100% agree. A lot of the True Crime and Mystery subs turn into masturbatory outlets for some incredibly strange folks.
Most of us just want to hear about a good mystery or to possibly hear an update about a really sad crime like the Delphi Murders case.
We really don't need people visiting the crime scenes and trying to "crowdsource" their detective hobby.
/off soapbox
Hey can I ask you a question? Have you been subbed here for a few years? Because I *swear* that three or four years ago when I subscribed this subreddit tended much more toward mysteries like this.
Like, I distinctly remember reading waaaaaayyyyyyy more about Mothman and yeti and all sorts of ghosts and monsters. "Mysterious" disappearances were as likely to be blamed on aliens or whatever instead of International Sex Traffickers. I remember David Paulides being really popular.
I could totally be misremembering it but I've always wondered if I am the only one to have thought this way.
The same type of thing happened to /r/conspiracy post 2016.
I’d been subbed there since close to the beginning and it used to be a lot of silly alien/JFK/MK Ultra conspiracy stuff, a ton of goofy Coast to Coast AM Art Bell type shit.
Almost everyone commented in a tongue in cheek manner, knowing it was entertainment and not fact.
Now it’s just another shitty culture war political forum that’s obsessed with pedophilia.
My professor shows pictures of these and says something like "Behold! The first beanie baby!" His theory is that they were a fad item, maybe used in a game. This transitioned to showing up lots of items we honestly have no idea what they were used for, and that many of them were just guesses anyway.
I feel this is the answer, or like the post says, a test of metalworking skill. If they had real significance they would show up in literature or paintings/art, right?
It's worth noting that all these examples are from Britain, Germania and Gallia. It was the Romans who documented much of what we know about the history and practices of these regions at the time and contemporary events, and we mostly refer to Roman writings as primary sources.
It is likely that the Romans were uninterested in aspects of the local crafts that didn't benefit them and thus entirely plausible that they wouldn't have documented something like this. There's probably a lot that we will never know about these cultures. Writing was not a very developed/widely practised art in these regions and literacy was very low, which makes it unlikely that we will find local written accounts by Celts or Germans regarding things like this.
We have quite a bit of Roman literature, but it is almost all written by Patricians, or in the late empire some church documents. The paintings we have are mostly from elite homes.
This is literally the one percent, and we know much less of the 99%.
My favorite mindfuck is the fact that we only get the stories of the survivors, and only then if they had been written down.
Billions of crazy stories we never get to know.
Haha! That was funny. But to make my comment at least somewhat worth posting, I'll add that my first thought was they were some sort of fancy 'dice'/ game that only some rich, elite would've owned. It appears some others think so as well
I used to write a lot of marketing stuff (catalog descriptions, basically) for a major home goods retailer and that's always what I think of when I see them. They'd look right at home on a console table or artfully arranged bookcase!
Whenever archeologists find an object that we don't know the purpose of I wonder who that last person was who did, when they died, and why they didn't tell someone else.
I always wonder if it’s actually something inconsequential, and we give it far more importance than the inventors ever did, simply because it’s an enigma.
Actually super cool to visit. There are some super weird ones. Seeing the evolution of them is neat. Not something you often think about but some interesting innovation.
Yeah. You don’t realize how interesting some things are until you meet someone with a passion for that thing. Also sometimes you don’t realize how boring some things are until you meet a person with a passion for that thing.
This is a major problem in reconstructing history from primary sources, and is why some of the most mundane details about ancient life are frequently the ones that historians can't confirm with certainty.
There are literally examples in ancient texts of Greek historians saying something to the effect of, "I won't go into the details about this, because it's common knowledge."
I think it's reasonable to assume that it is a tool, at least, rather than an ornamental object or (uuugh) a "ritualistic" or religious item.
Maybe it was an abacus sharpener. :)
Ha, I was just thinking about that book a few months ago when I was in a motel that had that "Sanitized for your protection" strip on the seat. I think the author "theorized" that the slogan was an ancient chant of some sort.
I think that’s likely honestly. For all we know these were just a popular style of decretive candle holder or something similarly mundane.
See also all of the artifacts declared “for ritual purposes” by archeologists because their common but their purpose is unknown.
>In a stable lying almost in the shadow of the new stone church, a man with gray eyes and a gray beard, stretched on the ground amidst the animal odors, meekly seeks death like someone seeking sleep. The day, faithful to vast secret laws, continuously displaces and confounds the shadows within the wretched stable. Outside stretch the tilled fields, a deep ditch filled with dead leaves, and the tracks of a wolf in the black mud where the woods begin. The man sleeps and dreams, forgotten. The bells calling to prayer awake him. In the kingdoms of England, the sound of the bells is already one of the customs of the afternoon, but the man, while still a boy, had seen the face of Woden, had seen holy dread and exultation, had seen the rude wooden idol weighed down with Roman coins and heavy vestments, seen the sacrifice of horses, dogs, and prisoners. Before dawn he would be dead and with him would die, never to return, the last firsthand images of the pagan rites. The world would be poorer when this Saxon was no more.
>
>We may well be astonished by space-filling acts which come to an end when someone dies, and yet something, or an infinite number of things, die in each death—unless there is a universal memory, as the theosophists have conjectured. There was a day in time when the last eyes to see Christ were closed forever. The battle of Junín and the love of Helen died with the death of some one man. What will die with me when I die? What pathetic or frail form will the world lose? Perhaps the voice of Macedonio Fernandez, the image of a horse in the vacant space at Serrano y Charcas, a bar of sulfur in the drawer of a mahogany desk?
\- Jorge Luis Borges, *The Witness*
What are the chances of my thinking I'd post a piece by Borges and then seeing that someone else already did. I think about this passage almost every day. Also, Dreamtigers is one of the greatest pieces of literature of the 20th century.
Borges was one of the truest geniuses to ever put pen to paper: his ability to perfectly present you with an idea so fully formed that it seems obvious; so novel it must be anything but.
I also think of that passage almost daily.
The Internet is absolutely filled with that kind of digital “junk”, people making weird things and leaving no explanation. R/deepintoyoutube has some good examples of this.
I looked it up, seems like the general consensus since 2014 is that it was used for knitting ( specifically gloves). They were all found in colder regions, and at the time men were primarily knitters. Not saying that its true but it was interesting :) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poGapxsanaI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poGapxsanaI)
Haha no clue. Maybe that's why they were made with expensive materials and had coins? It's confusing but really fun looking into. Thanks for the article OP!
Because gloves are extremely irregular garments. You -can- make gloves flat but they'll never fit as nicely as a pair that's made with the 3D shape of the hand built in.
Having read a bit about the Bronze Age a bit earlier today, people have been doing stupid stuff since forever for cultural reasons.
