JEWISH 'LULAB' AND t C PORTAL" COINS DE. GEAETZ. TRANSLATED BY H. MONTAGU, F.S.A. EEPRINTED FEOM THE NUMISMATIC CHRONICLE. VOL. VIII., THIED SERIES, PAGES 165198. LONDON 1888. ON THE JEWISH "'LULAB" AND BY DE, GEAETZ. TRANSLATED BY H. MONTAGU, P.S.A. REPRINTED FROM THE NUMISMATIC CHRONICLE. VOL. VIII., THTED SERIES, PAGES 165198. LONDON: 1888. JEWISH COINS. IN submitting the following translation of an article written by the learned Dr. Graetz, of Breslau, our chief living authority on Jewish history, and on all that per- tains to it, I add no comment or criticism of my own. The article was written for the purpose of being read by its author at one of the meetings lately held in connec- tion with the Anglo-Jewish Exhibition. At this Exhi- bition selections of ancient Jewish coins were sent from all the principal collections, always excepting those of the British Museum, which, under its rules and regulations, could not be lent for that purpose, but were, by the kind- ness of the authorities, exhibited separately at the same time within the precincts of the Museum. I was entrusted with the pleasurable task of cataloguing and of writing a short account of these coins in the official catalogue of the Exhibition, and hence my having been authorised by Dr. Graetz at the same time to translate his contribution. I may fairly ask some of our friends who have made a special study of the coins of the period referred to by him to give their views on the subject of the propositions which he has enunciated. H. MONTAGU. 2 ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. ON THE SIGNIFICATION OF THE JEWISH COINS WITH THE LULAB (PALM-BRANCHES) AND PORTAL. BY DR. GBAETZ. JEWISH numismatics for there are such bear eloquent testimony to the struggles and victories of the Jewish people from the Maccabaean period until, perhaps, after the destruction of the Second Temple. The coins which come within the scope of this study are invaluable records, inasmuch as they not only faithfully represent historical facts connected with personages and events, but also reflect, without distortion, their sense and importance. In addition to this, such of them as bear dates furnish fixed and certain aids to chronology, For two centuries those who presided over the Jewish mints issued coins with Hebrew legends for current use ; Simon Maccabaeus and his successors, the Asmonaean princes and kings, in the beginning, and, afterwards, vari- ous eminent personages at the time of the defection from Rome and of the great war under Yespasian, and perhaps even in later times. These last come under the denomination of coins of the Revolts. All these coins have acquired so great an importance that historians whose work extends over the period of their issue study them, and are com- pelled to study them, and the public museums of all European States have zealously devoted their energies towards the acquisition of genuine specimens, for which payment is at times made to the extent of a thousandfold their intrinsic value. Jewish numismatics have at the present day become the subject of a study of itself. It is interesting to trace how this branch of archaeology ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. 3 has from rudiments originally so slight attained the im- portance now attributed to it. Jt was always known in Jewish circles that there were once Jewish coins with Hebrew inscriptions and with lettering similar to the Samaritan characters. Maimuni saw some of these in Egypt in the twelfth century. "When Machmani was exiled, and sought an asylum in Palestine owing to the persecution of the Dominicans, he found, on his arrival at Acre in the year 1267, shekels and half shekels in the possession of the Jews there settled. This did not in the least astonish him ; he was more interested in considering the question whether their weight was in harmony with the declarations of the Talmud. In the first quarter of the sixteenth century Moses Alaschkar saw, in Tunis, several similar specimens in silver and copper, and with varied types and legends. He was also informed that three or four examples in gold, of the extraordinary value of six ducats each, were in the possession of a certain magnate there. In the same century the existence of similar pieces with the so-called Samaritan lettering was not unknown to the Jews in Italy. No one, however, devoted any attention to them, or seemed to have any knowledge of their historical value. Neither did the savants in Christian circles devote much more attention to Jewish numismatics even in the seventeenth and eighteenth cen- turies, although Hebrew literature and archaeological studies were then fostered and led to fame, and although a considerable number of specimens of this class of coins had been brought together and were accessible in public and private collections. Many Orientalists doubted their genuineness, owing to their peculiar striking and letter- ing, and considered them to be fabrications of astute dealers in Jerusalem or Italy, and bestowed more atten- 4 ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. tion upon the formation of the letters than upon the importance of the legends. It was only towards the end of the eighteenth century that the study of Jewish numismatics was treated with more consideration and zeal, and thereby attained the rank of a study in itself. A Spanish priest with a German patro- nymic, the Archdeacon of Valencia, Francisco Perez Bayer, gave to it a lasting impulse. His treatise, De numis Hebrceo- Samaritan is (1781), to which he added drawings of a substantial number of different specimens, marked an era in this branch of archaeology chiefly owing to the opposition which he at first experienced. Tychsen, a German professor of Rostock, who had learnt Hebrew from the heretical Rabbi, Jonathan Eibe- schiitz, of Altona, and who wished to utilise this know- ledge for the conversion of the Jews, maintained, without any valid reason, that all the specimens preserved as such rare treasures in public museums and private collections were the productions of forgers in Palestine or Italy. It was, however, just this dogmatical opinion (behind which lurked his own idiosyncrasy), and the manner also in which he treated the honourable and well - informed Buyer, that awakened interest in the study of Jewish numismatics, and its defender, Bayer, in his reply, Vindicia Numorum Hebrao-Samaritanorum (1790), pro- duced more evidence as to the genuineness of the coins, and published several more specimens, which he had discovered on his journey through Spain. Numismatists of authority confirmed his arguments. The venerable French archaeologist, Jean Jacques Barthelemy, whose opinion was of importance, remarked, " Si Ton doutait de leur authenticity (des medailles hebreo-samaritaines) il faudrait douter de celles des medailles grecques et ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. 