Has the hot numismatic market actually caused a reduction in intensive, original research projects?

Longacre

There are some great numismatic books that have come out lately. A few that come to mind are the Whitman series books, including the Garrett/Guth gold encyclopedia. Of course, you cannot forget Burdette's incredible Renaissance of American Coinage books.

Although these books are great, does anyone think that the hot numismatic market has actually caused a reduction in intensive, original research projects? For the sake of comparison, let's take all of the books that QDB has written for Whitman out of the mix. He is a special case in that although he is associated with ANR, he does not (to my knowledge) run the day to day minutia at the firm. Therefore, you are left with relatively few intensively researched books, with Burdette's books being the main examples.

Does anyone think that the hot numismatic market has stopped such young and promising researchers, such as John K. at ANR, David McCarthy at Kagins, and others from spending significant amounts of time writing? I am not sure how the industry works on the inside, but I don't think that with consignments coming in hot and heavy, firms would be willing to let their top numismatic researchers take a year off to research in the dusty archives of the Smithsonian. Once the hot numismatic cycle ends, do you think more Renaissance-type books will be issued? Will it be too late by then because it will be post market peak?

Mark

Longacre:

I'd have to check the copyright of my books, but off the top of my head I am not sure I see a correlation between the heat of the market and the number of books being
published. For instance, the Burdette series is probably one of the best books ever published about coins, yet it's coming with the "white-hot, nuclear" market. And, one could argue that when the market is slow, there are fewer people dealing in coins which means fewer potential authors, plus potential authors might be discouraged because with a slow market, there are fewer people buying coin books. If what I laid out were the case, then there would be fewer books published when the market is cold, which would be the opposite of what you suggested. But, as I said, without any research I don't see a strong correlation. It wil be interesting to read other people's take on your very interesting hypothesis!

Re QDB: I worry that he doesn't have many more massively researched numismatic tomes yet to write. I definitely hope I am wrong. Indeed, I REALLY hope that he writes his autobiography before long. That's a book I'd love to read, especially if tells tales, both good and bad, about some of his colleagues.

Mark

JZrarities

Another good question posed by Longacre.

(I'm thinking)

I don't think the market is the root cause for a slow down in writing... I suspect it is due more to the time neded to write a quality book is high these days. It takes more indepth research than it used to; plus, the market is much thunner for numismatics.

There are already lots of books written on the majority of important numismatic subjects (ancient Greek is my favorite)

Let me pose this back:

Longacre, What subjects would you like to see written?

I have almost started a research project / book so many times on the subject of Colorful Toning, but the daunting task kills me every time.

I would love to see a Rainbow Toning book one of these days...

DaveG

On the contrary, I think numismatic books are mostly published when the coin market is hot - more collectors, more potential book buyers.

I think we've seen more numismatic books published over the last couple of years than we've seen since the early '90s - that is, the last time the coin market was really hot.

Now, it's possible that the research is mostly done during slow markets. . .

Shamika

<< <i> On the contrary, I think numismatic books are mostly published when the coin market is hot - more collectors, more potential book buyers. >>


I would think the same thing. There have been many great books published in the last several years that are most likely the result of the hot market. The 1933 Double Eagle has produced two books alone, neither one of which are by QDB. David Lange's books on the Lincoln Cent, the Buffalo Nickel, and the Mercury Dime are three first class pieces of literature.

I'm currently reading a book titled "Crime of 1873" by Robert R. Van Ryzin which is a fascinating book about the silver rush and Morgan dollars.

Conder101

There is a difference betwen when they are researched/written, and when they are published. A serious quality book can take years to research and write. In many cases you can't tell from the publishing date when the book was actually researched.

PerryHall

I would imagine in a hot market, numismatic professional have little time to research and write books while in a cool markets, there is more time to do these things. Most of these books are written by people who have a love of the hobby and do it to leave behind the their legacy of knowledge.

RWB

The first "Renaissance" book published (1916-1921) took about 6 years to research. The 1905-08 book took about the same with some overlap. The 1909-1915 book that is currently in the works will have taken 6 to 7 years.

Since I have no connection with the business end of coin collecting, market conditions aren't relevant. Holding a full-time job, being a single father to teenagers and having limited resources all affect what can be done and time available. The last vacation was about 8 years ago - other leave time from work was focused on the books. I also have tried to "get it right," so each book has gone through more than 30 major rewrites and drafts. (I'm on version 34h of the 1909-1915 book.)

Enough of my boring comments…..

Coinosaurus

Actually, I think there is more substantive numismatic research being done now than ever before. The Internet has revolutionized everything and made it possible to get things done without moving all over the country. A lot of the club publications now contain original research too.