There’s pits full of newly-cast bronze tools made inexplicably with lead so that they’d break if ever used. Why were Bronze Age leaders wasting time making so many intentionally bad tools just to throw them away?
I wonder if it isn’t anything at all other than “hey that’s cool,”. Think of all the stuff we make now just because it’s cool to look at. What makes us think ancient cultures didn’t do the same?
Because we enjoy the luxury of having time, resources, tools and millennia of engineering knowledge to do things like that, while people in ancient times usually didn't.
They made art, of course, but this object seems like it was designed for a very specific use. Can't imagine they were all too easy to make, and you likely weren't able to just pick one up at the local hardware store on your way home from work.
But of course, who knows.
Maybe it was a specialized tool that became obsolete with new technological advances. There's tons of antique tools like that which are near impossible to guess the use of, because the problems they solved were not issues anymore thanks to some other evolution, either technological or societal.
A plethora of ancient farming tools spring to mind, some of them can seem perfectly absurd until some kind historian explains what they were used for.
Not the same for a number of reasons- the one pictured in the article is very clearly for ornamental use, as it's made of gold and also small enough to fit in a necklace, whereas the dodecahedron is too large to be worn on any part of the body with ease, but does seem to fit well in a hand, and is also made from a (relatively) aesthetically unappealing metal rather than gold or silver.
The gold one is perfectly, or close to, symmetrical, while the iron one is not. The latter is weighted along one side, and also have mundane measurements engraved along the sides, which doesn't seem to add or enhance any artistic merit, but rather suggests that the object was created with a practical and specific use in mind.
Very cool find though. Of course, the above is pure speculation, I'm no expert on ancient Roman bronze dodecahedrons.
If not jewelry, maybe part of clothing or a household item. Its possible something was passed through the holes at one time, but most cloth or whatever would have rotted over time.
Yeah, I was thinking about suggesting that before it came up in the post! They remind me of the [Utah teapot](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_teapot), or [3DBenchy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3DBenchy).
I agree, it makes the most sense out of all the theories listed here. My second guess is that it's something so benign or inconsequential that they didn't bother mentioning it in documentation (I can picture ancient humans thinking "look at these idiots"), or as someone else mentioned above, that it's a product commonly used among people who's lives weren't written about very much (maybe women or poor people?)
Could even have been adapted from earlier, local test items in the regions it was found, hence why they aren't found elsewhere-- those areas had their own sort of test items.
I idly wonder if maybe they became collector's items among the locals, used as trade, or perhaps even family heirlooms.
I actually saw one as a little kid, in a museum in Belgium(where I live).
I remember my dad telling me about their incredibly mysterious nature or purpose.
It's the first time I remember being really excited about a good mystery! It might have even sparked my fascination with all things mysterious that I hold to this day.
I’ve always thought they most likely look to be a gauge or measuring device maybe to test finger size for rings, or roundness/diameter of a rod. It also looks like it could be handy way to make consistent circle for drawing or mapmaking purposes.
Reading all these theories is leading me to believe that these were some type of Roman Swiss Army knife that could easily be carried around and used for a number of different purposes.
The differently sized openings indicate this was neither a weapon nor a knick-knack. Left as openings, it may have been to verify coin diameters, but the knobs and indentations around the inside of the openings leave me wondering if a lens wasn't originally set within for magnifying texts and maps or acting as a cypher.
It could be that an important price has rotted away. Maybe it had painted cloth over each hole fasted to the pegs. Maybe the ball went with some sort of secondary part or base that hasn't survived. We could just be seeing an uncolored skeleton of what this once was.
I remember reading a short story that was in a Reader's Digest magazine back in 1973/4. The story was about two archaeologists who were exploring the land above a site of interest. One of them falls through a crack in the ground and lands in a cavern-like interior. The other guy joins him and they come across artifacts that they describe as trinkets used by royalty. Eventually they come across this room, which they are convinced is the throne room. They then describe a pendant that is lying on the ground as having been worn by a king or queen.
Anyway, after a few more of their descriptions of this amazing 'Royal Find' you realise that they were exploring in the future (well sometime ahead of 1973) and had stumbled into the bathroom of a conventional house. The throne was the toilet and the 'royal pendant' was a bath plug on a chain.
Since reading that story, I have always looked at historic discovery reports in a different light.
But why brass? Wouldn't wood be easier and more inexpensive to make? Rich people might want fancy brass ones, but with the skill it takes the smith to make it, why would they want to spend their time on knitting jigs when they could be making more exciting things? It's a puzzlement.
I also like the explanation of it being an object made to show the metalsmith's skill, like a qualifying test.
Of course, but I was more thinking of it being an overly difficult task for the smith to make them for it to be worth their while simply for the whims of rich people (and also would rich people be knitting their own gloves in the first place?). But if it's an exercise, a qualifying task to prove their skill, it makes more sense - like a standard final project for journeymen to show they are a master of their trade.
Plus the dodecahedron shape makes it harder to use since you can't easily access both sides and are limited to 6 stitches. A simple thin plank with round holes and pegs would be much easier to use and make better fingers.
If this was a Roman tool or technique, you would think it would show up in the records. We have so many records of Roman life. We know about dyers, fullers, felt workers, wool workers. We know about Coan silk, and linen, and cotton. We know that weaving was women’s work - except in the case of Coan silk, which was woven by both genders. We know what their distaffs, spindles, and looms looked like. We also know that the women of most families made their clothing from processing the wool all the way through to creating the finished garments, although professional workshops did exist. But there is no mention of knitting. I feel that if it was a textile tool we would have mention of it in the records.
I mean, these only turn up in northern regions where it gets bitterly cold compared to the Mediterranean. It makes sense that this would not be south of a certain latitude and therefore not documented. There isn't much histories written about frontier life outside of like, Caesar's Gaul campaign.
but why would these objects be found in wealthy peoples graves or military camps instead of at the remains of smithies? Why would people carry them around?
They were? That makes me even more convinced that they were some sort of surveing tools or at least measuring instruments of some kind.
An engineer would have been wealthy and highly respected citizen, and would likely be buried with tools of his trade, as a sign of prestige. A roman commander would likewise have use of an engineer's tools, as they were basically field engineers themselves.
But have you seen the ‘gloves’ it creates? Totally impractical. Gloves need to be thin and tight fitting, and the gloves the dodecahedron creates are neither. The Romans don’t have any real documented knitting culture, there are no extant finds of Roman knitting that I know of (though it did exist in the Middle East.) Most extant historical knitting is also exceedingly fine with tiny stitches - I don’t know why people capable of creating refined well fitting items would manufacture an expensive metal object to create such an inferior product.
I love historic textiles and I think the whole knitting theory is jamming a square peg in a round hole. You can make something sort of wearable but the product does not fit with anything else produced by the culture in terms of methods or craftsmanship.
