Wednesday, November 26, 2025

The power of the Miraculous Medal

‘Is it possible that our enemies should display such activity and gain superior strength, while we remain idle, without getting down to work? Do we not have even stronger weapons, namely the protec¬tion of heaven and of the Immaculate Virgin?’ Saint Maximilian Kolbe We read in the following article: Maximilian Kolbe and the Miraculous Medal | Militia Immaculatae Maximilian Kolbe and the Miraculous Medal (Excerpt of the book “The Immaculate, our ideal”) As an outward sign of membership in the [Militia Immaculatæ), the Knight of the Immaculata wears her Miraculous Medal. We human beings are not only spirit, but also body. Our interior life, our ideal and mentality must be perceptible from outside, must be expressed in our external life. Therefore outward signs are necessary in order to bring the interior disposition to light. The Savior willed to grant His graces to people pre¬cisely through such “sacred signs”, namely the Sacraments. In a similar manner the Knight of the Immaculata must also make an outward pro¬fession. The Miraculous Medal is the outward sign of the interior Total Consecration to the Immaculata. Furthermore, as a weapon in the battle for souls he distributes these medals wherever he can. The Miraculous Medal should be the weapon, the bullet, which the Knight of the Immaculata makes use of. Even if someone is as wicked as can be, if he agrees to wear the Miraculous Medal, give it to him and pray for him, and occasionally try with a kind word to bring him to the point where he begins to love the Mother of God and to fly to her in all his difficulties and temptations. But anyone who sincerely begins to pray to the Immaculata will soon be con¬vinced to go to Confession as well. There is much evil in the world, yet let us consider that the Immaculata is even more powerful: “She will crush the head of the infernal serpent.” Isn’t such a practice somewhat exaggerated? How is it that the founder of the M.I. places so much trust in such an external thing? We should reply, first, that the very origin of the M.I. is closely related to a great miracle that was worked through the Miraculous Medal, namely the conversion of a Jewish man, Alphonse de Ratisbonne. In the year in which the M.I. was founded (1917), the seventy-fifth anniversary of this great miracle was being celebrated in Rome. Young Brother Maximil¬ian had already asked himself the question long before that: Is it possible that our enemies should display such activity and gain superior strength, while we remain idle, without getting down to work? Do we not have even stronger weapons, namely the protec¬tion of heaven and of the Immaculate Virgin? He found out the answer on that memorable twentieth of January, when the superior of the house presented to them the story of the impenitent Jew’s conversion as a theme for meditation. In that medita¬tion, as Father Pal, his friend and co-founder of the M.I. attests, the Saint received the inspiration to found a knighthood in honor of the Immaculata, which chose the Miraculous Medal as its emblem and shield for the future Knights. From that day on, Brother Maximilian often visited the church of Sant’Andrea delle Fratte in order to pray before the altar where Alphonse de Ratisbonne had converted. He also chose that altar as the one upon which he would offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass for the first time after his priestly ordination. Furthermore Fr. Maximilian often used to tell his friars about truly extraordinary incidents that he himself had experienced with the Mirac¬ulous Medal. For example, one time while he was recuperating in Zako¬pane he tried to convert a young Freethinker who proudly called him¬self “the Heretic”. All arguments were in vain. Nevertheless, out of courtesy he accept¬ed the Miraculous Medal. Immediately afterwards I suggested that he make a confession. “I am not prepared. By no means,” was his reply. But … at that very moment he fell on his knees, as though impelled by a higher power. The confession began; the young man wept like a child. The Immaculata had won. …. \Naturally, the cause of this miraculous change in a human heart was not the medal itself as a physical object, but rather the Immaculata, who attaches her special graces to the wearing of the Miraculous Medal. And there were many, many such incidents in the life of St. Maximilian. Therefore: Distribute her Medal, wherever there is an opportunity: to chil¬dren, so that they will always wear it around their necks; to the elderly and the youth, so that they, under her protection, might have enough strength to resist the temptations and falls that par¬ticularly beset them in our times. And also to those who do not go to Church, or who are afraid to go to Confession, who make fun of religious practices, who laugh at the truths of the faith, who are mired in a moral swamp or are living outside the Church in heresy – to all of these people you absolutely must offer the Medal of the Immaculata and ask them to wear it, but then fervently beg the Immaculata also for their conversion. Many people make use of another expedient when someone is reluctant to accept the Miracu¬lous Medal. They just sew it secretly into his or her clothing and pray for that person, and sooner or later the Immaculata will show what she is capable of. The Miraculous Medal is the ammunition of the M.I.