5 romaines." The most celebrated numismatist of that time, Joseph Eckhel, of Vienna, treated of the Jewish coins in his great work, Doctrina Numorum (1794), and entirely disposed of Tychsen by his superior authority. In the meanwhile, owing to the French Revolution and the great wars, the study of Jewish numismatics made no pro- gress for a long time. It was only in the middle of the present century that it gained further strength and eluci- dation. M. de Saulcy, a captain of artillery, mainly con- tributed to this. Entrusted with the task of writing the history of the Jewish nation before and after the second destruction of Jerusalem, and full of love for his subject, and especially for Judaism, as he averred in Les derniers jours de Jerusalem, he was so fortunate on his journey through Palestine as to obtain a large collection of Jewish coins. His work Recherches sur la Numismatique juddique (1854) marked a second epoch in the treatment of this sub- ject. On the one hand he excited emulation in connection with his acquisition of such genuine coins, inasmuch as he at the same time furnished proofs of their genuineness ; and on the other hand he advanced the cause of original research into the history of the Jews from the Maccabaean era until the time of Hadrian, this being found indispensable to a proper understanding of the coins. In the same way as, formerly, theologians sought to verify the chronology of the New Testament by reference to historical records and to Jewish literature generally, so were the same sources of knowledge now examined by those learned in the matter in the interests of Jewish numismatics. The Talmud, hitherto a sealed book, not to say an object of abhorrence so far as Christian savants were concerned, was now honoured by being called into the councils of the investigators, to throw, if possible, some light upon 6 ON THE JKW1SH " LULAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. obscure numismatic points. To this also De Saulcy gave an impetus, and he thereby showed his right appreciation of the subject. For, in fact, without a knowledge of the hints which are given, or, perhaps rather, let fall unde- signedly, and, therefore, all the more credibly, in the Talmud with respect to the customs and events connected with the actual life of the time in which the coins originate, or are said to originate, the history of that epoch is not altogether intelligible. The evidences of Josephus, notwithstanding their great worth, might excite some suspicion, owing to the fact that out of consideration for his Greek and Roman readers, he either wilfully or unintentionally effaced the original colouring as being too glaring for such readers. Much less information is on purely secular matters afforded by the Gospels, with their epics dialogues, and monologues. For, independently of the fact that these are not contem- poraneous, the circle from whom they originate held aloof from public life, and despised it too much to understand it. " Render to Ccesar the things that are Cwsar's " is a sentence which reflects clearly the Ebionitic conception of Mammon or of money. On the other hand, the Tal- mudic literature gives a faithful representation of the different aspects of public life within the cycle to which these coins belong, and to which, therefore, numismatic science must have regard. It is proposed to demonstrate in the following pages how certain casual expressions in the Talmud with reference to ancient customs indisputably elucidate an obscure point in Jewish numismatics. Al- though all difficulties connected with that portion which relates to the Maccabaean period have for the most part been dissipated, there still exists a difference of opinion concerning that portion of which the chronological position and date are not clearly denned. ON THE JEWISH " LULAB AND " PORTAL COINS. 7 There is especially a great controversy as to the class of coins upon which the name of Simon more or less dis- tinctly appears. Some numismatists identify this Simon with the elder or younger Simon Ben Gamaliel (of Hillel descent), the latter being the grandson of the former, or to some extent also with Simon Bar-Gioras, the wild hero of the zealots ; others ascribe the coins of this class, or a section of them, to the heroic Simon Bar-Cochab, who, in the time of Hadrian, kept the Roman legions at bay for three years. There are some pieces, too, which are called Eleazar coins. There is a controversy also as to these. Some attribute them to Eleazar, a leader of the zealots during the revolt of the Jews against the Romans, but, on the other hand, De Saulcy refers them to the little-known Eleazar of Modin, a Hagadist. It has, in short, been found impracticable hitherto to decide with any degree of cer- tainty which coins belong to the first and which to the second Revolt, notwithstanding the amount of discussion that has taken place. There is a series of coins also concerning which the same doubts have arisen, and which are called " lulab " pieces. They are all of almost identical types, but their legends differ. The types are of the following varieties, viz., on the one side is a bundle of branches better known by the name of a lulab (composed of a long palm-branch between two shorter ones of myrtle and willow), and near it is the representation of a fruit which is rightly considered to be the citron or ethrog, and is inseparably connected with the lulab. On the other side of these pieces the type is that of a portal or colonnade ; four columns with an architrave, and other ornamentations above. This tetra- style portal is not, however, struck in identically the same manner on all the pieces, but exhibits several varia- tions in form. The legends on these lulab pieces differ 8 ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. still more. One kind distinctly bears on the lulab side the words, "First Year of the Deliverance of Israel" (bbniZP nbbfcb nn rott?), and on the portal side, on both sides of the columns and over the architrave, the word, "Jerusalem" (DbtPlT), but no proper name. Several pieces, on the contrary, have on the lulab side the legend, " The second year of the freedom of Israel " (bs'W "inb D E7) and on the portal side, similarly to the last, " Jerusalem," also without any proper name. Others, again, have more or less distinctly on the portal side the name of " Simon " instead of Jerusalem. Finally, a third or fourth kind has on the lulab side the words, " On the freedom of Jerusalem" (abanT nnnb in full) but not the year of striking, and on the portal side the name " Simon." What makes the exact chronological attribution of this class of coins so doubtful is the circumstance that on some specimens traces of the head of an emperor, or Greek letters, occur in one case the termination NOC, and one has somewhat distinctly, in Greek lettering, an abbrevia- tion of the name Titus Flavius Vespasianus. These specimens are, therefore, surfrappd coins that is to say, that over Greek imperial coins of Vespasian, Domitian or Trajan, the impression of a Jewish coin has been struck, as is the case with other coins, which clearly show, under the Jewish striking, the full name of Trajan with his titles. Now Vespasian was proclaimed Emperor in July, A.D. 69, during the Jewish war. He only arrived at Rome A.D. 70. His first coin, therefore, could only at the very earliest have been struck in this year. Is it to be said that the besieged in Jerusalem had already become pos- sessed of coins of Vespasian a few months before the ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND "PORTAL" COINS. 