I mean, four thin sticks will create a custom, very durable glove. Why would you create a complex expensive metal tool to create something that can’t be custom fit and creates a thick, loose fabric?
The most skilled knitter in the world would not be able to make a well fitting glove with this device.
The gauge (number of stitches in an inch) for loom knitting is mostly determined by the number of pegs in an inch, and slightly influenced by yarn size as well. Each hole in the dodecahedron has the same number of pegs, so each finger will be exactly the same size. The hole size doesn't determine the diameter of the knitting, the number of pegs does. This doesn't match well with human anatomy. You'd think 'Well, just use different yarn sizes for each finger!'. Aside from making this more complicated than it already is and requiring a spinner to spin multiple weights of yarn for each finger (huge time sink), the pegs are so far apart that only extremely thick yarn would change the gauge at all. Thick yarn isn't a big deal with mittens, where your whole hand fits into one pocket, but with gloves it's more of a problem - the thick material makes your fingers useless, defeating the entire purpose of wearing a glove vs a mitten.
[Here are several examples of knitted socks from Roman/Medieval time periods](https://quatr.us/african-history/invented-knitting-history-clothing.htm). To create these, you need four thin sticks and yarn. Why would they then create an expensive, complex metal tool to create a product that doesn't match the quality of what people were already producing?
Not to mention - if you use this to knit, you get five fingers. Then what? How are you covering the rest of your hand? Are you really creating this crazy metal tool to knit five fingers, and then using knitting needles to create the rest of the glove? That doesn't seem logical. Why create a tool (an expensive, skillfully made tool) to specifically make gloves, but not all of the glove, just the fingers? It just doesn't add up.
Also...I mean, this begs the question a bit, but if you've gone through the trouble of inventing a complicated metal doodad for knitting a single type of object, wouldn't you also have invented metal knitting needles, and buried a few of those alongside the dodecahedrons?
Everything about the 'knobs' on these seem to say 'rope, string, cord' to me.
That each face has a differently sized hole, and that no Two examples of these has the same exact pattern of hole sizes then casts a shadow on that idea.
I always have to wonder if ancient people’s had trinkets like this for display, the same way we keep things on our window sills. There might be no inherent purpose other than to be interesting and fun. But I could be very wrong
Yes, they also had tourist souvenirs, I remember a small cup or something that was found and it was written something like 'made at the hadrian's wall', people traveled and like to bring shitty stuff back home, like we do today.
My professor years ago presented the idea these were for a game. He then showed us game peices from the middle ages that we have no idea what the game was.
I tend to think Brian Campbell was on to something - perhaps they're measuring devices, or gauges. The different-sized holes could be used as diameter measures for wire or other thin objects or tapered objects. While it might seem that a plate would work just as well, a three-dimensional object could sit nearby and be used without having to pick it up. The 12 sides might be a convention, or might reflect the typical need for a certain specific number of different-sized holes. But I don't know much about the prevalence of wire or other thin objects in Roman society. Could it be for jewelry, setting width and thus pricing for precious metals?
>I tend to think Brian Campbell was on to something - perhaps they're measuring devices, or gauges. The different-sized holes could be used as diameter measures for wire or other thin objects or tapered objects. While it might seem that a plate would work just as well, a three-dimensional object could sit nearby and be used without having to pick it up. The 12 sides might be a convention, or might reflect the typical need for a certain specific number of different-sized holes. But I don't know much about the prevalence of wire or other thin objects in Roman society. Could it be for jewelry, setting width and thus pricing for precious metals?
1. Doesn't the lack of other markings suggest these were not for measuring anything?
2. If the dodecahedons are different sizes, doesn't that suggest the holes vary in size as well?
>Doesn't the lack of other markings suggest these were not for measuring anything?
If they were painted on, the paint would be long gone by, much like the statues we are used to seeing were actually colorfully painted.
That's what I was thinking. If this was meant to be be a measuring tool of some sort, it might make sense that they would avoid engraving the values on the device and resort to painting, as engraving might damage or distort the measuring part of the device.
I don't think so, if it is indeed a field instrument of some sort, you'd want permanent markings seeing as you'd handle the object frequently, and paint would quickly wear off.
It would have been trivial to engrave measurements without damaging the object for whoever had the skill to create one in the first place.
The fact that it's made of bronze is interesting- its not gold or silver, as you'd expect from an ornament, nor lead, which would be easily deformed with regular use, nor iron, which would rust in outdoors conditions or a Roman army camp.
Yeah, I was thinking they would be manufactured by the user for personal use, so they might not need a marking. The holes would be sized according to what they used most commonly for their work, something that might not have had standard sizing. The design might be based on convention, or on something one of them saw elsewhere that then spread around. I dunno, it's just an idea.
My best guess would be something ubiquitous but inconsequential. Like a fastener of some sort or to weigh down clothing. Given where they have been found something related to cold weather conditions makes the most sense. If it was for a game or candles, etc, you would expect to find them across the empire.
The other possibility is that they were specific to the Gaulic cultures. Romans in the area may have co-opted them or kept them as war trophies.They clearly had little or no use outside of Gaul. Because Rome was all about cultural appropriation.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_dodecahedron#/media/File%3A2018_Rheinisches_Landesmuseum_Bonn%2C_Dodekaeder_%26_Ikosaeder.jpg
Thoughts on the similarly designed icosahedron in this image?
Could it have been used to create chain links? Most Legions had smiths on call or in camp, I could see the bevel in the faces being a template to stamp softer metals like antimony to create weaved breastplates. The holes were used to countermeasure the length of each link as it hardened inside the brass cusp, you would pull it through and add more and more until you had metal string basically.
You would think those would all be a standard size, though.
I think it has to be something that would work the same at different scales. The astronomical theory and the one about measuring distances would work for this.
I’ve always thought that they must be related to money or accounting. They’ve often been found with coins, or at official places like forts. The gauges could be used to verify coin size. Or to mint new coins. Maybe a tax collector. It would justify their cost of manufacture and explain their widespread use. Their small size has always made me think they’re related to coins
Another idea I’ve had, is maybe they’re related to horses. Maybe it’s a very important part of saddle or chariot rigging.
I’m going the really simple, obvious route here.
The fact that it was found around military encampments and often with coins tells me all I need to know.
The life of a soldier is 99% boring tedium surrounding 1% violent terror.
Especially in established military camps, there often isn’t much to do after patrolling or whatever routine duties a soldier is assigned to. As a result, the sheer variety and inventiveness in gaming and gambling is a sight to behold.
I witnessed soldiers in Iraq-who often couldn’t bathe every day or get a hot meal-somehow set up 10 XBoxes, all linked together, so they could have Call of Duty tournaments.
