German coin, predominantly German town situated in then Germany, should be Breslau like it's written on the coin. Also used internationally including English at that time.
Im not sure if back then a Forum discussion might have lead me to accept the change.
If you like coins, medals and tokens with ship motives follow my new instagram account with regular updates @numisnautiker
From time to time I sell some coins on Ebay make sure to follow me @apuking on Ebay.
As it says Breslau on the coin, it seems that's the better choice.
I challenge this rationale. Or we would have to rename all issuers using latin names for instance for cities
Latin is used as a ceremonial language. We all know that. In this instance, the official language of the state was being used. By all means include the modern name in the comments (Wrocław, get the spelling right) and make it searchable, but we musn't try and rewrite history. It undermines the entire catalogue.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
Rather than looking at Katz in isolation for reliable direction, I would suggest looking to a range of auctioneers.
Katz currently uses GPT to generate descriptions in its auction lots, a recent innovation which produces inaccurate descriptions in some cases, and demonstrates a lax attitude to accuracy, imo.
“University of Breslau” is English. I don't think anyone is suggesting we put “Universität Breslau” in the title for the English version (though that should, of course, be the German-version title).
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
University of Wroclaw is correct english from my perspective as this institution still exists.
My POV is that if this institution only existed when the city had german naming, we would consider not using current name.
I strongly believe numismatics is a science of alive things, not dead objects representing people and things prisonners of the way they were written depending on times and places. And that Numista can embody this editorial policy. But its just my opinion and as always I let the editorial director @Xavier decide :-)
University of Wroclaw is correct english from my perspective as this institution still exists.
My POV is that if this institution only existed when the city had german naming, we would consider not using current name.
I strongly believe numismatics is a science of alive things, not dead objects representing people and things prisonners of the way they were written depending on times and places. And that Numista can embody this editorial policy. But its just my opinion and as always I let the editorial director @Xavier decide :-)
It may be that Wikipedia is wrong, but it states that the University of Wrocław (even they get the spelling right) replaced the University of Breslau. Nevertheless, to deny that the university had a German name at the time the coin was issued is entirely inaccurate. You talk about Numismatics beng a “science of alive things”! How is a coin from 1911 “alive”? This attitude of applying the current political or linguistic situation to historical objects is completely the opposite of what is required for a catalogue of historic objects. From a purely practical perspective, it would mean that the catalogue has to be changed every time events affect a place, even centuries after a coin was produced. How can a permanently shifting catalogue be of any use to collectors?
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
From a purely practical perspective, it would mean that the catalogue has to be changed every time events affect a place, even centuries after a coin was produced.
Its exactly what I believe. Its what we do everywhere on the website when we have categories like french states or german states gathering entities sometimes way older than modern concepts of France or Germany, for instance.
There is no foresseable way imho to do differently as our goal is to make sense of past objects, and history is about making sense of things that we know how they evolved. Making as if they were stuck in the very day they were produced is pedantism to me and subject to endless debate as its often impossible to draw categories as if we were at that time and place (notably because a lot of places on Earth are subject to multiple cultural memories along the time).
We dont call the Roman Republic “Res Publica Romana” on Numista.
But you fear it would lead to endless changes. I dont think thats true in facts, even if possible in theory.
For your first example, yes, “Straßburg” is correct. To deny that the city was part of Germany in 1911 is false and absurd. We deny historical facts at our peril, however unpleasant they may be to some. The second example is a red herring, since we all know Latin was being used there as a ceremonial language.
Your entire premise is wrong. A catalogue is not about “making sense of history”, it is a record of historical items. As such, once we have the facts correctly and clearly recorded, we don't need to change it. The coin in question has not “evolved” one iota since it was produced. The place that it commemorates has changed. The two are completely different. You claim your approach won't lead to endless change but the changes keep on happening. Witness the knee-jerk renaming of all the issues of "Macedonia" to “North Macedonia”. We've had some success in undoing such revisions (including the reappearance of Ceylon) but we clearly have a long way to go. This will actually make your work as an admin easier, not harder.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
You want a specific editorial policy, I want another one. You state your approach is the only one to do a catalogue, I completely disagree. You answer examples which suit you, not the other ones (french states, german states, Res Publica Romana).
