Israel

Numismatic
Research
10 | 2015

Published by
The Israel Numismatic Society
Israel Numismatic Research
Published by the Israel Numismatic Society
Volume 10 2015
Contents

5 Paolo Visonà: A Missing Link in the Last Carthaginian Gold Series

9 Eric A. Carlen and Catharine C. Lorber: A Die Shared by the Ptolemaic
Mints at Sidon and ‘Akko-Ptolemais
37 Haim Gitler and Gérald Finkielsztejn: An Official Hellenistic Inscribed
Disk from Ascalon (with an appendix by Naama Yahalom-Mack, Haim
Gitler, Ofir Tirosh and Yigal Erel: Bulk Chemical Composition of the Disk
Naming Ascalon; and an appendix by Dana Ashkenazi and Haim Gitler:
Metallurgical SEM-EDS Characterization of the Disk Naming Ascalon)
55 Gérald Finkielsztejn: The Weight Standards of the Hellenistic Levant, Part
Two: The Evidence of the Phoenician Scale Weights
105 Oliver D. Hoover: A Clashed Seleucid Obverse Die of Philip I Philadelphus
111 Aaron J. Kogon: Greek Letter Forms on Judean Coins
129 Jean-Philippe Fontanille and Aaron J. Kogon: Two New Symbols on a
Coin of Herod Antipas
137 Yoav Farhi: Die Sharing and Other Numismatic Connections in Southern
Roman Palestine (Second–Third Centuries CE)
155 Achim Lichtenberger: Orientation Matters: The Obverse Portrait of Elagabalus
on Some Civic Coins of Abila and Other Syrian Coins
169 David Woods: Muʽawiya, Constans II and Coins without Crosses
183 Nikolaus Schindel: The Umayyad Fulūs of Gaza
191 Nitzan Amitai-Preiss and Oren Tal: A Lead Bulla from Apollonia-Arsūf
with the Place Name Arsūf (with an appendix by Dana Ashkenazi and Oren
Tal: Archaeometallurgical Characteristics of the Bulla)
207 Stefan Heidemann and Robert Kool: A Bedouin Amīr in Fāṭimid Ṭabariyya:
The Earliest Numayrid Coin Excavated in Tiberias
215 Robert Kool and Oren Tal: ‘Underground’ Money in an Outremer Estate:
Token Molds and Lead Tokens from Crusader Arsur
229 REVIEW: Ya‘akov Meshorer, with Gabriela Bijovsky and Wolfgang Fischer-
Bossert. Coins of the Holy Land. The Abraham and Marian Sofaer Collection
at the American Numismatic Society and the Israel Museum. Edited by David
Hendin and Andrew Meadows (Ancient Coins in North American Collections
8). The American Numismatic Society, New York 2013 (Danny Syon)
235 Abbreviations
 Greek Letter Forms on Judean Coins
Aaron J. Kogon
University of Toronto
a.j.kogon@gmail.com

Abstract
The Greek letter forms on coins of the Hasmoneans, early Herodians and Roman governors
are discussed. These letter forms are compared with those on contemporary Jerusalemite stone
inscriptions and coins of the eastern Mediterranean. The chronological progression of letter
forms in the Jerusalem mint and the mixing of letter forms within a die are also explored and
a catalogue of letter forms is included.

INTRODUCTION
Greek scripts are found on coins of the Hasmoneans, Herodians and Roman
governors of Judea.1 The Hasmonean Greek legends are always placed alongside
their Paleo-Hebrew or Aramaic equivalents while the coins of the Herodians and
Roman governors display inscriptions in either Greek or Latin.2
This paper discusses Greek letter forms on coins of the Hasmoneans, early
Herodians and Roman governors in Judea. A catalogue of Greek letter forms is
included. No attempt is made to catalogue letter forms used on coins of Agrippa I
and II and of other late Herodians due to the paucity and poor condition of many
coin types.
Most Judean coins can be dated to a specific time frame. Consequently, the letter
forms on these coins may be used as paleographic aids in suggesting absolute dates
for Judean inscriptions. Letter forms may further be used to establish a relative
chronology of coins within the reign of a ruler or to indicate multiple mints.
The epigraphy of Paleo-Hebrew on Judean coins has been discussed widely
(e.g., Kadman 1954; McLean 1982; AJC 1:50–53; AJC 2:102, 124–125, 161–163;
TJC:48–49, 131–132, 163). However, Greek epigraphy on Judean coins has
received far less attention due in part to the complexity of the topic as well as the
overshadowing richness and significance of Paleo-Hebrew numismatic epigraphy.
Meshorer noted variations of Greek letter forms in the catalogues of his books.
Unfortunately, many letter forms are misreported in the catalogues (see e.g., Ariel
and Fontanille 2012:123) and are only discussed briefly (e.g., AJC 1:85; AJC 2:17

1 Yehud coins have been found bearing Greek or pseudo-Greek legends (Fontanille and
Lorber 2008), but these are beyond the scope of this paper.
2 The author thanks David Kogon, Donald T. Ariel and the anonymous referees for their
comments.