9 destruction of the city, and had impressed upon them Jewish devices and inscriptions ? This is scarcely credible. But assume for one moment that these were coins of Trajan. It would be more readily conceded that this surfrappage had taken place much later, during the second Revolt. At all events, therefore, these pieces upon which the surfrappage is visible would belong to the period of Bar-Cochab. As then the similarity of the types points to a contemporaneous date, the class of lulab coins must also, one and all, belong to the same period. De Saulcy arrives at this conclusion, though not by the same method of reasoning. He claims that this class, as also many others, belong to the second Revolt, and the occurrence on some of the pieces of this class of the name " Simon " appears to support his attribution. Other numismatists, particularly Merzbacher and Madden, do not concur in this result. The former attributes tho types with the dates "first and second year" (Figs. \ , 2, 3) l to the first, and those without date (Figs. 4, 5, 6), to the second Revolt. Madden attributes Type I. only to the first Revolt. Another class of coins gives rise to similar differences of opinion on the part of these authorities. The Eleazar coius belong most probably to the first Revolt ; and these also have the date " First year of the freedom of Israel," the same as one kind of the lulab coins. The latter kind, at all events, therefore belong also to the period of the first Revolt. In short, the most eminent numismatists move in a circle in their attempts to fix the date of this class of coins. To find a way out of the difficulty a fresh path must be 1 Plate VI., in illustration of this translation, is an exact copy, with all faults, of that which accompanied Dr. Graetz's original paper, but the module of the coins has, in the process of reproduction, been slightly diminished. 5 10 ON THE JEWISH "LULAB" AND "PORTAL" COINS. struck. In the next place, the exact significance of the types and legends must be ascertained. For the lulab and portal, which all coins of that class have in common, are striking enough, and must have originated from ascer- tainable sources. The most obvious meaning of the lulab is given by the numismatic writers : " The type of these shekels the ethrog and lulab reminded the Jews of the Feast of Tabernacles." (Madden.) It should be added that they are represented as they were accustomed to be held during the recital of the psalms contained in the prayer of the Hallel in connection with which they were used, the lulab to the right, and the ethrog to the left. The numismatists have, however, omitted to notice a slight detail which is visible in connection with the form of the lulab. On all the coins the latter, with the small twigs appertaining to it, is depicted as being in an orna- mented receptacle. This has the appearance of a chalice. It is clearly an embellishment. What then is the meaning of this embellishment or receptacle ? The Talmud at once clears up the difficulty. Rabbi Meir states quite casually that the men of posi- tion in Jerusalem carried their lulab in a small golden basket. The bundle of palm, myrtle, and willow-branches, according to the laws of the ritual, was obliged to be bound together at the ends. Now Rabbi Meir, in oppo- sition to the assertion that the connecting band must be in the nature of vegetable fibre, refers to the fact that the leading inhabitants of Jerusalem did not observe that cus- tom, but effected the binding together by means of a small golden basket. His Halachic adversary concedes that fact, but gives it as his opinion that the bundle was connected together by bands of thread inside the basket. It may, in addition, be remarked that Rabbi Meir, as a disciple of Rabbi Akiba, may have received from him ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. 11 traditions on the subject of the customs and usages in Jerusalem ; for the latter was of an advanced age at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem. Let us now consider the meaning of the tradition con- cerning this gold lulab basket. The custom was not in vogue during the lifetime of Rabbi Meir, but only pre- viously thereto, during the existence of Jerusalem. This somewhat unorthodox custom, also, did not prevail outside Jerusalem. It happened, therefore, that it was in Jeru- salem alone that a display was made with the lulab. They not only made use of it in the Temple, and in the house of prayer when the Hallel psalms were recited, but it was seldom out of their hands during the day. The Talmud contains a tradition which has a bearing upon this also. The rich and those who were of note in Jerusalem, to make a show of their lulab, adorned it with a gold basket ; they could not grudge themselves this luxury. Regarding now the receptacle in which the lulab is placed on the type of the lulab coins, can there be any doubt but that it represents this very basket ? It appears to be ribbed and twisted like a basket ; it can clearly be called a basket. It has a foot or a handle by which it can be held, and two or three openings. The lulab-bundle on the coins is depicted in the same manner as the men of rank in Jerusalem used to hold and display it. It requires no further argument on that subject to make it clear that these coins could only have been struck during the exis- tence of Jerusalem ; and as the custom of depositing the lulab in a basket did not prevail subsequently, the later moneyers would not have taken it into their heads to de- pict bundles in that shape. That shape it is evident could not have been in vogue at the time of Bar Cochab, as Rabbi Meir, who was then living, refers to the custom as having been one existing in earlier times, and which, therefore, 12 ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND "PORTAL" COINS. was not practised in bis own time. It can also scarcely be argued that tbe receptacle in wbicb the lulab is depicted on tbe coin-types is only an embellishment, and this is all it could have been if it had been met with in the ordinary course as a kind of ornamental basket-work. I