At almost the very outset of his life, the newborn Jesus of Nazareth was presented with three gifts by the magi – gold, frankincense, and myrrh. While questions are usually raised about “what is frankincense?” and “what is myrrh?”, it is usually taken self-evident as to what the “gold” was that the Magi presented to Jesus. But is it really so obvious?
What picture does it conjure up in your mind? Simple pieces of gold? Jewellery? Ingots? Gold bars? I must admit that for the longest time – even after doing some numismatic research for various works – my thoughts on the ‘magi gold’ usually did not go past the vague notion of ‘gold’; not even really thinking about what form it might have taken.
There is (accidentally) some truth to this ‘vague notion’ as the word used in the original Koine Greek – χρυσός (chrysós) – does not seem to give much away in terms of an identification, but as well as the elemental substance of gold, χρυσός seems to have also been used as a term for ‘gold coin.’
If we are to run with this idea that one of the gifts brought to the stable by the ‘Three Wise Men’ consisted of ‘gold coins’, we might then ask “what type of gold coins were they?”
The geo-political history of Judaea and its surroundings provides several potential numismatic origins. Starting with the gift-givers themselves on the possibility that they might have brought their gifts from their point of origin… unfortunately, there is very little information recorded in the New Testament about the ‘wise men’ (even there being just three of them is only surmised from the fact that they only brought three gifts – Orthodox, Syriac, and Oriental traditions often number the magi at 12!).
The Greek phrase ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν is recorded for them, meaning ‘from the east’ or ‘from the rising [sun]’, which along with them being magi could posit origins within the Parthian Empire that dominated the lands from what is now Iraq to the frontiers of India. While they tolerated many religions, the Parthians were a largely Zoroastrian people, a religion which had a magos class.
So maybe the Biblical magi could have brought their gift of ‘gold coins’ from Parthian lands? Well, no. Probably not. This is because surviving Parthian coinage lacks gold issues. They instead focused on silver issues which followed the styles of Seleucid Greek drachms/tetradrachms and Achaemenid Persian satrapal coinage.
Of those few Parthian gold coins that have made their way into the public view, most are considered modern forgeries, while the only one to be found in an authentic archaeological setting – an issue of Gotarzes I (95-90BC) – has been considered a contemporary imitation of a Parthian coin. It seems then that if the magi brought their golden gift from Parthian territory, it was almost certainly not in the form of Parthian coins.
A similar lack of gold coins arises when we try to investigate any local Jewish issues. Judaea had been ruled with varying degrees of autonomy by the Hasmonean and then the Herodian dynasties since the mid-second century BC.
In 138BC, the Seleucid king, Antiochus VII, had given the Hasmoneans, in the form of Simon Maccabaeus, the right to mint their own coinage, a right that was maintained even as the kingdom became increasingly under the sway of Rome as the first century BC progressed.
However, even with almost 250 years of local Jewish coin minting either side of the period of Jesus’ birth, it seems that neither the Hasmoneans nor the Herodians minted any gold coins, sticking largely to bronze coins, with perhaps only a couple of silver issues (maybe some Roman-minted silver denarii). This removes any notion of the magi bringing Jewish coins as a gift.
Moving away from Parthian and Jewish origins for the ‘magi gold’ leaves us to look at Greek and Roman issues. The majority of both Greek and Roman coinage that was used in Judaea will have been bronze and silver, but both did mint gold issues which could have made their way into the hands of people in and around Judaea.
Greek cities and states had been minting gold coins for at least 500 years by time the ‘Three Wise Men’ were following the star to the Bethlehem stable. But while various earlier Greek coins may have made their way to Judaea through mere usage and their innate value, the most direct connection of Judaea with Greek coins will have come first with its incorporation into the empire of Alexander the Great and then successively those of the Ptolemaic and Seleucid Greeks in the years that followed his death. This Hellenisation of the Eastern Mediterranean saw Greek gold coins – usually in the form of what is called the stater – spread across the region and beyond.
It might be supposed that we should focus more on the Seleucids as a source of any ‘magi gold’ because by the time of Jesus’ birth, Alexander the Great had been dead for over 300 years while Ptolemaic Egypt had not held sway in Judaea for about 200 years – of course, this does not preclude Alexandrian, Ptolemaic or other Diadochi coins making their way across the frontiers into Seleucid/Hasmonean/Herodian Judaea, but it does make it extremely unlikely that the magi presented Ptolemaic gold coins. It is even more unlikely that gold coins of Alexander the Great were still in circulation in any real abundance over 300 years after his death.
It cannot also be completely ruled out that the magi gold coins could have been from amongst the Indo-Greek kingdoms to the east of the Parthian kingdom; issues which include the biggest gold coins to survive from the Ancient World.
However, in geographical and chronological terms, the most likely Greek origin of any numismatic magi gold would seem to be the issues of the Seleucid Greek kingdom.