INR 10 (2015): 111–128 111

112 AARON J. KOGON

and 39). Like TJC, RPC I admirably distinguishes among several different Greek
letter forms in its catalogue, albeit not without some errors (see Syon 2004:49).
The letter forms on Herod’s coins have been discussed in detail by Ariel and
Fontanille (2012:123–124). The study of Greek letter forms has aided in establishing
chronologies for coins of Herod (Fontanille and Ariel 2006:83; Ariel and Fontanille
2012:169–170) and Antipas (Hendin 2003–2006:60). Still, no systematic analysis
of letter forms on Judean coins has heretofore been conducted.

LETTER VARIANTS
The most important letter variants on Judean coins are mentioned below. The letter
forms listed are chosen so that types are easily distinguishable from one another.
Forms that appear due to obvious die-cutter errors, die flaws or other idiosyncrasies
are not included.

Alpha
Alpha appears in three forms: bearing a straight cross-bar (A), a bent cross-bar
(a) or a central dot (Ó).
In some cases, the central-dot form appears to be an unintentional result of a
die-cutting flaw. Before cutting, dies were often marked with small dots at the
letter vertices using a drill or pointed chisel (see AJC 1:53). If the cross-bar of the
alpha is unclear due to shallow die cutting or a weak strike it is not uncommon for
the central dot to be the only element visible. Some coins, however, show clearly
that the central-dot form was intended.
Serifed alphas appear on coins of Hyrcanus I. This is not considered a distinct
form, but rather a stylistic enhancement.

Epsilon
Epsilon can be written in a classic (E) or cursive (‰) form. Much like alpha
forms, variants of epsilon with a central dot instead of a central cross-bar ( and
Ͼ respectively) exist.

Sigma
Sigma is found in either classic (S) or lunate form. The latter is found in either
round (C) or box-like (Ç) form.
When the middle indentation (>) on the classic sigma is not prominent it is hard
to distinguish between the classic and the box-like lunate forms.

Omega
The two major omega forms are the classic and cursive (w) forms. The classic form
can be further subdivided into open- (W) and closed-bottom (≥) forms. Open-bottomed
 GREEK LETTER FORMS ON JUDEAN COINS 113

omegas are made from one continuous curve while the closed-bottomed ones are
made from two parts: a circle and a tangential line below. Ariel and Fontanille
noted a third form of omega resembling ﾵ. This form, always upside down3, is only
found on certain issues of Herod. It is often difficult to distinguish this form from
tall and thin examples of the classic open-bottom omega. This is a barbarous style
of the regular open-bottomed classic omega, thus I consider them the same form.
The closed-bottomed omega only appears on coins of Antigonus and the dated
coins of Herod.

SUMMARY OF LETTER FORMS BY MINTING AUTHORITY

Hasmoneans
John Hyrcanus I: The earliest Hasmonean coins are Jerusalem prutot of John
Hyrcanus I struck in the name of Antiochus VII (TJC:30–31). These coins were
struck in two years (132/1 BCE and 131/0 BCE). The letter styles on these coins
are identical to the forms present on other coins minted elsewhere by that king.
The letter forms on coins of Antiochus VII and his successors are generally classic.
All three alpha forms, classic epsilons, classic sigmas and both open- and closed-
bottom classic forms of the omega are present.
The similarity of the letter forms on those coins is not surprising. The Jerusalem
Antiochus VII coin was struck in Seleucid fashion, with Seleucid iconography and
inscriptions. The Seleucid era was used for dating the coin. Even the denomination, a
chalkous (Hendin 2009:106) could also be considered a prutah. Seleucid iconographic
influence on Judean coins persisted for decades under Hasmonean rule (e.g., TJC:37).
After Antiochus VII’s death, Hyrcanus I resumed minting in his own name
(TJC:31). Small Greek monograms made out of the letters alpha and pi are present
on some of Hyrcanus I’s coins (namely, TJC: Groups B, C, D, H, I and J). The
monogram appears in many styles. The alpha may appear with a bent cross-bar
(serifed or sans serif) or a straight cross-bar. When the alpha is conjoined completely
with the pi it can also resemble a delta or lambda.4 The monogram forms received
detailed treatment by Meshorer (AJC 1:85).
The alpha that appears above the Paleo-Hebrew script on Hyrcanus I’s wreath/
cornucopia coins is always serifed with a bent cross-bar.
Alexander Jannaeus: Alexander Jannaeus issued coin types with bilingual
inscriptions in Greek and Hebrew. All bore the same legend: BAΣIΛEΩΣ
AΛEΞANΔPOY.

3 This occurrence is not exceptional; omegas are commonly upside down on Ariel and
Fontanille 2012: Types 5–9, 12–13.
4 Most of these forms are exclusive only to the monograms on Hyrcanus I’s coins. I
therefore did not include them in the catalogue.
114 AARON J. KOGON

Despite the large volume of coins minted by Jannaeus and the sloppiness of
many of the dies, the Greek letter forms are surprisingly consistent. “There is
almost no difference between the sizes of the Hebrew and the Greek inscriptions
on the bilingual coins of Alexander Jannaeus, but the Greek letters do not share the
characteristic irregularity of the Hebrew letters” (Kadman 1954:154). The reasoning
for this phenomenon is unclear. Perhaps the die cutters were more familiar with
Greek letters than the seldom-used Paleo-Hebrew ones.
Mattathias Antigonus: Mattathias Antigonus continued the tradition of bilingual
coins. Greek appears on Antigonus’ two largest denominations (TJC:218–219, Nos.
36 and 37) and the ‘menorah’ prutah (TJC:220, Nos. 41–42). Similar to Jannaeus,
Antigonus’ inscriptions include both his name and title.
The two largest denominations share the same letter forms. This fact is unsurprising
as these types should be viewed as part of the same series — they have similar imagery,
legends and their flans were uniquely cast in a two-sided mold (TJC:51–53). The
‘menorah’ prutah uses a different sigma style and (on some dies) a different alpha.