Sunday, November 23, 2025

Who built Rome’s Pantheon, Marcus Agrippa or Hadrian?

by Damien F. Mackey “My investigation thus allows us to reclaim Hadrian’s planning and agency for at least part of this iconic building, and to discern more clearly his prominence, and perhaps even his personality, in the imperial capital city”. Mary T. Boatwright Introduction Conventionally considered, I believe that it is quite impossible for historians to arrive at a fully accurate answer to this question regarding the celebrated Pantheon. The received text book history and chronology just will not allow it. The conventional scholarship, as typified here by Mary T. Boatwright, would have Marcus Agrippa, whose inscription appears boldly inscribed on the Pantheon, dying around 12 BC, whilst the emperor Hadrian is thought to have come to power more than a century later, in around 117 AD. The best that could be said, from a commonsense point of view, is that Marcus Agrippa clearly built the Pantheon, while the emperor Hadrian may later have embellished and/or refurbished, it. The Pantheon could not have been a Hadrianic era building! My New History for Hadrian and Marcus Agrippa The revised history and chronology of these times that I have developed, however, can accommodate Agrippan and Hadrianic involvement in the Pantheon at the same time. This is because I have multi-identified both the emperor Hadrian and Marcus Agrippa in ways that are totally unconventional. Their era is the Infancy of Jesus Christ. The emperor Hadrian, a Seleucid king, was (among others) Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ and Augustus, who decreed a universal Census when Jesus Christ was born (Luke 2:1): Time to consider Hadrian, that ‘mirror-image’ of Antiochus Epiphanes, as also the census emperor Augustus (2) Time to consider Hadrian, that 'mirror-image' of Antiochus Epiphanes, as also the census emperor Augustus Marcus Agrippa, the Right-Hand Man Of Caesar Augustus (Lindsay Powell), was, variously Herod ‘the Great’ (also for Augustus); Philip the Phrygian (for Antiochus); and Herodes Atticus (for Hadrian). On this, see e.g. my article: Herod, the emperor’s signet right-hand man (7) Herod, the emperor's signet right-hand man So, just as King Herod (Marcus Agrippa) ‘the Great’ built on an enormous scale on behalf of the emperor Augustus Caesar, so, too, did he do the same for Hadrian as an alter ego of this Augustus. Disentangling convention Having laid this new and revolutionary foundation, we can now bring more light to bear on what Mary T. Boatwright has written at the beginning of her 2013 article: Hadrian and the Agrippa Inscription of the Pantheon (7) Hadrian and the Agrippa Inscription of the Pantheon Introduction Recent work has reignited debate about the authorship and meaning of the Pantheon, a now-iconic building whose convoluted testimony and unusual design have always complicated its understanding. …. Although the Pantheon is frequently considered to be Hadrian’s most famous construction and a key to his character and politics … it was long attributed to Marcus Agrippa because the inscription on its facade names this colleague of Augustus as patron: M. Agrippa L. f. co(n)s(ul) tertium fecit (CIL VI 896 [1]: … ‘Marcus Agrippa, son of Lucius, consul three times, made [this]’ …. Only in the late 19th and early 20th centuries did scholars begin to agree that the structure was Hadrianic. Their deduction, based on brickstamps, excavation and literary evidence, seemed conirmed by Herbert Bloch’s more thorough analysis of Roman brickstamps in the 1930s, which dated to AD 118 or 119 the initial construction of the present Pantheon. …. Doubts about the Pantheon’s design and architect lingered … however, as Mark