Danish India - Cash or Kas? [επιλυμένο]

Currently Numista divides the currency of Danish India (Tranquebar), the Royaliner, into 80 Cash. This despite the denomination clearly being in Kas, as written on the coins themselves. Norwegian and Danish coin dealers and encyclopedia alike also refer to them as Kas. When Numista started out it was to some degree inspired by and somewhat dependent on the Standard Catalog of World Coins. KM denotes these as Cash, so I understand where this originates from. This does, however, not change the fact that it is a weird and redundant conversion, since KM and Numista differs the Royaliner even though that's the same as a Fanam. One Fanam being 80 Cash in the British colonies. 

As an independent catalog I believe it is our role and responsibility to correctly display and convey information about coins. As a widespread and frequently used resource I also believe we have a certain influence on numismatics, which should be used to promote accuracy and knowledge. The Cash as the denomination for Danish India coinage is a result of a poor and unnecessary attempt to translate and convert the Kas. We correctly recognize Norwegian Skilling as just that, opposed to Shilling which would have been an inaccurate anglified version. Denominations often has a meaning in the languages they come from and should never be translated. Danish India is distinct from the British colonies within India, and their currency should be just as distinct. Whether the Cash and Kas practically was at par is irrelevant, they're from two different entities with two different currencies. 

We recognize the Royaliner and Fano as distinct from the Fanam, so we should also recognize the Kas as distinct from the Cash. I therefore propose that we accurately display the currency names in Danish, just as we do with any other language. 1 Royaliner = 1 Fano = 80 Kas.

Added Kas as native spelling, thanks

I checked and I can see that the coins now say for example 1 Cash (1 Kas) (1⁄80) while titles remain in Cash. Is this how it is preferred? I would personally prefer and suggest the titles to say Kas and the value field being 1 Kas (1 Cash) (1⁄80). I believe that's more accurate. I will gladly take it upon myself to correct titles as necessary, but I want to clarify what your intended solution is. 

T0r

I checked and I can see that the coins now say for example 1 Cash (1 Kas) (1⁄80) while titles remain in Cash. Is this how it is preferred? I would personally prefer and suggest the titles to say Kas and the value field being 1 Kas (1 Cash) (1⁄80). I believe that's more accurate. I will gladly take it upon myself to correct titles as necessary, but I want to clarify what your intended solution is. 

The current format is the expected one (English spelling fir titles and face value, with addition of local spelling in face value between brackets)

If so, we are very inconsistent within our catalog. For Norwegian, Danish and Swedish coins we have Skilling and not Shilling (anglified version). N#99350 N#89702 N#4094 We also have Thaler, which anglified is Dollar. By that logic every Thaler in the catalog should be called Dollar. I think it is more correct to say that we use Latin script for titles and face value, and if no such exists, we use an anglified version. Kas, being Danish, is by far Latin script. Furthermore, only places I've seen the usage of Cash over Kas as a term describing Danish India coinage is places citing KM or Numista. Effectively, we are a part of the problem by incorrectly identifying a currency by its wrong name. To me this is the equivalent of calling Norwegian/Danish Krone and the Swedish Krona for a Crown. They are not at all a Crown. It's not a matter of local spelling, Cash and Kas are different words just like Royaliner and Fanam are different words. We recognize Royaliner as completely distinct (when that's Danish too), and we should do the same for Kas for the sake of accuracy and consistency.

I agree completely with T0r.

Extremely well put, T0r.

We use the OED when possible. They consider Skilling as a valid word in English: https://www.oed.com/search/dictionary/?scope=Entries&q=skilling

Should be ‘Kas’ only.

Aidan.

The Oxford English Dictionary does not define Royaliner N#119830 or Fano N#113803, yet we still have those within Danish India. 

The dictionary doesn't define Kasu N#52859, Duit N#37233, Rasi N#73099 or Bazaruk N#113805. Bazaruco is also not defined N#49536. Even Dudu which is taken from the Madras Presidency (British India) is not defined in the Oxford English DictionaryN#78789. 

My examples do not indicate that the titles are wrong, only that using a dictionary to look up currency names is improper usage of such dictionary. A dictionary is not an encyclopedia for currencies. When even an English colony doesn’t have their denominations listed in an English dictionary, then I believe that emphasizes my point. Kas and Cash are two different words, they cannot be used interchangeably. It’s our job and responsibility as the leading online catalog to be as accurate as possible, we must therefore differentiate Kas and Cash. If absolutely required, then Kas should come first and not second. Title being in Kas and value field including Cash in parenthesis is the only acceptable compromise here. KM’s error and oversight does not justify or give an excuse to spread inaccurate information. Furthermore, the above examples clearly show that the correct practice for colonies within India is to use the native language’s name for the currency. Just like Dutch India use Kasu (quite similar word) Danish India use Kas and the titles should reflect such.

Currently the frontend website displays the structure of the DB this way: “EN spelling (native spelling)”, it's not me who manually put the parenthesis.
We already had on this forum many conversations about this topic; if you nevertheless feel there should be a change of order between EN spelling and Native/Local spelling, please post a “suggestion to improve Numista”.
 

I would agree with you if there was an actual English spelling, however, there isn't. Kas and Cash is two different words just like Kasu (which is currently in use), and Cash is different. I believe I provided more than enough examples of why Kas would be entirely consistent with how we have been titling denominations within Indian colonies on Numista. I cannot understand how one letter difference between Kas and Kasu would determine whether it is acceptable or not. To me Kas and Kasu are equally distinct from Cash. Either you’re insinuating that all these titles are wrong and must be changed, or Kas should be permitted as well. To me it seems illogical to make a point of keeping Kas as Cash while everything else is permitted. I don’t think it’s a matter of our titling structure, but instead simply being that there’s no English spelling which leaves us only with the native one. The usage of Cash is a misconception originating from KM and KM is well known for having some inaccuracies.