Head Decoration Representations on Hasmonean and Herodian Coins

Published by the Israel Numismatic Society Volume 8 2013 Contents 5 YIGAL RONEN: An Unusual Aramaic Grafito on an Athenian Tetradrachm 9 REBECCA SACKS: Some Notes on the Depictions of the Achemenid Great King on the Coins of Fourth-Century Judah, Samaria and Philistia 17 CATHARINE C. LORBER: A Mint Imitating Ptolemaic Tetradrachms of ‘Akko-Ptolemais 25 TOM BUIJTENDORP: Tyrian Sheqels as Savings: A New Perspective on the Ramat Raḥel Hoard 31 CECILIA MEIR: Tyrian Sheqels from the ‘Isiya Hoard, Part Four: Half Sheqels 39 IDO NOY: Head Decoration Representations on Hasmonean and Herodian Coins 55 ISADORE GOLDSTEIN AND JEAN-PHILIPPE FONTANILLE: The Small Denominations of Mattathias Antigonus: Die Classiication and Interpretations 73 DAVID B. HENDIN, NATHAN W. BOWER AND SEAN G. PARHAM: A Critical Examination of Two Undated Prutot of the First Jewish Revolt 89 GIL GAMBASH, HAIM GITLER AND HANNAH M. COTTON: Iudaea Recepta AARON J. KOGON: New Details and Notes on Some Minimi of Caesarea 109 UZI LEIBNER AND GABRIELA BIJOVSKY: Two Hoards from Khirbat Wadi Ḥamam and the Scope of the Bar Kokhba Revolt 135 YOAV FARHI: Note on Two Types of Lead Currency from Late Roman/Early Byzantine Palestine (Fifth Century CE) 143 ROBERT KOOL, BORYS PASZKIEWICZ AND EDNA J. STERN: An Unrecorded Bohemian Saint Christopher Penny from Montmusard, Acre 159 ADOLFO EIDELSTEIN AND DANNY SYON: An Unknown Token of the Commune of Genoa in Thirteenth-Century ‘Akko 165 DAVID J. WASSERSTEIN: Islamic Coins and their Catalogues IV: Ḥandusis 175 WARREN C. SCHULTZ: Mamlūk Minting Techniques: The Manufacture of Dirham Flans, 1250–1412 184 Corrigendum 185 Abbreviations Israel Numismatic Research 8 | 2013 8 | 2013 105 Israel Numismatic Research Israel Numismatic Research Published by The Israel Numismatic Society Israel Numismatic Research Published by the Israel Numismatic Society Editorial Board: Donald T. Ariel (Editor), the late Alla Kushnir-Stein, David Wasserstein, Danny Syon, Ilan Shachar Text editor: Miriam Feinberg Vamosh Typesetting: Michal Semo-Kovetz and Yael Bieber, Tel Aviv University Graphic Design Studio Printed at Elinir, Tel Aviv ISSN 1565-8449 Correspondence, manuscripts for publication and books for review should be addressed to: Israel Numismatic Research, c/o Haim Gitler, The Israel Museum, P.O. Box 71117, Jerusalem 9171002 ISRAEL, or to [email protected] Website: www.ins.org.il For inquiries regarding subscription to the journal, please e-mail to [email protected] The editors are not responsible for opinions expressed by the contributors. © The Israel Numismatic Society, Jerusalem 2013 Israel Numismatic Research Published by the Israel Numismatic Society Volume 8 2013 Contents 5 YIGAL RONEN: An Unusual Aramaic Grafito on an Athenian Tetradrachm 9 REBECCA SACKS: Some Notes on the Depictions of the Achemenid Great King on the Coins of Fourth-Century Judah, Samaria and Philistia 17 CATHARINE C. LORBER: A Mint Imitating Ptolemaic Tetradrachms of ‘AkkoPtolemais 25 TOM BUIJTENDORP: Tyrian Sheqels as Savings: A New Perspective on the Ramat Raḥel Hoard 31 CECILIA MEIR: Tyrian Sheqels from the ‘Isiya Hoard, Part Four: Half Sheqels 39 IDO NOY: Head Decoration Representations on Hasmonean and Herodian Coins 55 ISADORE GOLDSTEIN AND JEAN-PHILIPPE FONTANILLE: The Small Denominations of Mattathias Antigonus: Die Classiication and Interpretations 73 DAVID B. HENDIN, NATHAN W. BOWER AND SEAN G. PARHAM: A Critical Examination of Two Undated Prutot of the First Jewish Revolt 89 GIL GAMBASH, HAIM GITLER AND HANNAH M. COTTON: Iudaea Recepta 105 AARON J. KOGON: New Details and Notes on Some Minimi of Caesarea 109 UZI LEIBNER AND GABRIELA BIJOVSKY: Two Hoards from Khirbat Wadi Ḥamam and the Scope of the Bar Kokhba Revolt 135 YOAV FARHI: Note on Two Types of Lead Currency from Late Roman/Early Byzantine Palestine (Fifth Century CE) 143 ROBERT KOOL, BORYS PASZKIEWICZ AND EDNA J. STERN: An Unrecorded Bohemian Saint Christopher Penny from Montmusard, Acre 159 ADOLFO EIDELSTEIN AND DANNY SYON: An Unknown Token of the Commune of Genoa in Thirteenth-Century ‘Akko 165 DAVID J. WASSERSTEIN: Islamic Coins and their Catalogues IV: Ḥandusis 175 WARREN C. SCHULTZ: Mamlūk Minting Techniques: The Manufacture of Dirham Flans, 1250–1412 184 Corrigendum 185 Abbreviations HEAD DECORATIONS ON HASMONEAN AND HERODIAN COINS Head Decoration Representations on Hasmonean and Herodian Coins IDO NOY [email protected] Abstract Research into representations of head decorations on ancient Jewish coins reveals aspects of their evolution, relecting the complex relationship between their Jewish and the Hellenistic cultural settings. The head decorations’ origin and meaning in Hellenistic culture as well as the circumstances of their appearance in Jewish iconography shed light on the visual means used by the Jewish rulers in proclaiming their sovereignty. All Jewish dynasts placed head decorations on their coins. The head decorations are of two dominant types: the wreath and the diadem. Some rulers used only one of them and others used both. All employed the wreath, while Alexander Jannaeus, Herod the Great, Agrippa I, Agrippa II as well as the Herodian dynasts of Chalcis and Lesser Armenia also used the diadem. The wreath and the diadem irst appear on Jewish coins between the last quarter of the second century BCE and the irst quarter of the irst century BCE. There is no clear evidence that these decorations were employed