dwell somewhat upon this circumstance as it constitutes the centre of gravity for the chronological attribution of the lulab coins. Let us now consider the reverses of these pieces. They clearly bear only the representation of a portal, always with two columns on each side, and generally with an architrave. Numismatists are as wanting in unanimity on the subject of this type as they are unanimous with regard to the lulab and the ethrog at its left-hand. Perez-Bayer maintains that the portal is a representation of the Mau- soleum which Simon Maccabaeus (or rather his son) caused to be erected in memory of the Asmonaean family in Mo- din. This explanation has been rightly rejected, inas- much as most examples of this class bear the name of Jerusalem. It was also interpreted as depicting the Ark of the Covenant, which is somewhat paradoxical, as in post-exile times the ark and its form were utterly un- known. Other numismatists have been willing to see in it the form of the Temple, or of the entrance to the Temple. (Cavedoni, Levy, Merzbacher.) But this interpre- tation can scarcely be correct, as the Temple of the time of the Herods had no ornamentation of columns at the entrance ; and it can still less be regarded as a gate, inas- much as the opening is in a certain measure barricaded by a three-barred decoration. Merzbacher for that reason denominates the emblem as a closed gate. But a closed gate affords no entrance, and therefore it cannot symbolize ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. 13 the gate of the Temple. "What then is the meaning of the portal side of these lulab coins ? It must be remembered that on the other side the lulab is represented optima in forma to the right, bound up with the two other branches ; on the left the ethrog fruit, and in addition an embellishment to the bundle, as must have occurred in actual use. What deeper significance has this type ? It is a great departure from the emblems which occur on most of the Jewish coins. These latter, such as the palm-tree, or palm-leaf, or the vine, are symbols repre- senting the Holy Land or the Jewish people. What meaning, however, was there in the striking of a lulab on coins ? It was, without encumbering the argument with subtleties, simply and solely intended to commemorate the Festival of Succoth (Tabernacles), and beyond this the period of this festival, which was celebrated by means of two several ritual symbols, the branches of four kinds of plants (c^a SQIS), and the lightly constructed Festival Tabernacle (rOlD). If this festival is to be typically depicted it should be represented in both of these aspects, not only by means of the lulab, but also by means of the tabernacle. The portal, therefore, represents the fagade of the Festival Tabernacle, not, of course, that of the very first or best description, but, as in the case of the lulab, that of a Jew in a superior position, who has made a parade of it as with the lulab. It must have been a tabernacle of elegant construction. As a matter of fact, tabernacles of this elegance of con- struction, with columns, did actually occur. In Tal- mudical literature mention is made of one of these sur- rounded on all sides by columns, and that these columns were regarded as being in accordance with the ritual as 14 ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. representing walls, and the whole building considered to be an orthodox form of the Festival Tabernacle. The example is certainly borrowed from actual reality. Many a man of position has used as a Sukka (Festival Tabernacle) the 7repl fVWab nn nai& (Fig. I), was certainly struck during the first period of the Revolt from Rome, and with equal certainty at the time of the Feast of Tabernacles, as is proved by the types. In point of chronology this thoroughly agrees with the historical events in the beginning of the Revolt as they are narrated by Josephus. On the day of the Festival of the Boughs, the 15th day of the month Ab, 5 the Roman cohorts stationed in the citadel (Acra) under the Tribune Metilius, and Agrippa's troop under the leadership of the Babylonian Philip, were so hard pressed by the Zealots that they were compelled to seek refuge and entrench themselves in Herod's Palace on the Market Place. On the 6th Gorpiaios, i.e. 6th Elul, the Zealots allowed Agrippa's host to withdraw and continued the conflict with the Roman cohorts. Then these capitulated and were cut to pieces, with the exception of Metilius, who went over to Judaism. From that time the people of Jeru- salem felt themselves free from the foreign yoke. The day and month of this victory are, it is true, not given by Josephus, but the commemorative scroll for the day in question (Megillath Taanit) briefly declares "on the 17th Elul, the Romans were driven out of Jerusalem and Judah." The rejoicings at this victory were so great, 5 Josephus' Declaration (Jew. Chr. H. 7, 7, 8) that the Festival of the Boughs was observed on the 14th Ab rests upon a slip of memory. The Talmud is more accurate, and so often speaks of the Festival as occurring on the 15th Ab. 20 ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. that the whole of the inhabitants of the not unimportant city of Lydda repaired to Jerusalem for the Tabernacle Festival. 6 The inhabitants of other neighbouring cities probably betook themselves to the capital at the same time in order to take part in the triumph over the Romans. The rejoicings were universal. It was only after this victory that they could proceed to strike their own coins. This occurred in the month of Tishri, which, according to the calendar in those times, commenced the year. The legend naturally was, " In the first year of the liberation of Israel," and "Jerusalem," which was the essence of all sanctity, and the object of all reverence on the part of the whole nation. But what types were to be selected for the new coins ? As the striking of them did not commence long before the Feast of Tabernacles, it was natural that resort should be had to the symbols of this festival, viz., the lulab and the tabernacle. Both were represented with their most beautiful attributes, the lulab with the decorations of the basket tress-work as it used to be borne by the higher ranks in Jerusalem, and the tabernacle also after an agreeable pattern, the facade being depicted with columns and architrave and with the ornamentation of the lines of circles, the pictorial repre- sentation of strings of nuts, almonds, or other fruits. It was sought to represent at one and the same time the rejoicings over the victory and the liberation from the Romans by means of the lulab, and the hope for God's further protection by means of the symbol of the Sukka (tabernacle). These were no doubt the motives which 6 Josephus, Jew. Chr. II. 29, 1, Sia yap TTJV rrjs eoprrjv avaj3f^Kfi irav TO TrXfjOos (T^S TroAews AvSSa) ecs ' ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND "PORTAL*' COINS. 