Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The mysterious dodecahedrons of the Roman Empire

atlasobscura.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 103 posts

Re: The mysterious dodecahedrons of the Roman Empire

#91

Post by INTPenis »

akiselev wrote: post #52
INTPenis wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the major argument against this theory is the map, as the article states. Most of the theories for their use are actually invalid simply by looking at the map of finds. Fishing, toys, music, games, things that were global in the roman empire. What the map shows is that it was used in the colder parts of the empire.

That map looks exactly what I would expect it to look like if it was passed on from master to apprentice metalworker as part of a graduating project. These wouldn't have been products sold to customers and traded, they would have been symbols that the individuals had achieved mastery within a specific lineage of artisans restricted to that region. Almost all knowledge was communicated via oral means because scribes w…

Ok but that means there would be more such objects, for every level before mastery right?

And also such objects would be much more rare. Imagine all the objects that have been found and melted down during the last 2000 years. For us to have found over 100 of these so far is already an indication that it was a lot more common than an apprentice piece.

Re: The mysterious dodecahedrons of the Roman Empire

#92

Post by akiselev »

INTPenis wrote: post #91
akiselev wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That map looks exactly what I would expect it to look like if it was passed on from master to apprentice metalworker as part of a graduating project. These wouldn't have been products sold to customers and traded, they would have been symbols that the individuals had achieved mastery within a specific lineage of artisans restricted to that region. Almost all knowledge was communicated via oral means because scribes w…

Ok but that means there would be more such objects, for every level before mastery right? And also such objects would be much more rare. Imagine all the objects that have been found and melted down during the last 2000 years. For us to have found over 100 of these so far is already an indication that it was a lot more common than an apprentice piece.

> Ok but that means there would be more such objects, for every level before mastery right?

What levels of mastery? Roman historians didn't write much about the ins and outs of their metalworking industry so we don't know how intricate the process was but apprentices graduating is rather universal (their teachers get tired of them or die eventually, after all). Besides, just because it's an "apprentice piece" doesn't mean that it's made by an amateur, but by a skilled artisan to prove they're ready to go out on their own.

> And also such objects would be much more rare. Imagine all the objects that have been found and melted down during the last 2000 years. For us to have found over 100 of these so far is already an indication that it was a lot more common than an apprentice piece.

Finding only a hundred of these makes them extremely rare. Check out Wikipedia's non-exhaustive list of museum collections of ancient Roman and Greek artifacts [1]. The collections number in the tens of thousands of objects each and that's just the stuff a few collections felt was worth keeping - there is tons more Roman artifacts on the antiquities market and huge troves are still discovered on a regular basis [2][3].

From [3]:

> This guy even got his grubby hands on a Roman dodecahedron, an extremely rare artifact (only 100 are known to exist) whose purpose remains an archaeological mystery to this day. A total of 13,246 artifacts were seized in the raid on his home and from several safety deposit boxes he rented in Lorraine.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_museums_of_Greek_and_R...

[2] https://www.ksl.com/article/24751877/10k-roman-artifacts-fou...

[3] https://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/60269

Re: The mysterious dodecahedrons of the Roman Empire

#93

Post by HelloNurse »

irrational wrote: post #78
ftxbro wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

to test the skill of a stonesmith

LOL

Not unreasonable; an exact dodecahedral shape is equally challenging to construct geometrically in any material, and probably more difficult to build in stone or wood than in wax or clay. Artisans and amateurs of different specialties might have emulated each other.

Re: The mysterious dodecahedrons of the Roman Empire

#94

Post by Gordonjcp »

George83728 wrote: post #34
Gordonjcp wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knitting predates the Roman empire by a comfortable margin.

Do you have any evidence for that? Note that knitting is a specific thing, we're not talking about all woven textiles generally.

The Romans were buying knitted and spun textiles from the north-west of Scotland before they even set foot in the south of England. It's pretty well-documented.

Re: The mysterious dodecahedrons of the Roman Empire

#95

Post by DoctorOetker »

"A device for detecting counterfeit coins."

This one sounds most plausible to me, given some were discovered with coin hoards.

In the past coins used to have simple round edges. People would scrape (with say a knife or other hard tool) metal from coins slightly reducing their diameter imperceptibly.

This tool could be used both by scrapers and verifiers. After a daytime trading job a scraper might sort his coins by type, and do the pass vs no-pass test. Scraping ones that were slightly larger than average, but not those already scraped by others.

A verifier that doesn't scrape, but wants to avoid incurring loss due to scrapers might use the tool during trading and refuse coins that fall through, or he might more discreetly sort the revenue after work, and sort into coins to keep, and coins to return as change.

