Casual Conversation

3363 readers

311 users here now

Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.

RULES

Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling.
Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible.
Avoid controversial topics (e.g. politics or societal debates).
Stay calm: Don’t post angry or to vent or complain. We are a place where everyone can forget about their everyday or not so everyday worries for a moment. Venting, complaining, or posting from a place of anger or resentment doesn't fit the atmosphere we try to foster at all. Feel free to post those on [email protected]
Keep it clean and SFW
No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc.

Casual conversation communities:

Related discussion-focused communities

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

If there was a commonly used item today that was going to be our equivalent to the Roman dodecahedron, what item do you most speculate it would be? (lemm.ee)

submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

24 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The Roman dodecahedron is an item that has turned up in a lot of sites where people do archaeology. While most items, given time, have their purpose easily or at least approximately deduced by researchers, the Roman dodecahedron's purpose is largely baffling to even the most studied of archaeologists, who have no idea on where to start with it. This in turn would probably baffle the Romans, who would have seen it as a common household item, no different from a spoon or a comb.

Suppose a few thousand years from now, archaeologists were excavating our remains and had varying degrees of success deducing what different things were for. If you had to guess what common household item of ours would stump them the most, what item would you guess it would be?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Another running theory is knitting.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I think it's unlikely to be a knitting tool, as you could achieve the same with a simpler tool.

For example, I've seen people saying it's for wool gloves. But a bar with five holes and some knobs would do the trick, no need for an intricate form like a dodeca.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Respectfully, do you knit?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

I don't knit. I'm saying this based on multiple factors:

1. Videos of people who knit trying to use a dodecahedron. Like this one or this one. They use the holes, they use the knobs, but the core shape of the tool itself is practically irrelevant, and if anything it gets in the way. Also note the end result, it's way crappier than a good knitter could do by hand. (I might not knit but I do see people knitting all the time.)

2. The existence of a similar icosahedron. It could be used just fine for cyphers, but not for knitting - note how the holes are too small. (Also, you wouldn't need so many faces.)

3. The Romans assigned manual labour - like knitting - to slaves. And slaves aren't exactly the sort of person a Roman would waste precious bronze with, specially not for a tool with an excessively specific purpose, like this one.

4. Wool production in Rome was mostly around Gallia Cisalpina:

And yet those dodecahedra were mostly found around Germania, Belgica, Lugdunensis, some even in Britannia:

If anything the distribution hints more something military.