The core issue I feel is that from my perspective Breslau is the same thing as Wroclaw, Strassburg as Strasbourg, Paris as Parigi, etc. They exist, are not just a chain of characters. And one thing in one language in one time (our time) can have only one name. When I look at a medal, whatever its date, I analyse it with concepts of my time. If it depicts a university which still exist, I use its modern name in the page title, obviously. The lettering field already display the past local name, i dont see any added value mixing languages in titles.
You and I had this exact disagreement in exact same ways too many times already, I dont see the point of redoing same endless demonstrations. So I'll stop here.
PS: Invoking again Ceylon has no other purpose imho than misleading the discussion and twisting tons of past discussions and decisions in the way that suits you. I checked: 25 threads on the forum in which you took part have the word Ceylon, not half of them actually are about this country, but just your apparent thirst of clash. What makes my work of Admin easy or difficult, if it really interests you, is 95% about benevolence or aggressivity of people in the forum requests. Many conversations are nice even if different opinions. Some other ones, unfortunately, are dry, judgy and madly repetitive.
Here we are in an edge case where there is not an English name for the university, but the names borrowed from German (University of Breslau) and from Polish (University of Wrocław) are both used in English. The Polish name is probably more accessible, as it's the only name under which the university is currently known. The German name might also be acceptable, as it is the former name of the university, in use at the time the coin was struck.
Referring only to the guidelines and their spirit, I would recommend the name “University of Wrocław”. The name “University of Breslau” is fine too, emphasizing the fact that the coin celebrates a university of the German Reich and the role of Frederick William III.
What really matters here is to get the lettering right (we want to keep accurate record of what is written on the coin) and have both names on the page, so that we make sense out of the coin for people familiar with either of the names and searchable with any of the names. The Numista catalogue should have both roles of keeping factual records about the coins and explaining them.
It could even be nice to explain both names in the comment section: “The University of Breslau was founded on 3 August 1811 by King Frederick William III of Prussia. It was formed from the merger of the academy Leopoldina and the university Viadrina, previously located in Frankfurt (Oder), following the defeat of Prussia by Napoleon and the subsequent reorganization of the Prussian state. The university is now known as the University of Wrocław, in Poland.”
I modified both coin pages to add the comment and do some clean up. I left the German and Polish names in the title. As I mentioned above, I believe both are acceptable and the choice doesn't matter much in my opinion. I leave up to the referees to make a choice if they want to align both pages.
Status changed to Rejected(Xavier, 10 Jul 2024, 17:34)
I modified both coin pages to add the comment and do some clean up. I left the German and Polish names in the title. As I mentioned above, I believe both are acceptable and the choice doesn't matter much in my opinion. I leave up to the referees to make a choice if they want to align both pages.
@Xavier ,Breslau was a part of the Kingdom of Prussia until 1918, then part of the State of Prussia until 1945.
Therefore, the Polish name should be in the description, not in the title.
“All proper names must use the form commonly used in English texts. In the absence of an obvious consensus on the spelling of a proper name, the referee chooses a form consistent with the main available references (for example Wikipedia or Encyclopedia Britannica).”
Here we are in an edge case where there is not an English name for the university, but the names borrowed from German (University of Breslau) and from Polish (University of Wrocław) are both used in English. The Polish name is probably more accessible, as it's the only name under which the university is currently known. The German name might also be acceptable, as it is the former name of the university, in use at the time the coin was struck.
My two cents. The university website english version says University of Wrocław. https://uwr.edu.pl/en/
So, if they call themselves that way… scroll to the bottom of its page…
The history of the University includes three foundings, it's not a continuum like you can see even written on the coin itself
- Founded 1st October 1702 as Universitas Leopoldina - Merged on 24th April 1811 with the Brandenburgische Universität Frankfurt leading to a new founding on 3rd August as Königliche Universität zu Breslau (the hundredth anniversary being commemorated on the coin from 1911 not a two-hundredth anniversary in 1902) - After being largely destroyed after the war 2nd new founding on 24th August 1945 as Uniwersytet Wrocławski