by Jews in other media prior to appearing on their coins.1 It therefore seems reasonable that the origin of these head decorations is the long-standing Greco-Roman tradition of head decorations on coins.2 During the process of Hellenization commencing in the late fourth century BCE through the second century BCE, Jews probably saw these decorations on people’s heads, read depictions of them in Hellenistic literature and viewed them in works of art and, mainly, on the coins of Ptolemaic and Seleucid kings.3 1 No new inds have appeared to change Goodenough’s observation (1958:149) of an absence of archeological indings of pictorial representations of these head decorations prior to Hyrcanus’ coins. Right after the wreath irst appeared on Hyrcanus’ coins, it became one of the most prevalent symbols in Jewish art in antiquity. 2 For the usage of wreaths in ancient Greece, see Klein 1912; for wreaths and Hellenistic rulers, see Smith 1988:43. For the wreaths used by the Jews in the Greco-Roman period, see Goodenough 1958:148–152. On the origin and meaning of the diadem see Krug 1968; Ritter 1965:125–127; Ritter 1987:290–301; Smith 1988:34–43; Fredricksmayer 1997 and Salzmann 2012. 3 The irst instance of Seleucid iconographic inluence appears on the irst bronze coin struck in Jerusalem (132/1 and 131/0 BCE), undoubtedly minted by Hyrcanus as vassal INR 8 (2013): 39–53 39 40 IDO NOY HEAD DECORATION REPRESENTATIONS ON HASMONEAN COINS Wreaths appeared for the irst time on Jewish coins under John Hyrcanus I (TJC:281–300, Groups A, B, D–G, I). They had been inspired by the various types of Seleucid victory wreaths that appeared from the beginning of the reign of Demetrius I (162–150 BCE).4 The Seleucid wreaths were mainly used to propagate the message that the king’s victory was due to the gods’ will. The wreaths on the Jewish coins are viewed from the top, typically composed of two branches with their leaves tied together with a lat band at their bases and connected by a joining link at the top. In addition, fruit (depicted as dots) are shown on both sides of the branches. The wreaths decorate the border of one side of the coin; within them, in rows, the name and title of the minting authority generally appears. It has been suggested that because of Hyrcanus’ adherence to the biblical second commandment, he chose to forego the depiction of his own portrait. Instead, he placed an appropriate inscription (Kindler 2000:317–318; Hendin 2007–2008:76). The meaning of Hyrcanus’ wreath has already been discussed. Meshorer stated: “The wreath is a symbol of leadership and authority and is generally employed for purposes of coronation” (AJC I:64) and also: “The wreath symbolized leadership and authority, and it is one of the forms of the crown that adorn the head of a ruler”(TJC:35–36). Kindler also referred to this, arguing that the wreath “was to glorify the name and the status of the ruler in accordance with the legend” (2000:318). Elsewhere I have suggested that Hyrcanus adopted the wreath in its original meaning of victory (Noy 2012:37–41). In his position as the political and military authority,5 Hyrcanus used the wreath as a symbol of triumph, just like any other Hellenistic dynast. It either signiied the general victory of the Hasmoneans, or it may have referred to Hyrcanus’ conquests after the death of Antiochus VII. Observing both sides of the Hyrcanus’ coin may provide support for this reading. On the obverse, Hyrcanus’ name and title were surrounded by a wreath, whereas on the reverse, the cornucopias and pomegranate symbolized the fruits of victory (literally and iguratively), both abundance and fertility. The to Antiochus VII (Hoover 2003:29–39; SC II:392, No. 2123). Kindler (1979:290–300) noted that the symbols that were used in the Hasmonean (bronze) coins came mainly from the Seleucid bronze coins. On the economic, political and technical inluences see also Kindler 2000:316–323. 4 On the origin of Hyrcanus’ wreath see Noy 2012:32–37. 5 The ‘Great Assembly’ gathered in 140 BCE (1 Macc. 14:27–45) and made Simon the Maccabee “leader and high priest”. This entailed granting authority to govern over three areas of life: religious/ritual, political and military affairs. This decision remained valid for Simon’s descendants. HEAD DECORATIONS ON HASMONEAN AND HERODIAN COINS 41 depiction of the victory symbol by Hyrcanus most likely had a political role in propagating his military authority.6 Hyrcanus’ use of words identifying himself — a ‘textual portrait’ — surrounded by a top-viewed head decoration immediately became the prototype for most Hasmonean coins and later for Jewish coins in general. A wreath on the edge of the coin appears on coins of all Hasmonean dynasts. For Jewish coinage, in addition to surrounding names and titles, wreaths encompass other symbols, place names and dates. Aristobulus I (Yehudah; TJC:316–317, Groups U–V) as well as Alexander Jannaeus (Yehonatan; TJC:212–217, Groups P–T), continued Hyrcanus’ coin types by replacing his name with their names. Antigonus also depicted a wreath encircling his name and title as both king and high priest (Mattityah; TJC:318–320, Nos. 36–40). This continuity appears to derive from three possible considerations. First, the wreath continued to symbolize victory just as it did on Hyrcanus’ coin — as a means of spreading news of the triumphs of Hyrcanus’ successors. Secondly, his descendants most probably wanted to identify themselves with Hyrcanus, who was