Herodians
Herod: Herod’s coins have only Greek legends. The inscriptions on these coins
are similar to the Greek scripts of his predecessors, mentioning his name and title.
Ariel and Fontanille summarized the letter forms of Herod’s coins in detail
(2012:123). The dated series bears the classic form of omega. Along with other
features that always appear together on dies with the open-bottomed omega in
Herod’s Type 1, Fontanille and Ariel identified that group as an early series of the
type (2006:76).
The progression of several letters from classic to cursive form in the Jerusalem
mint took place during Herod’s reign. Ariel and Fontanille used this fact as an aid
in building their relative chronology of Herod’s coins (2012:169–170).
Herod Archelaus: Archelaus presumably produced his coins in the same mint his
father had established (TJC:78). The letter forms are similar to his father’s final coins,
assuming Ariel and Fontanille’s relative chronology (outlined in 2012:159–176).
The only letter that varies in form is epsilon.
Philip: Philip established his mint de novo in Paneas and issued a large number
of coin types. The all-Greek inscriptions are somewhat more diverse than those
of his predecessors in both substance and style. Philip’s coins bear nearly every
type of letter form that was recorded in this study. Despite many dated coins it is
difficult to discern meaningful trends among the letter forms.
Herod Antipas: Antipas’ first coin type is a unique prutah, apparently struck at
Sepphoris (Hendin 2003–2006:59–60). The inscription, dated to year four, indicates
that the coin was struck by a tetrarch named Herod. If struck by Antipas’ father
Herod, the coin would have to be among his earliest issues. The prutah has cursive
omegas, but cursive omegas are not present on Herod’s early coins. Therefore, the
 GREEK LETTER FORMS ON JUDEAN COINS 115

coin was probably struck by Herod Antipas, and not his father — and the attribution
is partly based upon its letter forms.
Two decades later, Antipas minted a four denominational series in his newly
founded city of Tiberias (TJC:81–82). Throughout the course of his rule, Antipas
intermittently minted three more similar series.
Like coins of Archelaus, the letter forms on Antipas’ earliest coins are similar
to those on the final coins of Herod. This may be because some of Archelaus’
celators were used to cut the dies of Antipas’ earliest coins, but it also may be
purely coincidental.
Each of Antipas’ series — except for the two consecutive series struck in 29/30
CE and 30/1 CE respectively — has at least one letter form different from another.
The letter forms are almost always identical on the obverse and reverse dies of all
the denominations in each series. The single exception to this norm occurs on the
second largest denomination of the final series from 39/40 CE.

Roman Governors
The Roman governors in Judea struck coins in Jerusalem. The letter forms on the
earliest coins of the Roman governors are nearly identical to those on Archelaus’
coins. There presumably was continuity at the Jerusalem mint, as the first governor
coins were issued within a year of Archelaus’ deposition.5
With the exception of the epsilon, the letter forms on the governors’ prutot are
quite uniform. This fact is quite surprising, because Roman governors in Judaea
struck many different issues intermittently over a span of about half a century.

LETTER FORMS ON COINS OF JUDEA’S NEIGHBORS

Nabatea
Nabatea bordered Judea to the east. Coins of Nabatea found their way into Judea
in modest numbers.
Greek inscriptions are present on some coin types of Aretas III (87–62 BCE).
Alpha either has a straight cross-bar or it is missing its cross-bar altogether (L)
(Meshorer 1975:10–12; Schmitt-Korte 1990:125) on his coins. Classic sigmas,
classic epsilons and closed-bottom omegas are always used. The letter forms used
on Aretas III’s coins (all classic) are similar to those on contemporaneous coins
of Judea.
The date (LKς) found on some coins of Malichus I (60–30 BCE) contains none
of the letters studied here.

5 Meshorer gave the date of the earliest coins of the governors as 6/7 CE (TJC:256), but
this was rectified to 5/6 CE in INR 4 (No Author 2009:6).
116 AARON J. KOGON

Phoenicia
It is beyond the scope of this paper to catalogue the letter forms of all coins of
Phoenicia in detail. Of the Phoenician cities, Tyre was perhaps the most economically
important to Judea. Most of Jerusalem’s silver currency during the Herodian period
(and possibly before) was struck in Tyre (Ariel 1982:283). More bronze coins of
Tyre were found in Jerusalem than bronze coins of any other Phoenician city (Ariel
1982:317–318, Table 4). Therefore, this brief analysis will focus specifically on Tyre.
The Tyrian whole and fractional silver sheqels appear to have used the same letter
forms throughout their minting (125 BCE–65/6 CE). All the letters are in classic
form; alpha and epsilon occasionally have central dots replacing the horizontal bars.
Bronze coins of Tyre may be observed to have slightly different letter forms
than on the silver coins. Most bronze Tyrian coins have alpha with a bent crossbar,
classic epsilon and classic sigma. Central dots are sometimes present in the alpha
and epsilon. Notably, cursive letter forms (namely, cursive epsilon and omega
and lunate sigma) begin to appear on the coins from around the turn of the second
century CE. At about this time, the mint of Tyre began to prefer cursive letter
forms. By the end of the second century CE, cursive letter forms are used almost
exclusively. In Tyre, the evolution of letter forms inexplicably began about two
centuries after it occurred in Jerusalem (see below, Progression of Letter Forms
in the Jerusalem Mint). Unfortunately, the lack of many clear Tyrian bronze coin
types limits my ability to undertake a fuller analysis of the letter forms in this mint.

