified,3 although
the most famous of these coins was first published in 1814.4 In 1991, the Samarian
series was first published.5 After these three large groupings - comprising five
mints (Philistian [mints in Gaza, Ascalon and Ashdod], Yehud [Jerusalem]
and Samaria [Samaria]) - were known, two other smaller series were proposed: in
2002, Qedar suggested that a coin type struck by Tissaphemes may be identified
at Dor,6 and in 2007, Gitler, Tal and Van Alfen reported a group of coins that they
identified as Edomite.7
The earliest numismatic research was based upon coins collected for
their intrinsic beauty or the historical interest they engendered. Much could
be understood about them despite their virtual lack of geographic provenance.
In fact, numismatic and other antiąuarian fields came to use the word “provenance”
to indicate the place of purchase of antiąuities, rather than their findspots. When
coins now identifiable as Persian-period coins minted in the Southern Levant were
first found, it was nigh impossible to associate them with this region. The best
evidence for any regional attribution of those coins derived from two aspects, one
extrinsic and one intrinsic.
The extrinsic aspect was the place of purchase, and the intrinsic one was
the legend, if any was legible, on the coin. A mint’s name could be read on a coin’s
legend, but on a morę basie level, the type of script would suggest a generał locale.
1 Shraga Qedar (1933-2015), in memoriam.
2 HILL 1914: lxxxiii-lxxxix.
3 SUKENIK 1934: 178-182.
4 COMBĘ 1814: 242, no. 5.
5 MESHORER and QEDAR 1991.
6 QEDAR 2000-2002: 9-14.
7 GITLER, TAL and VAN ALFEN 2007: 47-62.
zachowania ostrożności w kwestii przypisania emisji mennicom. Przedstawione
ogólne wnioski dotyczące obiegu monetarnego wskazują na potrzebę używania
mniej precyzyjnej terminologii przy atrybueji niektórych monet do momentu,
aż będzie ona oparta na bardziej pewnych argumentach.
SŁOWA KLUCZOWE: okres perski, obieg pieniężny, Samaria, Yehud, Filistia
INTRODUCTION
In the morę than three-century old field of ancient numismatics, the locally
minted Persian-period coins of the Southern Levant are relatively new.1 While
Persian-period coins minted in Phoenicia have been known for centuries, the first
more-or-less successful identification of Philistian (“Philisto-Arabian and Egypto-
-Arabian”) coins was madę in HilPs monumental work froin 1914 on the coins
of Palestine.2 1934 is the year the first Yehud coin was identified,3 although
the most famous of these coins was first published in 1814.4 In 1991, the Samarian
series was first published.5 After these three large groupings - comprising five
mints (Philistian [mints in Gaza, Ascalon and Ashdod], Yehud [Jerusalem]
and Samaria [Samaria]) - were known, two other smaller series were proposed: in
2002, Qedar suggested that a coin type struck by Tissaphemes may be identified
at Dor,6 and in 2007, Gitler, Tal and Van Alfen reported a group of coins that they
identified as Edomite.7
The earliest numismatic research was based upon coins collected for
their intrinsic beauty or the historical interest they engendered. Much could
be understood about them despite their virtual lack of geographic provenance.
In fact, numismatic and other antiąuarian fields came to use the word “provenance”
to indicate the place of purchase of antiąuities, rather than their findspots. When
coins now identifiable as Persian-period coins minted in the Southern Levant were
first found, it was nigh impossible to associate them with this region. The best
evidence for any regional attribution of those coins derived from two aspects, one
extrinsic and one intrinsic.
The extrinsic aspect was the place of purchase, and the intrinsic one was
the legend, if any was legible, on the coin. A mint’s name could be read on a coin’s
legend, but on a morę basie level, the type of script would suggest a generał locale.
1 Shraga Qedar (1933-2015), in memoriam.
2 HILL 1914: lxxxiii-lxxxix.
3 SUKENIK 1934: 178-182.
4 COMBĘ 1814: 242, no. 5.
5 MESHORER and QEDAR 1991.
6 QEDAR 2000-2002: 9-14.
7 GITLER, TAL and VAN ALFEN 2007: 47-62.