considered to have been a successful leader (Josephus, Ant. 13:299–300; see also Schürer 1973:214–215). This reinforced the legitimacy of their rules.7 The third possible reason is more practical: Imitation of coin types was prevalent in antiquity. The symbols on common, accepted coins were partially or fully replicated in order to add to the acceptability of the new coins. Employing earlier iconography also reinforced the symbols’ intended meaning. I would therefore argue that Meshorer’s statement noted above that “the wreath symbolized leadership and authority” (TJC:35–36) is only partially correct. Hyrcanus’ wreath did not symbolize leadership and authority but only victory.8 Yet, as a result of its appearance on Hyrcanus’ coins and later on his successors’ coins and mostly being associated with the ruler’s ‘textual portrait,’ the wreath gradually acquired the aforementioned secondary meanings of leadership and authority. Several decades after the irst appearance of the wreath on Hasmonean coins, a diadem was irst struck on the coins of Jannaeus (TJC:301, Group K; 303, 6 For military victory as the driving force behind the Hellenistic leaders, see Smith 1988:49. 7 Efforts by rulers to link themselves to successful dynasts were very common in ancient times. For example, many of the Hellenistic kings presented themselves in relation to Alexander the Great. These attempts are well documented in portrait iconography and especially on Hellenistic coins (see Pollitt 1986:26–28, 31–32). 8 Hellenistic kings made little use of wreaths as symbols of leadership and authority. The only example of such an exceptional depiction on Seleucid coins is a bronze of Antiochus VI minted in Apamea in 144/3–143/2 BCE (SC II:324–325, No. 2006) where the king’s head is portrayed wearing an ivy wreath on the obverse. 42 IDO NOY Group N; on the date of those types, see Shachar 2004:6–7, Types 3 and 4; Hendin and Shachar 2008). Although other bands and headbands were used for a variety of purposes in the Macedonian and Greek cultures (see above, n. 2), as well as in other cultures such as the Achemenid society, ancient sources tell us that the diadem was initially introduced by Alexander the Great as the foremost sign of kingship.9 It has been suggested that this plain lat band10 tied above the hairline and behind the head, originally had no speciic meaning, allowing it to be ‘illed’ with its new royal symbolism (Smith 1988:36). There is no accurate evidence as to the year Alexander adopted the diadem. The silence of the ancient sources might indicate that no coronation ceremony was involved. Surprisingly, Alexander did not use the diadem either in his portraits or on his coins (see Price 1991:33–34). By the end of the fourth century BCE his successors, the Diadochi, successively proclaimed themselves kings of territories within Alexander’s disintegrating empire. The Diadochi marked this act by crowning themselves with Alexander’s diadem11 and, ironically, they became the irst to depict Alexander the Great wearing his diadem.12 Throughout the Hellenistic and Roman periods, rulers were inspired by the portraits of Alexander using his model and attributes on their images. This political act was meant to spread the message that they were Alexander’s successors (Pollitt 1986:31–37; Smith 1988:35–37; Haake 2012:301–304). The appearance of the diadem on Alexander Jannaeus’ coins and the exact timing of that appearance, therefore, is not coincidental, occurring on Jannaeus’ irst coins in which the Hasmonean dynast styled himself as king. It is not quite clear whether Judah Aristobulus was the irst to declare himself as a king (Josephus, Ant. 13:301; BJ 1:70), or whether Jannaeus was the irst to do so (Strabo 16:2.40; see also Schürer 1973:217). Nevertheless, there is no doubt that shortly after Hyrcanus’ death, Jannaeus presented his crown, the diadem, on his coins, together with bilingual inscriptions announcing his new status as king and in so doing joined other contemporary Hellenistic kings.13 Hence, while 9 Diod. Sic. Bibliotheca Historica17:77.5; Curt. History of Alexander 6:6.4. 10 On the diadem’s material and color see Ritter 1987:298–230; Smith 1988:34 n. 26. 11 A typology of contemporaneous Hellenistic diadems — based on their appearance on coins — shows variation in the details on diadems (see Salzmann 2012:337–383, in particular the table on p. 361). 12 E.g., on a tetradrachm of Lysimachus minted in Chios between 297–281 BCE (Salzmann 2012:362, Fig. 1). For posthumous portraits of Alexander see Pollitt 1986:26–31. 13 Jannaeus self-presentation as a Hellenistic king may also be demonstrated by his Greek name –– Alexander (after Alexander the Great?). On the Greek names of the Hasmoneans see Ilan 1987:14–15. Moreover, on one of his coins he depicted both the ‘star of the Argeadai,’ symbolizing the Macedonian kingdom, and the anchor, which served as Seleucus I’s personal emblem and the symbol of Seleucid dynasty in general HEAD DECORATIONS ON HASMONEAN AND HERODIAN COINS 43 Hyrcanus and Aristobulus employed head decorations as symbolic of victory, Jannaeus became the irst Jewish head of state to adorn his coins with a head decoration denoting his sovereignty. The crowning of a Jewish king was probably perceived as a controversial political act. Some Jews regarded the Hellenistic diadem as an appropriate sign of the Jewish king’s new status. Others presumably viewed the appearance of the Hellenistic diadem on the high priest’s head as