21 influenced those who were engaged in the striking of the first Liberation Coins. Who was at that time the ruler who struck these pieces ? The fact that the coins of the first year bear no name is full of significance, for this omission proves that the coins were struck at a time when none of the pro- minent individuals who had contributed to the Revolt from Borne had as yet attained any position of authority. It was the honeymoon of Freedom in its youth. The Sanhedrin, with Simon Ben-Gamaliel at its head, had no political privileges, only rights of legislation in connection with religious matters, " et inter arma silent leges." There are other coins with the legend, " First year of the Liberation" which were certainly coined in the same year, particularly the Eleazar coins before mentioned. These must have been struck later at the time when the bearer of this name was at the head of affairs in Jeru- salem. They, therefore, also bear other types than the lulab coins ; they have no connection with the Festival of Tabernacles. Those examples of the lulab coins which have the legend " The second year of the Freedom of Israel " (as Fig. II.), differ though but little from the type of the first Year in the ornamentations on the lulab basket, and to some extent also in the beaded lines on the portal. They must, however, have been struck at the time of the first Revolt, and in fact during the month of the Festival of Tabernacles (about October, 67 A.D.). If also there be any example of this type which bears the Greek NO, that circumstance in no wise proves that they are struck over coins of Vespasian. As I have already stated, this can be amplified to [N6P.Q]NO[C] (in the genitive). Large coins of Nero were still known in 22 ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " ANT) "PORTAL*' COINS. Palestine (novro 3?bo). 7 Much more surely does the presence of the ornamental basket on the lulab bundle point to the time before the destruction of Jerusalem. Madden and others, therefore, erroneously attribute the coins with the legend " The second year " to the time of the second Revolt. There are, however, two varieties of this type, one with, and the other without, the name of " Simon." According to the acceptation of many numismatists, this name of Simon refers to the President of the Sanhedrin, Simon Ben-Gamaliel, whose name bsntZP S"tPD "psatt? more or less distinctly occurs upon several copper coins. There was no other Simon who bore the title " Nasi " (Prince) in existence at that time. As one of these varieties has round the name a wreath, the upper part of which is fastened with some gem, and on the other side within the inscription bfc-ntZ^ nbsib nn nsttf ; another also being known with the same types (only with some letters effaced), and the Berlin Cabinet possesses a coin which has the same types, but with nnb 2"P bwittP round the Diota, and within the wreath the name 7137EU7 only (Merzbacher in Yon Sallet I. 232 et seq.\ there remains no doubt that this name of Simon can also only -refer to Simon Ben- Gamaliel. Another proof that 7137CC7 can plainly be considered to be identical with bfcntZP N^tCO 713HQE7 may also be gathered from the so-called Eleazar coins, for there are examples of these which distinctly have on the one side 7 ?TDn -itrbK or the letters struck from right to left sbsn ron] (by a mistake of the engraver), and on the other side b-i2T nbwb nn H227. No numis- 1 Kelim, 17, 12, and parallel passages. ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND "PORTAL" COINS. 23 matist has disputed the authenticity of these coins. It is clear, therefore, that a priest named Eleazar caused coins to be struck in the first year of the Liberation (i.e. from the Romans). This Eleazar was either Eleazar, the son of Ananias, who threw considerable energy into the Revolution, or more probably Eleazar, the son of Simon, who on the flight of the Romans and of their leader Cestius Gallus had the care of the treasures and military chest which had been wrested from them, and who especially had in his hands the management of the finances of the State. Although he was passed over at the commencement, when the election of rulers of the different districts took place, yet by degrees, and because he was the Controller of the Finances, he obtained the supremacy in Jerusalem. 8 No other Eleazar is known who attained such eminence as to entitle him to strike coins. The theory advanced by De Saulcy that the Eleazar in question may have been the Eieazar of Modin (TYiEn iT3?bs "i) men- tioned in Talmudic literature, and of whom nothing further is known than that, during the siege of Bethar, he besought, in sackcloth and ashes, the aid of heaven, and was destroyed by Bar-Cochab through motives of jealousy, and that the Eleazar coins, therefore, belonged to the second Revolt, has received but little assent. The only author who agreed with it was Von Sallet, 9 but his total ignorance of Talmudic literature scarcely enabled him to judge how little this Eleazar of Modin was fitted for the role of a ruler. In the absence of any coin of Eleazar 8 Josephus' account of this Eleazar is important in connection with the rivalry of the leaders of the revolution, Jew. Chronicle II. 20, 3, rov yap TOV ^tpwos vlov 'EAeaapov, Kiiiirep, &C. 9 Zeitschrift fur Numismatik, v. 113. 24 ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND "PORTAL" COINS. bearing evidence of being struck over other pieces, either at the time of Vespasian or afterwards, it must be agreed that these coins belong to the first Revolt. Their genuine- ness is at all events more certain than that of the bulk of the coins bearing the name of Simon, either with or without traces of overstriking, for the one reason only that the Judaeo-Samaritan letter T occurs on no other coins, and therefore could not well be imitated. If then these coins of Eleazar are genuine and were struck before the time of Vespasian, those pieces also are equally genuine and belong to the same time, which have on one side the word Eleazar round a vase, and on the other side 3JB i.e. p^EE? within a wreath, with a gem ; the exact type of the example which distinctly bears the legend bs~W S^ttn pEtttt?. 10 It is, therefore, proved by this that at least some coins which have the name " Simon " with- out any title, are likewise attributable to Simon Ben- Gamaliel. This is at all events true of the series which has as emblems the lulab and the tabernacle (Fig. III.). The more incontrovertible the weight of suspicion that the numerous coins bearing the name of Simon are forgeries, the more we are convinced that there must have been genuine coins with this superscription, and which served as patterns to the forgers. Notwith- standing the occurrence of a star upon the example in the Paris Cabinet which might engender some suspicion, this type with the name of " Simon " can be treated as 10 De Vogue, who had only seen a cast of this coin, has doubted its genuineness, but Friedlander and Von Sallet, directors of the Berlin Cabinet, state that in that cabinet is a genuine example, and the one from which the cast was taken. The occurrence of the names Eleazar and Simon upon one and the same piece is attributed by numismatists to an error of the engraver. ON THE JEWISH " LU1.AB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. 