Wilson Jones explores elsewhere in this volume, as have questions about the relationship of the present building to the Agrippan and Domitianic predecessors known for its site. …. The newest challenge to the Pantheon’s Hadrianic date came in 2007, when Lise Hetland republished the Pantheon’s brickstamps. Arguing that the vast majority are Trajanic and only one clearly Hadrianic, she concluded that Trajan initiated the present building shortly after ad 110 (when lightning destroyed Domitian’s restored Pantheon), and substantially completed it before his death in AD 117. Damien Mackey’s comment: This adds an apparent further complication: TRAJAN. Once again my system can resolve this, for Trajan also was Hadrian: Hadrianus Traianus Caesar – Trajan transmutes to Hadrian (2) Hadrianus Traianus Caesar – Trajan transmutes to Hadrian Mary T. Boatwright continues: …. If she is correct, Hadrian was responsible mostly, or merely, for completing another’s project. …. This conclusion has radical implications, including for the interpretation of Hadrian and his relationship to the city of Rome. Although I do not contest Hetland’s Trajanic dating for the Pantheon’s inception, and I leave to Wilson Jones discussion of the Pantheon’s design (and architects), I argue in this paper that the Pantheon still provides insight into Hadrian and the topography of Rome. My focus is the Pantheon’s famous Agrippa inscription. Its placement on the Pantheon’s pronaos makes it among the finishing touches of the building, and it must reflect Hadrian in some way. But the inscription does not name Hadrian. This is usually taken to confirm a notice in the Historia Augusta, that Hadrian restored the Pantheon and various other buildings and consecrated them with the names of their original builders (HA Hadrian 19.10). …. The literary evidence, however, deserves closer study. Furthermore, comparison of other building and rebuilding inscriptions in Rome, including the rebuilding inscription of Septimius Severus and Caracalla on the Pantheon, underscores the uniqueness of the Agrippa inscription’s huge bronze lettering, and argues for Hadrian’s responsibility. The cos. tertium wording of the inscription can also substantiate Hadrian’s authorship. My investigation thus allows us to reclaim Hadrian’s planning and agency for at least part of this iconic building, and to discern more clearly his prominence, and perhaps even his personality, in the imperial capital city. …. [End of quote] For more architectural anomalies pertaining to this period, see my articles: Emperor Hadrian’s palaces missing (8) Emperor Hadrian's palaces missing Did Hadrian or Herod build the Wailing Wall? Did Hadrian or Herod build the Wailing Wall? Caligula exalts Marcus Agrippa Caligula exalts Marcus Agrippa

Thursday, November 20, 2025

Emperor Hadrian’s palaces missing

“Stratigraphy confirms that Hadrian did not visit a destroyed Jerusalem, but one that had long since been restored”. Gunnar Heinsohn This article can be a companion piece to articles of mine (Damien Mackey) such as: Henry VIII’s palaces missing (3) Henry VIII's palaces missing Professor Gunnar Heinsohn wrote: Jerusalems_First_Millennium_AD_1000_year.pdf …. Jerusalem is obsessed with Hadrianic temples that are said to have been demolished to make way for other structures. On the Cardo Maximus this act is said to have been carried out in favor of Christianity, while on the Temple Mount it was done in favor of Islam. However, under the Jesus Compound on the Cardo, the foundations of an imperial temple of Venus have not been found. On Temple Mount, a Jupiter sanctuary is said to have been built over the ruins of the Herodian temple. The Umayyads supposedly demolished it to build the Dome of the