Things you've learned from this hobby!

[JayAg47]

Aside from directly gaining knowledge about coins and their history, and identifying fakes or having an 'feel' for such coins, have you learned anything from your years of coin collecting that you apply to other areas of life? Some aspects that come to mind are pattern recognition, perspectives, understanding the market for other collectibles, identifying bubbles/bursts, and more.

Edited June 17 by JayAg47

[Heliodromus]

That's a tough one.

Patience perhaps (not jumping - waiting for right opportunity), and reinforcing purposeful action (buy for a reason, not just because).

Faith in the decrepit but ultimately fairly reliable USPS (and global mail systems too for that matter).

Faith in humanity - the stranger I send money to across the world isn't any more likely to rip me off than me ripping him off.

An then there's the reason I began collecting in the first place, as a kind of self-commitment to learn more about history, specificially Constantine's era and the rise of Christianity up to and beyond that point, which I think I've at least made progress on.

 

[shanxi]

I learned how to organise three thousand small pieces of metal. 

Edited June 17 by shanxi

[Ancient Coin Hunter]

To keep an eye out for rare examples of things that not only might be more valuable than thought, but also perseverance in other matters. Coins also contribute to an understanding of the tapestry of history given that in some cases they can be the primary historical sources for undocumented areas where no evidence survives.

[Ten-Speed]

I have learned to be peaceful in solitude...

[ambr0zie]

Not directly related to the hobby, I learned to photograph (still a long way to go, but before collecting ancient coins my photo skills were 0, as I was never interested in photography). 

.... my wife also learned that all the coins I buy cost 10 euros each. 

[seth77]

I have learned to be more introspective and less inclined to indulge in idle chitchats or pointless arguments with people. I have also learned that things which are of utter wonder to me are completely boring to people, I know of more than a couple archaeologists that consider numismatics equivalent to watching paint dry. I have also learned to not overestimate my knowledge or intelligence or risk making myself look/feel like a complete ass. To approach everything with respect and the will to expand my perspective, in other words to strive for some epistemic humility. Also, it brought me a lot of peace and fulfilment in my quest for the thrill of discovery, which I think helped me a lot in the process of growing up and maturing.

[ominus1]

this year marks my 20th anniversary collecting cons.....i'm still learning and making amateur mistakes when i get complacent and don't pay attention ...9_9...but i've amassed a lot o coin in that time and found others who are aa passionate about them altho i've never met any in person i consider them friends and co-collectors..i've learned a lot about history i didn't know before...and still learning even now...

[KenDorney]

This is my 39th year collecting ancients.  Oddly enough I do still have my first coin, illustrated below.  What have I learned?  I never know what is coming next.  What I might collect, what I might get bored with, etc.  There is always something new.

[AETHER]

I have learned im an addict. 😕

[JeandAcre]

The key segue in my collecting, from a long phase with later Roman (juvenile, low-end, correspondingly superficial) to medieval, set off a fun and endlessly rewarding convergence.  The historical contexts 'per se' immediately branch off into the dynastic ones; in this collective context, the synergy between the two is especially pronounced and sustained.  Along with war, marriage was a primary tool of statecraft.  (...Which always makes it fun when one of them wound up being a happy one, despite the odds.  --Happens, sometimes!) 

On a geopolitical scale, you can see progressions as dramatic as (my favorite) one from Byzantium (Dukas) to Germany (Staufen) to the Low Countries (Brabant) to France (Capet) to England (late Angevin).  I can see a little filmstrip in my head, outlining the geography and chronology (as a kind of time-line).  ...Right, genealogy is another hobby.  But especially in medieval Europe, it's already an integral dimension of the history.

To return to the coins, ever since learning of solidly, continuously documented descent from Edward I (available on request), I've been focussing on issues by lineal ancestors, along with their contexts.  What inevitably ensues is that, once I get an example of someone about whom All I Know is their place in the family tree, Of Course, I have to circle all the way back to, Wait for it, the broader historical context.  And this same, richly synergetic cycle starts all over again.

One sweetness of this is that when the coin market is thin, there are always books.  I'll never run out of things to spend money on!

Edited June 17 by JeandAcre

[Valentinian]

I have learned that much of what we "know" is an oversimplification. The world is not simple, and anyone who suggests there is an easy and short explanation for events is oversimplifying to fit some preconception, not to fit the evidence.  

If you think you know the history and meaning behind some coin type, read for another decade and you will learn it's not that simple. 

For example, is an antoninianus worth 2 denarii? Read the arguments and you will find that 50 years ago some scholars thought that it was 1 1/2 (it would be, by weight of silver) but simply got tired of arguing about it. It is not like there appeared conclusive evidence. Point out that in Syria around the time of the changeover, tetradrachms have both radiate and laureate heads without different value, and someone will respond "But that is provincial coinage."  (i.e. "I won't listen to evidence to the contrary.") On balance, it seems the 2 is the mostly likely conversion rate, but strong evidence is not to be found. We are just tired of arguing about it in the absence of any new evidence in 50 years. 