Egypt (Alexandria)
Egypt, Judea’s southwesterly neighbor, had an important mint in Alexandria. Before
the Roman period, the mint of Alexandria was controlled by the last Ptolemaic rulers.
The letter forms on the Ptolemaic Alexandrian coins from the time of Hyrcanus
I onward are all in a classic style (alpha with a bent cross-bar, classic epsilon,
classic sigma and open-bottomed omega). Box-like lunate sigmas are used in dates.
Alexandrian coins under Augustus can be divided into six series, spanning c.
30 BCE–12/3 CE (RPC I:691–692). Table 1 contains a preliminary recording of
the letter forms on these coins (Augustus to Claudius). Once again, a paucity of
clear examples of some coin types has inhibited a detailed recording of letter forms
on Alexandrian coins. Coins that are assigned to Claudius with uncertainty (RPC
I:698–699, Nos. 5107–5111) are not included in the table.
 GREEK LETTER FORMS ON JUDEAN COINS 117

Table 1. Letter forms on Alexandrian coins

Ruler Date Alpha Epsilon Sigma
Augustus/1 c. 30–28 BCE A E S, Ç
Augustus/2 After 19 BCE A E S, Ç
Augustus/3 c. 3/2 BCE A E S, Ç
Augustus/4 ? A E S
Augustus/5 c. 1–5 CE A, Ó E S
Augustus/6 9–12/3 CE A E S
Tiberius 17/8–36/7 CE A, a E S
Caligula 38/9 CE A - -
Claudius 41–54 CE A, a E, ‰ S, C

Despite about two centuries of minting, the letter forms of the Alexandrian mint
display no discernible pattern in the long term.

MIXING OF LETTER FORMS ON INDIVIDUAL DIES

For the most part, each letter has one form on individual dies. The appearance of
two forms of the same letter on one die is rare. Three instances of this phenomenon
are identified below.
The earliest mixing of letter forms is on Herod’s coins. Dies O1 and O3 of Type
5 of Ariel and Fontanille 2012 both bear an open- and closed-bottomed omega form.
The obverse of a coin type of Philip from 1/2 CE (TJC:228, No. 95) uses the
cursive epsilon form in the circular legend, while the date across the fields bears
the epsilon form . Varying amounts of space for the two letters may explain the
differing letter forms. The letters in the circular legend had to be packed together
and small, making it difficult to cut epsilons in the bulkier rectangular form.
Perhaps the most enigmatic case of letter-form mixing is encountered on one
obverse die of the second largest denomination of Antipas in 39/40 CE. The
inscription uses both the cursive and the classic open-bottom forms.
The two omega forms on Herod’s coins are identical except for their bottom
lines. It is easy to turn an open-bottomed omega into a closed-bottomed one, and
they can be easily confused. However, the two omega forms on Antipas’ coins
are quite dissimilar. Also, unlike the form of the omega on the dies of Ariel and
Fontanille’s Type 5, the omegas on Antipas’ dies are well formed and relatively large.
Mixing of letter forms has been observed on non-coin inscriptions from around
the same time. A notable example of this are the dedicatory inscriptions to “Mariam”
displayed on a limestone ossuary from Jerusalem, first century BCE–first century
118 AARON J. KOGON

CE (Cotton et al. 2010:184, No. 141). Two inscriptions are present on the ossuary:
one on the lid reads MaPIAM (=Mariam) and another on the façade that reads
MaIPAM (=Mariam, retrograde6; Cotton et al. 2010:185). In both inscriptions, the
leftmost alpha has a bent cross-bar and the rightmost alpha has a straight cross-bar.
Of course, many inscriptions on Jerusalem ossuaries were hastily, or at least
crudely, made (Rahmani 1994:11–12). In this case, however, although the inscription
on the façade is retrograde, the alpha forms are not switched. It is thus unlikely
that the name Mariam was copied by someone illiterate. The use of different letter
forms appears to have been intentional.7
The ossuary inscription illustrates that mixing of letter forms need not always
be an error. Still, it is most probable that the mixing of letter forms on coins is, at
least in most cases, a mistake. The mixing of letter forms is indicative of an era in
transition between two different letter forms (Gorissen 1978:151).