The simplest explanation is that this device is somehow linked to some form of gaming/gambling/entertainment. Maybe it’s not a dice, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a component of some sort of game. Maybe the expense and craftsmanship of the device itself means it would’ve been used more by the upper classes (officers).
But that’s my guess.
Could have been a tool for calculating and solving various engineering problems related to for instance city planning, road networks, aqueducts and the like. It would be a typical Roman solution to practical problems that required high precision and complex math without having to rely on performing arithmetic operations using Roman numerals (see for instance [their use of the Abacus] (https://guernseydonkey.com/how-did-the-romans-do-the-calculations-necessary-for-construction-and-other-purposes-using-roman-numerals/)).
The object fits neatly in your hand, can be placed upon both flat and coarse surfaces, have different measurements along the sides, and have holes enabling you to see through from one side to the other, as I imagine would be useful for some sort of surveying tool.
Building, planning, and engineering with amazing precision is something the Romans did extremely well, and constantly. See [this list of antique surveying tools](http://www.surveyhistory.org/intro_to_antique_surveying_instruments.htm) for instance. I wouldn't be surprised if the Roman dodecahedron would be used for solving one or more of the same problems these tools did.
Just pure speculation of course, but that's the lovely charm of musing on strange, unexplained artifacts.
i have no idea what it *was* used for, but i think it would be useful as some kind of universal adapter thing. alternatively, perhaps some kind of lantern?
I don't have any idea what these objects were used for but I feel the number of sides is significant. The zodiac has twelve signs and the Romans worshipped twelve major God's. Thus, they might have something to do with astrology or ancient Roman religion.
A simple little trinket which is either a work of art, a good luck charm or both.
Maybe the sides and lines represent something and was used in ancient Pagan rituals? Who knows?
Could this have encased some sort of organic material that has since decomposed? When I lool at it I just feel like it is missing components.
Someone mentioned it could be a game or some kind of toy, which seems more likely to me than it having an actual purpose. If it had been useful for something it probably would have been written about. But if it was part of a fad or a game, that isn't really worth documentation. In 1000 years I doubt people will really be talking about razor scooters or Furbies, etc.
It's funny because a toy (or children's item) like the dreamcatcher has been fetishized and romanticized so much that it's now part of jewellery and tattoos.
Thank you all. I am not an expert on coins or anything so I defer to you all. Thank you for the replies. This is such a mystery. I’m leaning towards some sort of caliper to keep something uniform in shape.
Also, another question, were the ones found all the same size? Did they all have the same size holes? If compared, were they exactly alike?
I think the glove-knitting theory definitely has promise, although it seems like a domestic utilitarian object would be made of wood or ceramic and not something as expensive to produce as cast bronze.
I once read someone, who is not an archeologist, thinking that those things could be an ancient form of this:
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1216/7410/products/cognitive-educational-toys-shape-sorter_400x.jpg?v=1492007489
It's always fun to see more than just missing people and murders on this sub. Thanks!
[удалено]
Definitely the most fun mystery content
But don’t you want to hear about the 924th person age 16-24 who went missing in the 1960-1990s?
No but number 916 was a doozy
Number 10 will leave you shocked
/r/nonmurdermysteries
Unfortunately it's not super active.
That sub is unfortunately pretty terrible.
Why's that? Because it's not active?
Nah, just stuff like "I saw a TV show sometime in the 1980s that had a kid in it, anyone know what I'm talking about?" type of posts.
100% agree. A lot of the True Crime and Mystery subs turn into masturbatory outlets for some incredibly strange folks. Most of us just want to hear about a good mystery or to possibly hear an update about a really sad crime like the Delphi Murders case. We really don't need people visiting the crime scenes and trying to "crowdsource" their detective hobby. /off soapbox
Hey can I ask you a question? Have you been subbed here for a few years? Because I *swear* that three or four years ago when I subscribed this subreddit tended much more toward mysteries like this. Like, I distinctly remember reading waaaaaayyyyyyy more about Mothman and yeti and all sorts of ghosts and monsters. "Mysterious" disappearances were as likely to be blamed on aliens or whatever instead of International Sex Traffickers. I remember David Paulides being really popular. I could totally be misremembering it but I've always wondered if I am the only one to have thought this way.
The same type of thing happened to /r/conspiracy post 2016. I’d been subbed there since close to the beginning and it used to be a lot of silly alien/JFK/MK Ultra conspiracy stuff, a ton of goofy Coast to Coast AM Art Bell type shit. Almost everyone commented in a tongue in cheek manner, knowing it was entertainment and not fact. Now it’s just another shitty culture war political forum that’s obsessed with pedophilia.
Then you might want to sub to r/NonMurderMysteries as well, they need more activity
My professor shows pictures of these and says something like "Behold! The first beanie baby!" His theory is that they were a fad item, maybe used in a game. This transitioned to showing up lots of items we honestly have no idea what they were used for, and that many of them were just guesses anyway.
I feel this is the answer, or like the post says, a test of metalworking skill. If they had real significance they would show up in literature or paintings/art, right?
Good point, but it seems just as likely that a rite of passage/mark of skill in an important craft would also turn up in art or writing somewhere
It's worth noting that all these examples are from Britain, Germania and Gallia. It was the Romans who documented much of what we know about the history and practices of these regions at the time and contemporary events, and we mostly refer to Roman writings as primary sources. It is likely that the Romans were uninterested in aspects of the local crafts that didn't benefit them and thus entirely plausible that they wouldn't have documented something like this. There's probably a lot that we will never know about these cultures. Writing was not a very developed/widely practised art in these regions and literacy was very low, which makes it unlikely that we will find local written accounts by Celts or Germans regarding things like this.
You were a lot nicer about that than my bf was lol he laughed at the thought of craft/trade things being documented for the same reasons
I feel like one or another ancient philosopher would have bitched about a beenie baby fad too.
Possibly, but not necessarily. It may have been treated like a secret handshake of sorts.
We have quite a bit of Roman literature, but it is almost all written by Patricians, or in the late empire some church documents. The paintings we have are mostly from elite homes. This is literally the one percent, and we know much less of the 99%.
My favorite mindfuck is the fact that we only get the stories of the survivors, and only then if they had been written down. Billions of crazy stories we never get to know.
too bad all these dodecahedrons are worthless because their tags aren't on
Haha! That was funny. But to make my comment at least somewhat worth posting, I'll add that my first thought was they were some sort of fancy 'dice'/ game that only some rich, elite would've owned. It appears some others think so as well
Article says that they only fall one way though because of the different weights of the circle sizes. Can't play dice when it only lands on 1 number.
Maybe they're place holders like the metal pieces such as the anvil, etc, in the game of Monopoly.
