Show alternative catalog numbers on coin page [Risolto]

Hello,

I create this topic to track the idea of having a better way to mention numbers from alternative catalogs besides KM numbers on coin pages. This includes both display and search.

Cita: "imreh"​1) Alternative Catalog Numbers
​Besides the KM number, we shall have an alternative catalog number to help those local experts to whom the KM number is either vague or just that KM does not cover the years in the collection.(e.g. before 1600) This, I trust is an easy add-on and now that we have the referees (experts in a country) this would facilitate their jobs a lot. In addition to that, Ancient Greece and Rome could be boosted, where there is no one major overruling system, but 2 or more (e.g. RIC, SEAR at least)​
​

https://en.numista.com/forum/topic22081.html

If this is implemented I suggest there should be either a pop-up when you hover your cursor above the abbreviations (or something similar) that tells you the name in the case of KM#: Krause-Mishler or Funk for F# etc ... or a link to a list of the catalog names somewhere.

I would love to have the British Penny 1860-1970 to be listed by Freeman and Gouby numbers.
This would allow identification and listing of the many varieties more accurately.
I have both books, and would be happy to do the work.

If you're going to do this, could you also add support for "previously known as" numbers.

In general I'm interested in alternative of the Krause catalogs. I do use it frequently, but that's simply because it's the only one I know of, and it's also my impression that it is the most common one to be used. Still, a second opinion would be interesting.

Cita: "Idolenz"​If this is implemented I suggest there should be either a pop-up when you hover your cursor above the abbreviations (or something similar) that tells you the name in the case of KM#: Krause-Mishler or Funk for F# etc ... or a link to a list of the catalog names somewhere.

​+1. Mentioning the name of the catalog is quite important specially to a beginner, otherwise, it will be just a jumble of numbers and alphabets

In general I'm interested in alternative of the Krause catalogs. I do use it frequently, but that's simply because it's the only one I know of, and it's also my impression that it is the most common one to be used. Still, a second opinion would be interesting.

I approve the idea.

It must also have, for each country, one brief introduction with few lines with its localization (some time it’s a headache), mint date and which catalogue is the used alternatively to the Krause.

When I created new pages to Portugal (1128>) and Portuguese India coins (1490>), I used the first line of the description of obverse to refer the most important used catalogue.

Freeman numbers for post 1860 English I would like similar to MuyGrand.

Thanks Xavier,

Alternative catalog numbers are a must to step further in Numista.
Now, I would further improve the suggestion in various ways:

1) I would introduce a scroll-down menu, just like in case of currencies, so people can only use certain pre-approved catalogs, and these catalogs would have a pre-approved catalog coding.
So, if you add a Roman coin, you can choose from RIC or SEAR and add the number accordingly, so at search it shows up consistently.

2) National catalogs could be added and encouraged by referees. Again standardized by referees (i.e. EH# for Hungary). It is a must before 1600, where Krause does not see anything; and practical for 1600-1900 where most nations prefer national catalog numbers for ID instead of KM.

3) More accurate catalog numbers with multiple sources ensure that the identification for members is more accurate, hence more pleasure...:)

cheers,

Imre

Spink is very well-known for their 'S' catalogue numbers for the coins of the British Isles.

Coincraft used to publish a catalogue around 15 years ago - & also using a very distinctive numbering system as well.

Aidan.

We generally use Spink numbers in the British catalogue now anyway. I think a more in depth catalogue number would be great !

Agree but ... do not give up KM because there is more accurate.
When KM is ok, it should still be used, and at least given in alternative because it is the only one all of us have access to !

André

Cita: "Ecapoe"​Agree but ... do not give up KM because there is more accurate.
​When KM is ok, it should still be used, and at least given in alternative because it is the only one all of us have access to !
​
​André

​I agree. I want to have specialized catalog numbers available, but understand that most users will just
want KM #s

Cita: "Xavier"​Hello,
​
​I create this topic to track the idea of having a better way to mention numbers from alternative catalogs besides KM numbers on coin pages. This includes both display and search.
​

​can we also split then the sub-km numbers(not only the letters, but also the .1 & .2's) into different types? In most cases the alternative cats will have other numbers for these I guess?

Hello,

I think you can do that if the difference is more than just a mint mark. I you judge the difference is worth a different sheet and another photo, then do it.