The Seleucids drove forward the monetisation of their realm, particularly in its western half, setting up numerous mints throughout the Middle East. Several of these were close to Judaea – Tyre, Sidon, Berytus, Phoenician Ptolemais, Damascus; however, it seems that gold coins (and larger silver denominations) were issued from the royal mints, which were a bit more distant from Judaea – Seleucia-on-the-Tigris (initially), Antioch (primarily?) and possibly others sites such as Cilician Soli. That said, the make-up of surviving Seleucid coins may also demonstrate that they did not mint an abundance of gold coins, focusing instead more on silver and bronze issues.
Judaea may not have been one of the core regions of the Seleucid kingdom, but it could be possible that its being a frontier province between the Seleucid and Ptolemaic states made Judaea more of a target for Seleucid gold issues in the form of military pay and propaganda initiatives than might otherwise have been the case.
However, in terms of geo-political developments, by the end of the first century BC, Judaea was well and truly in the orbit of the Roman Empire. To be clear, the direct Roman annexation of Judaea as a province in 6AD was still at least a decade away at the time of Jesus’ birth. Indeed, a full Roman annexation of Judaea did not occur until at least the aftermath of the Jewish Revolt of 66-70. And infamously, it was the eponymous ‘founder’ of this Herodian dynasty – Herod the Great – who was on the Judaean throne at the time of Jesus’ birth… but as we have seen, the Herodians and Jewish authorities in general do not seem to have minted any gold coins over their extended history.
This leaves us with Roman gold coins. Much like their Greek neighbours, Roman gold coins seem to have been minted infrequently, perhaps only in times of emergency such as the Second Punic War (218-202BC). There were official values for gold coins within the as and denarius measurements system – coins worth 60, 40 and 20 asses – but these may not have lasted long and while there does seem to have been a committee set up to oversee the minting of all coins in Rome - tresviri monetales (Their full official title was ‘tres viri aere argento auro flando feriundo’ – “three men responsible for casting and striking bronze, silver and gold”), the exact date of their establishment is uncertain. The recorded date of 289BC is considered far too early, and while the Second Punic War is a possibility (alongside the as issues?), it may not have been until the 2nd century BC.
The catalyst for more widespread Roman use of gold coinage may have been Lucius Cornelius Sulla’s need to drum up funds (and men?) for his upcoming war against Mithridates VI of Pontus in the aftermath of the destructive Social War in Italy. These Sullan gold issues His issues here are usually considered the first gold coins to be called aurei (sing. aureus).
Julius Caesar made similar use of the aureus during his dictatorship and in preparation for his proposed war against the Parthians. It could be that Augustus wanted to continue with this ‘Caesarian’ idea in a form of prestigious continuity (and perhaps Roman soldiers were getting a taste for payment in gold coins) as the issuing of the aureus became more prevalent under the principate.
But while Augustus did initiate the more widespread imperial issuing of aurei, quite how ubiquitous it might have been in Judaea is questionable. The Augustan use of gold coinage was still relatively recent by the time of Jesus’ birth and it is difficult to ascertain how much effort might have been put into spreading such gold issues to the eastern provinces and in particular a client kingdom like Judaea would have been.
Contrarily, it could be argued that the eastern provinces are exactly the part of the empire that needed to see Augustus’ face on coinage (and preferably the most prestigious coinage at that), given that they had first supported the ‘Liberators’, Cassius and Brutus, and then Mark Antony against Augustus.
As Joseph, Mary and the newborn Jesus were soon to depart for Egypt, Roman coinage would have been most useful and at the turn of the first century AD, as unlike Judaea, Egypt actually was directly controlled by the Romans; indeed, it was in the personal fiefdom of the emperor/pharaoh Augustus, so it might be expected that his gold aurei were being used there (Of course, how could the magi know that Joseph and Mary were going to go to Egypt?).
There is another important consideration to make with regard to what is essentially foreign currency being imported into Hasmonean and then Herodian Judaea. With this foreign currency came foreign ideas, and some of those ideas were contrary to Jewish belief, specifically the commandments forbidding graven images and the worship of other gods.
Many of Greek and Roman coins contained images that the Jews might have considered extremely problematic, particularly (but not limited to) those which held busts of Alexander the Great and later Augustus, both of whom were increasingly depicted as divine.
It is difficult to know whether any such consideration was taken with regard to the coins that ended up in Judaea, but it has been suggested that the presence of moneychangers in the environs of the Temple was to not only keep Greek or Roman coins in general out of the Temple, but more specifically coins with such ‘graven images’ out of the holiest Jewish site.
Given the absence of gold coins within Parthian, Hasmonean and Herodian Jewish states, their possible limiting to largely royal issues under the Seleucids and their infrequent use in Roman numismatics only being gradually reversed in the previous half century, it would be safe to say that if the magi’s golden gift to the newborn Jesus of Nazareth did contain coins, they were likely rather rare on the ground in and around Roman Judaea. This makes an exact identification impossible.
Bibliography
Reifenberg, A. Ancient Jewish Coins. Jerusalem (1965)
Yeoman, R.S. Moneys of the Bible. New York (1982)
Comments