Danko and Issar aren't Moneychangers

A few days back, when discussing erring moneychangers. Bava Kamma 99:

אִיתְּמַר: הַמַּרְאֶה דִּינָר לַשּׁוּלְחָנִי וְנִמְצָא רַע, תָּנֵי חֲדָא: אוּמָּן – פָּטוּר, הֶדְיוֹט – חַיָּיב; וְתַנְיָא אִידַּךְ: בֵּין אוּמָּן בֵּין הֶדְיוֹט – חַיָּיב!

§ The Gemara continues the discussion of an expert who erred, thereby causing a loss. It was stated: With regard to one who presents a dinar to a money changer to assess its value or authenticity and the money changer declares it valid, and it is found to be bad, i.e., invalid, causing its owner a monetary loss, it is taught in one baraita that if the money changer is an expert, he is exempt, while if he is an ordinary person he is liable. And it is taught in another baraita that irrespective of whether he is an expert or whether he is an ordinary person, he is liable to pay for the owner’s loss.

אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: כִּי תַּנְיָא אוּמָּן פָּטוּר – כְּגוֹן דַּנְכּוּ וְאִיסּוּר, דְּלָא צְרִיכִי לְמִיגְמַר כְּלָל. אֶלָּא בְּמַאי טְעוֹ? טְעוֹ בְּסִיכְּתָא חַדְתָּא, דְּהָהִיא שַׁעְתָּא דִּנְפַק מִתּוּתֵי סִיכְּתָא.

To reconcile the baraitot, Rav Pappa said: When the baraita teaches that an expert is exempt from liability, it is referring to renowned experts such as the money changers Dankhu and Issur, whose expertise is so great that they do not need to learn about assessing currency at all. The Gemara asks: But if they are so proficient, in what did they err? The Gemara answers: They erred with regard to a coin from a new press, which at that time was leaving the press, and they did not know its value.

Later on, the gemara (Talmudic Narrator) is going to ask about Rabbi Chiyya, and about Rabbi Eleazar, on the assumption that they, as well, are renowned experts!

My answer is that that is not what Rav Pappa meant. And Dankhu isn’t a person. Rather the daled is the Aramaic prefix, “that of”. Necho and Issur are prominent mint. Therefore, moneychangers should be exceptionally knowledgeable about them, and getting it wrong is more like peshia. As to the (perhaps Talmudic Narrator’s question, and answer, or maybe within Rav Pappa’s question and answer), so why did they err? Because it is a new stamping, so they are familiar with it but not extremely familiar.

Later, it seems like the Stamma, maybe a different Stamma, believes it to be names of moneychangers. Rashi explains it logically as moneychangers based on internal Talmudic evidence. Here are some of these ancient mintages.

I wrote this up in different form about seven years back. See here on parshablog.