A mysterious Roman object unearthed in an amateur dig has baffled experts as it goes on display in Britain for the first time.
The 12-sided object was discovered in Norton Disney, near Lincoln, in 2023, and will go on display at Lincoln Museum as part of the city’s Festival of History.
Richard Parker, secretary of the Norton Disney History and Archaeology Group, said it was a “privilege to have handled” the dodecahedron, but was still at a loss over what it was.
Ok I got a theory and I think it’s a good one. I would say that’s a measuring tool, like an ancient tape measure, or at least I think I could use it for that. If you chose a zero knob, roll it a certain way, and know how to read the knob it finishes at, you can measure something pretty fast, the holes tells you which knob you are at and measure the fractional part to a 1/12 of the knob distance precision. It certainly must have a bit of a learning curve though.
multifaceted cock rings
Those Romans… they knew how to party.
Lucky Romans. They did quite well for themselves girthwise.
There are larger girths to be found in the animal kingdom. Those Romans could get wild.
I’m curious where Swans fall on that spectrum?
I think they’re dice.
That is certainly one possibility, although I think the idea that these were some sort of worship object or fortune telling device by the Neoplatonists is the most likely answer, as the dodecahedron was an especially sacred object to them because it was to Plato.
A Midplatonist work attributed to the Timaeus of Plato’s dialogues discusses it-
According to “Timaeus” the universe has two causes: Mind, which governs rational beings, and Necessity, which governs bodies and all irrational beings. Interpreting Plato literally, “Timaeus” affirmed the temporal creation of the cosmos, and while stating that the cosmos is capable of being destroyed by the one who created it (the Demiurge), he denied that it would ever actually be destroyed, since it is divine and the Demiurge, being good and divine himself, would never destroy divinity. In what is possibly a later addition to the text, “Timaeus” assigns numerical values to the various proportions produced by the mixture of the Same and the Different (these being the two opposing forces, productive of all motion, growth, and change in the cosmos, as discussed in the Timaeus dialogue). The substratum of all generated things is matter, and their reason-principle or logos is ideal-form. “Timaeus” then proceeds with an account of the geometrical proportions of the cosmos, finally declaring that the image of the cosmos is the dodecahedron, since that is the closest approximation to the perfect sphere, which is the image of purely intellectual reality.
Neoplatonism was a pretty big deal in the Empire in the third century.
Either that, or the Romans manufactured and buried them in order to confuse people 2000 years later.
Seems pretty simple to me. Everybody loved to gamble, so they needed to be sturdy, and also big shiny metal trinkets are cool. They have different sized holes to denote the different values of the sides, and the knobbies make them bounce and roll in unexpected ways and keep them from rolling once they come to a rest.
We do have companies like Chessex that make blingy dice for the D&D and tabletop gaming crowd today, I suppose.
I’ve wondered before whether a similar, but more-rollable looking strange set of artifacts that were also found in Britain might be dice:
Actually, on second glance, they do appear to have “numeric” engravings at all the places that might settle facing up or toward you. Very interesting.
The number 12 was really significant to early Mesopotamia and continued on trhu the Roman age. Babylonians used Base12 instead of Base10, gregorian calendar has 12 months, etc
If it was religious in nature, why wouldnt there be any manual or depiction of it in any of the existing art and structures?
IMO, the answer is because it was too mundane, like a shoelace or a paper clip to us. Someone above mentioned as possibly being for tying tent poles and the like together, which is now my new favorite theory 😃
First thing that pops into my head is that it was used to lash poles together for tents, awnings, military banners, etc. I am no doubt wrong. But for some reason I think they would work nicely for that purpose, and make the whole kit portable and easy to set up and tear down.
That might actually have been a good guess.
I’d go with some sort of game- like jumping jacks, maybe. Or some sort of weird bocce ball.
My immediate thought was that it was just some kinda ancient fad, like fidget spinners.
Why make such a complicated ass shape when a rope or thong of leather would serve the same end?