I don't know if Isaac Newton was the first to introduce the slotted edges to deter scraping, but he did locally introduce it when he was appointed head of the Royal Mint.

Re: The mysterious dodecahedrons of the Roman Empire

#96

Post by xtiansimon »

INTPenis wrote: post #91
akiselev wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That map looks exactly what I would expect it to look like if it was passed on from master to apprentice metalworker as part of a graduating project. These wouldn't have been products sold to customers and traded, they would have been symbols that the individuals had achieved mastery within a specific lineage of artisans restricted to that region. Almost all knowledge was communicated via oral means because scribes w…

Ok but that means there would be more such objects, for every level before mastery right? And also such objects would be much more rare. Imagine all the objects that have been found and melted down during the last 2000 years. For us to have found over 100 of these so far is already an indication that it was a lot more common than an apprentice piece.

“Ok but that means there would be more such objects, for every level before mastery right?”

If bronze is expensive, then poor quality versions could simply be melted down to raw material.

I like this idea. And I struggle to imagine the scenario, because it seems like it would also have social aspects which we can’t know without written testimony.

If the metal is expensive, how is to valued compared to other goods? In the modern world we have tons of stuff, but to what degree is this the same in the ancient Roman world? Who pays it’s cost? If you’re an apprentice could you afford to keep it—especially if you’re not very good (haha).

Re: The mysterious dodecahedrons of the Roman Empire

#97

Post by DoctorOetker »

INTPenis wrote: post #44
akiselev wrote: post #15

The article fails to mention a major hypothesis that immediately came to mind when I saw the object. Wikipedia agrees [1]: > It has also been suggested that they might have been an object to test the skill of a metalsmith, perhaps as part of a portfolio to demonstrate their capabilities to customers or as a way to qualify for a certain status in a collegium (guild). This speculation is based on the historic cost of b…

I think the major argument against this theory is the map, as the article states. Most of the theories for their use are actually invalid simply by looking at the map of finds. Fishing, toys, music, games, things that were global in the roman empire. What the map shows is that it was used in the colder parts of the empire.

There may be more arguments besides the map.

Each object has 12 sides, so 12 holes. For hundreds of exemplars thats thousands of holes. The holes are described as having different sizes on the same dodecahedron. For being an object of mystery, one would assume a catalog of features to have been constructed, but I am not aware of any.

I believe they were used to test coin sizes (could be used by both scrapers and verifiers), see my comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35946841

Such a hypothesis should be testable: catalog the hundreds of dodecahedra, one row per item, and 12 columns for the radii.

Collect all occurring thousands of radii and sort, and observe density peaks and compare age of item and coins of era with radii.

Re: The mysterious dodecahedrons of the Roman Empire

#98

Post by George83728 »

Gordonjcp wrote: post #94
George83728 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any evidence for that? Note that knitting is a specific thing, we're not talking about all woven textiles generally.

The Romans were buying knitted and spun textiles from the north-west of Scotland before they even set foot in the south of England. It's pretty well-documented.

Where is that documented?

Re: The mysterious dodecahedrons of the Roman Empire

#99

Post by CommitSyn »

Hammerhead12321 wrote: post #37

It’s a chandelier/candle holder or heating device, is it not? Wax was even found on one. The different size holes accommodate different candle sizes. They were made with a copper alloy and thus conduct heat efficiently. That also aligns with the reasoning used to justify the gloves theory (i.e. they were primarily found in colder climates).

When a type of object is ubiquitous enough and has the ability to serve multiple purposes, even those it wasn't specifically designed for, it will inevitability be used for those purposes.

Re: The mysterious dodecahedrons of the Roman Empire

#100

Post by INTPenis »

akiselev wrote: post #92
INTPenis wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok but that means there would be more such objects, for every level before mastery right? And also such objects would be much more rare. Imagine all the objects that have been found and melted down during the last 2000 years. For us to have found over 100 of these so far is already an indication that it was a lot more common than an apprentice piece.

> Ok but that means there would be more such objects, for every level before mastery right? What levels of mastery? Roman historians didn't write much about the ins and outs of their metalworking industry so we don't know how intricate the process was but apprentices graduating is rather universal (their teachers get tired of them or die eventually, after all). Besides, just because it's an "apprentice piece" doesn't…

But you can't really compare any artifact with a metal object, metal was valuable and often melted down. The ones we know about were the ones not found by battlefield scavengers and other opportunists. Even gravediggers would take metal objects and melt them down.
Post reply on HN