Another Roman dodecahedron has been unearthed in England

Post by karaterobot » Tue, Jan 23, 2024, 10:12 PM UTC

yendor wrote: post #79

INTPenis wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That just doesn't work for me for two reasons, they would have been recycled almost immediately as all metals were relatively precious, and why don't we find as many other training pieces? And of course it goes without saying that they've appeared made out of non-metal materials.

They wouldn't be recycled if they were also used as a credential for quality of work. If you're a metal worker who wants to migrate to a new town, and wants to work at my forge, how do I know you can do quality work? Sure, these could be stolen but I'm assuming a master metal worker knows the right questions to ask to verify it's legitimate.

Post by pclmulqdq » Tue, Jan 23, 2024, 10:20 PM UTC

yetanotherloser wrote: post #204

mrob wrote: post #10

I like the theory that it's an examination piece to qualify as a master metalworker. Casting a flawless dodecahedron could have been a way to demonstrate your skill. The shape is somewhat arbitrary: anything that's both difficult to cast and easy to examine for quality would work, but once people started making dodecahedrons that's what people expected and it became a kind of standard.

I like that theory too and offer a followon explanation: to make a dodecahedron you must make an accurate regular pentagon and this is not trivial with ancient geometric methods, you need to have learned a thing or two to get there. This makes it a better test than, say, an icosahedron. But we do know that the Roman empire wasn't completely unfamiliar with icosahedral dice, probably for a magical or divinatory purpos…

Post by arp242 » Tue, Jan 23, 2024, 10:34 PM UTC

nemo wrote: post #87

mrob wrote: post #10

I like the theory that it's an examination piece to qualify as a master metalworker. Casting a flawless dodecahedron could have been a way to demonstrate your skill. The shape is somewhat arbitrary: anything that's both difficult to cast and easy to examine for quality would work, but once people started making dodecahedrons that's what people expected and it became a kind of standard.

One thing to keep in mind is the geographic distribution of these things. They're mostly found in the province of Gallia and Britain, and not in other regions. There'd be a lot of metalworkers in Rome and the surrounding cities in central and south Italy, but no artifacts like this have been found, and they've found > 100 of them now so the distribution is probably significant.

Post by ojo-rojo » Tue, Jan 23, 2024, 10:41 PM UTC

hiatus wrote: post #234

pinko wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Along these lines, if you haven't ever seen it, check out _Motel of the Mysteries_ by David Macaulay. (Yes, that David Macaulay!)

A Canticle For Leibowitz touches on a similar theme.

Post by throwup238 » Tue, Jan 23, 2024, 10:47 PM UTC

SantalBlush wrote: post #295

throwup238 wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As is tradition in archaeology.

It's the archaeologists saying, “Nobody knows for certain how the Romans used them,” and offering a variety of competing theories, while people on this thread are trying to finesse the facts to support the theory they like. So saying, "archaeologists are doing it" is demonstrably untrue here.