Rock over it. Traces of this temple of Hadrian are missing as well. Nevertheless, the latest research on Roman Jerusalem claims, without hard evidence, the existence of such a structure: “A Temple to Jupiter on top of the temenos, as implied by Cassius Dio, cannot, in my opinion, be ruled out” (Weksler-Bdolah 2014, 58). Cassius Dio (ca. 165-235 AD) lived nearly a century after Hadrian. He provides the only source: “At Jerusalem he [Hadrian] founded a city in place of the one which had been razed to the ground, naming it Aelia Capitolina, and on the site of the temple of the god he raised a new temple to Jupiter” (Historia Romana, LXIX, 12:1). However, the original of this source is lost. The passage is a paraphrase by John Xiphilinus (late 11th c. AD), a Byzantine historian and the nephew of Patriarch John VIII of Constantinople. He may have tailored this paraphrase to present an imperial blasphemy as a convincing cause of war. He painted the customary act of establishing pagan shrines in a new Roman colonia “in the harsh colors of a religious confrontation by using a ‘loaded’ verb and referring to the temple by a name familiar to both Jewish and Christian readers” (Eliav 1997, 142). Of course, this must remain speculation. Perhaps the term Capitolina in the new city name also led to associations with Jupiter. In Rome stood the most important of all Jupiter temples in the entire empire, Jupiter Optimus Maximus, on Mons Capitolinus (Capitoline Hill). There was also a contemporary of Hadrian, Appian of Alexandria (95-165 AD), with statements about Jerusalem. He did not know anything about Hadrian rebuilding a destroyed city and even putting a temple of Jupiter on its most holy site. Yet, he reminded his readers of Jerusalem’s destruction in the time of Vespasian and Titus to then add that “Hadrian did the same in our time” (Stern 1980; no. 143). This makes good sense if Hadrian’s war against the Bar Kokhba rebels (132-136 AD) resulted in damages to the city. Stratigraphy confirms that Hadrian did not visit a destroyed Jerusalem, but one that had long since been restored. There are also no better candidates than Arab Nabataeans with their Umayyad culture for repairing the city after AD 70. And unlike the Jupiter Temple of John Xiphilinus, the Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount is indisputable. …. [End of quote] There are so many problems to be sorted out here. Let us take just a few of these. While the real Hadrian, who was the Seleucid tyrant, Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’, at the time of the Maccabees: Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ and Emperor Hadrian (3) Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ and Emperor Hadrian did not come to a destroyed Jerusalem as he would have, had he really lived in c. 130 AD, he certainly invaded and despoiled that City near to the Nativity of Jesus Christ. What is wrongly called the Temple Mount is actually where the invading Gentile forces took up their residence. Cassius Dio, a non contemporary of Hadrian’s, is a most unreliable historian – for this period, at least. Appian, had he known of what Vespasian and Titus had done to Jerusalem, could not possibly, therefore, have been a contemporary of the much earlier Hadrian. Hadrian’s war belonged to the Maccabean era, decades before 70 AD. To find traces of Hadrian’s architecture in Jerusalem, one would need to revisit the Seleucid era, and the buildings of Hadrian’s right-hand man, Herod the Great, who was the same potentate as the great builder, Marcus Agrippa: Herod, the emperor’s signet right-hand man (3) Herod, the emperor's signet right-hand man

Wednesday, November 19, 2025

Hadrian, Aelia Capitolina, and which Jewish Revolt?