a symbol of his tyranny.14 This political shift was probably also viewed as an act of deiance against the tradition that Jewish kingship must come from the Davidic line. The tradition that in those days no way had been instituted to choose a king is relected in the statement of the ‘Great Assembly’ that Simon’s leadership was valid “till there should arise a faithful prophet” (1 Macc. 14:41). In light of this we may also note the view of the author of 1 Macc. that “David for being merciful possessed the throne of an everlasting kingdom” (1 Macc. 2:57). Rappaport has also noted (1991:497–501), that the difference between Jewish kingship and Hellenistic kingship is also relected in the ‘coronation’ ceremony: A Jewish king from the Davidic line must be anointed with oil whereas a Hellenistic king would have a diadem placed upon his head as symbolic of his royalty. On account of the chronological proximity and familial connection, there is a close stylistic similarity between Jannaeus’ diadem and Hyrcanus’ wreath. Both use ‘textual portraits’ of the ruler together with a top view of the head decoration, an ideal perspective for presenting wreaths when not displayed on a head. Understanding the origin of Jannaeus’ top-view diadem may be aided by contemporaneous Seleucid iconography: Surprisingly, in Jannaeus’ day, another top-view diadem is depicted on a unique Seleucid hemidrachm, minted in Damascus (97/6–88/7 BCE), commemorating the coronation of Demetrius III in the city (SC II: 591–592, No. 2453). The obverse shows the diademed portrait of Demetrius III while the reverse presents a top-view diadem between vertical inscriptions. It is not quite clear whether source of inspiration for this speciic Seleucid top-view diadem was Jannaeus or the Seleucids. Its long bands differ from the short ones in Jannaeus’ diadem tie. Moreover, the overall composition of these two types is also dissimilar. It is more likely to assume that Jannaeus’ choice of a top-view diadem was inspired by the top-view wreath introduced by his (SC I:5–6; Stiebel 2011:179–180). 14 For the current view that the Pharisees opposed the Hasmonean kings, see Schalit 1983:187–199; Schwartz 2001:19–24. It is also possible to learn from non-Jewish authors, such as Diodorus and Strabo about some Jews’ attitudes towards the Hasmonean kings. Diodorus (Diod. Sic. Bibliotheca Historica 40:2) described the Hasmonean kings as having overthrown the ancient laws and unjustly enslaved the citizens by harassment and even murder, using the many mercenaries they engaged. Similarly, Strabo (Geography 16:2.40) described Jannaeus’ rule as tyrannical. 44 IDO NOY father. By so doing, Jannaeus expressed an aspiration to identify with Hyrcanus or at least with the image on his father’s coins. In view of the diadem’s appearance on Jannaeus’ coins, one would expect to ind that his grandson, Mattathias Antigonus, would have depicted the diadem on his coins, especially as he included his title, ‘king’, with his name on the coin inscriptions. It is also interesting that at that same time King Herod’s diadem is also missing from his irst coins (TJC:221, Nos. 44–47); he, too, styled himself as ‘king’ on those coins. For more than three years King Antigonus and King Herod ruled and fought each other, Antigonus with possible assistance of the Parthians and Herod with deinite help from the Romans. It is possible that both kings awaited victory before donning diadems. Indeed, on Herod’s next issue (Ariel and Fontanille 2012:177–180), the diadem is prominent. HEAD DECORATION REPRESENTATIONS ON HERODIAN COINS During the period of the Herodian dynasty, the diadem was employed on all kings’ coins, in different variations. In fact a systematic correspondence exists between the Jewish ruler status and the diadem’s appearance or absence. First, it adorns King Herod’s coins, together with the Greek title ‘king’ (TJC:221–222, Nos. 48–54). Later it is missing from his sons’ coins –– Herod Archelaus, Herod Antipas and Philip, who were not kings but rather ethnarchs or tetrarchs. As soon as Agrippa I recouped his grandfather’s royal title from Caligula, the diadem appeared on his bust, the same way it would have appeared on that of any other contemporary Hellenistic king (TJC:329, No. 122). The diadem also appears on coins of Agrippa II, the last Herodian king (TJC:330, No. 133). A portrait of Agrippa II is not depicted; rather, the diadem is found in a top-view perspective. Its identiication as a diadem is dificult because its tie is so small. Nevertheless, two short bands are detectable at the base of the closed hoop. An inscription in Greek denoting one of his regnal years can be seen inside the diadem. Depictions of diadems to signify kingship are also found on coins of the Jewish kings of Chalcis and Lesser Armenia. Herod of Chalcis and his son Aristobulus of Lesser Armenia adorned their busts with diadems (TJC:354, Nos. 362–367). Even more interesting is the fact that Queen Salome, Aristobulus of Lesser Armenia’s second wife, and granddaughter of Herod the Great, is also crowned with the same diadem and presented with the same title as her husband BACIΛICCHC CAΛΩMHC (of Queen Salome). This diadem identiication was made possible only now with the recent publication of the Sofaer collection HEAD DECORATIONS ON HASMONEAN AND HERODIAN COINS 45 (CHL:264, No. 170). This phenomenon demonstrates the political power of the Hellenistic queens15 and especially of Jewish queens.16 This new