What is Jerusalem worth?
That's a question I asked myself as I bid in one of a series of auctions on eBay for some ancient and medieval coins. This particular coin was listed by the seller as "Broken Silver Crusaders Coin from Holyland Jerusalem." There was no identification as to the date or authority under which this coin was minted. I considered this coin and another "crusader coin" and commenced with Google research.
The other "crusader" coin I was able to identify as struck under a 13th century king of Cicilian Armenia and not one of the Latin Christian states created in the aftermath of 1099. Interesting, yes, but not what I was looking for. The "Holyland Jerusalem" coin, however, proved to be just as was claimed:
Despite the break at the top, this denier coin is readily identifiable. The reverse side, shown on the left, depicts the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and reads De Ierusalem (Jerusalem) around the edge. The obverse has a cross in the middle and, while the letters are harder to make out, they should read Amaulricus Rex or King Amalric. In short, this is a coin minted in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, the "crusader" state created in 1099 and which lasted in some form or another until the fall of Acre in 1291.
The name "Amalric" invokes some ambiguity, however. King Amalric I reigned 1162-1174, a period that could be considered the apex of the kingdom's security and power. His only major successor before the fall of Jerusalem to Saladin was Baldwin IV, an effective ruler in spite of his leprosy from childhood. The child-king Baldwin V was dead within a year and then Guy de Lusignan led the kingdom to disaster. Of these rulers from the period of the original kingdom, only Guy appears to have minted his own, distinct coin. The Baldwins continued to use Amalric's denier.
Moreover, a King Amalric II ruled over the post-1187 Kingdom of Jerusalem, a much-reduced coastal strip of cities, in the years 1197-1205. He issued a coin that is, as far as I can tell, identical in design to the first Amalric's coin. So I was left with a bit of confusion: which Amalric minted this coin? And, if it was the first, was this particular coin struck under Amalric himself or one of the late Baldwins?
I may never get an answer to the second question, but the first has been addressed to my satisfaction. I queried the seller as to the place where this coin was found. He replied that it was uncovered in southern Jordan. We know that territories east of the Jordan River were controlled by Latin Christians only during the early Kingdom of Jerusalem. After 1187 I find it unlikely that a Frankish coin would be considered necessary or useful that far from the Mediterranean coast. So I think it's a safe bet to conclude that this coin, which I now own (pending successful delivery!), dates from the early Kingdom of Jerusalem between the years 1162 and 1186.
A kingdom which, for various reasons, I find to be a fascinating subject in itself. But I will have to save those thoughts for another time.
The other "crusader" coin I was able to identify as struck under a 13th century king of Cicilian Armenia and not one of the Latin Christian states created in the aftermath of 1099. Interesting, yes, but not what I was looking for. The "Holyland Jerusalem" coin, however, proved to be just as was claimed:
Despite the break at the top, this denier coin is readily identifiable. The reverse side, shown on the left, depicts the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and reads De Ierusalem (Jerusalem) around the edge. The obverse has a cross in the middle and, while the letters are harder to make out, they should read Amaulricus Rex or King Amalric. In short, this is a coin minted in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, the "crusader" state created in 1099 and which lasted in some form or another until the fall of Acre in 1291.
The name "Amalric" invokes some ambiguity, however. King Amalric I reigned 1162-1174, a period that could be considered the apex of the kingdom's security and power. His only major successor before the fall of Jerusalem to Saladin was Baldwin IV, an effective ruler in spite of his leprosy from childhood. The child-king Baldwin V was dead within a year and then Guy de Lusignan led the kingdom to disaster. Of these rulers from the period of the original kingdom, only Guy appears to have minted his own, distinct coin. The Baldwins continued to use Amalric's denier.
Moreover, a King Amalric II ruled over the post-1187 Kingdom of Jerusalem, a much-reduced coastal strip of cities, in the years 1197-1205. He issued a coin that is, as far as I can tell, identical in design to the first Amalric's coin. So I was left with a bit of confusion: which Amalric minted this coin? And, if it was the first, was this particular coin struck under Amalric himself or one of the late Baldwins?
I may never get an answer to the second question, but the first has been addressed to my satisfaction. I queried the seller as to the place where this coin was found. He replied that it was uncovered in southern Jordan. We know that territories east of the Jordan River were controlled by Latin Christians only during the early Kingdom of Jerusalem. After 1187 I find it unlikely that a Frankish coin would be considered necessary or useful that far from the Mediterranean coast. So I think it's a safe bet to conclude that this coin, which I now own (pending successful delivery!), dates from the early Kingdom of Jerusalem between the years 1162 and 1186.
A kingdom which, for various reasons, I find to be a fascinating subject in itself. But I will have to save those thoughts for another time.
Very cool. Just nosing around on the internet, I've found a lot of inauthentic "Holy Land" crap, so congratulations on an interesting find.
Posted by
Vershal |
Monday, April 27, 2009 9:13:00 AM
Post a Comment