[Published in The Numismatic Chronicle, and Journal of the Numismatic Society, n.s. v. 2, 1862, pp. 125-135, as part of Dickinson's "Remarks Upon an Article on Assyrian Antiquities, by H. Fox Talbot, Esq., as to the Cuneiform Inscription on the Cylinder of Sargon in the British Museum," pp. 123-135.]

[a partial quotation of WHFT's private response is Doc. No: 01188].

To H. Fox TALBOT, ESQ.

Leamington, 20th February, 1862.

DEAR SIR,

I have read carefully your translation of the Assyrian inscription, and though I think it a very valuable addition to written history upon the subject of money, yet I am not inclined to admit that it establishes the existence of coined money at a period antecedent to that generally recognized by numismatists. Nay, I think the real value of the notice weakened by the endeavour to extend it to a supposition opposed to the testimony of both written and art history.

Before entering upon observations as to your cuneiform translation, it may be well to refer to the evidence of written and art history. Herodotus states (Clio, sect. xciv. -Beloe) that the Lydians invented the art of coinage. His history may be dated about B.C. 450. Another authority states, that Phidon, King of Argos, is said to have coined the first silver money at Ægina. Art history lays before us the coins of Lydia and Ægina; and they both present proofs of having been struck in the very in¬fancy of the art; and perhaps a fair review of them may tend to reconcile the two authorities stated as to the in-ventors of medal money. If anyone will examine, in a first-class collection of coins, such as that of the British Museum, or any other national collection, a series of the coins of Lydia and Ægina, he will see in the former lumps of gold or silver, of an oblong, almost rude, amygdaloidal shape, impressed on the upper side with an open-¬mouthed head of a lion, or the same, generally, with a bull's head looking towards it, with, on the under side, a rude indentation of a metallic stud, this indentation being in some specimens two small squares joined together. Here is seen just what might be expected in an artist's first rough attempt at a new work; and these specimens would certainly warrant the historian in calling them the earliest instances of coinage. The early coins of Ægina are scarcely so rude as those of Lydia, though, presenting at first the reverse rude stud-mark. They are in silver (as will hereafter be stated), the first species of bullion used for currency in commerce. But whilst the obverse of the Æginetan coins presents from the first the figure of a tortoise, the reverse very speedily offers to view a singular indented square, divided into four parts by elevated lines, the fourth quarter being again divided by a diagonal bar, so as to form, in fact, five compartments; and this peculiar indented square is seen on nearly all the multiples and divisions of the drachma of silver, as far as size will permit. It has been thought, that the lion's head on the Lydian coins symbolises the city of Sardis, devoted to the worship, or under the protection, of the goddess Cybele, of whom the lion was an attribute; and the bull's head has been supposed to be a type of the river Pactolus, which ran through the city. Various causes have been suggested for the adoption of the tortoise device by the Æginetans, of which it will be needless here to speak; but a few words may be said, as to the reverse, of the very remark. able indented square. Writers have, 1 believe, generally dismissed this as simply the impress of the stud used to hold the metal fixed whilst hammering the die, to raise the bold relief of the tortoise. But from the almost constant five divisions of the square, it may be surmised that it was intended to represent some idea, as of a monogram of the name of the island, or the plan of a city or fortress with its lines of roads or streets. It is certainly dangerous to speculate in archæology; but this surmise is only thrown out to instigate inquiry as to the real object of this device. But shortly after these first forms of Æginetan money, they introduced the letters ΑΙΓ or ΑΙΓΙ, for ΑΙΓΙΝΗΤΩΝ into the upper compartment or compartments of the square, and a small figure of a dolphin into one of the lower compartments. As the dolphin has always been considered as an emblem of the sea, it may be some guide as to the possible allusions of the obverse and reverse. When these early coins of Lydia and Ægina are considered, we may discover reasons for the two statements as to the origin of coinage. The first idea of impress may be fairly assigned to Lydia; whilst the perfecting in silver; the early material of money, of an obverse and reverse design, may have justified the appropriation to the Æginetans of the honour of having first completed the art of coinage. The period of this useful invention has generally been supposed to be about the year B.C. 600. The object in stating the character of the earliest coins known, and the steps by which the art advanced, is to endeavour to ascertain the form of bullion money before coining was invented, and to show that these two ancient states did not derive the art from others, but themselves independently elaborated it. From the accounts given, it seems that when the Lydians com¬menced coinage they operated upon rude lumps or pieces of bullion, adjusted to specific weights, such pieces being probably previously fabricated by anyone, and not being marked by any stamp to indicate any authoritative guarantee for just weight and purity. Hence these pieces were, before coinage, weighed in commercial trans-actions, if doubted as to amount, and tested as to purity by the Lydian touchstone; whence the “Lydian stone" became a proverb as to any mode or matter of trial. Testing stones being generally called Lydian stones, may lead to the inference that the Lydians first introduced their use; and this presumed fact will induce the belief that they first of all turned attention to the establishment of a regulated form of currency in' trade. Probably, almost certainly, previous to coinage, unstamped pieces of bullion were current in commerce, far and wide, over the south-western coasts of Asia and eastern coasts of Europe, from the most remote periods; and this will lead me to the only written record of bullion currency, the Bible, unless your inscription should afford us another glimpse of light from written history to guide us in the consideration of the subject.