Also, they’re commonly found stored with people’s valuables - coin stashes, jewelry, etc. They were clearly valuable. Many of them don’t appear to have any wear on them either, so if they had a utilitarian use it likely didn’t involve lashing stuff together.
My guess is just a good luck charm type of thing. The Romans had a lot of those.
Around those times wasn’t anything manufactured entirely of non-lead metal kind of valuable? I don’t think this rules out the knitting functionality either. To this day people still hand down things like simple hand crank sewing machines in their dowry boxes as tradition from the past when those were family heirlooms
They weren’t cave men, they had plenty of metal stuff.
These dodecahedra are vastly over-complicated for “utilitarian” uses. As Boinkage says, if you need something for fastening some ropes together just to lash stuff, why use an intricate forging like this? All those knobs, the complex hollow shape, the variously-sized holes, those are features that took a lot of work to add. If it’s a utilitarian piece then those features need to be for something. Otherwise we’d be finding examples of simpler versions that lacked those features.
The “they could be for knitting glove fingers” idea, for example, could be just as easily done using a hunk of wood with five nails driven into it.
Erector bobs
Obviously you’re supposed to put it in your ass
“The imagination races when thinking about what the Romans may have used it for. Magic, rituals or religion - we perhaps may never know.”
Yes, magic, ritual, or religion—the only conceivable purposes for anything archeologists can’t immediately identify.
And by immediately you mean hundreds of people working full time for decades trying to figure it out.
It didn’t take them decades to come up with the idea that they were for magical use, it took them decades to fail to arrive at a better consensus.
It took them decades to thoroughly and methodically rule out other explanations to make sure their initial estimation is accurate.
Archeologists are highly educated professionals that spends a lot of time and effort into research. I don’t know why you want to portray them as bumbling idiots that make shit up when they dont know.
He’s saying that archaeologists have a tendency to grandiously assign religious or ceremonial purposes to uncovered objects when they should start with mundane purposes first. This object looks like a dice. Therefore, the first potential purpose should be a dice, not a mystical device to contact the Goa’uld.
I’m not portraying archaeologists as making shit up—I’m saying people in general jump to “magic rituals” when archaeologists can’t provide a definitive answer. The person quoted was explicitly speculating, not providing a professional opinion.
Just like how the figurines of busty ladies are used for “fertility rituals.” I think they were just prehistoric porn.
Why does it have to have a use? Someone might have wanted to make one such thing because they found the geometry/crafts of it interesting and entertaining.
Strictly speaking, it doesn’t. But this isn’t a “one of” thing, numerous examples of them have been found throughout Europe. It’s been awhile since I’ve read about them, but in some instances, they’ve been found in situations that imply they had some kind of special value or significance to their owners.
And at the end of the day “use” is pretty open ended. Even if they were considered art pieces, made while training to build other things, some unknown religious decoration, or just a status symbol – that’s all still a use.
I find the antikythera mechanism much more baffling!!
Why is it baffling? We already know what it does. If anything it should be a source of admiration of the skill needed to design and build such a device. I can’t find it right now but someone took the time to rebuild one with only hand tools proving that it could be done accurately by hand and not some mysterious technology.
The only people wanting you to be baffled are the ones trying to clickbait you into visiting their site for views.
I actually wonder if this is a coin sorter to help count money of various sizes
Kids toys. Someone made a killing one Xmas.
The ancient Roman Furby
It’s obviously a strawberry planter.
DO NOT SOLVE THE PUZZLE
My completely uneducated guess would be some sort of test piece for new smiths. Or a Thneed.
This is my guess. Kinda like making a cube on a lathe is a test for machinists, and making a captive cube within a hollow cube is a more advanced version.
Oh is that why the fraudulent archaeology group I’m on started talking about this weird meme that seems to think that the Romans understood the concept of knitting and that these would be practical to manufacture for that task.
We’ve been having a good laugh about it, although it’s the typical “what do you scientists know about anything” story that way too many people believe.
So this leads me to another “might be” kind of answer.