by Damien F. Mackey “In 1967 a hoard of coins that was said to have been illegally excavated in the northern part of the Judean desert surfaced on the antiquities market. The hoard included Bar-Kokhba coins and an Aelia Capitolina coin. This seemed to indicate that Aelia was founded before the revolt, since the refugees who supposedly hid the coins during the revolt also had an Aelia coin”. Hanan Eshel The very suggestion that there could have been a massive Jewish revolt against Rome (c. 132-135 AD) a mere 60 years or so after the complete and utter destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple by Titus and his legionaries, in 70 AD, I find quite ridiculous. According to typical accounts, some half a million Jews may have died in this second revolt. From whence did they all come? Judah, Jerusalem, the Temple, and Judaïsm, were all finished in 70 AD. ‘Not a stone was left upon a stone!’ (Luke 21:6). This is the sad tale of it as foretold by the Lord of History (vv. 20-33): ‘When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people. They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. ‘There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea. People will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world, for the heavenly bodies will be shaken. At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. When these things begin to take place, stand up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near’. He told them this parable: ‘Look at the fig tree and all the trees. When they sprout leaves, you can see for yourselves and know that summer is near. Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that the kingdom of God is near. ‘Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away’. As I wrote in my article: Simon Bar Kochba in Temple Period (4) Simon Bar Kochba in Temple Period …. But the most compelling argument in favour of a necessary (as I had thought) synchronisation of the activities of Simon Bar Giora and Simon Bar Kochba was that the destruction in Israel was so complete in the first case, at the hands of Vespasian and Titus, with the entire land devastated, the great City (Jerusalem) and its Temple completely burned to the ground, and the people slaughtered wholesale, or sent into slavery, that I did not consider it reasonable to suggest that, some 60-70 years later - {and again readers might cite the recovery of nations much sooner after the First World War going in to the Second – but these nations, e.g. Germany, had not been obliterated internally} - Simon Bar Kochba was able to command armies of 400,000 men in Israel against a Hadrian-led Rome and to have several of the most famous of all the Roman legions on the verge of annihilation - only afterwards to see some 580,000 Jewish men die, almost 1000 fortified villages in Israel completely devastated, once again, and the people, once again, slaughtered or taken into captivity en masse. …. These are numbers both massive and completely unbelievable! Quite different from realism, however, is the account that we find in our text books. Hadrian and the Bar Kochba revolt, are considered to have followed the cataclysmic 70 AD event, as a Second Jewish Revolt - whereas they actually preceded it, in the Maccabean era. You see, Hadrian was not a Roman emperor at all, but was the Seleucid Greek tyrant, Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’, who definitely did not live as late as c. 130 AD: Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ and Emperor Hadrian (3) Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ and Emperor Hadrian His Jewish foe, a Hasmonaean – presumably Simon – minted coins according to which the Temple was still standing. But note in the following article the admission that: “The Bar Kochba Revolt lacks the eyewitness accounts, like Josephus, who chronicled the First Jewish Revolt against Rome (A.D. 66-73)”. Typically, we read worrisome articles such as the following one by Mark Turnage: Weekly Q&A: What was the Bar Kochba Revolt? - CBN Israel Weekly Q&A: What was the Bar Kochba Revolt? Posted on June 23, 2023 By CBN Israel In Blog Hope stirred within Judaism sixty years after the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of its Temple. Perhaps this was the time when the Jews in the land of Israel would finally remove Rome’s presence. The revolt broke out in A.D. 132. The Bar Kochba Revolt lacks the eyewitness accounts, like Josephus, who chronicled the First Jewish Revolt against