interpretation must reopen the discussion of the minting of Salome Alexandra. Salome, Aristobulus’ widow and Jannaeus’ wife,17 ascended the throne in 76 BCE and ruled successfully for nine years. Quite unexpectedly, coins bearing her name have not been deinitively identiied. Meshorer (TJC:41–42) argued that although Salome struck no new coins, she probably continued to mint her husband’s coins after his death. In my opinion, if Alexandra chose to mint coins of her own, she would have presented herself as any other Hellenistic queen, together with royal iconography and inscriptions, as Jannaeus did. The crude coins that Meshorer thought might have been struck during Salome’s rule (TJC:40)— if in fact they are from that time — are therefore more likely the product of unoficial mints (Hendin and Bower 2011:141). The Romans saw in the diadem the primary symbol of ‘Eastern’ (Hellenistic) kingship. Although it played some role in the late republic, subsequently it was scrupulously avoided by Augustus and later emperors (Smith 1988:38). A remarkable example of this is brought by Suetonius: “after the sacred rites of the Latin Festival a man in the crowd placed a laurel crown encircled with a white illet on one of Caesar’s statues. Immediately, two tribunes requested that the illet be removed from the crown, and the man should be put in prison. Caesar, being much concerned either that the idea of royalty had been suggested to so 15 Shortly after the Hellenistic rulers adopted the title ‘king’ (basileus), the corresponding term ‘queen’ (basilissa) was also adopted by the kings’ wives. The earliest usage of this title appears in inscriptions referring to Phila, wife of Demetrius Poliorketes the son of the Antigonus I Monophthalmus, one of the Diadochi, who was given the title shortly after 306 BCE. Apamea, wife of Seleucus I, was given the title in an inscription dated to 300 BCE, and Berenice I, wife of Ptolemy I, in 299 BCE (Martin 2012:407; Carney 1991:161). Presumably at about the same time, queens began to wear diadems, as can be seen on the Theon Adelphon coins (from 272/1 BCE) of Ptolemy II Philadelphus depicting his sister-wife Arsinoë II with his mother Berenice I (Carney 2011:206; Martin 2012:398, Fig. 2; on the question of the identity of the irst queen to wear the diadem see pp. 406–411). 16 Although the status of queen exists in Jewish royalty in the sense of a king’s wife, it is likely that Jewish queens (as Hellenistic queens) were also crowned with diadems. Nevertheless the image of Cypros, as shown on Agrippa I coins (TJC:328, No. 114, CHL:263, No. 149), is badly preserved and it is impossible to discern whether she was crowned with a diadem. We are also familiar with the image of Queen Berenice as it appears on Agrippa II’s coin minted to commemorate the voyage of Agrippa II and his sister Berenice to Rome in 79 CE (TJC:332, No. 149; CHL:266, No. 207). However, like the previous coin, this coin is also in poor condition, and no diadem is detected. 17 We get an impression of Salome Alexandra’s political power from Josephus (Ant. 13:320; BJ 1:85), who states that after King Aristobulus died, the queen herself raised his brother Jannaeus to the throne and the high priesthood. 46 IDO NOY little purpose, or, as was said, that he was thus deprived of the merit of refusing it, reprimanded the tribunes, and removed them from their ofice” (Suet. Iul. 79). Despite the Romans’ aversion to adopting monarchical traditions for themselves, they allowed client kings to rule in order to avoid having to directly govern a number of regions. Herod the Great, Agrippa I and Agrippa II and also the Jewish kings of Chalcis and Lesser Armenia were all client kings, crowned by the Romans. Thus, whenever the Jewish kings placed the diadem on their coins, it was not just to illustrate their royalty but also to mark the political power given them by the Romans. Unlike the diadem, and yet very much as a result of its appearance, the depiction of the wreath on the edge of coins declined during the Herodian period. While throughout Hasmonean times it was the predominant type, by the end of the Herodian period the wreath became quite rare. Herod I enclosed an anchor inside a wreath, probably to commemorate the founding of the new port in Caesarea (TJC:322, No. 60). Herod Archelaus, who could not employ a diadem, encircled his name and title ‘ethnarch’ with a wreath (TJC:323–324, Nos. 69, 72). His brothers, Herod Antipas and Philip, who served as tetrarchs, also used wreaths as victory symbols. Antipas placed the inscription TIBE/PIAC within a wreath as he had founded that city as his new capital (TJC:325, Nos. 75–90). On the coins dated ‘year 43’ he also encircled inscriptions in honor of the emperor with a wreath (TJC:325, Nos. 91–94). Philip, the irst Jewish dynast to portray his own bust, nevertheless did not display it wearing a wreath.18 Instead, he placed the wreath around inscriptions enumerating years in his reign (TJC:327, Nos. 108, 111). There is some vagueness concerning the use of a wreath on Agrippa I’s coins,19 but his son, King Agrippa II, placed a wreath around inscriptions indicating regnal years (TJC:332, No. 151; pp. 336, No. 182) as well as around various other inscriptions (TJC:330, Nos. 127–131, 134). 