un droit municipal, un droit propre à chaque cité, quelque petite qu'elle fût, et par conséquent les monnaies frappées dans chaque ville étaient marquées de types particuliers, et signées du nom d'un magistrat responsable. Si la ville ou l'État était soumis au pouvoir d'un seul homme, alors des monnaies devaient porter son nom, puisqu'elles étaient émises sous sa responsabilité. Les monuments sont d'accord avec ces principes; il est facile de nommer des villes importantes qui ont fait frapper des monnaies autonomes pendant une longue suite d'années, et sans jamais s'être soustraites au joug persan. Il suffira de citer Tarse, Sidé, Aspendus et les villes lyciennes, dont la numismatique continue sans interruption depuis le commencement du Ve siècle, jusqu'à la chute de la monarchie persane.

"Mais non seulement les villes émettaient des monnaies; les satrapes aussi, ces lieutenants immédiats du roi, en frappaient et les signaient de leur nom. Pharnabaze a laissé des monnaies frappées dans deux portions très-différentes de l'Asie-Mineure; à Lampsaque d'abord, ou plutôt à Cyzique, villes situées dans sa satrapie; ensuite à Tarse, où il fut envoyé pour conférer avec Conon (398-397). L'exemple de Pharnabaze est important, parceque pendant sa longue carrière, ce satrape garda une fidélité invariable envers son souverain, et ne fut jamais en révolte ni ouverte ni secrète contre lui. Les dynastes de Carie, depuis Hecatomnus jusqu'à Othontopate, ont tous battu monnaie, et il en est de même de beaucoup d'autres satrapes, pour lesquels nous renvoyons le lecteur au savant ouvrage de M. le Duc de Luynes."

From the statements here given respecting the "droit monétaire" during the Persian rule, it would seem not at all unlikely that the Jews, after Artaxerxes had granted

them their autonomy, commenced to strike money as their neighbours. M. F. Lenormant, as I have previously observed, has no doubt upon the subject, and adds, "un passage du firman délivré à Esdras par Artaxerxe paraît même impliquer virtuellement le droit de monnayage." 14

I may add that Mr. W. S. W. Vaux, late keeper of the Department of Coins and Medals, British Museum, in a letter to me, writes as follows:-"I see in a recent work of F. Lenormant that he maintains the view which, as you know, I have always held, that the thick shekels and halfshekels must have been struck soon after the return from the Captivity, as they are perfectly analogous with the thick pieces attributed to Tyre or the Phoenician coast of a date about 460 or 470 B.C."

Before, however, accepting off-hand this new theory as the correct one, it will be as well-if for nothing else, for the credit of the many numismatists who have attributed these coins to Simon Maccabæus-to examine three points-1, the fabric, 2, the palæography, and 3, weights of the pieces in question.

the

1. Fabric. M. de Sauley himself did not fail to recognise 15 that the style and fabric of the silver shekels did not accord with the copper; but not knowing what to do with the copper, he attributed both to the high priest Jaddua.

14 This is the passage already quoted. The reference given by M. Lenormant is to "Nehem. xiii. 18." This is certainly incorrect, and should be to Ezra vii. 18. M. Lenormant has informed me that the remarks of Mr. Waddington have been confirmed and enlarged by the late Dr. Brandis in his work "Das Münz- Mass- und Gewichtswesen in Vorderasien." I have been unable to consult a copy of this work.

15 Rev. Num., 1864, vol. ix. p. 370 seq.

Mr. R. S. Poole, the present keeper of the Department of Coins and Medals, British Museum, has expressed himself strongly on this point. He says: 16 "The fabric of the silver coins is so different from that of any other ancient money that it is extremely hard to base any argument on it alone; and the cases of other special classes, as the ancient money of Cyprus, show the danger of such reasoning. . . . . We may remark that the forms are too exact, and that apart from style, which we do not exclude in considering fabric, the mere mechanical work is like that of the coins of the Phoenician towns struck under the Seleucidæ."

In this opinion most numismatists have agreed.