Rome (A.D. 66-73). The causes of the revolt are not entirely clear. Several factors seem to have contributed to a second Jewish revolt in the land of Israel within a sixty-year period. The Roman Emperor Hadrian banned circumcision in the year’s leading up to the revolt. His ban against circumcision grew out of a general ban against male castration. Romans viewed the Jewish practice of circumcision as mutilation. Of course, circumcision was the sign of the covenant between God and Abraham’s descendants (Genesis 17). The ancient sources disagree whether Hadrian refounded Jerusalem as a Roman colony, named Aelia Capitonlina, with a Temple to Jupiter, before or after the Bar Kochba Revolt. If it happened prior to the revolt, it may have served as a cause of the revolt. The Jews seem to have assumed this period would see the Temple of Jerusalem rebuilt. After the destruction of the First Temple, the Temple of Solomon, the Second Temple was built by Zerubbabel in Jerusalem. The Jews looked at this earlier precedent as a pattern for God bringing about the rebuilding of the Temple in their day. Some of the coins minted by the Jewish rebels depict the façade of the Temple. Others bear the inscription “for the redemption of Jerusalem.” The Jewish rebels anticipated their revolt would return Jerusalem to the Jews, remove the Romans, and see the Temple rebuilt. The revolt receives its name from its leader, a charismatic, messianic figure named, Shimon ben Kosiba. Rabbinic tradition relates how a great Sage of this period, Rabbi Akiva, hailed Shimon as the Messiah, calling him bar Kochba (“son of the star;” Numbers 24:17). After the failure of the revolt, the rabbis referred to him as bar Koziba (“son of the lie”). Shimon took the title Nasi Israel (Prince of Israel). This language comes from Ezekiel where the future, hoped for ruler will be known as Nasi. The revolt had a devastating impact upon the Jewish community in the land of Israel. Roman, Jewish, and Christian sources place the Jewish casualties between 400,000-500,000. Even if these figures are inflated, they speak to the widespread loss of Jewish life. The Jewish rebels also inflicted heavy causalities upon the Roman forces as well. Many Jews were sold as slaves because of the revolt. Others emigrated outside of the land. Jews from Babylon immigrated into the land of Israel at this time. The Romans changed the name of the province from Judaea to Palestina. Jerusalem became a Roman colony and Jews were expelled from the city. The Galilee, which had been a center of Jewish life, had idolatrous non-Jews settling in the region. It also impacted the relationships between Jews and Christians. [End of quote] In the next article, Hanan Eshel, also following a conventional route, will try to determine when Hadrian set up his Aelia Capitolina: Hanan Eshel. “Aelia Capitolina- Jerusalem No More.” Biblical Archaeology Review 23, 6 (1997). | Center for Online Judaic Studies ‘Eshel. “Aelia Capitolina- Jerusalem No More.” Biblical Archaeology Review 23, 6 (1997). Unlike the First Jewish Revolt against Rome (66–70 C.E.), which was chronicled in detail by the first-century historian Josephus, the Second Jewish Revolt, the so-called Bar-Kokhba Revolt (132–135 C.E.), is known only from scraps of ancient literature. …. Archaeology alone can fill in the gaps. And it has been doing so in an amazing way in recent decades. …. One of the mysteries surrounding the revolt involves the founding of the city Aelia Capitolina, the name the Romans gave to Jerusalem. Did the Romans establish Aelia Capitolina before the Bar-Kokhba Revolt, thereby inciting the Jews to revolt? Or did they establish it after the revolt and exclude the Jews from the city as punishment? Scholars, as might be expected, have taken two views. Recent numismatic evidence—coins from the Judean desert—may provide the answer. The first view, that the founding of Aelia Capitolina preceded the revolt, is supported by the Roman historian Dio Cassius. In 130 C.E. Emperor Hadrian (117–138 C.E.) made a tour of his eastern lands, traveling through Judea, Arabia and Egypt before returning to Rome. According to Dio, Hadrian founded Aelia Capitolina during this journey. …. The church historian Eusebius, however, describes the transformation of Jerusalem into Aelia Capitolina as occurring after the Bar-Kokhba Revolt was crushed, in 136 C.E. …. The Mishnah, the earliest rabbinic classic, redacted in about 200 C.E., seems to support Eusebius. In Ta’anit 