This is another coin of Herod the Great, also copied in Spanheim, and reported to be in the Royal Treasury of France. On the front is an altar with a flame, and on the back the high-priest's cap, or as Spanheim thinks a helmet, the inscription on the obverse being ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ΗΡΩΔΟΥ. From this it is evident that this coin was struck after the assumption of the regal dignity by Herod; perhaps after the building of the second temple. H n k Here is a coin of Herod Antipas, the son of Herod the Great, whose coins are by far the most numerous.* On the upper side presents itself a palm branch, the symbol (iepoyλvpixór) of Judea and Galilee, (for these countries by the testimony of Plinyt are covered with palm-trees,) having the Greek inscription ΗΡΩΔΟΥ ΤΕΤΡΑΡΧΟΥ and the numerals Σ.ΛΔ, the year 34 of the Tetrarchy of Herod, and 37 of Christ. On the under side a laurel wreath with the letters N. K. * Vide Spanhemium, loc. cit. pag. 527. SECOND SERIES, VOL. XII. NO H. 30 To the coins already exhibited, I add those of Herod Agrippa, in which two festivals of the Jews are represented, that of Tabernacles and that of Pentecost. The tent which appears on one side of them represents the feast of Tabernacles, and the ears of corn upon the other the feast of Pentecost.* The inscription is Greek, ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ΑΓΡΙΠΑ, or simply ΑΓΡΙΠΑ. John Villalpandus, † Antony Augustinust and others assure us that the thirty pieces of silver which were the price of Christ's betrayal bore a Greek inscription also. The following is a representation of them, according to these authors: On the one is a radiated head of the Colossus of Rhodes, on the other a rose, with the Greek word POДION, all which prove it to be a Rhodian coinage. One of these is preserved in the church of Santa Croce di Gierusalemma, and another in Paris in a glazed cabinet: nevertheless my own candid opinion is that these learned men have greatly mistaken about these * Vide Spanhem. loc. cit. p. 528. Calmet. 1. cit. n. 20. † Villalpandus, lib. 2, de Pond. Disp 4, cap. 30, p. 402, tom. 3. Anton. Augustin. Dial. 2. de Numism. p. 22, ed. Rom. * coins, as Selden has clearly shown. But enough of Jewish moneys with Greek inscriptions. They survive in such numbers that Hardouin has written a whole book upon them called De Numis Herodiadum, which those who require further information would do well to consult. † * Selden. de. Jur. N. L. I. p. 242 et 243, ed. Lond. t. 1. Here some will possibly object that about this period, (1) Simon Maccabæus was permitted by Antiochus,' king of Syria, to coin money inscribed with the Samaritan language and character, like the following:2 And (2) that the tribute money which the Pharisees and Herodians presented3 to Christ for his opinion bore a Latin inscription, as follows:4 But neither of these coins is any serious objection to our argument. For, in regard to the first-John Christopher Wagenseil, Charles Patin, and Otho Sperling, some of our 1) Lib. 1 Mach. cap. 15, v. 6. 2) V. Conringium de N. Hebr; Parad. p. 56. Hadrianum Relandum, de Nummis Samaritanorum. 3) Math. Evang. cap. 22, v. 17 ad 19. 4) V. Selden. de J. N. et G. lib. 2, cap. 8, p. 239. In the same language also are inscribed the coins of the neighboring regions, Galilee, Samaria, and others. Many first writers on numismatology, have declared it spurious, an opinion which commands my own most unhesitating suffrage. The passage in Maccabees goes for nothing: "I permit thee to make a coinage of thine own money," because this goes no further than the article of permission. That Simon availed himself of this license, and that he actually coined money, is neither proved by the phraseology, nor has it ever yet been proved by any author. This argument then is of no avail, for the authority of Antiochus was as despised in the country as his friendship was disregarded. Thus we dispose of the Scripture argument; and now turn to the coins themselves, which are utterly destitute of any memorial of Simon. The inscription on them is Sekel Ischrael, Jeruschalaim Hakkedoscha-that is, the Shekel of Israel, Jerusalem the holy, and so on. But the most convincing proof of their spuriousness (voveía) is that they have a Samaritan inscription; that is an inscription in a language not then extant among the Jews. The force of this difficulty those who contend for the genuineness of the coins confess, and know not how to evade: For although they urge that Simon had them struck in the cities of Samaria, this makes little for their purpose-because it is incredible that seeking to record the achievement of the national liberty of the Hebrews, he would have availed himself of the help of the Samaritans, a race held in the utmost detestation by the Jews. Would he, further, have chosen a language and character then unknown? and would he have abandoned so far the usage then universally prevailing of employing in their coinage none but their vernacular tongue ? Neither would the Samaritans have originated such an inscription-Jerusalem was not holy with them, nor would they go up to it to worship, preferring their native Samaria. Nor, finally, does the effort of Augustine Calmet, Peter Allix,3 and Father Souciet, to explain away the difficulty by assuming that there were two characters then 2 1) Vide Morinum, exercit. 2. in Pentat. Samar. 1, 10. Bibliotheq. Critiq. lib. 2, cap. 27, p. 404, 405. 2) Calmet, Dissert. sur le Medail. Hebraiq. p. 65. coins of Tiberias, the chief town of Galilee, are extant bearing Greek inscriptions to this effect, ΚΛΑΥΔΙΟ ΤΙΒΕΡΙΩΝ ET. AII: This era is from the building of the city DCCLXX, on which see Noris,* Vaillant, etc. The coins of Sephoris, the most strongly fortified town of Galilee, are inscribed in Greek ΣΕΠΦΩΡΗΝΩΝ-on which consult Vaillant † and Patin.g It was just the same with the cities of the Samaritans; many Greek coins remain of the capital, Samaria, to which Herod, out of flattery to Augustus, gave the name of Sebaste (Zeßάorn). A representation of these is given by Noris in his masterly work De Epochis Syro-Macedonum. On one is found the inscrip in use among the Hebrews-a sacred and a profane-and that in this latter, borrowed from the Samaritans, the coins were struck, settle the point to our satisfaction. If we ask them upon what ancient and valid authority they rest this assumption-they have absolutely none to produce. Let them, then, trumpet the worth of their Samaritan coins to others, they bring them to a bad market with us, so firmly satisfied are we that they are the productions of impostors.Sperling in fact says, that he himself saw, at Holsace, a laboratory where such shekels as these were manufactured: and Patin, a most skilful and exact numismatolagist, declares that in all the cabinets of coins he has ever seen, he has never yet fouud a genuine shekel. From these premises, then, we conceive ourselves justified in concluding, either that Simon Maccabeus never availed himself of the concession of Antiochus to coin his own money, or that the shekels now remaining and ascribed to him, are suppositious (inoßoluαiovs). But in regard to the tribute money with its Latin inscription, if we should concede that it was the same as the Pharisees showed to Christ, as Freher, Fischer, etc., etc., assert,' what is this to the purpose? The Roman tribute was paid in Roman money, but we are now arguing about the inscriptions upon Jewish coins-so that this, too, is travelling beyond the record, and is nought to our purpose (nihil hoc açòs τηv kúgav.) *Noris. de Epoch. Syro-Maced. Diss. 5, t. 11, p. 582 et seq † Vaillant, de Num. Imp. a Pop. Græc. loq. p. 30. Vaillant, de N. Imp. a Pop. Græc. loq. p. 24 et 30. Patinus, in Num. Imp. Roman. p. 183. Noris. de Ep. Syro-Maced. diss. 5, p. 559 et seq. 1) Freherus. et Fischer de Numismate Census. |