It is already done when metal changes, when weight or size changes because of the specific fields. It is up to the referee to judge and discuss.

Otherwise, comment field is good to document variations with pics, combinations of photos and details (including Cobra's and Soejlund excellent documents).

Counter examples would be there https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces320.html , just the mint differs, but KM gives .1 to .7 sub numbers, I think nobody would want to split this in 7 sheets.

Regards,
André

Cita: "Ecapoe"It is up to the referee to judge and discuss.

In my opinion, that's one of the bigger problems on Numista: there is too little a general vision, too little consistency. It's NOT up to the referee to judge and decide if a coinpage has to be split or not because the result of these individual decisions is one referee makes the splits, another one doesn't.
It's the same with splitting in countries if it is the referees who make individual decisions. Some referees do, others don't and the result is no consistency. Some countries are split, other countries in equivalent positions aren't:
British Honduras - Belize, Ceylon - Sri Lanka, Burma - Myanmar, Congo - Zaire, Dahomey - Benin, Equatorial African Staten - Central Africa and many more are split.
British East Caribbean Territories - East Caribbean States (even with different members), British Guiana - Guyana and others aren't split.
And because of the absence of a general rule, we get those endless discussions like splitting Austria.
Or this one: French Municipal Tokens are in the coin section, similar Canadian Municipal Tokens are in the token section. Where is the logic?
It's up to Xavier and his Numista Team to judge and discuss it and then make a final and equal decision for similar circumstances. And then it's up to the referees to execute those decisions. For me there isn't even a problem if the referees are taking part of this judging and discussing round, but there are a lot of referees and the bigger the group, the more difficult it is to come to a consensus.
We have to have faith and trust in our Team, that's an important condition to feel happy in this community. And of course the Team has to do everything to deserve our respect, faith and trust, and one of these things is being consistent.

Just to clarify the original proposal:

1) ALTERNATIVE means: KM and something else, not or!

So if you look at this coin: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces38915.html
This would show KM#152 and EH#1107, so you can search using the KM number for the coin, or the EH number if you are a Hungarian or Austrian collector.

Likewise KM# and S# (Spink) can be used alternatively in search.
So it is not either or, but both if their is a KM number available.

2) There is no KM number for pre-1600 coinage, so Numista shall favour some of the local catalogs and use that consistently, that would be probably the S# for Brittain and EH# for Hungary; plus RIC# (Roman Imperial Coinage) RPC# (Roman Provincial Coinage) and SEAR for Ancient Rome

Agreed 100 % !
Use as many refs as possible. More work but worth it.

Scroll-down menu preparation, I guess, Xav, is the next step? or not?

I already agreed and I've another reason to wait for its implement: I've just faced an issue in my country in which co-exist 2 different coins with the same catalog reference but another references in an other one.

My one concern with using multiple catalog numbers is that, in some countries like China, there are numbers by type (FD, which we use currently, and KM, which is very often incorrect) and numbers by variety (DH, with hundreds of thousands of varieties). Also for Rome, Sear (type) and RIC (variety). How would we be able to implement variety-style catalog numbers?

Hello,

Either I use the first of a serie as entry number and add "from xx to xx in Zöttl).
Or put all the Zöttl numbers in the date line comments.
ex. https://fr.numista.com/catalogue/pieces73804.html
or https://fr.numista.com/catalogue/pieces73808.html
or https://fr.numista.com/catalogue/pieces71904.html where KM groups 2 types and I considered them different enough to separate.

It is only a start and done before all this discussion. I still have a lot of work there.

Indeed, some decision may come from the referee, and some guidelines are needed , not too much though

Cheers, André

The references will be by type. I think we can do like mentioned Ecapoe, since it will still be possible to add references in years comments.

Adding the catalogues will be done upon members or referees request. I will start delivering the feature with a small set of catalogs, then we can add more.
You are welcome to share the catalogues you need already.

Cita: "Xavier"​The references will be by type. I think we can do like mentioned Ecapoe, since it will still be possible to add references in years comments.
​
​Adding the catalogues will be done upon members or referees request. I will start delivering the feature with a small set of catalogs, then we can add more.
​You are welcome to share the catalogues you need already.

​Wonderful decision, Xavier!
I am looking for the experiments.