PROGRESSION OF LETTER FORMS IN THE JERUSALEM MINT

Preference towards certain letter forms evolves with time. As one would expect, such
changes are seldom abrupt. Conservatism and care must be used when attaching
chronological significance to letter forms (McLean 2002:42–45).
Cursive letter variants became increasingly favored in the Early Roman period
(Cook 1987:15; cf. McLean 2002:41). This fact is attested to by the progression
of letter forms in the Jerusalem mint.
Ariel was the first to note the development of forms of the omega in the Jerusalem
mint (2000–2002:119–120). Before Herod, only classic omegas were used on coins
of the Hasmoneans (Jannaeus and Antigonus). The dated coins of Herod display
classic omegas, while the undated coin types exhibit either the classic or cursive
forms. After Herod, cursive forms appear on coins of Archelaus and the Roman
governors. Based on these findings, Ariel proposed that the classic omega form
is present on earlier coins of Herod, and cursive omegas are present on the later
coins. This suggestion agrees with his typologically and archaeologically based
relative chronology for Herod’s coins.
Ariel and Fontanille also noted a progression of sigma forms, albeit not as
sharp a progression as that of the omega forms (2012:170). The classic sigma
form appears on coins of the Hasmoneans and the dated coins of Herod, while the
Jerusalem coins of Archelaus, the Roman governors and Agrippa I exhibit lunate
sigmas. Both classic and lunate sigmas are written on many coin types within the

6 Cotton et al. wrote “the name on the façade may not be misspelled (as Sukenik and
Rahmani supposed), but intentionally spelled backwards” (2010:185).
7 Other inscriptions from around the same time have also been found bearing two letter
forms (e.g., Cotton et al. 2010: No. 2).
 GREEK LETTER FORMS ON JUDEAN COINS 119

class of Herod’s undated coins. However, Ariel and Fontanille preferred not to
rely upon changes in sigma letter forms for establishing chronological pegs for
Herod’s coins.
The chronology of the maturing of the sigma forms under Herod can be compared
to that of the omega. Lunate sigmas appear on all five coin types of Herod that
display only cursive omegas (i.e., Ariel and Fontanille 2012: Types 12–13, 15–17).
Sigma and omega are not the only letter forms to undergo a chronological
development. Epsilon, and alpha are also seen to generally change in form over
the years, though not as clearly or as smoothly as the omega or sigma.
Classic epsilons (with center dots or cross-bars) are preferred — but are not
used exclusively — on coins of the Hasmoneans. They transition toward the cursive
form on Herod’s coins, but not as clearly as the omega. However, like the sigma,
cursive epsilons appear on all five coin types in which only cursive omegas are
displayed. Archelaus’ coins bear mostly cursive epsilons.
Curiously, a transition of epsilon forms can be observed even past Herod’s
reign. Gubernatorial prutot from 5/6 to 24/5 CE have cursive epsilons; the coins
from 29/30 CE and 30/1 CE (traditionally attributed to prefect Pontius Pilate) bear
both regular cursive omegas and cursive omegas with a dot in the center and the
coins of 54 CE and 58/9 CE bear only cursive omegas with a center dot. Agrippa
I’s prutot issued in Jerusalem in 41/2 CE fit this progression as well, as they exhibit
cursive omegas with a center dot.
The transition of the alpha’s form is the most subtle of all of the five letters.
Hasmonean coins display all alpha forms. Herod’s coins exhibit alphas with both
straight cross-bars and bent cross-bars. Coins of Archelaus and his successors bear
alphas with straight cross-bars (or occasionally central dots).
In general, letters on coins minted outside Jerusalem do not advance to cursive
form with time. For example, Antipas’ last coins display alphas with bent cross-
bars and classic omegas — both characteristic of the early Jerusalem mint.
Numismatic inscriptions make up only a small component of all extant Hasmonean
and Herodian era inscriptions. Stone inscriptions are another important source for
paleographic study. Is there a relation between the letter forms on coins and on
contemporaneous stone inscriptions?
This chronologically based study requires the stone inscriptions to be dated;
unfortunately, few are. Some inscriptions may be assigned a sufficiently precise
date based on content or provenance. The datable inscriptions from Jerusalem
between the first century BCE and 70 CE are summarized in Table 2.
120 AARON J. KOGON

Table 2. Dated Greek stone inscriptions from Jerusalem

Cotton et al. 2010 (No.) Description Date Alpha Epsilon Sigma Omega
Donation
3
Commemoration
18/7 BCE a E S W

666 Scale weight 9/8 BCE a? E Ç -

8 9
2 Warning sign 23 BCE–70 CE A, a E S W
10
676–691 Scale weight 40/1 CE A E Ç w
692 Scale weight 40–70 CE - E - -
8910

All the letter forms on coins (except alphas and epsilons with central dots) are
found on Jerusalemite inscriptions from between the first century BCE and 70 CE.
Regrettably, it is impossible to confidently correlate letter forms on coins and dated
stone inscriptions due to the paucity of the latter. It is also currently impossible
to use the letter-form inscriptions found in Jerusalem and Caesarea11 as a tool to
assign a mint to the governors’ coins. It would be worthwhile to reconsider these
topics as more datable Greek inscriptions are found.

DISCUSSION
Letter forms vary widely throughout the Judean numismatic corpus. The study of
the letter forms deepens the current understanding of the minting process.
Most likely, the letter form used was simply the selection of the (master?) die
cutters or some other authority in the mint. The partiality towards certain forms
may be due to aesthetic appeal or their ease of die engraving.
Within a single minting, letter forms generally change minimally from coin to
coin, especially if struck within close chronological proximity. For example, the
coins struck under Antiochus VII by Hyrcanus I were struck for two consecutive
years, and the letter forms did not change. Likewise, Antipas’ series from 30/1 and
Philips’ coins from 29/30 CE underwent no letter-form changes on coins of the
following year. It is likely that whoever determined the letter forms on one coin
type would also have selected the letter forms for other close-in-date coin issues.