25 genuine, as it bears more resemblance to the Types I. and II. than to the doubtful examples of Type IV. (Fig. IV. VL). The result of the inquiry can now be summed up. It is ascertained that after the Maccabaean series, there are some coins with the lulab which must be held to be genuine, viz., those with the tj-pe of the festival bunch and the facade of a tabernacle accompanied by certain ornamentations. For what coin-forger of the time when antiquities and old coins had acquired a value could have conceived the idea of providing a basket-shaped receptacle for the stems of the lulab ? For the same reason, also, these must have been struck before the destruction of Jerusalem, at a time when this decoration was in use among the higher classes in Jerusalem, and could then only have served as a pattern to the die engraver. I ^epeat that they cannot be of a period after the destruc- tion, because such an ornamentation was then no longer in practical use and was only remembered as a matter of tradition. The first lulab coins with the portal facade which bear the legend, " First year of the Liberation of Israel," were struck shortly before the Feast of Tabernacles, A.D. 66, after the victory over the Roman cohorts in Jerusalem, and when there ceased to be any Romans in the country except those &t the Legionary station at Caesarea. The types chosen served as a symbol, both of rejoicing at this victory and of God's protection. There was at that time no individual person in power whose name could appear upon these coins as authorising their coinage. It was a period of transition. In the course of the year 66, Eleazar Ben Simon, chief of the Zealots, obtained by means of their assistance the d 26 ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. possession of the State Treasury, and by means of his popularity, the ruling power in Jerusalem. The coins, therefore, which were issued at that time were struck in his name, " The Priest Eleazar," and " First year of the Deliverance of Israel." But the Sanhedrin, of which Simon Ben-Gamaliel was President, also exercised authority in the same year. This Simon was, according to Josephus, his opponent, of a noble stock (great-grandson of Hillel, who appears to have been a descendant of the Royal House of David), and at the same time of such discernment and power of mind that he might have greatly improved the position of the affairs of the State if he could only have held absolute power. 11 As he also belonged to the party of Pharisees, as Josephus has recorded, or, as we are bound to say, was their chief, he must have had a considerable following among the people, the greater portion of whom held the doctrines of that party, a fact prominently set forth by Josephus in many passages of his work. It naturally followed that this Simon was regarded as the head and representative of the Commonwealth, and equally so that his name should appear as the coining authority upon the coins. Eleazar Ben Simo/i was obliged to retire to the background. We have no means of ascertaining the exact events which led up to this change, in connection with which coins were struck with the legend, "First year of the Liberation of Israel," and with the name " Simon, the Prince of Israel." The high-sounding title of Prince of Israel appears, however, to have been distasteful to the Zealots, who had included in their programme and inscribed on their 11 Josephus, Vita, 88. ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. 27 standards, the democratic principle of equality and freedom from personal rule. For this Simon was after all only head of the Sanhedrin (rr3 S^3 blinn in) ; to recognise him as Prince of all Israel was to subject themselves to a ruler. After Josephus had suffered the loss of Galilee owing to his want of judgment, cowardice, or treachery, and after other aristocratic leaders had been found wanting, the sensibilities of the democratic Zealots caused them to be especially enraged against the Jewish aristocracy. This opposition to any sovereignty over Israel appears to have brought about that the title bs~iK7 <1 S^ttn was no longer allowed to be struck upon coins, and it gave way to the simple name pUSttf (as to the coin which has both Simon and Eleazar, see Von Sallet, 167). There is no other Simon in question, Simon Bar-Gioras being excluded owing to his only having been called in during the third year of the Revolt in Jerusalem. The commencement of the second year was now ap- proaching, i.e. the mouth Tishri and the Feast of Taber- nacles (October, 67). Of this period occur only those coins which have the legend, " The Second year of the Liberation of Israel" (II. III.). The types of both are very similar, except that some specimens have only "Jeru- salem " as a legend, and ^thers the name of " Simon " instead. This difference is % of course remarkable ; for if at that time Simon Ben-Gamaliel still maintained his position, on what ground was his name passed over in another series ? The cause may perhaps be traced to the party conflicts which broke out about this time. The Zealots in Jerusalem, who attributed the defeat in Galilee to the treachery^ of the aristocrats, removed the nobles and priests from the offices in the city and in the temple which 28 ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND "PORTAL" COINS. they had hitherto enjoyed, and appointed in their stead persons from their own ranks. They even divested the high-priest Matthias, son of Theophilus, of his dignity, and installed into it a simple priest, Phineas, son of Samuel, an inhabitant of the village Aphta, upon whom the choice had fallen by lot. 12 This produced a tumult among the aristocratic party. Anan, the son of Anan, who had formerly been called in for the protection of the city and had been high-priest, thundered against the blasphemy of the democratic Zealots, and the inso- lence of their pretensions. Simon Ben- Gamaliel also was irritated at the subversion of the previously existing order of things. He called upon his hearers in the popular assemblies to oppose the " Destroyers of Liberty " and " the Blasphemers of the Holy One." 13 This naturally arose from a breach between the Zealots and their chief Eleazar Ben Simon on the one hand, and Simon Ben- Gamaliel on the other. The Zealots initiated a reign of terror against their adversaries. The Sanhedrin was purged of its anti-Zealot members, and seventy fresh members were appointed in their stead from the general mass. 14 Josephus does not, it is true, mention the month in which the election of the ney high-priest took place. The election was probably taken in hand in view of the necessary functions on^'the Day of Atonement in the second year, and so as to remove a high-priest who had been appointed by the detested King Agrippa, and who was in addition suspected to have Roman tendencies a suspicion well founded, as was proved by his subse- quent conduct. 