RE: Kenny's concern, if you add enough alternatives the problem will resolve itself. My experience with Hungarian coins is that I have 3-5 EH numbers for 1 oversimplified KM number (in Hungary 1600-1700); so if we have 3-5 EH entries as SEPARATE coins, all with the same KM number, I do not see it a problem.
What could go wrong? if someone is looking for a particular KM, he/she realizes that it is actually 5 different coins, then he/she has the option to decide which is the right one.

RIC/SEAR is the same problem as above, Kenny, will have an overlap... no issues for most of the experts, I guess.

I don't know if this is the right place to recommend catalogs, or if they should be referred to the appropriate referee, but here is a start.

For British bronze

"The Bronze Coinage of Great Britain" by Michael Freeman reprinted in 2006
"The British Bronze Penny" by Michael Gouby 1986

and maybe
"The Early British Bronze 'Bun' Penny 1860 to 1865 (inclusive) and Their Varieties (Currency Issues Only)"
also known as the Satin Catalog by John Jerrams 1999
Although this catalog is somewhat hard to find

I have all of these catalogs, and can help with more information.

I guess suggest a catalog and a good identifiable catalog code, then the referees will go into research on validity.

But God knows what Xavier wants at the end...

Here are more that I had posted elsewhere:

BR Breton (for Canada Provinces)
Dav Davenport. There are several but I guess they have unique numbers
Flon is Flon (Dominique): Histoire monétaire de la Lorraine et des Trois-Evêchés ; 3 volumes
Zöttl is Zöttl for Salzburg: Salzburg Münzen und Medaillen 1500-1810
H or Her is generally Herinek for Austria. Österreicher Münzprägung 3 volumes
MT is Moser Tursky for Tyrol. Die Münzstätte Hall in Tirol 2 vols
Diet is Dietiker. Böhmen. Der katalog der Habsburger Münzen
Saur is Saurma. Die Saurmasche Münzsammlung, deutscher, schweizerischer, und pölnischer gepräge

BD: Boudeau (Emile) Vol. II féodales - Catalogue général illustré de monnaies provinciales
RCV: Roman Coins and their Values, David R. Sear

A short preview of ongoing work:

​Looks great, Xavier!

Good, it's a better place than now, on the up-right corner. Like also the added reference description. Need it asap

Juste un nouveau catalogue:
Markl -Die Münzen, Medaillen Und Prägungen Mit Namen Und Titel Ferdinand I. Moritz Markl. 1896.

Schön, Weltmünzkatalog - German language world coin catalog, more up to date for many countries than the SCWC.

Encore un:

Schulten . Deutsche Münzen aus der Zeit Karl V. : Typenkatalog der Gepräge zwischen dem Beginn der Talerprägung (1484) und der dritten Reichsmünzordnung (1559). 1974.

Hello,

The new feature allowing a coin to be linked with numbers from multiple reference catalogs is live.

Most references have been migrated from the old KM-specific field to the new multi-references field. However, there are many numbers that were entered in the KM field with a different code, which I don't know which catalog they stand for. I will open a separate topic to try to migrate most of them.

I did not add all the catalogs that have been mentioned previously. Could you please post them again with following information: proposition of code, title of the catalog, author(s) in full form (no initials) and publisher. At least in a first time, only catalogs that are really used as references in their respective fields will be added.
Example:
Code: BR
Title: Histoire illustrée des monnaies et jetons du Canada
Author: Pierre Napoléon Breton
Publisher: P. N. Breton & Cie

Code: Flon
Title: Histoire monétaire de la Lorraine et des Trois-Évêchés
Author: Dominique Flon
Publisher: Société Thierry Alix

The KM number was pretty much everywhere on Numista, so the change impacted many areas. Feel free to report any bug that I missed.

Hello Xavier,

The most important catalog for British bronze coinage (Farthing, Half-Penny and Penny 1860-1970) is

Code: FMAN
Title:The Bronze Coinage of Great Britain
Author: Michael Freeman
Publisher: Spink
Reprinted and updated 2006

Let me know if I can help

Thanks for doing this

Chris

Thanks, I've added it.