8 There are in fact two copies of this inscription. They were each cut by a “different
hand, [but have] similar epigraphic features” (Cotton et al. 2010:42).
9 Contra Cotton et al. 2010:42.
10 Though not all every scale weight contains all the letters alpha, epsilon, sigma and
omega, the paleographic style of all the weights is identical.
11 Only four Greek inscriptions from Caesarea can be securely dated to the reign of the
Roman governors (Ameling et al. 2011:606–611: Nos. 1726–1729).
 GREEK LETTER FORMS ON JUDEAN COINS 121

It also appears that, over time, the evolution of forms in Jerusalem developed out
of the changing common preferences of the celators.
Antipas’ and Philip’s coins both exhibit their own letter-form idiosyncrasies. In
each series of Antipas’ coins, nearly all denominations have the same letter forms.
In contrast, the letter forms on Philip’s coins are seldom the same from coin to
coin. Even connected obverse and reverse dies seldom share the same letter forms.
In these cases, it is most likely that die cutters, rather than a central administrator,
decided the letter forms. If die cutters in fact chose the letter forms on coins of
Jerusalem, their letter-form preference was not shared by Antipas’ and Philip’s
mints. A letter-form analysis of coins of the later Herodians is a desideratum as
more well-preserved coins are discovered.

CATALOGUE
The Greek letter forms on coins of the Hasmoneans, early Herodians and the Roman
governors are recorded in the catalogue below. The letter forms were determined
by examining photographs of coins and die composites from books, papers and
auction catalogues. Clearly, not every known die of all the coin types discussed
in this study was examined. As a consequence, it is possible that some letter
forms was not recorded. This is especially true in regard to common coins with
many die variations. However, die studies (Fontanille 2011; Ariel and Fontanille
2012:65–88; Fontanille and Goldstein 2013) have allowed for the examination of
many dies of a few series.
‘Hybrid’ coins (i.e., coins struck by dies from two different coin types) and
rare letter forms caused by a die-cutting mistake are not included in the catalogue.
Retrograde letters are not noted as such.
All references are TJC groups or numbers unless otherwise specified. Abbreviations:
A&F=Ariel and Fontanille 2012; O=Obverse; R=Reverse
Ruler Reference (TJC O/R Alpha Epsilon Sigma Omega Date
122

or A&F) A Ó a E  ‰ Ͼ Σ C Ç W ≥ w
Hyrcanus I under TJC:30–31 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 132/1–131/0
Antiochus VII BCE
Hyrcanus I Group A12 O ✓ 129?–104 BCE
Groups B, C, R ✓ ✓
D, H ,I and J
(monogram)13
Jannaeus Group K O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 104–76 BCE
Group L O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Group M O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Group N O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Antigonus No. 36 R ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 40–37 BCE
No. 37 R ✓ ✓ ✓
Nos. 41–42 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Herod A&F: Type 1 R ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 38/7 BCE
A&F: Type 2 R ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ (A&F:89–92)
A&F: Type 3 R ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
AARON J. KOGON

A&F: Type 4 R
A&F: Type 5 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 37–4 BCE
A&F: Type 6 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
A&F: Type 7 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
A&F: Type 8 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
A&F: Type 9 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
12 A&F: Type 10 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
A&F: Type 11 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓?
13
A&F: Type 12 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

12 Alpha always serifed.

13 Alpha may be serifed.
Ruler Reference (TJC O/R Alpha Epsilon Sigma Omega Date
or A&F) A Ó a E  ‰ Ͼ Σ C Ç W ≥ w
A&F: Type 13 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
A&F: Type 1414 O ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
A&F: Type 15 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
A&F: Type 16 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
A&F: Type 17 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Archelaus 67 O ✓ 4 BCE–6 CE
R ✓? ✓
68 O ✓
R ✓
69 O ✓
R ✓ ✓
70 O ✓
R ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
71 O ✓
R ✓ ✓
72 O ✓
R ✓ ✓
73, 73a O ✓
R ✓ ✓? ✓ ✓
74 O ✓ ✓
R ✓
GREEK LETTER FORMS ON JUDEAN COINS

14
123

14 Letter forms unclear on this unique coin.

Ruler Reference (TJC O/R Alpha Epsilon Sigma Omega Date
124

or A&F) A Ó a E  ‰ Ͼ Σ C Ç W ≥ w
Antipas Hendin O ✓ 1 BCE/1 CE
2003–200615 R ✓? ✓ ✓
75 O ✓ ✓ ✓ 20/1 CE
R ✓ ✓ ✓
76 O ✓ ✓ ✓
R ✓ ✓ ✓
77 O ✓ ✓ ✓
R ✓ ✓ ✓
78 O ✓ ✓
R ✓ ✓
79 O ✓ ✓ ✓ 29/30 CE
R ✓ ✓ ✓
80 O ✓ ✓ ✓
R ✓ ✓
81 O ✓ ✓ ✓
R ✓ ✓ ✓
82 O
AARON J. KOGON