In math, many "word problems" greatly oversimplify the real world. "Water pours in a trough at some number of cubic feet per second and out at ...." The real world doesn't work like that. (Did you know that if you put water from uphill into a 1/2" PVC pipe that runs a thousand feet downhill it won't flow out the other end? Too much friction.) 

Why do prices go up or down? Supply and demand, of course (says the economist). That is true and important, but bid in auctions for twenty years and you learn it is not that simple. Neither supply nor demand is anywhere near constant. Demand can change during the last seconds of an auction as bidders change their minds about their max bids. Supply changes when you discover that next month the firm has additional examples of that same type you didn't expect to see. ("I'm glad I lost at that high price; I can bid again next month.")

Anything political is oversimplified by each side now, often in a misleading way. Many arguments that support one side could easily be followed by "But, [insert some previously deliberately unmentioned relevant fact]."

The world is not simple. 



  
 

Edited June 18 by Valentinian
typo

[Sulla80]

@Seth77 I loved your answers:  avoid fights over nothing, humility, and especially "things which are of utter wonder to me are completely boring to people"

Beyond learning about coins and ancient history,I have learned the value of sharing ideas and paying attention to details. I am fascinated by the challenge of finding historical facts amidst political and commercial interpretations, and uncovering the complex realities beneath compelling but oversimplified narratives. I am continually surprised by how much our present has been influenced by people and events from thousands of years ago.

 

 

[JeandAcre]

Hat-tosses to @Valentinian and @Sulla80.  ...Not to mention @seth77.  'Epistemic humility' --I could second that four times.  

Especially to @Valentinian's point, history, economics, and other 'social sciences' (--does even the phrase verge on oxymoron?) are full of generalizations which try to arbitrarily impose abstract principles on phenomena which are individual, episodic, and often random in their relation to eachother.  In other words, not the kind of thing that lends itself to the practice.  Wishful thinking has a way of progressing to mere fiction.

For the medieval period, especially, you have to back up to the historiography, where the validity of the primary sources is subject to its own endless interpretation.  (Thanks, @seth77, for having memorably made that point years ago, in the other forum, relative to the selective reliability of Joinville's memoirs of Louis IX's crusades.)  What I like about recent academic historians in the sub-genre is their generally implicit, but unmistakable acknowledgment that any approximation of What Really Happened (--expletive of choice?) is an ongoing pursuit.  ...It's really that one, defining feature of the methodology that makes me appreciate the extent to which the discipline does manage to resemble the sciences in the stricter sense.  Add to that the accelerating expansion into numismatics and archaeology, over the past few decades, and the gap is narrowing.  ...Closing? I for one wouldn't venture as far as that!

[Hrefn]

I believe the most important influence my pursuit of numismatics has had upon my thinking has been to underpin my everyday conscious thought with a usually unspoken axiom.  And that is, that we exist in history, which is to say our daily experience is influenced and affected by the actions of all our earthly predecessors. Their decisions shaped society, our languages, the movement of peoples and cultures, our religious beliefs and philosophical assumptions, our countries, politics, even our very names.  

Numismatics has helped make history concrete and palpable;  and knowledge of history has freed me from the tyranny of the present moment.  Knowing that our ancestors, who were much like ourselves, faced the same struggles and crises we are experiencing is a great prescription against anxiety or panic.  History provides perspective, and knowledge of the past produces a certain equanimity about the present.  

The barbarians are always at the gate, allies have mixed motives and may betray you, disaster always looms, and sometimes is messily manifested.  Great men have feet of clay.  Society’s moral fabric is decaying, strange new vices and evils (which are the same old vices and evils) seem ascendant, courage is uncommon and faithfulness is all the more valuable because it is rare.  

The numismatist-historian is surprised by none of it.  If you think politics now are terrible, think on Caesar. Morality is in decline?  Talk to Cicero.  Unprecedented corruption in the Church, or the Legislature, the King, the President?  We have seen it all before, and probably can show you a coin from a place and era when matters were so much worse.  

[Ancient Coin Hunter]

8 hours ago, JeandAcre said:

Hat-tosses to @Valentinian and @Sulla80.  ...Not to mention @seth77.  'Epistemic humility' --I could second that four times.  

Especially to @Valentinian's point, history, economics, and other 'social sciences' (--does even the phrase verge on oxymoron?) are full of generalizations which try to arbitrarily impose abstract principles on phenomena which are individual, episodic, and often random in their relation to eachother.  In other words, not the kind of thing that lends itself to the practice.  Wishful thinking has a way of progressing to mere fiction.

