Israel: 25 mil 1949 (5709), km8, 3 varieties [solved]

Israel 25 Mils (1948/1949): Jerusalem vs Holon mint attribution — sources?

Seeking authoritative sources: 25 Mils 1948–49 (open/closed link) minting locations

Hi all — I’m a collector focused on the Israel 25 Mils 5708/1948 and 5709/1949 series. I’m preparing a short collector-perspective article and I’m trying to tighten the source record around minting location and chronology.

Collector taxonomy is fairly stable (1948 issue; 1949 Open Link; 1949 Closed Link; “straight-leaves” discussed as a subtype), but the Jerusalem vs Holon attribution story is still messy in the accessible sources.

I’m particularly looking for authoritative references (books, journal articles, archival material, biography, museum publications, etc.) that address:

Where the earliest 25 Mils were actually struck (Jerusalem workshop vs Holon/Michsaf)

Any documentary basis for Holon vs Jerusalem attribution (beyond repeated lore)

Any reliable notes on how the Open Link and Closed Link varieties map (or do not map) onto mint locations

Any primary/near-primary evidence (e.g., ministry records, period press, institutional notes)

If you have citations (page numbers, issue numbers, scans, links) or know the best Hebrew-language sources to consult, I’d really appreciate it. Happy to share comparative photos of the main varieties if helpful.

Thanks in advance.
Here is a photo of one of my recent purchases:

Hi,

I have taken a look at my old documentation and have come to the conclusion, that it was partly wrong. I have modified it according to the SCWC catalog (and numista). Here are the new graphics:

What do you think about the type C?

Hi,

Many thanks for this — these revised graphics are very helpful.

I think the updated layout makes the collector taxonomy clearer, especially by separating the 1949 pieces into:

Type A = Closed Link

Type B = Open Link

Type C = Open Link / Straight-cut leaves subtype

That is useful, because it shows more clearly that the diagnostics do not all travel together in a simple way.

I find Type C particularly interesting. It looks like an attempt to separate a distinct open-link subtype rather than treating all “straight-cut leaf” features as part of the closed-link family only. From a collector perspective, that is a meaningful observation and worth preserving.  I will review the coins that I have access to in order to consider if any match the Type C.

Where I remain more cautious is on the mint attribution side. I can see that your revised mapping is aligned with SCWC / Numista-style attribution, and I understand why you have updated the graphics that way. However, I am still finding that mint-location chronology is less stable than the collector typology. Some sources point one way, while other sources — including institutional and older printed references — suggest a more complicated Jerusalem/Holon sequence.

So at the moment I am tending to separate the two questions:

Collector taxonomy / morphology — where your revised charts are very useful

Mint attribution / chronology — where I still think caution is needed because the sources conflict

In other words, I think your revised graphics are a strong contribution to the taxonomy discussion, even if I am not yet ready to treat all of the mint attributions as settled.

Thanks again — very helpful work.

Best regards,
William

Re mint location

I’m increasingly treating collector typology and mint attribution / chronology as two different questions. The A/B/C breakdown is very useful for identifying coin families, but the Jerusalem vs Holon story still looks source-dependent and partially contradictory.

For example:

The 1948 Carmel newsreel (Oct 1948) shows 25 Mil coins being produced under armed guard with a Ministry of Finance narration, but the archive location is listed as unknown. So it is strong evidence for process, but weaker for site attribution.

Older printed references (Haffner) preserve a mixed sequence: Jerusalem / Bethlehem Road (Salzman) with later strikings in Holon, and explicitly allow that coins may have been struck in both places.

BOI / museum summaries sometimes simplify the chronology in different, and at times contradictory, ways.

So I’m very happy to discuss mint attribution, but I’m not yet ready to treat any one mapping (for example, “X variety = Y mint”) as settled unless it can be pinned to specific primary or printed citations. That is the area where I am still trying to track down firmer documentation.

At the moment, one possible scenario that seems to make sense is that die engraving and perhaps some early trial or initial striking work may have been done on Bethlehem Road in Jerusalem, before more practical production moved to the Holon factory. That would fit the wartime / interim nature of the issue, while also preserving the strong symbolic importance of issuing the first coinage in the name of the revived State of Israel.  

That, to me, is why this issue is so important: it sits at the intersection of sovereignty, emergency production, and revived nationhood.

Hi William

I don't  mind to take the mint assignment out of the graphics.  I can't do it now since I'm  hospitalized 

 Will have to wait until I'm back home