To understand clearly the question of uncoined bullion currency, it is necessary to ascend to the first discoverable period of its adoption as a representative of property, and a medium of exchange.

The first notice of it which we have, is, when Abram came up out of Egypt, "very rich in cattle, in silver, and in gold." (Gen. xiii. 2.) It is scarcely needful to say that this establishment of bullion as wealth, and the means of obtaining articles of life without the inconveni¬ence of barter, was a mighty stride in social science, and we may, with much probability, attribute it to that great storehouse of wisdom, ancient Egypt; for in the cata¬combs we see representations of rings of gold and silver being weighed and recorded as amount of property. The next step noticed is in the actual employment of silver for the purchase of property. (Gen. xvii. 12.) We are first told of the calculation of silver by weight, in the effecting of a purchase, in Gen. xxiii. 9-16, "four hundred shekels of silver, current with the merchant." This passage not only tells us of silver as a commercial medium of exchange, but how it was passed, namely, by weights of a specific amount, having a recognised value per given weight; and these conditions of currency widely acknow¬ledged and practised. That there were, for convenience in traffic, divisions of the standard unit of calculation, in separate pieces, we learn from Exodus xxx. 13, where the half shekel is named, which must have been (see ver. 15) an actual division, for no one was to give more, none less. Then there was the quarter shekel (see 1 Sam. ix. 8), which must of necessity have been an actual piece~ as it was all the "silver" which the servant of Saul had. This currency, passed by weight, continued to the Babylonish captivity (see Jer. xxxii. 9, 10), and till after the return (Zech. xi. 12), according to the received chronology to the period B.C. 517. There is (2 Kings xii. 9) a curious instance of the mode of receiving silver money, well calculated for lump pieces. It is said the high priest bored a hole in the lid of a chest, through which hole, as in our money boxes and tills, the money was to be cast, for security against pillage, no doubt. This money was "the collection that Moses the servant of God laid upon Israel in the wilderness," namely, half a shekel each. (See 2 Chron. xxiv. 9; and Exodus xxx. 15.) When the chest was emptied, the silver was bound up in bags, and" told," that is, counted up as to amount.

I have been thus particular to show the exact state of currency in Judea to a later period than that of Sargon (about B.C. 700), because Assyria being so near to Judea, and having constant intercourse with it, we may suppose that had coined money existed in either country, the practice would have spread to the other.

But it may be objected, that if no coined money has been found up to this period in Egypt, Assyria, or Judea, no more have pieces of silver graduated to weights been found. To this it may be answered, the idea of money, in modern times, having attached to medal money only, if found such pieces would not have been noticed, but melted down. Even whilst current they were melted down when col-lected - see marginal reading of 2 Chron. xxxiv. 17 - the money, it is said, was “poured out, or melted." And that this was not a mere figure of speech, but a fact, may be presumed from the practice of Darius, son of Hystaspes, who reigned near to this period (B.C. 521-485), of whom it is said (Herodotus, 'Thalia, sect. xcvi.-Beloe)," The manner in which the king deposited these riches in his treasury was this, the gold and silver were melted and poured into earthen vessels; the vessel, when full, was removed,6 leaving the metal in a mass. When any was wanted, such a piece was broken off as the contingence required." The riches here spoken of, was the amount of the tribute exacted by Darius from his twenty provinces of the empire; showing that no coinage existed in them at that time. There is another reason why these bullion pieces were not likely to be found. In the various wars of these Eastern nations, the silver and the gold were violently extorted from the conquered country; and if there was a suspicion of concealment, torture was used to compel discovery of it, as we may imagine from the cruelties seen practised on prisoners in sculptures.