R ✓
83 O ✓ ✓ ✓ 30/1 CE
R ✓ ✓ ✓
84 O ✓ ✓ ✓
R ✓ ✓ ✓
85 O ✓ ✓ ✓
R ✓ ✓ ✓
86 O
15
R ✓

15 Letter forms unclear on this unique coin. Retrograde epsilon resembles Ɛ.

Ruler Reference (TJC O/R Alpha Epsilon Sigma Omega Date
or A&F) A Ó a E  ‰ Ͼ Σ C Ç W ≥ w
87 O ✓ ✓ ✓ 33/4 CE
R ✓ ✓ ✓
88 O ✓ ✓ ✓
R ✓ ✓ ✓
89 O ✓ ✓ ✓
R ✓ ✓ ✓
90 O
R ✓ ✓ ✓
91 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 39/40 CE
R ✓ ✓ ✓
92 O ✓ ✓ ✓
R ✓ ✓ ✓
93 O ✓ ✓ ✓
R ✓ ✓ ✓
94 O ✓ ✓ ✓
R ✓ ✓ ✓
Philip 95 O ✓ ✓ ✓ 1/2 CE
R ✓ ✓ ✓
96 (Fontanille O ? ? ? ✓ ✓
2011: No. 2, R1)16 R ✓ ✓ ✓
96 (Fontanille O ? ? ? ✓ ✓
2011: No. 2, R2) R ✓ ✓
GREEK LETTER FORMS ON JUDEAN COINS

97 O ✓ ✓ ✓ 8/9 CE
R ✓ ✓ ✓
98 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
16
R ✓
125

16 The legends on the two reverse dies of TJC:228, No. 96 are different (see Fontanille 2011:110, Fig. 5).
Ruler Reference (TJC O/R Alpha Epsilon Sigma Omega Date
126

or A&F) A Ó a E  ‰ Ͼ Σ C Ç W ≥ w
99 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 12/3 CE
R ✓? ✓
100 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ After 14 CE
R ✓ ✓
101 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 15/6 CE
R ✓ ✓ ✓
102 O ? ? ? ✓ ✓ 26/7 CE
R ✓ ✓
103 R ✓? ✓
104 O ✓? ✓ ✓ 29/30 CE
R ✓ ? ? ? ?
105 O ✓ ✓ ? ? ? ? ✓
R ✓ ✓
106 O ? ? ? ✓ ✓ 30/1 CE
R ✓ ✓ ✓
107 O ✓ ✓ ✓
R ✓ ✓
AARON J. KOGON

109 O ✓ ✓ ? ? ? ? ✓
R ✓ ✓
110 O ✓ ✓ 33/4 CE
R ✓ ✓ ✓
Governors 311–314 O ✓ ✓ 5/6, 8/9 and
9/10 CE
respectively
315 O ✓ ✓ 10/1 CE
R ✓
316 O ✓ ✓ 15/6 CE
317 O ✓
318 O ✓
Ruler Reference (TJC O/R Alpha Epsilon Sigma Omega Date
or A&F) A Ó a E  ‰ Ͼ Σ C Ç W ≥ w
320 O ✓ ✓ ✓ 16/7 CE
R ✓
321 O ✓
32217 O ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 16/7? CE
325 O ✓ 17/8 CE
R ✓ ✓
326 O ✓
327 O ✓ ✓
R ✓
328 O ✓ ✓ 18/9 CE
R ✓ ✓
329 O ✓ ✓ 24/5 CE
R ✓
331 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 29/30 CE
R ✓ ✓
333 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 30/1 CE
334 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 31/2 CE
335 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 31/2? CE
340 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 54 CE
R ✓
341 O ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓?
GREEK LETTER FORMS ON JUDEAN COINS