12 Josephus, iv. 3, 6 8. 13 Josephus, 9. 14 Josephns, v. 3, 4. ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. 29 The rupture between the Zealots and Simon Ben-Gama- liel may possibly, therefore, have taken place as early as in the month of Tishri, in which the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated, and the former being indignant at Simon's partisan agitation against them, may have struck coins with the same types and emblems as those which bore his name, so as to demonstrate that he was no longer at the head of the commonwealth. In the course of events his name was, in fact, no longer employed, and Josephus also points to the fact that this Simon was deposed, inas- much as he remarks, ''He had been in a position to im- prove the wretched position of affairs (Ivvafjievos re TT pay /Jiara KUKW^ /ret/zei/a. . . . liopOwaaaOai)." There are also no further coins of the second year in existence which bear the name of this Simon. The example which has on one side H^a 7137EK7, and upon the other bsnK7> (in the Wigan Collection 15 ), in addition to which Merzbacher wished to read *inb 2" 127, offers no certainty on this sub- ject, as Madden has rightly observed. It may especially be mentioned further that no genuine coins are known which bear the date of the second year or even of the fourth. The remarkable pieces which read SQ-iS rott7 are subject to suspicion, for the reason that they exhibit either two lulabtlike types, or two ethrogim (citrons), and in addition \he legend ]VS nbs^b. Zicn was in later times only used poetically and metaphorically for Jerusalem. The genuineness of this class of coins, which have always been attributed to Simon Maccabaeus, has yet to be proved. There was after the second year no individual who can be said to have represented the com- monwealth, or who could have had the necessary autho- 15 Now presumably in the Rev. S. S. Lewis's Cabinet. H. M. 30 ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. rity to strike coins. In the spring of the year 67, John of Giskala, who had a considerable following, and who be- came a rival of Eleazar Ben Simon, arrived in Jerusalem. In the third year Simon Bar-Gioras also came thither, and each of these leaders sought to assume the supremacy, and would scarcely have granted to the other the right of appearing to have authority to strike coins. In the first year only were there two men who had such an authority, first, Eleazar, and subsequently Simon Ben- Gamaliel. 16 NOTE I. So far as is known there are four types of the series of lulab coins. TYPE I. appears to be unique in the Paris Cabinet, and is in silver. On the lulab side, beginning from beneath the holder or little basket is the legend bwntt^ nbw^b nns ri3tt7 round the coin. The ethrog, somewhat rudely formed, particularly at the top, partly projects above the basket. On the side with the portal, on the column to the right, is i\ above the architrave the let- ters un, and on the left column ob = nbtt7VT ; within the opening of the portal a semicircle with little rings or pellets ; within this semicircle, towards the upper part of the centre, is a short line of four little rings, further beneath, two more, and lower again four more ; a longer line above the architrave consisting of about twenty little rings (see Fig. I.). TYPE II. Of this type six or sfwen specimens are known. (1) In the collection of the /Oomte de Vogue" (Rev. Num. 1860, 2, note), imperfectly engy.ved by De Saulcy, Tab. XI. 3, cf. Fig. II. 16 The example in De Saulcy, Tab. XIII. 6, which has on one side bSTitf'' nbsnb nn roitf, and on the other five letters, which Levy has read ]l3n p psn, and wished to attribute to the high-priest Anan, is thoroughly untrustworthy, as has been shown by Garrucci, Merzbacher, and more lately also by Madden. Whether we can read instead ]ron "iT^bN is open to question. (Merzbacher in Von Sallet I. 230, note iv. ; 35] , No. 89.) ON THE JFAVISH " LULAB " AND "PORTAL" COINS. 31 (2) In the collection of Dr. Eugen Merzbacher of Munich (to whose courtesy I am indebted for an impression). (3) In the collection of Dr. Babington (Madden, Num. Orient. II. 244, No. 37). (4) In the collection of Dr. Welcher v. Moltheim (Madd. id.). (5) In the collection of Senor Infante, in Spain (deemed genuine by numismatists according to the statement of Dr. Merzbacher. See Von Sallet, Zeitsch. fur Numismatik, I., 224, No. 6; IV., 256, No. 112). (6) In the Hunter collection (communicated by Woide in Bayer, de Numis, p. XII. No. 2). (7) In the possession of a Mr. Lurie of Mohilew there is said to be a similar example (Merzbacher). On the lulab side is D s btt7W ~inb i'tt? round the coin, commencing from the bot- tom. The upper edge of the lulab holder is of a somewhat more substantial form than No. 1. The ethrog in No. 2 projects but little over the holder. On the other hand, it is set down lower in Nos. 1 and 3 ; so that its head only reaches as far as the centre of the holder. On the portal side is the word nbtPYTS half on the right and half on left side, in Nos. 1 and 3 ; but on No. 2 as on Type No. I. Nos. 1 3 have above the portal also a representation of a small cross with limbs of equal size. These two also have, in common with Type I., the linear ornamentation (the semicircle and the line in the middle) within the porch, but with slight differences so far as No. 3 is concerned. In Mr. Babington's example the line also occurs above the architrave. I do not know how the ornamentations of the other examples are arranged, or whether they have the small cross before mentioned, as I have not seen any representations of them, and numismatists have not considered these points. Some variations in this type indicate that more than one die was used. According to t.