Please add these three to the list. They are all references for India - British . We do not need them immediately but they have more information than KM and we will need them as the catalog evolves

1) The Uniform Coinage of India 1835 to 1947, a Catalogue and Pricelist
Authors: Paul Stevens & Randy Weir.
Publisher Spink
SW#
(SW#s are now being used on British India coin slabs by NGC and may become the new standard for British India coins)

2) The Coins of the British Commonwealth of Nations, to the end of the reign of George VI, 1952
Part 4 INDIA, Volume 1: East India Company, Presidency Series c.1642-1835
Author: Major Fred Pridmore
Publisher: Spink & Son, London 1975
PRIP#

3) The Coins of the British Commonwealth of Nations, to the end of the reign of George VI, 1952
Part 4 INDIA, Volume 2: Uniform Coinage, East India Company 1835-58, Imperial Period 1858-1947
Publisher: Spink & Son, London 1980
​Author: Major Fred Pridmore
PRIU#


(Fred Pridmore wrote similar books for many British colonies - these above 2 books are only for India). I suggest PRIP# (Pridmore India Presidencies), & PRIU# (Pridmore India Uniform coinage) to differentiate the Pridmore numbers across different volumes because he restarts numbering at '1' for each book and a plain PR# would be confusing - unless we mention the names of the books next to the PR#

Thanks! I have added SW# and Pr#.

I prefer to have a single code for Fred Pridmore's, as he wrote many books the British Commomwealth, and it would be tedious to have a different code for each. I think everyone can refer to the correct book if needed, according to the country and the period. I see it like KM numbers, which start again from 0 for each country.

By any change, do you know what are the DR# numbers? They seem to be used for old Indian coins.

Thanks, Xavier, for the implementation.

I see that now it is easy to search, and also easy to add new new catalog numbers, I trust this is a major step!

Great job.
I did not have time (and will not have in near future) to massively experiment the feature yet, but I hope it'll be bug-free in general.

Currently, it looks that any Catalog number I enter, it lists all non-KM numbers in search, which I believe shall not be the case:


It might require a second look,

cheers,

Imre

Cita: "imreh"​Currently, it looks that any Catalog number I enter, it lists all non-KM numbers in search, which I believe shall not be the case:
​
​
​It might require a second look,

​Hello Imre,
Thank you for your feedback.
It's not possible to search for the coins that are listed under a given catalog. The search criteria is taken into account only if you enter a number. I agree it might be counter-intuitive. I will have a second look.

I can't add other numbers. When I click on "add more reference numbers" there's an error.

Cita: "Xavier"​Thanks! I have added SW# and Pr#.
​
​I prefer to have a single code for Fred Pridmore's, as he wrote many books the British Commomwealth, and it would be tedious to have a different code for each. I think everyone can refer to the correct book if needed, according to the country and the period. I see it like KM numbers, which start again from 0 for each country.
​
​By any change, do you know what are the DR# numbers? They seem to be used for old Indian coins.

​Thanks Xavier! I've messaged Sujit for the DR# reference. He has the book I think and can give us the exact name..

DR# refers to Dillip Rajgor's Catalog of Sultanate Coins.

Most alternative references listed have to be reenlisted again.

Moreover, when I try to add new references there is an error:

Thanks Sujit, I've added the DR.

Chomp-master, thanks for reporting the bug. I think I've corrected the issue. Could you please verify?

Alternative references don't need to be re-enlisted. They are automatically migrated, provided the details of the reference catalog are known. 97% of the references have already been migrated. The codes that could not be migrated yet are listed here: https://en.numista.com/forum/topic44507.html.

Seems to be fixed. Unfortunately for me, I have to reenlist all Flon references thanks to the file history.

No, there is no need to reenter the references. As soon as you give me the details of the catalogue I will automatically migrate the references to the new system.

I'll give you asap by PM more details about this special issue.

Xavier, please, add the following catalogs frequently used for Spain and Spanish States:

Code: Cal
Title: Numismática española
Author: Xavier Calicó
Publisher: Aureo & Calicó

Code: Cy
Title: Las monedas españolas
Author: Juan, Adolfo & Clemente Cayón
Publisher: Cayón Jano

Thanks zegeri, I've added Cal and Cy.

Please add
The Coinage and History of Southern India - Michael Mitchiner
MSI#

need for these types of coins.... (MSI# 414)
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces67258.html

For "Germany after 1871" we need "J." (Jaeger, K.: Die deutschen Münzen seit 1871, currently 23-rd edition 2013/14) - a standard reference for this epoch. Also useful can be AKS (Arnold, P., Küthmann, H., Steinhilber, D.: Großer deutscher Münzkatalog von 1800 bis heute). Current edition is 31 from 2015.