4.6, the Mishnah lists five disasters that occurred on the ninth of the Hebrew month of Av, including the Babylonian destruction of the First Temple and the Roman destruction of the Second Temple. The fourth item in the list is the fall of Betar, the last stronghold of Bar-Kokhba’s warriors, which ended the Second Jewish Revolt. The final item in the Mishnah’s list is the plowing of “the city”—that is, Jerusalem. When the Romans founded a city, they fixed its boundaries in a ceremonial ritual in which an ox and a cow, tethered together, plowed a line that marked the new city’s limits. That the Mishnah lists the fall of Betar before the founding of Roman Jerusalem seems to confirm Eusebius’s statement that Aelia Capitolina was founded after the Bar-Kokhba revolt was suppressed. Who was right—Dio Cassius or Eusebius? Like the rebels of the First Jewish Revolt, the Jews of the Second Jewish Revolt issued their own coins. These may help us answer the question. The Second Revolt coins are all overstrikes; that is, the rebels took coins then in circulation and imprinted them with their own impressions. Rome issued coins commemorating Aelia Capitolina. If an Aelia Capitolina coin had been found overstruck with a Bar-Kokhba impression, this would provide clear evidence that Aelia had been founded before the revolt. However, since no such coin has been found, some scholars have assumed that Aelia was established after the revolt, as punishment. In 1967 a hoard of coins that was said to have been illegally excavated in the northern part of the Judean desert surfaced on the antiquities market. The hoard included Bar-Kokhba coins and an Aelia Capitolina coin. This seemed to indicate that Aelia was founded before the revolt, since the refugees who supposedly hid the coins during the revolt also had an Aelia coin. Later, in 1970, hoards said to have come from the same area appeared on the market. These too contained a mixture of Bar-Kokhba and Aelia coins. As Yaakov Meshorer, the dean of Israeli numismatists, noted, these discoveries seemed to support Dio’s testimony that Aelia was founded in 130 C.E., during Hadrian’s eastern tour. There was a problem, however. These hoards were found not in professional digs but in illegal excavations. Local Bedouin regularly engage in such digs and then sell their finds to antiquities dealers. Some skeptical scholars have suggested that antiquities dealers may have added the Aelia coins to the hoards to increase their value. I can now report the controlled and legal excavation of a hoard of coins that may remove any doubts. This excavation is really part of a larger story involving the search for and excavation of caves in the Judean desert. Many of these caves were used by Jewish refugees fleeing from the Roman forces during the Second Revolt. …. Since 1951, 27 Second Revolt refugee caves have been identified. Eight of these caves have been found by the Israel Cave Research Center (ICRC), established in 1979 by the Israel Society for the Protection of Nature. All of these caves can be dated to the Bar-Kokhba period by the finds—pottery, glass, keys, wooden combs and bronze vessels as well as coins. In most of the caves, unfortunately, archaeologists detected evidence of prior illegal excavation. Nevertheless, important finds awaited discovery. In one cave that was clearly a Jewish refuge during the revolt (the Araq el-Na’asaneh Cave), ICRC volunteers found 16 silver denarii struck by the emperors Trajan (98–117 C.E.) and Hadrian, as well as one tridrachma from the Roman province of Cappadocia. Damien Mackey’s comment: Trajan and Hadrian I believe to have been just one and the same emperor: Hadrianus Traianus Caesar – Trajan transmutes to Hadrian (4) Hadrianus Traianus Caesar – Trajan transmutes to Hadrian Hanan Eshel continues: This demonstrates that the Jewish rebels did not overstrike all the coins they got hold of but continued to use Roman coins bearing their original impressions. In 1986, I excavated a cave (known as the Abi’or Cave) to which 38 people had fled. We found their skeletons in the cave. They probably suffocated as a fire kindled by the Romans at the entrance withdrew oxygen from the cave. Five documents written on papyrus (three in Greek and two in Aramaic) indicate that the people fled to the cave in 135 C.E. Some of these documents were found on a terrace located at the entrance to the cave. However, the stratigraphy was reversed. Usually, as archaeologists dig deeper, they reveal earlier and