Knowing a little more than we knew yesterday.
RogerB
Posts: 8,852 ✭✭✭✭✭
Few coin collectors or dealers realize it, but the hobby and business of American coin collecting are built on numismatic research. This is the source of information – accurate or inaccurate – that drives imagination, sales and lore of coins.
Meaningful research into coins has two primary parts that often operate separately: examination of coins, and examination of documentation. The first is primarily direct observation and comparison of specimens in an effort to determine die or design characteristics and changes over time. This is the approach of many hobby books that describe “Varieties of Mercury Dimes” or similar subjects. The second approach is identification of documents and related materials that describe events, processes and actions of mints and human interaction with coins. The book “From Mine to Mint” is a good example of this kind of research.
Whenever the two parts of research connect, we find ourselves with both specimens of a particular coin variety and an explanation of how that occurred; the ultimate result of the hunt for knowledge. A prominent example is a 1909-S VDB cent where we have multiple specimens from different dies, and also a complete die/quantity struck list and contemporary descriptions of why and how initials VDB were included and then removed from the design.
Most older and current numismatic research is observationally based, and there are probably a hundred or more people involved in this effort. Documentary research has traditionally supported observation, but in the last few decades, this has become an independent discipline where the search for original information is primary to the investigation. There might be ten or twenty people following this path.
It is hoped this very high-level post will stimulate a little interest among readers. Not that any will run out to the nearest National Archives location, or haunt coin shows examining three-cent silver varieties; but maybe that one or two people will add their abilities and interests to the search for more and better knowledge than we currently possess.
Comments
Who needs to do research when we have the internet? After all, everything we read on the internet is true.
Interesting post Roger, and I do agree. It does seem that the field of numismatic research is thin and certainly could use more 'eyes' and minds.... I read all your posts/contributions with interest and have learned a great deal. I hope more people are inspired to join the ranks of numismatic historians. Cheers, RickO
Appreciate the efforts of you and others doing numismatic research.
there is a saying, "don't believe everything you read" that was around long before the internet.
This seems like an ideal area the ANA could provide a strategic roadmap for and then identify the folks that would be best to focus on the areas and keep it all in order and consumable.
None of the major numismatic organizations have shown interest in supporting this kind of basic research -- with the exception of Central States, that awards several $5,000 research grants each year. The business/sales end of the hobby is not structured to fund long-term projects that might produce no new results.
A useful analogy is in basic scientific research, where companies fund only projects that might benefit their particular business. It was not until the 1920s and 1930s that the national government began to fund consistent basic research. Interestingly, one of the earlier supporters of basic research was Col. E,H.R. Green, noted coin collector and source of many of Eric Newman's collection. He supported basic research by MIT, at the 100% level, into uses for radio especially related to navigation and maritime problems. Only after his death did the US Navy begin supporting such programs.
American numismatic research has no such funding source. (Mr. Newman has put his resources into Washington University of St. Louis and "perpetual" storage of numismatic materials via NNP. However, there are no basic research grants that would permit concentrated investigations.)
I was not even talking about money (but that would be nice). I meant to say that some body like the ANA should have a research framework that aspiring folks could use to see: What needs to be done? Where are the gaps? How should research be formatted? A list of who's who in the industry? etc.
That was attempted when the ANA was last in Philadelphia. Draft materials were prepared, introductory and a beginning research workshop planned with the cooperation of NARA. They would even provide expert staff to help at no cost. But there was absolutely no cooperation or interest from ANA, it's officers or Board. No support. The same head-in-the-sand approach.
None of the numismatic organizations have expertise in research, except on the most incidental basis. Some individuals working at these places understand research, but the associations themselves barely know what assets and documents they already have. I realize that sounds cynical - but that has been my experience and that of others over the past 15 years.
This
"Inspiration exists, but it has to find you working" Pablo Picasso
Is the US mint currently doing a decent job of keeping up with indexing and cataloging records & documentation? Somedsy that info will be just as old and just as useful as the historical data people are looking through now.
The Mint seems to be maintaining high-level documentation, but I suspect there is little about how and why decisions are made. This really dates back to telephone the 1920s discussions that occurred without complete notes taken, and now includes ephemeral email and phone discussions. I'm not sure why this approach was used - since all it does is reduce a dynamic process to just bare bones with no flesh and blood.
If the old paper files are examined there is a lot more information on how and why things were done until the 1950s. Then the depth of material drops and finally reaches the present level in the late 1980s. It's as if there was less willingness to be associated with a decision during this time, and the people there now, know no other way to think or operate.
The US. Mint Bureau has traditionally been an insular place, with only a few being given glimpses of the inside. Even then, the view was very narrow. Almost none of the thousands of pocket notebooks kept by Mint employees remain today..... We just have to do what we can with what remains.
I really enjoyed the thoroughness of Mike Moran's history of the Mint from 1794 to 1854 in "The Mint Stikes Gold -1849". Of course Roger's Renaissance series is outstanding as well.