2. Palæography. There is no palæographic reason why these pieces should not belong to the Persian period.

3. Weight. This was the great question on which numismatists have differed from De Saulcy.

The silver shekel weighs 220 grs., giving a talent of 660,000 grs. This is the same as the Eginetan, which appears to be of Phoenician origin. Both the Eginetan and Phoenician standards were disused under Alexander the Great, to whose time De Saulcy assigned these coins. De Sauley therefore, in assigning these coins to Jaddua, attributed these pieces to the very period at which it was impossible they could have been issued.17

The silver shekel, according to Bayer,18 contained a sixth of copper mixed with the silver; and it has been shown, that a similar proportion occurs in the coins of

16 Smith, "Dict. of the Bible," s. v. Money.

17 Cf. R. S. Poole, in Smith's "Dict. of the Bible," s. vv. Money and Weights; F. W. Madden, "Hist. of Jewish Coinage," pp. viii. and 249 seq. A complete résumé of this subject is in my paper in the Num. Chron., N.S., 1865, vol. v. p. 198.

18 De Num. Hebr., p. 66.

VOL. XIV., N.S.

P P

the last Syrian kings and of the Parthian kings contemporary with Simon Maccabæus.19

There was therefore very good ground for rejecting De Saulcy's persistent attribution of the coins to Jaddua, and of assigning them to Simon Maccabæus, during whose government the coins could have been issued, both from historical and numismatic evidence.

As, however, the shekels correspond in weight to the tetradrachm and didrachm of the early Phoenician talent, which was in use in the cities of Phoenicia under Persian rule, there is no reason on this point on which we can repudiate M. de Saulcy's new suggestion.20

I fear, however, that the question will still remain a "vexed one." The controversy on these coins has now extended over a period of ninety years, and I myself have been a student of this particular branch for more than ten. I am, however, pleased to have recorded a new suggestion on their classification, which is of far greater value than the attribution previously given by De Saulcy of these pieces to the High Priest Jaddua.

There still, however, remains the question of the copper coins.

M. de Saulcy does not help us on this point.

19 Eckhel, Doct. Num. Vet., vol. i. p. xxv.; vol. iii. p. 542; Cavedoni, Bibl. Num., vol. ii. pp. 7-9; F. W. Madden, "Hist. of Jew. Coinage," p. vii.

20 For coins of the same weight as the shekel, and which were current under Persian rule, see Mionnet, vol. v. p. 645, Nos. 30 to 40; Suppl., vol. viii. p. 426, Nos. 29 to 35. The full weight of this series of coins appears to be on the following scale-Octodrachm, 440 grs.; tetradrachm, 220 grs.; tridrachm, 165 grs.; didrachm, 110 grs.; drachm, 55 grs.; halfdrachm, 28 grs.; quarter-drachm, 14 grs.; one-eighth drachm, grs. I have to thank Mr. Head for kindly weighing these coins for me, and for answering the numerous enquiries on several points on which I have required information.

Are they also to be attributed to Ezra ? or are they to be assigned to the period of the first revolt, as proposed by the Padre Garrucci? 21

As I have previously stated, it was always felt that there was a great difficulty in classing the silver and copper coins together. Mr. John Evans, a distinguished numismatist, as long ago as 1857 recognised this fact. He says: 22 "I must confess that I very much doubt the propriety of classing these copper coins with the shekels, both from the formation of the W, and from the nature of the inscriptions, which so closely resemble some of those on the coins of Simon Barcochab." The Padre Garrucci, in an admirable article on "The Coins of the Revolts of the Jews," 23 as will be remembered, attributed them boldly to the period of the first revolt, a theory which in the year 1866 I did my best to demolish. I see no reason at the present time to alter my views, which will be found fully set forth in a paper on the "Coins of the Two Revolts of the Jews," 24 assigning these coins to the Maccabæan period; and the curious coin in the British Museum, countermarked with an elephant, would seem to put the seal on this opinion. 25

Æ

Dissertazioni Archeologiche di vario Argomento," vol. ii.

p. 31, Rome, 1865.

22 Num. Chron., vol. xx. p. 12.

23 Dissertazioni Archeologiche di vario Argomento," vol. ii. p. 31. Rome, 1865.

24 Num. Chron., N.S., vol. vi. p. 36.

25 Num. Chron., N.S., vol. vi. p. 61.