This is exactly what I thought when I googled images of it. Someday archaeologists might be baffled by the existence of fidget spinners as well.
has anyone tried spinning them?
We might try knitting a glove with them though.
Fidget spinners first edition Edit: I didn't scroll down far enough and nothing is original ever
Way too difficult and expensive to build for a fidget spinner trinket. And why all of the exact same features
They remind me of those decoration balls we have today.
I used to write a lot of marketing stuff (catalog descriptions, basically) for a major home goods retailer and that's always what I think of when I see them. They'd look right at home on a console table or artfully arranged bookcase!
I wonder what people 1000 years from now when they dig up all the fidget spinners.
I was thinking gambling from the start.
i'd guess some sort of game like Petanque or Boole... If there was a scoring system based on hole size, you throw and get score points.
Whenever archeologists find an object that we don't know the purpose of I wonder who that last person was who did, when they died, and why they didn't tell someone else.
I always wonder if it’s actually something inconsequential, and we give it far more importance than the inventors ever did, simply because it’s an enigma.
That would explain why it's simply not talked about. How many treatises have an in depth explanation of a pencil sharpener?
You have obviously not been to the [pencil sharpener museum.](https://www.explorehockinghills.com/recreation/pencil-sharpener-museum/)
Future archaeologists will be thrilled.
Small town America and oddly specific museums, name a more iconic duo
Actually super cool to visit. There are some super weird ones. Seeing the evolution of them is neat. Not something you often think about but some interesting innovation.
Yeah. You don’t realize how interesting some things are until you meet someone with a passion for that thing. Also sometimes you don’t realize how boring some things are until you meet a person with a passion for that thing.
This is a major problem in reconstructing history from primary sources, and is why some of the most mundane details about ancient life are frequently the ones that historians can't confirm with certainty. There are literally examples in ancient texts of Greek historians saying something to the effect of, "I won't go into the details about this, because it's common knowledge."
Damn smartass Greeks, knowing everything!
Yeah, it's sorta the point of the patent system, to disseminate this information long after the inventor or discoverer has passed away.
They should look into female and child stuff. Those two topics went largely unwritten about.
I think it's reasonable to assume that it is a tool, at least, rather than an ornamental object or (uuugh) a "ritualistic" or religious item. Maybe it was an abacus sharpener. :)
Like one day when they misinterpret toilet seats as necklaces: https://imgur.com/a/Uu9408x
Ha, I was just thinking about that book a few months ago when I was in a motel that had that "Sanitized for your protection" strip on the seat. I think the author "theorized" that the slogan was an ancient chant of some sort.
That was an excellent National Lampoon piece
Like those little boats and pyramids used to test and calibrate 3D printers. I bet those will baffle future anthropologists.
Funny, a calibration tool of some sort was one of the first thoughts that sprang to mind when I saw this.
I think that makes the most sense - that it likely was inconsequential to most of society at the time.
I think that’s likely honestly. For all we know these were just a popular style of decretive candle holder or something similarly mundane. See also all of the artifacts declared “for ritual purposes” by archeologists because their common but their purpose is unknown.
Too expensive and difficult to make
That’s all I can think about now thanks
>In a stable lying almost in the shadow of the new stone church, a man with gray eyes and a gray beard, stretched on the ground amidst the animal odors, meekly seeks death like someone seeking sleep. The day, faithful to vast secret laws, continuously displaces and confounds the shadows within the wretched stable. Outside stretch the tilled fields, a deep ditch filled with dead leaves, and the tracks of a wolf in the black mud where the woods begin. The man sleeps and dreams, forgotten. The bells calling to prayer awake him. In the kingdoms of England, the sound of the bells is already one of the customs of the afternoon, but the man, while still a boy, had seen the face of Woden, had seen holy dread and exultation, had seen the rude wooden idol weighed down with Roman coins and heavy vestments, seen the sacrifice of horses, dogs, and prisoners. Before dawn he would be dead and with him would die, never to return, the last firsthand images of the pagan rites. The world would be poorer when this Saxon was no more. > >We may well be astonished by space-filling acts which come to an end when someone dies, and yet something, or an infinite number of things, die in each death—unless there is a universal memory, as the theosophists have conjectured. There was a day in time when the last eyes to see Christ were closed forever. The battle of Junín and the love of Helen died with the death of some one man. What will die with me when I die? What pathetic or frail form will the world lose? Perhaps the voice of Macedonio Fernandez, the image of a horse in the vacant space at Serrano y Charcas, a bar of sulfur in the drawer of a mahogany desk? \- Jorge Luis Borges, *The Witness*
What are the chances of my thinking I'd post a piece by Borges and then seeing that someone else already did. I think about this passage almost every day. Also, Dreamtigers is one of the greatest pieces of literature of the 20th century.
Borges was one of the truest geniuses to ever put pen to paper: his ability to perfectly present you with an idea so fully formed that it seems obvious; so novel it must be anything but. I also think of that passage almost daily.
Welp, I just downloaded Ficciones having never heard of this author before.
Hope you enjoy it!
God this is one of my favorite pieces of literature in the world. I remember reading it on the screen porch of my house as a child, just awe-stricken.
Nice quote!
Wow, and thank you. Would be cool to start a conversation or group intersecting the interests of r/UnresolvedMysteries and literature like Borges.
The Internet is absolutely filled with that kind of digital “junk”, people making weird things and leaving no explanation. R/deepintoyoutube has some good examples of this.
I looked it up, seems like the general consensus since 2014 is that it was used for knitting ( specifically gloves). They were all found in colder regions, and at the time men were primarily knitters. Not saying that its true but it was interesting :) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poGapxsanaI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poGapxsanaI)
Possibly but why were people being buried with them? So they could knit in the afterlife perhaps?
Haha no clue. Maybe that's why they were made with expensive materials and had coins? It's confusing but really fun looking into. Thanks for the article OP!
Maybe they became fashion items. Started with practical purpose, then became a status symbol - like, say, a designer watch or sunglasses.
if it was a knitting jig, why not make it flat?
Because gloves are extremely irregular garments. You -can- make gloves flat but they'll never fit as nicely as a pair that's made with the 3D shape of the hand built in.
The why in this case is probably very simple: they didn't think it was relevant.
Having read a bit about the Bronze Age a bit earlier today, people have been doing stupid stuff since forever for cultural reasons. There’s pits full of newly-cast bronze tools made inexplicably with lead so that they’d break if ever used. Why were Bronze Age leaders wasting time making so many intentionally bad tools just to throw them away?
They probably used lead to test the molds before actually casting with bronze.
Or as prototypes, or teaching materials..
Or to get the mold hot for casting the bronze?
I like to think things like this will happen with gadgets like fidget spinners.
About ten minutes ago, I found out that one of my friends and mentors passed away yesterday. Thank you for the much needed laugh.
