Numismatic and History Discussions > Biblical & Judean Coins

Merry Christmas and Happy Channukah!

<< < (2/3) > >>

Ecgþeow:
I could see Jerusalem, as it was the only place where the coin was really used at that point, but why Antioch or Caesarea?  Antioch really had no reason to mint them.  Caesarea, maybe, because of Herod's involvement with rebuilding the Temple, but if the right to mint silver were really taken away from Tyre, Caesarea seems very far out of the way, and Antioch much more so.  If Jerusalem was the only place it was needed, it makes sense that the coins would be minted there, cutting transportation costs and all of that.  The minting of the shekel was tollerated because if it were taken away, the Jews of Jerusalem would be sure to revolt.  The Romans were not that stupid as to deliberately cause a revolt.  So a simple appeasement would not be above them.  It would not be a huge problem to let the Temple mint its own coins for religious ceremony.  It just seems to far away for Antioch or Caesarea to have any connection to it.
What, if any, information is there about hoards found of the coins?

Robert_Brenchley:
There's a page on a large hoard at http://www.begedivri.com/shekel/teachings/kadman.htm . I suggested Caesarea because it was the seat of the Prefect of Judea, who would be highly likely to keep such a mint under strict control. There would also have been riots if the Yom Kippur rituals, for instance, failed to take place because the Prefect wouldn't hand over the HP's robes, but the implied threat was there. Because the Temple was so central to the life of Judea, which was essentially a temple state, the Romans would have put all the pressure they could on the authorities there to cooperate. Antioch could be another possibility simply because it was a Roman mint city not too far away; if coin could be brought from Tyre, it could also be brought from there.

Ecgþeow:
Tyre is different from Antioch because it was never 'chosen' as a place where the shekel would be minted.  It just so happened that Tyre was the only remaining producer of a coin pure enough to meet Temple standards.  If Tyre lost the right to mint the shekel, which did not necessarily happen, then they would need to choose a place to continue the minting of the coins, as discontinuing the shekel was not an option.  It would naturally make sense to make the mint closer to the Temple, as that was the coin's only remaining purpose.  This is why Jerusalem would be most probable.  However, I could see Caesarea, as it was the Roman city of Judaea, and as the seat of government, It would be prudent to also have the mint close to governmental control.

Robert_Brenchley:
I think there's one other point against Jerusalem; they may have felt that the commandment to have a pure silver coin overrode the commandment to avoid images, but if the mint was moved to Jerusalem, that would have put Jews in charge, and it's odd that the type remained unchanged.

dolcinus:
Thank you Zam, Thank you Robert!!!
You are an incredible sources of informations!!!! ;D ;D ;D
I'm feeling really ignorant.... :( :(

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page