C 800 ] 
IX. 
For the farther illuftration of what has been here 
advanced, it will be requifite to obferve, that two 
sera’s were antiqntly followed at Sidon ; the sera of 
Seleucus, and another peculiar to the inhabitants of 
that 
“ ciennes.” Memoires de L'ltterature , tires des Regijlres de l' Aca- 
demic Royalc des Iufcriptions Belles-Lettres , &c. Tom.xxiv. p. 60. 
A Paris, 1756. 
For the better underftanding of this note, it will be proper to 
obferve, that the Itranger therein mentioned was M. Brucker, 
Profeflbr of Hiftory in the Univerlity of Bafil ; with whom I con- 
tracted an acquaintance when at Oxford, towards the clofe of 
March 1750. This gentleman then informed me, that M. 1 ’Abbe 
Barthelemy communicated to him draughts of three Samaritan 
coins of Jonathan, prince and high-prieft of the Jews. He added, 
that one of thefe exhibited the words BA 2 IAEQ 2 AAEHANAPOT ; 
which, according to him, M. l’Abbe Barthelemy interpreted of 
Alexander the Great, talcing the piece to have been twice flruck. 
This M. Brucker afterwards in a great meafure confirmed, by a 
letter he wrote to me at Oxford ; which I publifhed intire in 1750, 
and endeavoured to prove, that the foregoing infeription was to be 
underftood of Alexander I. king of Syria, and not of Alexan- 
der the Great. The Samaritan infeription, which M. Brucker only 
juft touched upon, as is manifeft from his letter, I likewife at- 
tempted to explain ; producing proper vouchers, in fupport of what 
I advanced. Thus ftands the faCl, which feems to have given fome 
offence to M. l’Abbe, ftated in the moft concife manner poflible ; 
and from it, thus ftated, as I apprehend, are naturally deducible 
the following obfervations. 
1. As 1 differed in opinion from M. l’Abbe, with regard to the 
words BA5IAF.US A AV EANAPOT, as well as in feveral other re- 
fpe£ls, and fupported by indifputablc authorities what I in all points 
advanced, without receiving from any perfon whatfoever the leaft 
information relative thereto ; it very evidently appears, that I did 
not adopt M. l’Abbe’s explication of the coin in queftion. 
2. By publifhing M. Brucker’s letter, which I have ftill by me, 
intire, I both did him juftice, and clearly acknowledged M. l’Abbe 
f.o have firft difeovered the medals it treats of to belong to Jona- 
than, 
