Jeivish Shekels and Other Coins of Ancient Judea. 447 



as may enable the general public to follow and appreciate the 

 new views on the subject which are from time to time appearing ; 

 especially the logical and very complete theory of M. de Saulcy, 

 from, which, however, I have ventured to differ in some particulars. 



Among other remarks of my correspondents on the sub- 

 ject, it has been suggested that the date on the coins issued 

 under the auspices of the first Koman Procurators of Judasa is 

 that of the era of Augustus, and not that of the battle of Actium. 

 I think it probable that it may be so, but the dates only differ 

 by three or four years, and I have therefore thought fit at 

 present to follow the great authority of Eckhel, who calls 

 it the Actian era. Cavedoni, another very good authority, 

 considers it to be the Alexandrian era; while both the 

 Actian and Alexandrian eras bear reference to the first 

 establishment of the power of Augustus throughout the 

 eastern possessions of Eome. The coin engraved below is 

 one of the coins in question, bear- 

 ing date the 39 th year, F©, which was fig§} 

 misprinted in the former article.* 



The same correspondent observes 

 that the inscription BA^IAEOS \M>< 

 ArPinnA should be BA2IAEO * 

 ArPIIIA, with one II. He is not aware, it would seem, that 

 the inscription occurs in both forms, as D. Cavedoni expressly 

 states. My correspondent further suggests that the coins with 

 this inscription all belong to Agrippa I. D. Cavedoni, on the 

 other hand, gives them all to Agrippa II., and says nothing of 

 coins belonging to Agrippa I. 



Another remark I have to reply to is, that, according to my 

 correspondent, the Emperor Titus, in the coins of the celebrated 

 JYDAEA CAPTA type, places his foot upon a helmet, and 

 not upon a clod of earth, as I have stated. It is true that in 

 many of the devices of that class it is so ; but they vary very 

 considerably, even in the more important features. Many which 

 I have examined have the object on which the emperor places 

 his foot of such irregular shape, that it is impossible to trace 

 the form of a helmet by the utmost stretch of imagination. I 

 have, therefore, in describing the coin before me, presumed it 

 to be a clod of earth, seeing that in other Roman devices of a 

 similar class a figure seated on a small mass of rock is intended 

 to symbolize a taking possession of territory. 



Eebata foe the Decembeb Nfmbeb, 1863. — In the interpretation of the 

 inscription at page 332, the Hebrew letter at No. 1 should be ^ (yod), instead of t 

 (zain), and at Nos. 4 and 5, and 17 and 18 there should be 1 (vau) instead of 

 ^ (yod) ; at page 341, line 30, 2 (beth), and T (daleth), should be respectively j 

 (caph) and 1 (resch) ; at page 338, line 35, for nPH read HPft ; at page 340, for 

 BAEIAEflE read BASIAEflS ; at page 318, read A. T (year 39). 



* The A.T0 is very indistinct, and the A of ancient form. 