18 Here it must be noted that Philip struck coins with images of Augustus and Tiberius crowned with laurel wreaths. The same occurs on Agrippa I and Agrippa II’s coins when they depict the laurel wreathed images of Caligula, Claudius, Nero, Vespasian, Titus and Domitian. The laurel wreath as ornamenta triumphalia was worn by the generals of the Roman army in their triumphal processions. From the days of Augustus the laurel wreath gained importance mainly because celebrations were the sole privilege of the emperor and his family. It was then that the laurel wreath became the customary head decoration of the emperors, as a symbol of their victory (Maxield 1981:67–81; Smith 1988:43). This might explain the complete absence of laurelled portraits of the Jewish dynasts even though it is clear that they used such head decorations. 19 Agrippa I may also have encompassed his name and title within a wreath, if the ascription of TJC:328, No. 115 to that king is correct (Alla Kushnir-Stein, pers. comm.). HEAD DECORATIONS ON HASMONEAN AND HERODIAN COINS 47 ICONOGRAPHY AND STYLE AS A MEANS OF IDENTIFICATION AND CLASSIFICATION Can an iconographic and stylistic analysis of the wreaths and diadems under discussion enable us in some cases to identify the ruler’s identity or status? Although attempted in the past,20 the low quality and poor preservation of the Hasmonean bronze coins, certainly, make this a complex task. Few wreaths are completely preserved, with all the elements clear and identiiable. Another, more challenging obstacle to a proper typology is the fact that the differences among the various wreaths are generally minor and manifested in one or more of the elements composing the wreath. Nevertheless, some distinctions may be noted (Pl. 10:1; Table 1). In order to obtain a more systematic and detailed result than from the past attempts, I divided the wreath into three separated components: wreath form (W), joining link (L) and tie (T). For this task I based myself on three publications rich in images of Hasmoneans coins: TJC and the two volumes of Kaufman (1995; 2004), there referring only to coins with at least one well preserved component, whether wreaths, joining links or ties. Although this sample is large, it is certainly not complete. Therefore, this provisional typology is likely to change as more published coins are examined and new coin inds become available. Consequently, the typology below should probably be used to identify a coin only when the other numismatic criteria (inscriptions, weight, diameter etc.) are exhausted. Hasmonean Wreaths (W) The Hasmonean wreaths are all set in top view. They are all typically made up of the same elements set in the same composition. All wreaths are narrow and have a large inner diameter leaving enough space for the ‘textual portrait.’ Hyrcanus, Aristobulus, Jannaeus and Antigonus share the same type of wreath (Wa) which is typically made of several groups of three long leaves bounded in their bases. Hyrcanus’ wreaths are made of three to six groups of three bound leaves, Aristobulus has ive groups of three bound leaves, and Jannaeus has between four and nine. Antigonus’ Wa wreath consists of three to four groups of three bound leaves arranged vertically and horizontally. Hyrcanus and Aristobulus share a second type of wreath (Wb1) containing a branch (hoop) with backward-bent 20 In his early research Meshorer created a typology of eight types of wreath forms as they appear chronologically on Hasmonean coins (AJC I:64–65). This typology is rather general and does not systematically refer to differences between the number of the leaves and the forms of varied joining links and ties. In his later and comprehensive study Meshorer omitted his 1982 typology, but published the drawings as an illustration (TJC:36). 48 IDO NOY leaves alternately connected. Hyrcanus has a second wreath type that is very similar to this but with oval leaves rather than bent ones (Wb2).21 Hasmonean Links (L) and Ties (T) There are 12 different types of joining links at the top of the wreath, whereas most of them must be seen together in a composition with various fruits. In addition, there are ive distinct types of ties. Hyrcanus’ Wa wreaths consist of several types of joining links (La–c, f, h–i) and are tied with ties Ta, Tb and Te. His Wb1 wreath is linked with Lh and Lj), and tied with Tc, and his Wb2 wreath is linked with L hand tied with Tc. Aristobulus’ Wa wreaths include links Lb and Lk and are tied with Ta. Aristobulus’Wb1 wreaths contain the Lh link and are tied with Tc. Jannaeus’ Wa wreaths are composed of the widest variety of joining links (La–b, d–g and l) and ties (Ta–b, and e). Antigonus’ Wa wreaths are set vertically as well as horizontally. They end with crossed bands emerging from the irst group of leaves (Td) and they sometimes contain the Lb link. Other coins of Antigonus depict a wholly different type of wreath, at least when compared to those of the other Hasmoneans. Their leaves are botanically quite different, being of the ivy genus22 (Pl. 10:1). Table 1. Hasmonean wreaths, joining links and ties Type Hyrcanus Aristobulus Jannaeus Antigonus Wa Wb1 + + + + + + Wb2 + Wreaths Joining links La + Lb Lc + + + + Le Lg + + Ld Lf + + + + 21 It is possible that Wb1 and Wb2 are actually the same type, but that Wb2’s leaves were eroded. 