I know that monkey fist and similar other knots to help casting a line to a dock or whatever als frequently have weights in them, the nubs and holes could help keep it from getting lost.
It’s a good theory, but they are found all over the place and not necessarily close to water.
Just spitballing on my part. I’m not sure what the context of the find is. I’d assume if it for knitting it’d be found near other tools for yarn craft. (distaffs, drop spindles, or whatever they used. and the, uh, yarns.)
I’d assume if it was for tent poles, it’d be found stored near tents, Similarly, if it was for casting lines… it’d be near ropes- though rope would have needed to be tossed for a variety of tasks beyond purely naval interests.
another potential is as some sort of lampshade for a candle/oil lamp. Though that’d probably be pretty self-evident, with soot and all.
A candle holder has been one of the possibilities suggested because a couple of them were found with wax inside, but some of them don’t have any holes at all. They aren’t all uniform in size, some have holes, some don’t. Some have knobs, some don’t. The only thing they all seem to have in common is that they’re dodecahedrons.
well, that complicates things.
Are we sure they’re just not messing with us?
That’s my other guess. It was an ancient plot to confound future archaeologists.
“I call it: the Roommates”
4th century welding test
Thanks. I was about to embarrass myself 😅
Just so anyone else doesn’t- the Romans didn’t know how to knit (it originated around the 11th or 12th century in the Middle East): https://motherknitter.com/history-of-knitting/
That link mentions that finger knitting was practically prehistoric. Are we confident that there was not some rudimentary form of knitting being practiced?
There are a great many Roman fabric samples from dry areas like Egypt, along with stone carvings of people making Roman textiles and writings about Roman textile-making and none of it suggests they understood the concept of knitting.
More to the point, these objects would be less practical than a knitting frame anyway.
And it doesn’t answer all questions about the object. Why is the object polyhedral if you only use one side to do the knitting. If it’s a mundane item, why did they make it stupidly complex when a simpler shape would do. It also ignores why the wholes are different sizes when the size of the holes doesn’t affect the knitting.
Are you sure the hole size doesn’t affect the finger size? It would seem to change the stitch size. If so, having one object that could make different finger and thumb sleeves might be useful, and the shape makes it easy to hold and find.
Or maybe it’s for measuring how much spaghetti to put in the pot!
The hole isn’t used in the process of knitting with these things, just the knobs on the corners.
As someone with a BA in Archaeology, the idea that the Romans didn’t understand the concept of knitting, is the dumbest thing I’ll read today.
FFS, they weren’t cave men…
No. Obviously they were building continent sized roads and aquifers and libraries completely butt naked
Hmm. Yeah, it seems like it’d come before weaving.
googles
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_knitting
Knitting is a technique of producing fabric from a strand of yarn or wool. Unlike weaving, knitting does not require a loom or other large equipment, making it a valuable technique for nomadic and non-agrarian peoples.
It does say that the oldest known stuff was from 11th century Egypt, but I assume that that’s because it’s a cloth artifact, not metal, ceramic, or stone, so less survives.
The oldest knitted artifacts are socks from Egypt, dating from the 11th century.[2] They are a very fine gauge, done with complex colourwork and some have a short row heel, which necessitates the purl stitch. These complexities suggest that knitting is even older than the archeological record can prove.[3]
Ugh I hate this kind of folk knowledge circlejerking
If it was done with prior knowledge of Roman textile making (i.e. the Romans actually did know how to knit), it would be an okay archaeological experiment, and experimental archaeology is a valid form of archaeology.
But this was not that. This was some lady who knew how to knit, saw one and said, “that could be used to knit gloves.”
And the knitters who are part of the group have chimed in and let us know that it is far less practical than a knitting frame anyway.
Why wouldn’t Romans know how to knit? Did they not have sheep?
They didn’t know about it because it hadn’t been invented yet. Their textiles were mainly produced through weaving. We have plenty of Roman textile samples to know how they made them.
Hmmm, interesting. I always assumed knitting was about as old as sheep shearing.
