• pulsey@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      11 months ago

      History Channel: Did they use that to communicate with Ancient Aliens? We might never know the full truth!

  • Darkard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    ·
    11 months ago

    The holes are all slightly different sizes. It’s for measuring spaghetti servings

  • Signtist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    11 months ago

    I’m just waiting for some guy to come forward and explain that he’s been locating dig sites ahead of archeologists for years and planting these around just to fuck with them.

    • Maalus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      11 months ago

      No need, it’s been solved basically. You knit gloves with them. Or rather the fingers. They are only found in colder climates / up north. There are videos of people using replicas of them to knit gloves.

      • Nawor3565
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        56
        ·
        11 months ago

        There’s not a scientific consensus on that. It’s a good theory, but stating it as an accepted fact is inaccurate.

        • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          38
          ·
          11 months ago

          “It’s been solved basically

          Almost always translates to “This is the theory I like most so it’s the answer I’ll run with.”

        • friendofafriendofafriend@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          I feel like the point isn’t that it MUST have been used for knitting (even if it could have been), but that we should be open to more possibilities before defaulting to a religious explanation.

    • samus12345@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Be careful, though, they sometimes have mindflayers inside them who want to have sex with you.

  • woodytrombone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    11 months ago

    This is a resonator. You put one or more fossils inside it to alch gear with a guaranteed set of affixes.

  • Stalinwolf@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I saw someone using one of these to weave or knit or something, and it seemed to me a pretty good explanation.

    Edit: If it’s truly such a mystery, is it at all possible these only exist because they looked interesting? Just a knick-knack for your shelf?

    “Did you see those things Caius Cosades is making down at the den? Not much you can with them, but they’re neat.”

    It’s not as though we don’t make pointless and artistic things today.

    • KISSmyOS@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      11 months ago

      Except those objects were found in coin hordes and the graves of rich aristocrats, and must have been too valuable to be a simple knitting tool.
      And for some reason, this style of knitting would have then disappeared until it was reinvented the 16th century.

    • KISSmyOS@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      If it’s truly such a mystery, is it at all possible these only exist because they looked interesting? Just a knick-knack for your shelf?

      It’s one of the most convincing theories, but also a bit unsatisfying. The question then becomes, why they were made in relatiely large numbers (so that hundreds could be found) with that very specific shape in different parts of the empire.

    • KISSmyOS@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      11 months ago

      A knitting helper the size of a grapefruit that would have cost more than what a shepherd earned in a lifetime.

      • Ross_audio@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        11 months ago

        My argument against this is they’re all 12 sided. That’s like finding out knitting needles were all the same length and shape.

        Something used for a task like that will have variations in design.

        These things are oddly specific. The lack of evolution leads away from it being an actually designed and optimal tool.

        It’s definitely designed to look good first. If it does anything while looking good that’s a mystery so far.

        • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          11 months ago

          Given that we are talking about roman times, metal was expensive, and working metal in such a way even more so.

          It could also be that similiar tools in cheaper were made out of wood and simply rottet away since then.

          • Ross_audio@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            Those stone tools are surprisingly effective and efficient.

            The innovation block to improve was access to bronze.

            That’s different than a complex shape requiring rare resources and skills to produce appearing out of nowhere and disappearing again.

            If people start using that shape for knitting I’ll start to believe it. But all I’ve seen is that it can be used for knitting, not that it’s even close to the best shape for it.

            I’ll bet a knitter could learn to use one of those and improve on the design almost immediately, creating a better tool.

            • Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              Sure, maybe the only thing preventing any innovation was access to a new material, tho I strongly doubt that for the same reasons many paleontologists doubt it - namely that they frequently weren’t even used, the stone flakes chipped off them were used instead, and that near the end of the period they can be found, there were actually some impactful changes to the design, before revolutionary new materials were found. But likewise in Roman times they were limited (both the skill to make it and decent enough quality material to actually work with)

              Only a few people in an area would be metal workers skilled enough to do something like this (and who knows, maybe the dumb thing is an apprentice training item, not actually serving any purpose), and they likely wouldn’t be the ones using it if it is for knitting. So perhaps until the design evolved into something so different we don’t recognize them as iterations, the same one was just used because the people doing the metal work weren’t the people using the tool, and didn’t want to have to design a workflow for something new for marginal increases in usefulness. Perhaps it appearing out of nowhere was also an innovation, lasted until the replacement of an entirely different design caught on or something, and abruptly died out because it wasn’t very good.

              Frankly I don’t have a dog in this one, and I don’t think it’s actually a knitting implement, I’m just saying a long time period without design change doesn’t necessarily mean anything.

              • Ross_audio@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                11 months ago

                My point is this isn’t a long period without design change though. Not compared to the axes.

                Innovation has periods of change and equilibriums.

                It’s an object around for a short period of time, then forgotten about.

                If it was a new innovation it would be when changes were constant, until the design settled into equilibrium.

                Essentially if it were a tool, there would also be prototypes and variations. Then the winning design. Not a winning design with no changes.

                • Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  The prototypes (Or what commoners would use) may not have been metal, since metalwork was probably rather pricy, (carved wood or unfired clay perhaps) and decayed over time. Only the “winning” design was made metal, until replaced. :)

                  Idk, really just spitballing, like I said I don’t think that’s actually what it’s for. I find it more likely to be an apprentice test object, kept as a status symbol. But we’ll probably never actually know.

                  This little blurb from the article is why I think it’s a training object

                  Parker says the piece was cast in “sticky,” leaden metal—making it difficult to mold—and was fragile in texture.

                  “A huge amount of time, energy and skill was taken to create our dodecahedron, so it was not used for mundane purposes,” writes the group, adding: “They are not of a standard size, so will not be measuring devices. They don’t show signs of wear, so they are not a tool.”

    • rowrowrowyourboat@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      “A huge amount of time, energy and skill was taken to create our dodecahedron, so it was not used for mundane purposes,” writes the group, adding: “They are not of a standard size, so will not be measuring devices. They don’t show signs of wear, so they are not a tool.”

      Instead, the group agrees with experts who think dodecahedrons were used for ritualistic or religious purposes. As Smithsonian magazine wrote last year, researchers at Belgium’s Gallo-Roman Museum have hypothesized that Romans used the objects in magical rituals, which could explain dodecahedrons’ absence from historical records: With the Roman Empire’s eventual embrace of Christianity came laws forbidding magic. Practitioners would have had to keep their rituals—and related objects—a secret.

      “Roman society was full of superstition,” writes the Norton Disney group. “A potential link with local religious practice is our current working theory. More investigation is required, though.”

      • PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I’ve seen a video of one being used to weave metal wire for jewelry. It’s definitely plausible.

        But until someone unearths an ancient Roman user manual, all the people confidently asserting “it was for knitting gloves” should be a lesson about how people on the internet will present guesses as proof.

    • samus12345@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yeah, makes total sense that rich aristocrats would have common knitting tools buried with them with other valuables.

      • MrCookieRespect@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        If its expensive as hell, like the article says, it might have been a valued gift someone liked, man people get buried with a lot of stuff…

  • bedrooms@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Dildo. That’s my default hypothesis for anything unexplained.

    Example:

    • Who’s Satoshi’s father? – Dildo.
  • CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    11 months ago

    It’s clearly an ancient fidget toy. Those romans had a headstart on ADHD, how much knowledge has been lost /s