^e statement of its possessor, Dr. Moltheim, the Greek letters hlO are distinctly visible under the porch on No. 4. \ TYPE III. Of this type i^oly two examples are known, (1) In the Paris collection (De Saulcy, Tab. XIV. 4). (2) In the collection of Mr. L. Hamburger, of Frankfurt-am-Main, who most courteously obliged me with a cast of it, clearly taken from a struck example. I do not know whether other examples exist. On the lulab side is n^btEYT' ~inb 22', as in Type II. The ethrog is towards the centre of the lulab- holder. On the portal side is 27 to the right and ]13? to the left (on No. 2 the former is effaced). Above are what appear to be two architraves, instead of the linear ornamentation, and above the second a small star (effaced on No. 2). The decoration 32 ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. within the porch is different from Fig. II. The arch of the semicircle is not like a circle of dots, and the little lines on No. 2 are like the others, but on No. 1 resemble two wands, one beneath the other. No. 2 shows indistinct traces of the head of an emperor, with the ends of a diadem (see Fig. III.). TYPE IV. Five examples are known : (1) In the Paris Cabi- net (De Saulcy, Fig. IV. 1). (2) In the Berlin Cabinet (of which, the director, Von Sallet, has kindly sent me a plaster cast). It bears traces of an emperor's head, with the diadem. (8) In the collection of Rev. S. S. Lewis (see Madden. Joe. cit. p. 239, No. 19). It shows traces of the letters T. 4>AAYI. OY. (Tiro? $Xavtos OucorTrao-iavos). (4) In Bayer, de Numis, p. 141, No. 2 (see Fig. V.). (5) In the Museum Kircherianum (engraved by Merzbacher, in Von Sallet, III. 214, Tab. V. No. 114). This example has somewhat legibly on the upper portion of the lulab side the letters NOC, and on the right hand distinctly the head of an emperor ; towards the right are the outlines of the mouth, nose, brow, eye, and the leaves of the laurel wreath (see Fig. VI.). All these examples have, in common, the inscription dbtPYT rmnb on the lulab side, and "p^cttf, more or less distinctly, on the portal side. But some differ from others in points of detail. Fig. VI. least resembles the others. This specimen has not DbttfTl^ fYnnb in full, but at the foot of the lulab holder are the letters nb ; then there is a wide interval, which is occupied by the emperor's head wreathed, and then still further, close to the left side, is the word D^tETYl. There is ample space to have admitted the striking of the full inscription DbBPY'T' rvpnb , but it gives one the impression that it was desired that the head should not be effaced by the striking over it. Only Nos. 1 and 2 are alike. In these the lulab-holder is divided into four parts, on No. 4 into five, and on No. 5 only into two pai^s, as in the case of Types I., II., and III. Nos. 1, 2, and 6' have but a faint trace of an architrave, but above it two stra'ght lines. No. 4, on the other hand, has scarcely any trace Dron architrave over the columns, but only the decoration of a 'straight line, and above it a wavy line. All the examples have a star above the decoratijn over the columns with the exception of No. 4, which has none. The numismatists have not observed this peculiarity, though this is just what excites a suspicion that it is not a genuine piece. The n also in nb on No. 5, has by no means the appearance of that letter on other coins or in the Samaritan alphabet. The letter 1 also, in the word nbffiTn is peculiarly formed. The decoration within the opening of the portal also differs. If we take into consideration that the legend Dbti71"i s rmnb ON THE JEWISH " LULAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. 33 by itself is meaningless in the absence of any statement as to the year of striking (which is wanting throughout in the case of these pieces), and even if this had occurred, that refer- ence would be due on the coins, not only to the freedom of the capital, but to that of the people and of the land in general, and if we further take into consideration that some of the examples of these coins bear signs of surfrappage of a time after Vespasian, when Jerusalem had long since been de- stroyed, and if we finally take into consideration that the exam- ples cannot be of one and the same make, the certainty arises that all the examples of this type are equally open to suspicion. The star upon some examples of this Type IV. cannot in any degree serve as representing the guiding star of the Pseudo- Messiah Bar-Cochab. Especially may it be urged that the genuineness of the proportionately large number of examples of this type with nbttJW nvinb and "p^aitf. with or without signs of surfrappage, must be better evidenced than has at present been the case. It is probable that we possess no genuine example of the period of the Bar-Cochab revolt. This suspicion extends also to those examples which have the words bfrntZ^ "inb 2" W by the side of psja'j?, as in the Berlin Cabi- net there is one example with the palm-tree and vine, and with this legend, which bears traces also of the Latin letters NVS under the vine (Von Sallet, V. III.). It is struck, therefore, either over a coin of Vespasian, Domitian, or Trajan, and in either case after the destruction of Jerusalem. This city was, how- ever, not rebuilt during the second Eevolt, and did not fall into the possession of Bar-Cochab. The name of this hero also was not Simon. Can these coins, therefore, have been engraved or struck over other coins in his time and in his name ? \ FUKTHEB N(W TO PAGE 19." The Rev. Dr. Babington's cab\et contains a similar silver coin of an abnormal type, with a lyre and grapes and the same legends as the Reichardt example, but the legends are rendered less leg- ible owing to a hole towards the side. On one side is bs~>2P -in &, and on the other btTiW n b H N, which means bs-)tt7> nbhdb nnN rottf. This is described as No. 2570 in the Catalogue of the Anglo-Jewish Exhibition, but Madden treats it 17 This is attached in manuscript to my copy of the original work, and is in Dr. Graetz's own handwriting. H. M. 34 ON THE JEWISH " LTJLAB " AND " PORTAL " COINS. as false (Num. Orient.) : " I do not consider this piece to be genu- ine." Mr. H. Montagu, on the other hand, maintains " This coin appears to be perfectly genuine, but the use of two reverse dies with different dates is remarkable." But it is just the use of these different words nbs^b nvinb, which stamps it as being a false coin. Mr. Montagu was kind enough to lend me this coin, and its appearance has convinced me more effectually of its want of genuineness. The coin is not struck but is cast, and every cast must be regarded as false of which no struck original is forthcoming to prove the contrary. 18 This example of Dr. Babington's is therefore in the same category with the Reichardt example, which experienced numismatists have condemned. Both prove that forgers have existed who have driven a trade by striking or casting scarce pieces in feeble imitation of genuine coins. 18 I have again examined this coin by the kindness of its owner, and have submitted it to the highest authorities. It is clearly struck and not cast. H. M. Num. Chron. Ser. III., Vol. VI1L PI. VI. JEWISH "LULAB" AND "PORTAL" COINS. University of California SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY Return this material to the library from which it was borrowed. 6B91 A 000045168 2 v Universi Southu Libn