Academic Numismatics
Greeniejr
Posts: 1,321 ✭✭✭
I was going to post to the thread re: Laura's hot topics but I think addressing the issue of Academic Numismatics needs to be separated out of that thread in order to focus on the content rather than the fact it was in a hot topics. Unfortunately, most of the people coming up through the ranks in numismatics are focusing primarily on the business side and less on the academic side. Sure there are some people on the younger side contributing a little bit, but there are many fewer in the pipeline than ever before. I think Laura is absolutely right that numismatics needs to be presented and available in that context to encourage new academics. The biggest trouble of course is curricula. I am not talking about ANA curricula, I am talking about legitimate, university worthy curricula that could result in real scholarship. I am guessing the ANA does not have anyone who can do that.
I took a class on ancient coins in college based on the coins of the Wulfing Collection at Wash U. It was a few years before Newman gave them all of the money to develop resources so I could not push for or inquire about further coin related classes. What would be interesting is if someone would be able to talk to someone with pull with the Newman people to have someone there generate curricula. My initial thought was to talk to them about offering an online course but it is so expensive nobody would go near it. If someone with the Library could put together curricula to be administered by someone else, it may be a positive step. Of course it comes back to the issue that someone needs to actually do the legwork and then teaching. So many of us are business people, doctors, lawyers, engineers, military and not so many teachers. My suggestion to Laura would be to start there and talk to representatives of the Newman Library.
Comments
Stanford is currently developing curricula within their Classics and History Departments that is coin-related. I've been in contact with several people in their History Department personally and have been to several coin-oriented events at the newly-established Frank Kovacs Numismatic Library.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
Here's a news article on the Frank Kovacs Numismatic Library, which covers ancient coins.
library.stanford.edu/blogs/stanford-libraries-blog/2016/07/transformative-numismatic-donation
Ancient coins naturally involve more academic skills to understand, as they involve multiple languages and symbols.
Do you think there is a bias in the ANA towards US coins, which have a shorter history and usually do not require advanced skills to identify?
I have been doing some research on die varieties of Liberty Seated Half Dimes, simply by downloading all the available images from auction sites and PCGS CoinFacts for a given year and attributing them to known and new die pairs. This is made possible by the sharing of these images. I know Joe K. is also doing an exhaustive die variety study for trade dollars using the same resources.
How does academic numismatics benefit the ANA/US collector base?
By helping people identify new die varieties to acquire? (Or to enjoy more the coins they already have?)
Is the goal "collector enjoyment" or health of the coin resale business, and do these conflict?
Or is the goal increasing the number of US collectors?
P.S. The questions above are not directed at anyone in particular.
They are simply things I am wondering about.
There is an old joke about how trade dollar varieties are often scarce, but trade dollar variety collectors are even scarcer! The same goes for Liberty Seated Half Dimes, of course, which have the additional disadvantage of being small, although magnification technology just keeps getting better and cheaper.
But perhaps some quality new publications like the Logan-McCloskey Federal Half Dimes book and the more recent bust dimes and bust quarters books could broaden the appeal of other series.
Traditionally numismatics has been part of archeology and remains so in nearly every academic institution. Beyond that, it is a peripheral discipline used more for "local color" than any rigorous study.
A possible academic treatment of numismatics - especially for the United States and its pre-Federal period - is as a subset of economics and sociopolitical sciences. Another way to put it: A coin cannot be understood except within its context. (This is something I've attempted to do in nearly all of my books and articles, but it is difficult. The general coin-collector-reader must have enough basic history and economics to place research within a very general setting, then use the written research to build and expand. That is tough to do when public and private schools tend to skip most of the 19th and 20th centuries, and avoid almost all economic subjects. (Home schooled kids are even worse off - usually dependent on parental misinformation.)
Sadly, for most US coin collectors "1:16" and "gold standard" are just formless phrases of no substance.
To answer your first question, the ANA has more US collectors than ancient collectors, but I wouldn't say that there's a bias there. It's more balanced at the ANS, but I'd say there is an academic bias there that lends itself to ancient coins...
The other question (how does academic research benefit the US collector base/what is its goal?) is much more complicated. I think that different sorts of research have different goals, and benefit different groups.
If the goal is to increase the collector base/collector enjoyment, the sort of research that Roger mentions above is probably the best route, although, as he points out, in order to present a coin properly within its context the writer needs to spend a lot of time giving background information in a way that's both concise and relatable. Roger and a handful of others have done great work along these lines, and I've made an attempt or two; however, the number of people who are willing to take the time to read an article of this sort that's over three pages long is smaller than you might expect. The only way to succeed with this sort of thing is to tease an interesting story out of a LOT of data, which is both challenging and time consuming.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
For years I have commented that if one does not understand the political, social and economic reasons for a coin one can not fully understand the coin they are collecting.