earlier strata, or layers of occupation. But near the mouth of the Abi’or Cave, we found a fourth-century B.C.E. document above three documents from the Roman period. This indicates that some later occupants dumped the cave’s contents onto the terrace, thereby turning the strata upside down. Damien Mackey’s comment: Or, has the archaeology here simply been misconstrued? The interpretation of some of what follows I think may well be questionable. Hanan Eshel continues: It is not difficult to determine who did this: monks who lived in this cave during the 14th century. In 1987 I excavated another refugee cave, which yielded one bronze coin that had been overstruck by the rebels and a silver dinar of Hadrian, further proof that the rebels continued to use some regular Roman coins. In 1991 David Amit, an archaeologist with the Israel Antiquities Authority, and I excavated a cave that yielded a tetradrachma of Bar-Kokhba with the facade of the destroyed [sic] Jerusalem Temple on the obverse. About 2,000 of these coins are known, but this tetradrachma is the first to be discovered during a legal excavation. We named the findspot the Cave of the Tetradrachma. Finally, I come to the el-Jai Cave, on the south side of Wadi Suweinet, northeast of Jerusalem. I visited the cave several times, looking for artifacts from the Bar-Kokhba Revolt, but found only some Early Bronze Age potsherds (c. 2000 B.C.E.). When I led a group of students here in 1997, we found evidence of intensive illegal excavations. Near one of the cave’s two entrances we noticed potsherds from the second century C.E. Crawling into the inner part of the cave, we came upon broken glass vessels, often found in destruction layers from the Bar-Kokhba period. We also found two coins near the entrance to the cave’s huge hall and three more inside. The oldest [sic] was a bronze coin of the Roman emperor Domitian (81–96 C.E.), minted in Sebaste, with two countermarks (stamps) of the Tenth Roman Legion. (This legion led the forces that suppressed the First Jewish Revolt against Rome in the first century C.E.) The other four coins all dated to the time of Hadrian. Three of these coins are critical to our discussion: a city coin from Gaza, found in the huge hall, and two Aelia Capitolina coins, from a tunnel leading into the hall. The Gaza coin is important because it can be dated precisely. When Hadrian made his eastern tour, he visited Gaza, an honor the city wanted to preserve in memory forever. To do this, the Gazans recorded two dates on their coins: the Gaza era (the number of years from the Roman liberation of the city in 61 B.C.E.) and the number of years after Hadrian’s visit. The inscription on the Gaza coin from the el-Jai Cave tells us it was struck in year 5 after the visit of Hadrian and year 194 of the Gaza era. This double date (the difference between the two dates is seven or eight months) allows the coin to be dated to the end of 133 C.E. or the beginning of 134 C.E. [sic] One of the Aelia Capitolina coins portrays, on its reverse, the ceremony of the founding of the city as a Roman colony. The emperor appears plowing the boundary of the city with an ox and a cow. The Latin inscription reads “COL[ONIA] AEL[IA] KAPIT[OLINA], COND[IT],” or “Colony of Aelia Capitolina, founded.” In the background is the legionary standard. The other Aelia coin depicts, on its reverse, the head of Sabina, Hadrian’s wife, with the inscription “Sabina Augusta.” Both coins strengthen the association of the founding of Aelia with Hadrian’s tour, especially his visit to Jerusalem. If, as I believe, the Gaza coin was deposited in the cave at the same time as the Aelia coins, Aelia must have been founded by 133/4 C.E. The Bar-Kokhba Revolt lasted another year or so. Therefore Aelia must have been established before, not after, the revolt. Dio Cassius was right. The establishment of Jerusalem as a Roman colony named Aelia Capitolina was apparently one of the causes of the Second [sic] Jewish Revolt against Rome. One final insight provided by the coins from this cave: Some scholars have argued that the rebels had no commercial connections with people outside Judea during the revolt. Their argument is based largely on the fact that coin hoards from the Bar-Kokhba Revolt usually contain no Roman coins dating later than 132 C.E. The coins from the el-Jai Cave disprove this contention. The Jews who fled to this cave no earlier than 134 C.E. carried with them coins minted in 133/4 C.E.—during the revolt.