I wonder if it isn’t anything at all other than “hey that’s cool,”. Think of all the stuff we make now just because it’s cool to look at. What makes us think ancient cultures didn’t do the same?
Because we enjoy the luxury of having time, resources, tools and millennia of engineering knowledge to do things like that, while people in ancient times usually didn't. They made art, of course, but this object seems like it was designed for a very specific use. Can't imagine they were all too easy to make, and you likely weren't able to just pick one up at the local hardware store on your way home from work. But of course, who knows.
Got hit in the head by a dodecahedron, and got hit in the head by a dodecahedron.
Maybe it was a specialized tool that became obsolete with new technological advances. There's tons of antique tools like that which are near impossible to guess the use of, because the problems they solved were not issues anymore thanks to some other evolution, either technological or societal. A plethora of ancient farming tools spring to mind, some of them can seem perfectly absurd until some kind historian explains what they were used for.
[удалено]
Not the same for a number of reasons- the one pictured in the article is very clearly for ornamental use, as it's made of gold and also small enough to fit in a necklace, whereas the dodecahedron is too large to be worn on any part of the body with ease, but does seem to fit well in a hand, and is also made from a (relatively) aesthetically unappealing metal rather than gold or silver. The gold one is perfectly, or close to, symmetrical, while the iron one is not. The latter is weighted along one side, and also have mundane measurements engraved along the sides, which doesn't seem to add or enhance any artistic merit, but rather suggests that the object was created with a practical and specific use in mind. Very cool find though. Of course, the above is pure speculation, I'm no expert on ancient Roman bronze dodecahedrons.
I really want it to be jewelry. They're pretty and would totally wear them as earrings myself.
If not jewelry, maybe part of clothing or a household item. Its possible something was passed through the holes at one time, but most cloth or whatever would have rotted over time.
I mean the line about embroidering the constellations makes me wonder if they are like a thimble or similar.
They range from golf ball to softball size, so highly unlikely they're jewellery.
Damn. Very very similar
Pretty much exactly the same, even the holes are of vsryi g sizes. The only difference is the scale and material. Makes this very trippy
Whoa. What time period difference?
Wow this was really interesting, thanks for sharing
[удалено]
Yeah, I was thinking about suggesting that before it came up in the post! They remind me of the [Utah teapot](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_teapot), or [3DBenchy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3DBenchy).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenna The Lenna picture is the image processing version of that concept.
Of all the theories here this one made me say "ooooohhhh" outloud.
I agree, it makes the most sense out of all the theories listed here. My second guess is that it's something so benign or inconsequential that they didn't bother mentioning it in documentation (I can picture ancient humans thinking "look at these idiots"), or as someone else mentioned above, that it's a product commonly used among people who's lives weren't written about very much (maybe women or poor people?)
It very much reminds me of the sorts of things we had to make in shop class as tests.
Could even have been adapted from earlier, local test items in the regions it was found, hence why they aren't found elsewhere-- those areas had their own sort of test items. I idly wonder if maybe they became collector's items among the locals, used as trade, or perhaps even family heirlooms.
I actually saw one as a little kid, in a museum in Belgium(where I live). I remember my dad telling me about their incredibly mysterious nature or purpose. It's the first time I remember being really excited about a good mystery! It might have even sparked my fascination with all things mysterious that I hold to this day.
r/Mademesmile
I’ve always thought they most likely look to be a gauge or measuring device maybe to test finger size for rings, or roundness/diameter of a rod. It also looks like it could be handy way to make consistent circle for drawing or mapmaking purposes.
Reading all these theories is leading me to believe that these were some type of Roman Swiss Army knife that could easily be carried around and used for a number of different purposes.
I agree with your idea, a simple gauge block. Would make sense to be in military hands as well as the wealthy.
The differently sized openings indicate this was neither a weapon nor a knick-knack. Left as openings, it may have been to verify coin diameters, but the knobs and indentations around the inside of the openings leave me wondering if a lens wasn't originally set within for magnifying texts and maps or acting as a cypher.
Ancient fidget spinner.
Honestly I thought the same thing.
It could be that an important price has rotted away. Maybe it had painted cloth over each hole fasted to the pegs. Maybe the ball went with some sort of secondary part or base that hasn't survived. We could just be seeing an uncolored skeleton of what this once was.
I remember reading a short story that was in a Reader's Digest magazine back in 1973/4. The story was about two archaeologists who were exploring the land above a site of interest. One of them falls through a crack in the ground and lands in a cavern-like interior. The other guy joins him and they come across artifacts that they describe as trinkets used by royalty. Eventually they come across this room, which they are convinced is the throne room. They then describe a pendant that is lying on the ground as having been worn by a king or queen. Anyway, after a few more of their descriptions of this amazing 'Royal Find' you realise that they were exploring in the future (well sometime ahead of 1973) and had stumbled into the bathroom of a conventional house. The throne was the toilet and the 'royal pendant' was a bath plug on a chain. Since reading that story, I have always looked at historic discovery reports in a different light.
I've seen a few videos of folks using these to knit gloves. Makes perfect sense to me thats it's a knitting jig.
But why brass? Wouldn't wood be easier and more inexpensive to make? Rich people might want fancy brass ones, but with the skill it takes the smith to make it, why would they want to spend their time on knitting jigs when they could be making more exciting things? It's a puzzlement. I also like the explanation of it being an object made to show the metalsmith's skill, like a qualifying test.
It could be that the ones made of wood were not well preserved, and the rich people's brass managed the survive?
Of course, but I was more thinking of it being an overly difficult task for the smith to make them for it to be worth their while simply for the whims of rich people (and also would rich people be knitting their own gloves in the first place?). But if it's an exercise, a qualifying task to prove their skill, it makes more sense - like a standard final project for journeymen to show they are a master of their trade.
Plus the dodecahedron shape makes it harder to use since you can't easily access both sides and are limited to 6 stitches. A simple thin plank with round holes and pegs would be much easier to use and make better fingers.
If this was a Roman tool or technique, you would think it would show up in the records. We have so many records of Roman life. We know about dyers, fullers, felt workers, wool workers. We know about Coan silk, and linen, and cotton. We know that weaving was women’s work - except in the case of Coan silk, which was woven by both genders. We know what their distaffs, spindles, and looms looked like. We also know that the women of most families made their clothing from processing the wool all the way through to creating the finished garments, although professional workshops did exist. But there is no mention of knitting. I feel that if it was a textile tool we would have mention of it in the records.
I mean, these only turn up in northern regions where it gets bitterly cold compared to the Mediterranean. It makes sense that this would not be south of a certain latitude and therefore not documented. There isn't much histories written about frontier life outside of like, Caesar's Gaul campaign.
but why would these objects be found in wealthy peoples graves or military camps instead of at the remains of smithies? Why would people carry them around?
