Pfennig and Pfenning are often used interchangeably -- I searched forum pages and found many cases where the subject of a topic using Pfennig and the replies used Pfenning (and there was no confusion).
But we should be more precise in the coin listings. The lettering should specify what is on the coin, and the value should always use Pfennig (as that is how the currencies are defined).
I would prefer to have the title match the lettering for better searching (for when the lettering isn't in the listing or when the word in the lettering is split into two lines PFEN / NING). But either approach works
Hi bjherbison
This is a good point great that you bring it up. It is covered as you describe it already in the new guidelines, which will hopefully be out very soon!
best
strato
The word Pfennig (as a silver penny replacing the denarius) can be traced back to the 8th century and was called Penning, Panni(n)g, Pfenni(n)c, Pfending etc., until 1873 the term Pfenning in still used in Prussia.
In this case it served to distinguish it from the Pfennig from before 1821, when the thaler was still worth 24 (Gute) Groschen = 288 Pfennig and not 30 Silbergroschen = 360 Pfenning as it was since 1821.
Quote: "Idolenz"The word Pfennig (as a silver penny replacing the denarius) can be traced back to the 8th century and was called Penning, Panni(n)g, Pfenni(n)c, Pfending etc., until 1873 the term Pfenning in still used in Prussia.
In this case it served to distinguish it from the Pfennig from before 1821, when the thaler was still worth 24 (Gute) Groschen = 288 Pfennig and not 30 Silbergroschen = 360 Pfenning as it was since 1821.
So, use what is written on the coin.
Could you clarify the scope of your last statement? Since you are talking about value, so you mean that Pfenning should be used in the "Face value in word form" field?
Currently none of the entries in Numista connected to Prussia use Pfenning in the Face value field.
German language catalogs are divided. Grosser Deutscher Mŭnzkatalog (Paul Arnold/Harald Kŭthmann/Dirk Steinhilber) doesn't use the final N in the value statement for post 1821 coins but Weltmünzkatalog 19. Jahrhundert (Helmut Kahnt, Günter Schön) does.
Pfennig vs Pfenning for face value is mostly consistent, there are only a dozen places that use Pfenning.
Taler vs Thaler is something else. There are 3578 results found for Taler and 1899 for Thaler. Some English dictionaries have Taler as the primary and Thaler as an alternative and other dictionaries reverse those two.
The guidelines should specify a standard term for Taler/Thaler in the face value to make face value searches useful. I would say that Thaler wins since the Oxford English Dictionary (though supplement IV in 1985) has an entry to Thaler but no entry for Taler.
I agree that the title must match what's on the coin. When it comes to the value, if a given currency of a state used more than one spelling, we need to make a choice and just use one. However, if there was complete consistency for that currency, we don't need to make a choice, just stick with what was used. Yes, that will mean some have Pfennig, others Pfennige, Pfenning or Pfenninge, but if that's what was consistently used, we should stick to it.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
May be a little of topic, sorry if it is, but then I have to ask: What about Belgian Francs/Franks? They change lettering, depending on being the Dutch language issue or Franch.
It seems like some of the Cents are named after their respective language, but the Francs are named "Francs" regardless of the language of the coin. I don't entirely agree on making names consistent, but make them after (if not shortened) named what's written on the coins. See:
Franch text: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces1247.html
Dutch text: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces756.html
But since I suppose when a person searche for eg. "Francs" it also searche in the text about the coin and currency name, then just make sure it is written right on the text page?
Or like Switzerland, where on some of the coins, the Rappen is also named Centisimi and Centimes in the blue box. See: https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces178.html
I have a soft spot for origami paper cranes.
Read or watch about "Sadako Sasaki and the Thousand Paper Cranes".
Spread a little peace and happiness wherever you go :)
It would be nice if the title always represented what's on the coin (assuming the denomination is shown). The "blue box" allows us to give alternate names where appropriate. Thus, if a state issued coins using the names pfennig and pfenning within a given currency, the "value in words" can contain both spellings to ensure searches are all encompassing.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
Quote: "Jamtrup"May be a little of topic, sorry if it is, but then I have to ask: What about Belgian Francs/Franks? They change lettering, depending on being the Dutch language issue or Franch.
Franch text:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces1247.html
Dutch text:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces756.html
But since I suppose when a person searche for eg. "Francs" it also searche in the text about the coin and currency name, then just make sure it is written right on the text page?
Or like Switzerland, where on some of the coins, the Rappen is also named Centisimi and Centimes in the blue box. See:
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces178.html
Not off topic at all.
For Belgium i put an edit request to change the title of the Dutch text to match the coin. It's a shame I didn't think if this topic last year as I just went through all of Belgium adding Schön catalog numbers (about half had it before) and some missing privy information.
For the 20 Rappen coin the "Centesimi" doesn't belong in the value as it's not part of the currency description. If you search for Swiss you see this below the results:
Switzerland • Franc (1850-date)
100 Centimes / Rappen = 1 Franc
The Face value in numbers also should be fixed -- it should be "0.20" instead of "0.2" to reflect the currency precision.
The good news for the Face value in numbers: The search algorithm is flexible. You can search for "0.2" or "0.20", or even "0.2000", and get the same nine results.
Dependng on how far afield we would like to go, there is also:
Groat/groot/gros/grossus/groschen/grosz/grosso (I realize this goes across many monetary systems, but various combinations were co-exisitng in geographic proximity like gros/groot in Low Countries, and Groschen/Grosz in Saxony/Poland/Silesia).
Schilling/szelag(/solidus?)
If you ever try to find a grosz in the KM catalog under Poland, you will go absolutely crazy trying to decide whether to look under
Groschen
Grossus
Grosz (where there are also wrong pictures and coins with Grossus on the coin)
Please also make searchable kopek/kopeks/kopeck/kopecks/kopeyka/kopejka. Thanks
Yeah, I used to commonly forget if I should look for “kopecks”, “kopeks”, “copecks”, or “kopeek". (Rouble vs. ruble is a similar problem, but at least without as many options.)
[It's “kopecks” for the Russian Empire coins, BTW, but the other three get sporadic results elsewhere. There are no results for “kopeyek” or “kopejki”, searching for “kopejek” gives Tannu Tuva coins where the local currency is in fact spelled “kɵpejek” in both singular and plural, and “kopeyki” gives one Spitsbergen result where the word appears in the comments.]
Then there's the Belarusian kapeyka and the Ukrainian kopiyka, both of which can also be translated as “kopek”…
This post was marked Started in May 2022, which I thought was work on the search which found all alternatives, but now it is marked Completed but when I search for Pfennig and Pfenning, or Taler and Thaler, I still get different sets of results.
Is the change to the search feature being tracked somewhere else?