R ✓
342 O ✓ ✓ ✓
R ✓
345 O ✓ ✓ ✓ 58/9 CE
17
R ✓ ✓ ✓
127

17 No clear examples of this type have been found. It may be a minima of Caesarea (TJC:257).
128 AARON J. KOGON

REFERENCES
Ameling W., Cotton H.M., Eck W., Isaac B., Kushnir-Stein A., Misgav H., Price J. and Yardeni
A. eds. 2011. Corpus Inscriptionum Iudaeae/Palaestinae 2: Caesarea and the Middle
Coast (1121–2160). Göttingen.
Ariel D.T. 1982. A Survey of Coin Finds in Jerusalem (Until the End of the Byzantine Period).
LA 32:273–326.
Ariel D.T. 2000–2002. The Jerusalem Mint of Herod the Great: A Relative Chronology. INJ
14:99–124.
Ariel D.T. and Fontanille J.-P. 2012. The Coins of Herod: A Modern Analysis and Die
Classification (Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 79). Leiden–Boston.
Cook B.F. 1987. Greek Inscriptions (Reading the Past). Los Angeles.
Cotton H.M., Di Segni L., Eck W., Isaac B., Kushnir-Stein A., Misgav H., Price J., Roll I. and
Yardeni A. eds. 2010. Corpus Inscriptionum Iudaeae/Palaestinae 1: Jerusalem 1
(1–704). Göttingen.
Fontanille J.-P. and Ariel D. T. 2006. The Large Dated Coin of Herod the Great: The First Die
Series. INR 6:73–86.
Fontanille J.-P. 2011. Herod Philip: The First Jewish Portrait. INR 6:105–119.
Fontanille J.-P. and Lorber C. 2008. Silver Yehud Coins with Greek or Pseudo-Greek
Inscriptions. INR 3:45–49.
Goldstein I. and Fontanille J.-P. 2013. The Small Denomination of Mattathias Antigonus: Die
Classification and Interpretations. INR 8:55–71.
Gorissen P. 1978. Litterae Lunatae. Ancient Society 9:149–163.
Hendin D. 2003–2006. A New Coin-Type of Herod Antipas. INJ 15:56–61.
Hendin D. 2009. The Metrology of Judaean Small Bronze Coins. AJN (Second Series)
21:105–121.
Kadman L. 1954. The Hebrew Coin Script: A Study in the Epigraphy of Ancient Jewish Coins.
IEJ 4:150–169.
McLean B.H. 2002. An Introduction to Greek Epigraphy of the Hellenistic and Roman Periods
from Alexander the Great Down to the Reign of Constantine (323 B.C. –A.D. 337).
Ann Arbor.
McLean M.D. 1982. The Use and Development of Palaeo-Hebrew in the Hellenistic and
Roman Periods. Ph.D. diss., Harvard University. Cambridge, Mass.
Meshorer Y. 1975. Nabataean Coins (Qedem 3). Jerusalem.
No author 2007. Editor’s Note. INR 4:5–7.
Schmitt-Korte K. 1990. Nabataean Coinage—Part II. New Coin Types and Variants.
Numismatic Chronicle 150:105–133.
Syon D. 2004. Tyre and Gamla—A Study in the Monetary Influence of Southern Phoenicia on
Galilee and the Golan in the Hellenistic and Roman Periods. Ph.D. diss., Hebrew
University. Jerusalem.
 ABBREVIATIONS
AJC Y. Meshorer Ancient Jewish Coinage. Dix Hills, NY 1982
AJN American Journal of Numismatics
BMC e.g., BMC Arab.: G.F. Hill. Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Arabia, Mesopotamia, and Persia. London
1922
BMCO e.g., BMCO 1: S. Lane-Poole. The Coins of the Eastern Khaleefehs in the British Museum. Catalogue of
the Oriental Coins in the British Museum 1. London 1875
CH Coin Hoards
CHL Y.Meshorer, G. Bijovsky and W. Fischer-Bossert. Coins of the Holy Land: The Abraham and Marian
Sofaer Collection at the American Numismatic Society and the Israel Museum. Ed. by D. Hendin and A.
Meadows. New York 2013
CIL Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum
CNP e.g., L. Kadman. The Coins of Akko Ptolemais (Corpus Nummorum Palaestinensium IV). Jerusalem
1961
CRE e.g., H. Mattingly. The Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum I. Augustus to Vitellius. London
1923
DOC e.g., P. Grierson. Catalogue of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection and in the
Whittemore Collection 3. Leo III to Nicephorus III 717–1081. Washington, D.C. 1973
IEJ Israel Exploration Journal
IG Inscriptiones Graecae
IGCH M. Thompson, O. Mørkholm and C.M. Kraay. An Inventory of Greek Coin Hoards. New York 1973
INJ Israel Numismatic Journal
INR Israel Numismatic Research
LA Studium Biblicum Franciscanum Liber Annuus
LRBC e.g., P.V. Hill and J.P.C. Kent. Part 1: The Bronze Coinage of the House of Constantine, A.D. 324–46. In
Late Roman Bronze Coinage (A.D. 324–498). London 1965. Pp. 4–40
MIB e.g., W. Hahn. Von Anastasius I. bis Justinianus I (491–565). Moneta Imperii Byzantini 1. Österreische
Akademie der Wissenschaften Philosophisch-Historische Klasse Denkscriften 109. Veröffentlichungen
der Numismatischen Kommission 1. Vienna 1973
MIBE W. Hahn. Money of the Incipient Byzantine Empire (Anastasius I–Justinian I, 491–565) (Veröffentlichungen
des Instituts für Numismatik und Geldgeschichte der Universität Wien 6). Vienna 2000
MIBEC W. Hahn and M. Metlich. Money of the Incipient Byzantine Empire Continued (Justin II—Revolt of
the Heraclii, 565–610). (Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Numismatik und Geldgeschichte der
Universität Wien 13). Vienna 2009
MN American Numismatic Society Museum Notes
NC Numismatic Chronicle
NCirc. Numismatic Circular
NNM Numismatic Notes and Monographs
RIC e.g., C.H.V. Sutherland. The Roman Imperial Coinage I. From 31 BC to AD 69. London 1984
RN Revue Numismatique
RPC e.g., A. Burnett, M. Amandry and I. Carradice. From Vespasian to Domitian (AD 69–96). Roman
Provincial Coinage 2. London 1999
RRC M.H. Crawford. Roman Republican Coinage. Cambridge 1974
SC e.g., A. Houghton and C. Lorber. Seleucid Coins. A Comprehensive Catalogue. Part I. Seleucus I through
Antiochus III. New York, Lancaster, PA-London 2002
SICA e.g., S. Album and T. Goodwin. Sylloge of Islamic Coins in the Ashmolean 1: The Pre-Reform Coinage
of the Early Islamic Period. Oxford 2002
SNAT e.g., L. Ilisch. Sylloge Numorum Arabicorum Tübingen–Palästina IVa Bilād aš-Šām I. Tübingen 1993
SNG Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum (with suffix as necessary, e.g. SNG Cop.)
SNR Schweizerische Numismatische Rundschau
TINC Transactions of the International Numismatic Congress
TJC Y. Meshorer. A Treasury of Jewish Coins from the Persian Period to Bar Kochba. Jerusalem-Nyack 2001
ZfN Zeitschrift für Numismatik

235