It could be easier to check some big numismatic shops or auctions for their list of literature reference. For example look at https://www.kuenker.de/de/information/muenzwissen/literaturverzeichnis

For "German states" I have also used Noss (Cologne, Julich, Berg, Cleve and some small states), Kalvelage/Trippler (Oldenburg) and Kappelhoff (East Frisia) - they are all included in this list.

Dav. (Davenport) is not only "European crowns" by John S. Davenport, but:
- German Talers 1500-1600. Frankfurt 1979.
- German Secular Talers 1600-1700. Frankfurt 1976.
- German Church and City Talers 1600-1700, 2. Auflage. Galesburg 1975.
- German Talers 1700-1800. Galesburg 1958.
- German Talers since 1800. Galesburg 1949.
- Guldentalers and Silvergulden. Frankfurt 1982.
- European Crowns 1484-1600. Frankfurt 1978.
- European Crowns 1600-1700. Galesburg 1974.
- European Crowns 1700-1800. Galesburg 1971.
- European Crowns since 1800. Galesburg 1974.
- Large size silver coins of the world. Iola 1991.
They have unique numbers.

For example this coin: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces47887.html is Dav. #507
But if I add this number, user would see a tooltip "European crowns by John S. Davenport (Spink)". If he tries to find this coin there, he'll have a problem - because it is described in "Silver Gulden 1559-1763".
And this one https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces69851.html, Dav. #3170 ist probably from "German Church and City Talers 1600-1700".

Is it me or you guys forgot about David Hartill ?!

I think it's already included...

Sear/Seaby lists coins for England, Byzantium, Rome, and Greece, but they are all different numbers: SP#, SB#, RCV#, and GCV#. The first two numbers are named after the authors, the last two are named after the books. Which should we use instead, the publisher or book title?

Again with variety-based catalogs like DH, would it be possible to list DH#s twice in the reference section? The varieties listed in DH are very minor and should not be listed separately.

Two bugs:
1. when sorted by references, they are listed together as if they are the same catalog
2. numbers are organized by first digits (ex. #11, #1100, #1101, #12, #120; should be: #11, #12, #120, #1100, #1101)

LT# for Gallic coinage is missing from the list: La Tour II - les monnaies gauloises

Hello,
MSI, J and ASK, BCV (or should it really be SB?), RCV and GCV are present.
I'm not sure which codes should be adopted for the other Davenport catalogs.

Can you please add

Code: R
Title: Rennik’s Australian & New Zealand Token Values Book
Author: Michael T Pitt
Publisher: Rennik's Publications

Cita: "KennyG"​Two bugs:
​1. when sorted by references, they are listed together as if they are the same catalog
​2. numbers are organized by first digits (ex. #11, #1100, #1101, #12, #120; should be: #11, #12, #120, #1100, #1101)​

Thanks for pointing this out. It's fixed :)

The first bug still persists (ex. RIC#5, RCV#8, RCV#9, RIC#12, RCV#13)

Can you please send a screenshot where this bug is visible?

OK, I have an example. I will investigate.

The ordering is fixed.

As far as I can tell there is no way to add the numbers of these important catalogues:

Netherlands, Batavian Republic, Curaçao, Netherlands Antilles, Aruba, Netherlands West-Indies, Suriname, Netherlands East-Indies
--> Schulman-number (Handboek der Nederlandse Munten van 1795-1975 / Jacques Schulman, Amsterdam, 1975)
--> Scholten-number (De munten van de Nederlandsche Gebiedsdelen Overzee 1601-1948 / C. Scholten, Amsterdam, 1951)

Dutch Republic
--> Verkade-number (Muntboek, bevattende de namen en afbeeldingen van munten geslagen in de zeven voormalig vereenigde Nederlandsche Provincien / P. Verkade, Schiedam, 1848)

Belgium
--> Morin-number

Sorry I may be a bit late on this topic but there does not appear to be an option for Hern's Handbook of South African Coins & Patterns, would it be possible to add it please?

Don't forget about the 'Schon' numbers as well - as the Schon Weltmunzkatalog is usually more up to date than the Krause catalogues are.

Aidan.

Cita: "BCNumismatics"​Don't forget about the 'Schon' numbers as well - as the Schon Weltmunzkatalog is usually more up to date than the Krause catalogues are.
​
​Aidan.

​Schön is already an option.