Classic Numismatic Fail, ACCG digs Hole, Falls into it

Fifty thousand (we are told) collectors of dugup ancient coins in the US are represented by a group calling itself the "Ancient Coin Collectors' Guild". This group seems in fact to represent more the interests of the no-questions-asked coin TRADE than those of ethical collectors. This group in order to promote unrestricted import of dugup coins regardless of origins has been actively trying to persuade the world (and in particular their Department of State) that dealers deal and collectors collect this material (no-questions-asked), not for personal reasons, fun or profit, but for altruistic independent scholarly endeavour (coin dealers label themselves "professional numismatists" for example). It is however abundantly clear from the forums, where one can see at first hand these collectors and dealers discussing what they actually do, that this is a self-serving simplification of a much wider spectrum of activity, and in fact this scholarly endeavour is very much a minor fringe activity among a greater mass of people collecting these objects for other reasons.

The dealers claim that their brand of numismatics (here treated as something one can do with 'data' in the form of a heap of decontextualised coins on a table rather than those individually linked with a known collecting history) is a discrete discipline. Moreover it is one, they claim, with a nobler tradition than younger ones (here they compare it to archaeology). For it however to be regarded by the rest of the academic world as a discrete discipline, it has to be based on some kind of a methodology.

The professional numismatists practising "heap of coins on a tabletop numismatics" however have time and time again showed that they are at a loss to produce even a simple handlist of texts setting out even the basics of such a methodology. As far as I know, the collectors and dealers gathered under the ACCG umbrella have not yet hit upon the idea of collecting such a reading list for the benefit of guild members, and others that would like to see what they claim to be doing with all those millions of decontextualised pieces of archaeological evidence, still less write a textbook of their own.

A few days ago one dealer produced a list of works which he claimed fulfilled this task, but it consisted mainly of catalogues rather than any exposition of method or theory and examples of their application. When I pointed this out, he retaliated in the only manner it seems that collectors of all types can imagine. Name-calling and insult.  

It beats me why these people behave like this. You can see that they all desperately want to be treated seriously, as equal partners in the heritage debate. That would be fine if they were capable of behaving in such a way. that includes having something substantive to say, rather than their habit of trying to refer to self-created and unsubstantiated myths. The proper response in any debate, including this one, to "but that was not what I meant at all" surely is "sorry, I misunderstood, this time I asked a mate to help me, here is the list you asked for" and not a stream of abuse and ad personam attacks. It seems to me that only a complete lunatic would see that as the way to convince anyone of the validity of their arguments.

In the past few days, I have posted up some links on my own blog to texts on the methodology of numismatics, but one that on the whole pays attention to all the attributes of ancient coins as data, that is examining them in relationship to their findspot context, rather than just the comparative study of the pictures, writing and physical mass of the decontextualised object in bulk lots. Be it noted that there are no corresponding posts on related subjects on the blogs of any ACCG members. All they can do is sling mud and hurl insults. Very 'scholarly'. I know the Department of State is watching this and drawing, I hope, conclusions and passing them on to the CPAC.