I have to request pardon for this long discussion, but your translation seems so likely to cause unsettling of the minds of numismatists as to the time and place of the origin of coinage, unless clearly explained, that the question cannot be too closely investigated.

Now then, permit me to enter upon your cuneiform in¬scription. It strikes me you may be perfectly correct as to the passage recited referring to money currency; but from the facts stated, I decidedly doubt if it infers coined silver or copper. To have this admitted, you must establish, upon construction allowed by all Assyrian scholars to be beyond conjecture or doubt, that such a statement is really meant; for you have to contend against all written and art history on the point; and to prove that there were two distinct, independent origins of coinage, both taking the same course, and both pro-ducing flat impressed coins - in fact, medal money. As I have said, your translation will be a very interesting addi¬tion to the history of money currency, even if limited to unmarked, weighed pieces of bullion, of which all we know is from the Bible, whose object was not the explanation of art or science, and which only refers to it incidentally in the account of general transactions. Perhaps unstamped money - being merely an affair of mercantile and popular convenience, fabricated by any one, and not calling forth art or sentiment, and subject to be melted down at each transit through the public treasury - was not considered worthy of a thought or record; hence the silence of all classical writers on this point. But when states and kings took the currency in hand, art exhibited its skill in beautifying, religion and sentiment threw soul into it, and sovereigns and governments assumed to them¬selves the right of coinage as their own peculiar privilege; and the medallic art was deemed worthy of the notice of the scholar and historian.

I will ask your indulgence whilst I freely criticise your translation. That ףהכ (Keseph, Lee) is applied to silver, and, next, to money, from the verb signifying" to grow pale," because silver was pale, and money was made of silver, is allowed both by Lee and Gesenius; but whether you can translate" Kaship," "to count," to mean money, or connect it with" Keseph" (silver, pale), I hesitate to admit, but do not feel competent to dispute critically; and question whether the Hebrew text will at all bear you out in it, as "Keseph" is a word, I believe, invariably used for money, silver abstractedly being the object understood, irrespective of count. In the passage I have referred to (2 Kings xii. 9), as to" telling" (counting) of money, it does not seem to apply to money – silver - as an article passed by tale, but only to the adding up of the amount collected. I should rather be disposed to consider" Ka¬ship," as the Assyrian analogue of "Keseph." "Rikkati," I should also question as. to meaning flat, stamped coins, from ךקע "rika," ( to strike metal with a hammer so as to spread it out;" Lee," stamped on in order to stretch, stamped on." But the word may apply to hammering in a more limited sense; without establishing an impress, or medallic form; for there are money pieces of silver at this day - the ticals of Siam - of a character combining lump, ring, hammered, and impressed money, and yet not at all medal money, expanded or spread flat out. The bullet-like ticals of Siam, preserving to us (though now about to give place to medal money) the pre-medallic ring and lump money, seem to have been struck with a hammer to form several flat surfaces, to prevent their rolling about on a table or board.. There may have been balls of silver money in Assyria, so hammered, for such purpose; or even flattened lumps of bullion; but never, I conceive, coins after the Lydian or Grecian type. As to the men¬tion of copper money, such money is at variance with all the tenor of ancient money in those parts, for it is ever " Keseph," "silver," to the last in the Bible. In Greece copper was most reluctantly received as currency, and not at first; and was contemptuously spoken of; as bullion only appeared to them to involve the idea of a representative of property. I perceive, however, that you do not dwell upon the word you interpret copper, so I will dismiss it. I observe that the bullion money of Assyria to which you refer, was a popular, and not a state fabrication; and the second verse of your translation bears out this view. It was the money of the inhabitant, of the city, decreed (directed) by them, and renewed to them, and that which Sargon made he transferred to the inhabitants as their property and concern, apparently without his further interference or control. This is at variance with usual practice, ancient or modern, as to medal-money, the right to make which has been only rarely and guardedly allowed to individuals by governments, and therefore is adverse to your idea of coined money. You question whether the words" images of my majesty JJ (" Assyrian Texts Trans¬lated")l1 do not apply to coined money. This, I think, must be negatively answered, from the absence of the dis¬covery of coined money in Judea, the country in point; and perhaps it will be admitted, from what has been said, that Sargon, and probably, if not certainly, Sennacherib, did not stamp their images on any currency of Assyria.

Such are my views as to your translation, and I hope if I have not been able to agree with you in your conclu¬sions, I have not expressed myself in a manner offensive. or disrespectful towards you.

I remain, dear Sir, Yours faithfully,
W. B. DICKINSON.