22 Scholars differ as to botanical identiications of the leaves used in the depictions of the Hasmonean wreaths (Noy 2012:31). HEAD DECORATIONS ON HASMONEAN AND HERODIAN COINS Type Hyrcanus Aristobulus Lh + + Li + Lj + Jannaeus Antigonus + Lk Ll + No Link + Ties Ta + Tb + Tc + + + + + + + Td Te 49 + + Herodian Wreaths The sequence of the wreath on Herodian coins suggests that its transference to the Roman era had not thoroughly changed its meaning. Nevertheless, the Herodian wreaths differ in their design as well as in their usage. The wreath of Herod that encircles the anchor (TJC:223, No. 60; Ariel and Fontanille 2012:62, Type 10), is made of a pair of long leaves arranged consecutively. The wreath ends with a distinctive tie made up of bands and dots and has no joining link (Pl. 11:1; Ariel and Fontanille 2012: Pl. 58, Die R1). Herod Archelaus introduced two new types of wreaths, one with serrated-edged oak(?) leaves and with large hoops as joining link (Pl. 11:2; TJC:224, No. 69). Its base is composed of two small hoops and its free hanging ends are set upward within the wreath (see also Pl. 11:2 and Ariel and Hoover 2011:67, Fig. 1 and 69, Fig. 2). Archelaus’ second wreath is poorly designed; its two branches are set horizontally and with no joining link or tie (Pl. 11:3; TJC:225, No. 72). In contrast, Herod Antipas’ wreath is very carefully designed. Its laurel(?) leaves are arranged one in front of the other on both sides of a branch ending with a doubly slipped square knot in its base and a band-like link or a hoop on the top (Pl. 11:4–4a; TJC:227, Nos. 83, 87). This wreath is very thick with dense leaves allowing little space for the inscription in the coin’s center. Herod Antipas has poorly executed versions of this wreath as well (Pl. 11:5; TJC:226, No. 76). Just like his father and brothers, Philip produced a unique wreath (Pl. 11:6; TJC:230, No. 108), composed of four groups of three leaves connected with a distinctive tie and a large circle as a joining link. Philip’s wreath is very thick and again, leaves little space for the date. Agrippa I employed a very similar wreath to that of Antipas; however, it apparently has no joining link (Pl. 11:7; 50 IDO NOY TJC:230–231, No. 115). Another wreath type of Agrippa I consists of serrated leaves (Pl. 11:8; TJC:232, No. 124). It has a medium diameter with enough space for the dextrarum iunctio in the middle of the coin and for inscriptions, both on the inside and outside of the wreath. Agrippa II depicted three different wreaths. The irst one is very similar to that of Antipas (Pl. 11:11–11a; TJC:236, No. 151); however, sometimes it ends with a large circle or with three dots arranged in a triangle as joining link. Agrippa II’s second wreath has four groups of three fruitless leaves. It has a doubly slipped square knot and no joining link (Pl. 11:12; TJC:240, No. 182). Another distinctive type of Agrippa II is composed of groups of three very thin leaves with two fruit pedicels in between them (Pl. 11:13; TJC:233, No. 129). It has a distinctive doubly slipped square knot and a small circle as a joining link. This wreath is very similar to that of Herod of Chalcis (Pl. 11:9; TJC:263, No. 361). However, its joining link is a much larger circle. Aristobulus of Lesser Armenia’s wreaths are poorly preserved. They are apparently composed of groups of three long leaves and have a plain large hoop or a large hoop encircling an X-shaped sign as a joining link (Pl. 11:10–10a; TJC:263, No. 367). The task of identifying the Jewish ruler from his diadem is easier than from wreaths. Jannaeus’ has two types of diadems. The irst one is composed of a closed, symmetric, narrow hoop (Pl. 12:1; e.g., TJC:209, Group K), it has a large inner diameter and two distinctive short, triangle-shaped bands hanging from the square knot on its base. Jannaeus’ second diadem (Pl. 12:2; e.g., TJC:211, Group N) has medium inner diameter leaving enough room for an anchor on the inside and for the Greek inscriptions on the outside. Its tie consists of two parallel, short free-hanging bands. Herod’s diadems are completely different (Pl. 12:3; TJC:222, No. 49; Ariel and Fontanille 2012:61, Type 5). They contain a long curved band, very similar to the Greek capital letter Ω. In some instances the diadem is composed of a closed hoop with two long bands (Pl. 12:4; Ariel and Fontanille 2012: Pl. 42, Dies O24, O25). It has a medium inner diameter, which leaves space for the symbol inside and for the Greek inscription outside. There is no doubt that the diadems represented on the kings’ heads are the easiest to identify. The diadem irst appears on Agrippa I’s portrait (Pl. 12:5; TJC:222, No. 49), encircling his head above the hairline and tied in the back of his head the same way it would have appeared on any other Hellenistic king portrait. The very same phenomenon occurs on the portraits of the Jewish kings of Chalcis and Lesser Armenia. Herod of Chalcis’ diadem (Pl. 12:6; TJC:263, No. 362) resembles the abovementioned diadem of Agrippa I, while those of Aristobulus of Lesser Armenia (Pl. 12:7; TJC:232, No. 122) and Salome (Pl. 12:8; CHL:264, No. 170) clearly show longer free-hanging ends running down their backs. In light of the appearance of this type of diadem on his father’s coins, it is quite surprising that it does not appear on Agrippa II’s coins; instead, it is visible in top view (Pl. 12:9; TJC:233, No. 133). Agrippa II’s diadem looks very much like that HEAD DECORATIONS ON HASMONEAN AND HERODIAN COINS 51 of Jannaeus especially in its symmetric close hoop. However, it has a larger inner diameter since no inscription surrounds it. In addition, it has only a minor square knot in its base and its ends are missing. CONCLUSION The representations of head decorations on ancient Jewish coins relect a complex relationship between the Jewish and the Hellenistic cultures. The origin and meaning of the head decorations in Hellenistic culture as well as the timing of their appearance in Jewish contexts shed light on the visual means used by the Jewish dynasts to reinforce their claim to rule. Moreover, as shown above, the iconographic and stylistic characteristics of each head decoration can, in some cases, be used as a practical tool for dating and identifying the ruler and his status. REFERENCES Ariel D.T. and Fontanille J.