Close Visual Analysis of the Year Three Shekel
Thanks to the photographic
abilities of Bruce Zuckerman, Ken Zuckerman and Marilyn Lundberg of West
Semitic Research, I was able to perform a detailed analysis of my coin,
noticing tiny flaws and intricacies otherwise invisible to the naked eye.
The sets of pictures below are each taken in different lighting, making certain
features more salient. Magnified and preserved clearly, one can, quite literally,
view this artifact from a number of enlightening perspectives.
 
The matching pictures are color (left)
and black-and-white (right)
Photo Courtesy of Dr. Bruce
Zuckerman
|
The most prominent
flaw, which one can identify easily on the unmagnified coin, is its off-center
stamping. The obverse has been struck too low, and the ring of pearls
therefore disappears slightly below the middle of the coin.
 
Photo Courtesy of Dr. Bruce
Zuckerman
|
The reverse, also
stamped off-center, seems to have been struck to the left of center. The rim
here extends off the coin to the left, leaving the paleo-Hebrew
lettering hanging precariously close to the edge of the coin.
Upon personally observing
the coin itself, I found the left side of the coin (if viewed from the obverse)
to be thicker than the right side. Knowing how coins were struck, it seems
to me that the die placed on top of the flan, which would have been hammered
into the flan, would have more of an effect on the coin's variable thickness.
Evidence in support of this assumption can be noted in the manner that the
obverse is off-struck on a more top-to-bottom hemispherical perspective, while
the reverse has been off-struck on a left versus right basis. A coin struck
more to the left on the reverse would be thicker on the right reverse and,
therefore, the left obverse, and this fits what one observes. There is less
variable thickness between the top and bottom of the coin than between the
right and left sides.
There are also a series
of slight scratches to the right of the chalice's stem.
Photo Courtesy of Dr. Bruce
Zuckerman
|
These most likely
resulted from general wear and tear over the years and perhaps even from cleaning.
On the right, on top
of the first shin in the inscription, a little
tail of silver hangs off, perhaps indicating an imperfection in the die. We
see a similar projection from the right side of the qoph.
A much larger defect of this type occurs to the left of the resh.
Shin
with tail |
Qoph
with tail
Photos Courtesy
of Dr. Bruce Zuckerman |
Resh
imperfection |
The shekel's obverse
contains 30 definable pearls surrounding the coin, some of which meld together
with the lettering, most noticibly on the qoph
and the lamed.
| Nine beads or pearls form the
rim of the chalice, two overhanging the left of the chalice and one on
the right. This rim also slopes upward to the left. Not all Year 3 coins
contain the same number of pearls. While most contain nine, some have
eight and others seven. |
 |
| |
Photo Courtesy
of Dr. Bruce Zuckerman |
 |
Fianlly, one notices a darker
mark between the chalice and the first shin.
Though barely noticeable in the high-resolution photograph, it appears
on the coin when viewed with the naked eye as a lighter line, formed because
of a slight elevation in the metal. This defect, we shall
see later, is the result of a flaw in the die. |
| Photo Courtesy of Dr. Bruce Zuckerman |
|
When
one observes the reverse, one can only marvel at beautiful condition of the
stamped image. Its surface has been damaged in only one area, around the waw.
Visible in the picture below, there appears to be a cut in the top of
the letter , then to the right of the cut, a small but deep scratch above
the letter. Perhaps this damage occured all in one stroke, since the sites
of damage are remarkably close and align in the same direction.
 |
| Photo Courtesy of Dr. Bruce Zuckerman |
 |
One may also
note that the letters and pomegranates on the reverse have been remarkably
well crafted. The lines of the letters and those around the pomegranates
are very crisp and defined, and the angles in the lettering are sharp,
usually forming clear corners and straight, unwavering lines. The only
letter that appears to deviate from this norm is the last he'.
The horizontal stroke on the bottom of the character (if you were to
view it upright), curves upward toward the downward stroke, seeming
less well defined and more diminutive in comparison to the similar strokes
in other letters. The top horizontal stroke is also thin and wavy.
|
| Photo Courtesy of Dr. Bruce Zuckerman |
|
See
how this coin compares to others from year 3
back
The University of Southern California does not screen or control the content on this website and thus does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity, or quality of such content. All content on this website is provided by and is the sole responsibility of the person from which such content originated, and such content does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the University administration or the Board of Trustees