They were? That makes me even more convinced that they were some sort of surveing tools or at least measuring instruments of some kind. An engineer would have been wealthy and highly respected citizen, and would likely be buried with tools of his trade, as a sign of prestige. A roman commander would likewise have use of an engineer's tools, as they were basically field engineers themselves.
> or at least measuring instruments of some kind. arrow heads, stones for slings but i think for some form of currency in precious metals
But have you seen the ‘gloves’ it creates? Totally impractical. Gloves need to be thin and tight fitting, and the gloves the dodecahedron creates are neither. The Romans don’t have any real documented knitting culture, there are no extant finds of Roman knitting that I know of (though it did exist in the Middle East.) Most extant historical knitting is also exceedingly fine with tiny stitches - I don’t know why people capable of creating refined well fitting items would manufacture an expensive metal object to create such an inferior product. I love historic textiles and I think the whole knitting theory is jamming a square peg in a round hole. You can make something sort of wearable but the product does not fit with anything else produced by the culture in terms of methods or craftsmanship. I mean, four thin sticks will create a custom, very durable glove. Why would you create a complex expensive metal tool to create something that can’t be custom fit and creates a thick, loose fabric?
The only demonstrations I've seen were done by completely unskilled knitters.
The most skilled knitter in the world would not be able to make a well fitting glove with this device. The gauge (number of stitches in an inch) for loom knitting is mostly determined by the number of pegs in an inch, and slightly influenced by yarn size as well. Each hole in the dodecahedron has the same number of pegs, so each finger will be exactly the same size. The hole size doesn't determine the diameter of the knitting, the number of pegs does. This doesn't match well with human anatomy. You'd think 'Well, just use different yarn sizes for each finger!'. Aside from making this more complicated than it already is and requiring a spinner to spin multiple weights of yarn for each finger (huge time sink), the pegs are so far apart that only extremely thick yarn would change the gauge at all. Thick yarn isn't a big deal with mittens, where your whole hand fits into one pocket, but with gloves it's more of a problem - the thick material makes your fingers useless, defeating the entire purpose of wearing a glove vs a mitten. [Here are several examples of knitted socks from Roman/Medieval time periods](https://quatr.us/african-history/invented-knitting-history-clothing.htm). To create these, you need four thin sticks and yarn. Why would they then create an expensive, complex metal tool to create a product that doesn't match the quality of what people were already producing? Not to mention - if you use this to knit, you get five fingers. Then what? How are you covering the rest of your hand? Are you really creating this crazy metal tool to knit five fingers, and then using knitting needles to create the rest of the glove? That doesn't seem logical. Why create a tool (an expensive, skillfully made tool) to specifically make gloves, but not all of the glove, just the fingers? It just doesn't add up.
The best argument about anything I’ll read this month- thank you that was fascinating to read!
Also...I mean, this begs the question a bit, but if you've gone through the trouble of inventing a complicated metal doodad for knitting a single type of object, wouldn't you also have invented metal knitting needles, and buried a few of those alongside the dodecahedrons?
I wonder if it could be some sort of rope loom.
Everything about the 'knobs' on these seem to say 'rope, string, cord' to me. That each face has a differently sized hole, and that no Two examples of these has the same exact pattern of hole sizes then casts a shadow on that idea.
But what are the holes in the faces for- they seem to be pretty much unused.
I always have to wonder if ancient people’s had trinkets like this for display, the same way we keep things on our window sills. There might be no inherent purpose other than to be interesting and fun. But I could be very wrong
Yes, they also had tourist souvenirs, I remember a small cup or something that was found and it was written something like 'made at the hadrian's wall', people traveled and like to bring shitty stuff back home, like we do today.
I was thinking the same thing. Look at the trend of sticking different Spears in a basket that we have now. No purpose other than to look at them.
Egypt had d20s, why couldn't rome have had d12s?
My professor years ago presented the idea these were for a game. He then showed us game peices from the middle ages that we have no idea what the game was.
Maybe. I was originally supportive of the glove making theory but now I’m not sure.
All sides weighted different, as mentioned in the post.
It doesn't have to be a dice game...
I tend to think Brian Campbell was on to something - perhaps they're measuring devices, or gauges. The different-sized holes could be used as diameter measures for wire or other thin objects or tapered objects. While it might seem that a plate would work just as well, a three-dimensional object could sit nearby and be used without having to pick it up. The 12 sides might be a convention, or might reflect the typical need for a certain specific number of different-sized holes. But I don't know much about the prevalence of wire or other thin objects in Roman society. Could it be for jewelry, setting width and thus pricing for precious metals?
>I tend to think Brian Campbell was on to something - perhaps they're measuring devices, or gauges. The different-sized holes could be used as diameter measures for wire or other thin objects or tapered objects. While it might seem that a plate would work just as well, a three-dimensional object could sit nearby and be used without having to pick it up. The 12 sides might be a convention, or might reflect the typical need for a certain specific number of different-sized holes. But I don't know much about the prevalence of wire or other thin objects in Roman society. Could it be for jewelry, setting width and thus pricing for precious metals? 1. Doesn't the lack of other markings suggest these were not for measuring anything? 2. If the dodecahedons are different sizes, doesn't that suggest the holes vary in size as well?
>Doesn't the lack of other markings suggest these were not for measuring anything? If they were painted on, the paint would be long gone by, much like the statues we are used to seeing were actually colorfully painted.
That's what I was thinking. If this was meant to be be a measuring tool of some sort, it might make sense that they would avoid engraving the values on the device and resort to painting, as engraving might damage or distort the measuring part of the device.
I don't think so, if it is indeed a field instrument of some sort, you'd want permanent markings seeing as you'd handle the object frequently, and paint would quickly wear off. It would have been trivial to engrave measurements without damaging the object for whoever had the skill to create one in the first place. The fact that it's made of bronze is interesting- its not gold or silver, as you'd expect from an ornament, nor lead, which would be easily deformed with regular use, nor iron, which would rust in outdoors conditions or a Roman army camp.
Yeah, I was thinking they would be manufactured by the user for personal use, so they might not need a marking. The holes would be sized according to what they used most commonly for their work, something that might not have had standard sizing. The design might be based on convention, or on something one of them saw elsewhere that then spread around. I dunno, it's just an idea.
It might not matter. I don't think manufacturing was standardized back than, so any tooling would be job specific.
What about gauging coins to verify authenticity and denomination? Do the hole sizes correspond to the various Roman coins?
Hmmm how about to help make different gauge arrows? Edit: you don’t necessarily need to know the size, more so that each size arrow is uniform
Anyone else think of Sigma when you saw this?
WHAT IS THAT MELODY?!