For the medieval period, especially, you have to back up to the historiography, where the validity of the primary sources is subject to its own endless interpretation.  (Thanks, @seth77, for having memorably made that point years ago, in the other forum, relative to the selective reliability of Joinville's memoirs of Louis IX's crusades.)  What I like about recent academic historians in the sub-genre is their generally implicit, but unmistakable acknowledgment that any approximation of What Really Happened (--expletive of choice?) is an ongoing pursuit.  ...It's really that one, defining feature of the methodology that makes me appreciate the extent to which the discipline does manage to resemble the sciences in the stricter sense.  Add to that the accelerating expansion into numismatics and archaeology, over the past few decades, and the gap is narrowing.  ...Closing? I for one wouldn't venture as far as that!

Spot on. 

One can detect the animosity of Western Europeans towards Byzantium from accounts like Liutprand of Cremona's experience visiting Constantinople in the time of Nicephorus or De Profectione Ludovici VII in Orientem by Odo of Deuil, which lampoons the emperor Manuel Comnenus. Eventually the attitude spilled over with the conduct of the Fourth Crusade, one of the saddest events in Medieval history.

Edited June 18 by Ancient Coin Hunter

[kevikens]

Yes. If learned authors and historian are going to foul up their stories and accounts with demonstrable errors it will be getting their financial facts fouled up because they have no idea about the actual coins and currencies of the time period they are writing about.

[Alegandron]

I have learned:

 

I am dumber than a box of rocks.

Over the last 30 years or so of collecting Ancients, I just sit, listen, watch, and learn from folks that know things better'n me.

Great folks, fun discussions, and I appreciate all the wonderful advice.

Yeah, and I do a bit of research, too...

🙂

🙂

🙂

 

 

 

Edited June 18 by Alegandron

[JeandAcre]

@Alegandron, the only reason you can say that here is that no one is believing it for a minute!  :<}

[Sulla80]

3 hours ago, Alegandron said:

I have learned:

 

I am dumber than a box of rocks.

Over the last 30 years or so of collecting Ancients, I just sit, listen, watch, and learn from folks that know things better'n me.

Great folks, fun discussions, and I appreciate all the wonderful advice.

Yeah, and I do a bit of research, too...

🙂

🙂

🙂

Some rare rocks in that box, @Alegandron, always more interesting and fun when you are in the room.

[Alegandron]

5 hours ago, Sulla80 said:

Some rare rocks in that box, @Alegandron, always more interesting and fun when you are in the room.

LOL, well thank you. 🙂

[I_v_a_n]

I was forced to completely sell the collection 2 times (after a divorce and after ruzzian aggression against Ukraine) and learned in practice the meaning of the proverb “first you feed the collection, then it feeds you.”

But even more important: you shouldn’t get too tied to any material objects. In terms of coins, you do not need to regret about any rarity of any kind, or "lifetime opportunity". Life is full of "lifetime opportunity" at every step.

[robinjojo]

Confirmation that my ability to make precipitous bad decisions is limitless. 

On the plus side I've learned about how cyclical supply and demand is in this (and other) hobbies, driven in the realm of ancient coins by the appearance of hoards on the market.

[Nerosmyfavorite68]

I've learned lots from the hobby.  For instance, about ancient economics, overstrikes, etc.

Other lessons have been to avoid priority mail and registered mail, respectively, for coins.

[ewomack]

I have learned oodles upon oodles of things.

• Never to start a hobby by just going out and buying things. Research, read, and learn first. I wasted a lot of money on careless impulse buying
• People rarely listen to advice, especially when they're excited and starting out in a hobby 😁
• History - I know the basic lineage of US Presidents, UK and French Royalty, and Roman and Byzantine emperors by relating them to coins
• I learned about my addictive side and how to keep it in check - one can go bankrupt quickly in this hobby without restraint
• A lot of very nice and interesting people also collect coins - the stereotype is that only anti-social nerds do so. Of course some do, but a lot of very fascinating people do so as well
• Learning that one rarely gets more than what one paid for when selling collectibles (I have had some successes, but the vast majority of my purchases have only broken even or lost money when I sell them - I make sure not to avoid the impact of inflation when comparing buy to sell prices, which is often quite sobering)
• People really like to buy and possess things, sometimes at great personal expense - sometimes even if those things only sit in a safe for years
• Most people I have met in my life don't care at all about coins or the money they use - I once had to tell a group of 12 educated Americans who appeared on the US dime - half of them didn't believe that it was FDR and they kept guessing - somehow I was able to hide my shameful hobby from them 😁
• Most people know nothing about how collectible markets work - so many people saved worn coins, torn bills, or common items thinking they would be worth something because they were "cool" or "hyped" at the time and didn't consider the impact of condition or scarcity - I've had to upset a few people over the years by telling them the pile of coins and bills that their deceased relative saved actually has only face value
• Auctions are very dangerous. Just stay away. They will suck your money like lampreys suck blood. Even if you're aware of the psychological tricks, you still overspend
• It's okay to just collect what you like. You don't need a valuable, impressive, or record-breaking collection. You just need to buy what you like.

Edited June 19 by ewomack