-P. 2012. The Coins of Herod: A Modern Analysis and Die Classiication (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 79). Leiden. Ariel D.T. and Hoover O.D. 2011. A New Coin of the Mint of Marisa. INR 6:61–77. Carney E.D. 1991. “What’s in a Name?” The Emergence of a Title for Royal Women in the Hellenistic Period. In S.B. Pomeroy ed. Women’s History and Ancient History. London. Pp. 154–172. Carney E.D. 2011. Being Royal and Female in the Early Hellenistic Period. In A. Erskine and L. Llewellyn-Jones eds. Creating a Hellenistic World. Swansea. Pp. 195–220. Fredricksmayer E.A. 1997. The Origin of Alexander’s Royal Insignia. Transactions of the American Philological Association 127:97–109. Goodenough E.R. 1958. Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman Period, VII. Pagan Symbols in Judaism. New York. Hendin D. 2007–2008. Numismatic Expressions of Hasmonean Sovereignty. INJ 16:76–91. Hendin D. and Bower N. 2011. Irregular Coins of Judaea, First Century BCE–First Century CE: New Insights from Comparisons of Stylistic, Physical, and Chemical Analyses. AJN (2nd series) 23:35–54. Hendin D. and Shachar I. 2008. The Identity of YNTN on Hasmonean Overstruck Coins and the Chronology of the Alexander Jannaeus Types. INR 3:87–94. Haake M. 2012. Diadem und Basileus. Überlegungen zu einer Insignie und einem Titel in Hellenistischer Zeit. In A. Lichtenberger, K. Martin, H.-H. Nieswandt and D. Salzmann eds. Das Diadem der hellenistischen Herrscher: Übernahme, Transformation oder Neuschöpfungeines Herrschaftszeichens? Bonn. Pp. 293–313. Hoover O.D. 2003. The Seleucid Coinage of John Hyrcanus I: The Transformation of a Dynastic Symbol in Hellenistic Judaea. AJN 15:29–39. 52 IDO NOY Ilan T. 1987. The Greek Names of the Hasmoneans. Jewish Quarterly Review 78:1–20. Kaufman J.C. 1995. Unrecorded Hasmonean Coins from the J. Chaim Kaufman Collection (Numismatic Studies and Researches 8). Jerusalem. Kaufman J.C. 2004. Unrecorded Hasmonean Coins from the J. Chaim Kaufman Collection, II (Numismatic Studies and Researches 10). Jerusalem. Kindler A. 1979. Hellenistic Inluence on the Hasmonean Coins, I. In B. Bar Kochva ed. The Seleucid Period in Eretz Israel: Studies on the Persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes and the Hasmonean Revolt. Tel Aviv. Pp. 289–308 (Hebrew). Kindler A. 2000. The Hellenistic Inluence on the Hasmonean Coins. TINC XII:316–323. Klein J. 1912. Der Kranz bei den Alten Griechen: Eine Religions geschichtliche Studie auf Grund der Denkmäler. Günzburg. Kushnir-Stein A. 2000–2002. Some Observations on Palestinian Coins with a Bevelled Edge. INJ 14:78–83. Krug A. 1968. Binden in der griechischen Kunst. Untersuchungen zur Typologie (6.–1. Jahrh. v. Chr.). Ph.D. diss., Johannes-Gutenberg-Universiẗt zu Mainz. Mainz. Martin K. 2012. Königin und Göttin. Zur Pr̈senz des Diadems auf hellenistischen KöniginnenMünzen. In A. Lichtenberger, K. Martin, H.-H. Nieswandt and D. Salzmann eds. Das Diadem der hellenistischen Herrscher: Übernahme, Transformation oder Neuschöpfungeines Herrschaftszeichens? Bonn. Pp. 337–383. Maxield V.A. 1981. The Military Decorations of the Roman Army. Los Angeles. Noy I. 2012. The Victory Wreath of Hyrcanus I. INR 7:31–42. Pollitt J.J. 1986. Art in the Hellenistic Age. Cambridge. Price M.J. 1991. The Coinage in the Name of Alexander the Great and Philip Arrhidaeus. Zurich-London. Rappaport U. 1991. On the Hellenization of the Hasmoneans. Tarbiz 60:477–503 (Hebrew). Ritter H.W. 1965. Diadem und Königsherrschaft. Munich. Ritter H.W. 1987. Die Bedeutung des Diadems. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte 36/3:290–301. Salzmann D. 2012. Anmerkungen zur Typologie des hellenistischen Königsdiadems und zu anderen herrscherlichen Kopfbinden. In A. Lichtenberger, K. Martin, H.-H. Nieswandt and D. Salzmann eds. Das Diadem der hellenistischen Herrscher: Übernahme, Transformation oder Neuschöpfung eines Herrschaftszeichens? Bonn. Pp. 337–383. Schürer E. 1973. The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ. Rev. and ed. By G. Vermes and F. Millar. Edinburgh. Schwartz D. 2001. Priesthood and Monarchy in the Hasmonean Period. In I. Gafni ed. Kahal Israel: Jewish Autonomy Throughout the Ages, 1. Ancient Times. Jerusalem. Pp. 13–26 (Hebrew). HEAD DECORATIONS ON HASMONEAN AND HERODIAN COINS 53 Schalit A. 1983. Domestic Policy and National Institutions. In A. Schalit ed. The History of the Jewish People, 7: The Hellenistic Age. Tel Aviv. Pp. 171–199 (Hebrew). Shachar I. 2004. The Historical and Numismatic Signiicance of Alexander Jannaeus’ Later Coinage as Found in Archaeological Excavations. Palestine Exploration Quarterly 136:5–33. Smith R.R.R. 1988. Hellenistic Royal Portraits. Oxford. Stiebel G. 2011. Power and Rule—Jerusalem Coins of Alexander Jannaeus. In G.D. Stiebel, O. Peleg-Barkat and D. Amit eds. New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem and its Surroundings. Collected Papers 5:179–184 (Hebrew). PLATE 10 274 275 276 MEIR NOY PLATE 11 NOY PLATE 12 NOY