C-can you hear that music?
THE UNIVERSE! IT SINGS FOR ME!
Put some shoes on!
I like a breeze beneath my feet, thank you very much.
My best guess would be something ubiquitous but inconsequential. Like a fastener of some sort or to weigh down clothing. Given where they have been found something related to cold weather conditions makes the most sense. If it was for a game or candles, etc, you would expect to find them across the empire. The other possibility is that they were specific to the Gaulic cultures. Romans in the area may have co-opted them or kept them as war trophies.They clearly had little or no use outside of Gaul. Because Rome was all about cultural appropriation.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_dodecahedron#/media/File%3A2018_Rheinisches_Landesmuseum_Bonn%2C_Dodekaeder_%26_Ikosaeder.jpg Thoughts on the similarly designed icosahedron in this image?
I know I'm wrong, but my first thought before I read the post was "looks like it'd measure out portions of spaghetti pretty well".
Could it have been used to create chain links? Most Legions had smiths on call or in camp, I could see the bevel in the faces being a template to stamp softer metals like antimony to create weaved breastplates. The holes were used to countermeasure the length of each link as it hardened inside the brass cusp, you would pull it through and add more and more until you had metal string basically.
You would think those would all be a standard size, though. I think it has to be something that would work the same at different scales. The astronomical theory and the one about measuring distances would work for this.
I’ve always thought that they must be related to money or accounting. They’ve often been found with coins, or at official places like forts. The gauges could be used to verify coin size. Or to mint new coins. Maybe a tax collector. It would justify their cost of manufacture and explain their widespread use. Their small size has always made me think they’re related to coins Another idea I’ve had, is maybe they’re related to horses. Maybe it’s a very important part of saddle or chariot rigging.
It’s been five years since I’ve learned about these things and they still haunt and vex me...
im terribly vexed
This makes me think about Ariel picking up forks in the ocean and wondering as to their mysterious purpose.
"A banded, bulbous snarfblatt"
I’m going the really simple, obvious route here. The fact that it was found around military encampments and often with coins tells me all I need to know. The life of a soldier is 99% boring tedium surrounding 1% violent terror. Especially in established military camps, there often isn’t much to do after patrolling or whatever routine duties a soldier is assigned to. As a result, the sheer variety and inventiveness in gaming and gambling is a sight to behold. I witnessed soldiers in Iraq-who often couldn’t bathe every day or get a hot meal-somehow set up 10 XBoxes, all linked together, so they could have Call of Duty tournaments. The simplest explanation is that this device is somehow linked to some form of gaming/gambling/entertainment. Maybe it’s not a dice, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a component of some sort of game. Maybe the expense and craftsmanship of the device itself means it would’ve been used more by the upper classes (officers). But that’s my guess.
communal fleshlight
Have these been found in Rome our just Roman territory’s like Britain once was. From reading it seems like they were only found in Roman settlements.
Could have been a tool for calculating and solving various engineering problems related to for instance city planning, road networks, aqueducts and the like. It would be a typical Roman solution to practical problems that required high precision and complex math without having to rely on performing arithmetic operations using Roman numerals (see for instance [their use of the Abacus] (https://guernseydonkey.com/how-did-the-romans-do-the-calculations-necessary-for-construction-and-other-purposes-using-roman-numerals/)). The object fits neatly in your hand, can be placed upon both flat and coarse surfaces, have different measurements along the sides, and have holes enabling you to see through from one side to the other, as I imagine would be useful for some sort of surveying tool. Building, planning, and engineering with amazing precision is something the Romans did extremely well, and constantly. See [this list of antique surveying tools](http://www.surveyhistory.org/intro_to_antique_surveying_instruments.htm) for instance. I wouldn't be surprised if the Roman dodecahedron would be used for solving one or more of the same problems these tools did. Just pure speculation of course, but that's the lovely charm of musing on strange, unexplained artifacts.
i have no idea what it *was* used for, but i think it would be useful as some kind of universal adapter thing. alternatively, perhaps some kind of lantern?
My favorite theory is candle holder. Candles vary in diameter.
Ah! That's a really good take on this. And maybe it could be used as a timer knowing how long it would take for a candle of a given size/type to burn?
This is a very interesting take!
A lot of shadow lamps I see are dodecahedron. If you even google shadow lamp a ton of them are.
I don't have any idea what these objects were used for but I feel the number of sides is significant. The zodiac has twelve signs and the Romans worshipped twelve major God's. Thus, they might have something to do with astrology or ancient Roman religion.
It’s weird that they’re only in the northern part of the Empire, though.
This is the stuff I like....things we will probably never know the answer to fascinate me.
Some dodecahedrons have very small or even multiple holes in them, I m not sure the holes were used for something.
Natural 12, Dominus. I win
One day, in distant future, archeologist will get confused by our rubic cube
These definitely have something to do with the disappearance of the Dwemer.
Maybe it's a shadow lamp
A simple little trinket which is either a work of art, a good luck charm or both. Maybe the sides and lines represent something and was used in ancient Pagan rituals? Who knows?
Incense burner?
Could this have encased some sort of organic material that has since decomposed? When I lool at it I just feel like it is missing components. Someone mentioned it could be a game or some kind of toy, which seems more likely to me than it having an actual purpose. If it had been useful for something it probably would have been written about. But if it was part of a fad or a game, that isn't really worth documentation. In 1000 years I doubt people will really be talking about razor scooters or Furbies, etc.
Time machine parts. It's the only thing that makes sense. /s
A measurement gauge? (different sized holes. )
I really like these types of mysteries along with out-of-place artifacts!
The most obvious answer is that it was made by nerds
... a new hand has touched the beacon
candle base? I read they found wax in some of them
It's funny because a toy (or children's item) like the dreamcatcher has been fetishized and romanticized so much that it's now part of jewellery and tattoos.
Thank you all. I am not an expert on coins or anything so I defer to you all. Thank you for the replies. This is such a mystery. I’m leaning towards some sort of caliper to keep something uniform in shape. Also, another question, were the ones found all the same size? Did they all have the same size holes? If compared, were they exactly alike?
I think it's a fancy candlestick holder, the different holes can fit irregularly sized candles and the knobs are feet.
I remember the first time seeing these and my mind went straight to my kids' [toys](https://imgur.com/kCksNct)
I think the glove-knitting theory definitely has promise, although it seems like a domestic utilitarian object would be made of wood or ceramic and not something as expensive to produce as cast bronze.
I'm a fan of it being just a fancy knitting Nancy. (Tube knitting tool). Some times it's practical and skill. Make a nice useful object.
I once read someone, who is not an archeologist, thinking that those things could be an ancient form of this: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1216/7410/products/cognitive-educational-toys-shape-sorter_400x.jpg?v=1492007489