Too many collectors are just interested in population reports, the label on a coin from their favorite grading company, whether it has a fancy sticker and how it will increase their standing in the registry set. Many can not tell you anything about how or why it was made or any other interesting story about the time period when it was issued.
The ANA correspondence courses were a good basic beginning but they have not been updated in ages. They merely scratch the surface of the topics leaving one searching for more information on their own. The Summer Seminars offer a different method of learning about numismatics limited to a short week of instruction. Again, not enough for serious study into the subject.
The ANS sponsored the Coinage of the Americas conferences along with the published papers of the seminar. These were some of the most helpful references for me personally. They, unfortunately, have become extinct.
Many of us are left looking for more guidance all the while advancing our knowledge through home study and interactions with other like minded collectors.
An avenue for more advanced study would be welcomed by myself, but how many others would be interested. Can an advanced numismatic study course have enough of a following to make it economically viable? That is the $64,000 question. Too many are just interested in the crack, fix, upgrade, and flip side of the business.
Knowledge may not still be king.........
A: The year they spend more on their library than their coin collection.
A numismatist is judged more on the content of their library than the content of their cabinet.
With modern technology, the cost of establishing an ongoing seminar that is a little more in depth than Summer Seminar or the correspondence courses would probably be low enough to make "economic viability" a non-issue, assuming that the people involved in the project weren't looking to make money.
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
Maybe an example will help understand the situation as I see it.
A current subject of my research focuses on the “private pattern coins” and related items produced by International Nickel Company, Inc. prior to adoption of the Coinage Act of 1965. I could have limited this to an illustrated list of varieties with a bit of description and updated Pollock catalog numbers. That is all the authentication companies want and all that probably 85% of collectors want. Identify, pick a number, estimate a grade, stick in plastic and forget it.
But what of the 15% that would look at this list and think, “How did this happen? Why did a big company go to all this trouble? Who did all this?”
The article, presently in an advanced draft form, will include the obligatory lists and item numbers. But it will also show how and why this project was undertaken, who was involved, when events occurred, and what were the influences in the US and world economy that pushed the USA toward the Coinage Act. All these and more tie into the context and understanding of International Nickel’s involvement as well that of DuPont, Handy & Harmon, Union Carbide and many others.
The presentation will not be strictly “academic” in tone – that’s not the reader audience and it’s not a PhD dissertation (been there, done that) – but it includes sufficient references to permit any interested person to find original materials. Maybe one day, someone will find more information and update the story? Plus it is factually based including measurements of real coins and independent metal analysis.
As others have eloquently noted, the real audience is only a small percent of those who might otherwise look at the article. But to ignore the 15% who are interested is to cut off the very people who are most likely to make long-term use of the material, and eventually contribute to the next generation of knowledge.
@RogerB Would you like to have a PhD in numismatics to recognize all your hard work and research? It would certainly be well deserved!
As I mentioned in the "hot topics" thread, the biggest difficulty is not the curriculum ... that's one of the simplest issues. Determining content is easy. Establishing a numismatics course is relatively simple, in fact I taught two numismatics courses while on faculty at UT Austin.
The real challenge is everything that goes into supporting a university level degree program (verses a sporadic course or two). Most noteworthy is the accreditation process for establishing a new degree program. This is particularly challenging for an undergraduate degree program as compared with a masters or doctoral program.
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
Congratulations to Stanford for this significant step in ancient numismatic education. That's an impressive library collection and will serve students and faculty well.
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
Wow, I remember the core of that collection there at Stanford. As an undergrad I had an unofficial minor in the Classics and reorganized their Greek silver. I just don't see "Coins" or even "Numismatics" as an area that on its own would merit a University in any serious sense - maybe some articles delving into metals alloys and crystallography or other contextual issues such as history, economics or the mentioned archaeology, but lets put this into perspective. Maybe Laura or others suggesting this go sit in on some academic courses there like physical chemistry, advanced chemical engineering, etc.
Not to be a downer as I appreciate that there is some interest in promoting deeper study in coins besides how much money can be made on a flip....
Well, just Love coins, period.
While such courses garner interest here on the forum, one must also gauge the interest at a University. Would these be filler courses or do people foresee a degree in numismatics? As a profession, I see the field very limited. As stated above, most participants are in this for fast profit, status or as a side hobby. Certainly there could be a career path with a large museum (i.e. Smithsonian), however, I do not see career opportunities such as in robotics, chemistry, finance or business. After I retired, I took many college credits in areas that interested me, and would certainly have taken one in numismatics if one was offered. Generally speaking though, I do not see numismatics as an area that would profit colleges since the interest would be so limited.
Cheers, RickO
Only from a fully accredited University....