At What Point Can You Call Yourself a Numismatist and Not Just a Coin Collector?

Just wondering...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Coin collectors and numismatists are two separate things.

You can be either, or both. Many numismatists are not collectors, many collectors are not numismatists.

 

Perhaps when the importance of coins is for 90% knowledge / learning and 10% or less is for financial gain.

 

I don’t know the threshold, but collectors don’t research.

 

Personally, I would say this:

A coin collector collects circulating coinage with the intent of completing a set. Often, collectors look for certain coins in their change or through CRH, but don't research coins or have an interest in the history of the coins. A coin collector is simply there to collect a certain coin type. Most often, coin collectors may also collect coins with the intent to sell the coins for a profit. Example: State quarter coin collectors

A numismatist, on the other hand, is incredibly well-versed in the coin world. Often, numismatists gather higher quality coins and coins that are often much more valuable. The end goal may be to complete a set, but the main interest in coins comes through the historical aspect. Coin collectors may have larger collections than many numismatists, but many numismatists may have higher quality collections that coin collectors. Numismatists are often out to collect a certain type of coin (or maybe a few types). A type set is a popular set where one collects many different types, but, most numismatists, even if they are doing a type set, will likely learn everything they can about a certain type of coin within the type set, like EAC, classic commemoratives, half dimes, etc.

 

Your description of a "numismatist" is actually an advanced collector. A numismatist is one who studies and researches (with the focus on new research - uncovering new things, answering unsolved questions, or explaining things in a way nobody has before), a collector is one who buys to complete a set or acquire more coins. A collector with more experience or more money may buy nicer things, but that does not make them a numismatist. An advanced collector will learn their series, learn the details, and even branch out to other series - but their focus is on learning so that they can be savvy buyers. It's like me reading Consumer Reports before I buy a car - you're not going to say I'm a safety researcher because I read the report before buying the car. Same with collectors.

Compare, for example, two of the greatest collectors of the 20th century: Eliasberg and Bass. You cannot argue that they built two of the finest collections ever assembled. However, Eliasberg was a pure collector - he made no study of his coins, published no research, had no numismatic tendencies at all. Bass, however, did some of the finest research in his area, publishing his studies and expanding the knowledge of numismatics. Both of them are the most advanced collectors, only one of them was a numismatist.

I disagree. Even the most advanced collectors may never be numismatists. It is not a sliding scale - they are two completely different things.

The confusion comes because as collectors get more deeply involved in collecting, some of them start to study and research the things they are collecting. They become numismatists as well as collectors.

Now, you can argue where on the spectrum the line should be drawn to distinguish "beginner," "layman," "advanced," and "expert." That is definitely a sliding spectrum with opinions. But "collectors" and "numismatists" are two separate things.

 

When you put your coin under a loupe or a magnifying glass....that triggers the next level

 

I don't feel there is a clear line between the two. It's like the term expert. When can you call yourself that? It's not important to me where I fit or what others think I am.

 

When you spend more time studying, reading or researching coins than looking for or buying coins.

 

Ok, take me, for example...

I used to collect coins to complete a set - silver Ikes, war nickels, Franklin halves. However, I felt collecting in the traditional way was simply looking at the same coin with different dates and mint marks, and it didn't really excite me too much to show them off. And to be honest, unless you're a hardcore coin collector, most people really aren't that interested in what looks to be the same thing for 40-120 pieces. But errors, varieties, and counterfeits? Everyone loves looking at them that I show them to, including my 10th graders at the high school. They are already asking me if I'm bringing in my collection again this year, and if I have any new ones. Each piece is essentially unique, and just their oddity and bizarre appearance draws people otherwise not interested into the hobby. But I wanted to learn a lot about them before I started collecting them. Plus I had to know is this error rare, common, or possibly even faked? What determines value? How can something missing features - or having greatly distorted features - be "Mint State?" What exactly is considered "damage?" How did it get to look like this???

Most you know me as an error collector, with some varieties and counterfeits. I have been spending way more time studying how particular errors are made or could have been made, researching the history of certain series, asking and answering questions about why a compositional change occurred, and studying the minting process overall and how it has changed, which is key to move yourself more towards the "Numismatist" camp.

I am also currently working on a book using my collection of high-grade mint state errors as a basis to explain such things to novices. Many of you have seen some of my pieces on here. I look at coins all the time - especially non-certified ones - and i have a much more solid grasp on what errors are, what they are not. I read every single day about such matters, and even learn from some of you. I have been corrected a few times - and even corrected you guys a few times. But I keep an open mind.

Lastly, I do not sell my coins. I buy what I like because i understand what it is. I research a specific type, like "wrong planchet/off-metal errors," post photos, ask questions, answer questions, read from the best, and use that as a basis to then educate others. I find that more enjoyable to me. I even help local dealers who ask me about possible raw errors to help identify the type(s) and if they were altered.

I asked because i am wondering with what i just explained, am I now a Numismatist?

 

Good question.. I think I have done what you are doing with Mint Errors much longer than you have.. So I ask the question also.. am I a Numismatist?

 

How is your "dusty fist" coming along? Mine is coming along just fine. https://www.potus-sgm.com/

 

My fist doesn’t collect dust, only huge honkin’ clumps of mud. At least I HOPE that’s just mud.

 

I think the simplest answer is... the difference is what someone considers themselves, a collector or a numismatist. In the end, people that they interact with get to decide which term is more accurate

 

One of the same...Numismatist: The study or collecting of money.

 

I know!
Here is a true coin collector..

A parking meter coin collector!

 

I totally agree with your distinctions on recognizing different levels of expertise within each term. But I think someone like JCro57 could be called a numismatist based on his study and book on error coins, but only within that field. Anything else he does with coins I think would fall under the term collector. That's how I would define those two words. I am working on learning more about Morgans, but anything else I pick up, I'm just collecting. IMHO.

 

I don't fit most of the definitions of "coin collector" nor "numismatist."

I research my coins but for instance I own a "major design" of each denomination before the more recent ones still in circulation, except for cents.

For instance I own at least 1 of the Shield, Liberty and Buffalo nickels. Of course I own more than one of them of various quality but, for instance with the Shield, I did not differentiate between with or without rays, or open/closed 3. I just have a few that I categorized as "Shield" nickels. But I'll collect going back as early as I can to hopefully pre-1800.

And I have that for Half Cents, 2 cents, 3 cents, half dimes, 20s, quarters, halves, dollars, gold coinage. I also have a few cents such as the Flying Eagles and I believe I have one, yes "ONE" Indian Head Cent as the loan representative of that "era" of cents. After that I consider all the cents "modern" and just kinda hoard all the newer cents (and all pocket change) on/off since the 70s but for a completely different reason.

Really though my "type set" is a coin with an Eagle on it. Doesn't matter if it's clad, silver or gold. If it has an Eagle on it then it's on my list to get. There are a few eagle designs that I don't like though. But keep in mind, one St Gauden of any year complete's that "set" as the eagle is the same on all of them. Any more and it's just because I like it.

Of course on my list is putting together a "set" of Peace Dollars. But I've put aside that desire for right now because it just doesn't make sense after I thought about it as they all have the same eagle design on them.

 

One problem with this statement is "The end goal...". There is never an "end goal". It's not a destination...it's a journey! You never collect, say, the entire run of Washington quarters and then stop...you go on to something else. The fact that you think you have an entire collection is a myth! JMO,