# Roman dodecahedron - what do you think it was for? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [June 18, 2011, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945 "2011-06-18T17:14:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![j666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/9de0a6/32.png) [@j666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/j666)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2011, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/61 "2011-06-23T02:52:58Z")
> [@Count\_Blucher](#): > > My snark aside, lets go with this, but not for simple dinner table spaghetti. What if it could have been used as a quick hand-held tool to measure and ensure the uniformity of a merchants bundle of some stalked commodity like wheat or some such? It could be to determine actual vs estimated shipping quantities on the fly or even give a rough idea fo how much tax to charge. Or for estimate of measure by volume rather than weight. There has to be some standardization of price in a market. > [@Mangetout](#): > > Coin clipping was a big problem in the time of the Roman Empire - could these be coin gauges? We need to know how uniform the holes are; it’s unlikely all the recovered pieces would be for different types of coins just be coincidence. > [@Mangetout](#): > > They do to me - not necessarily _weak_, but probably brittle and susceptible to snapping off if the item was dropped or thrown. > > I’m seriously going to make one of these and have a play. I have a very strong conviction that I will be able to divine the purpose of these by handling one. Please do. I’m not a metalurgist, so I just don’t know that much about bronze. I do know that ‘stone’ is not a very clear description. If they are marble, the knobs might be fragile, but not if they are granite or soapstone. They do look a lot like jacks, too, don’t they? ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2011, 8:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/62 "2011-06-23T08:11:57Z")
> [@j66](#): > > Please do. I’m not a metalurgist, so I just don’t know that much about bronze. The material probably isn’t the issue - Bronze can be forged, in which case it’s pretty strong, but these pieces look cast - probably lost wax method, which will be brittle. I’m not a metallurgist either, but I do know from experience that cast metal objects are prone to breakage when dropped or thrown, especially on thin or protruding parts. > [@](#): > > I do know that ‘stone’ is not a very clear description. If they are marble, the knobs might be fragile, but not if they are granite or soapstone. I’m not sure I’ve even seen a picture of one of the stone examples, but if they’re just a stone-carved version of the metal ones, the knobs would be very vulnerable to breaking off even if the material is granite - > [@](#): > > They do look a lot like jacks, too, don’t they? They do, but the knobs also look a great deal like ball feet you’d find on a cauldron or other item of small metalware. ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2011, 1:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/63 "2011-06-23T13:01:50Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > probably lost wax method Which could explain the presence of wax in one of them - first out of the cast. Some more thoughts: If they were candle holders, there’d be more than one with wax in. The dodecahedron is prone to roll a bit, but the surfaces are flat. I’d speculate that if they were for steadying it, the little knobs were either put there after some former design proved to be too “rolly”. But since no earlier versions are extant despite their widespread distribution, I’d argue that the knobs were integral to the design from the very beginning. Perhaps, rather than to stop them rolling, the knobs are to raise the flat face of the object from the surface on which it’s resting? Finally, I think the holes may be a red herring. An image search on “roman dodecahedron” reveals [this icosahedron](http://pbmo.wordpress.com/2010/10/09/roman-dodecahedron/) which has a very similar design, but the holes are tiny and clearly only ornamental. (No idea as to the validity or provenance of the image, however.) ---
**Author:** ![Billerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/c2a13f/32.png) [@Billerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Billerius)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2011, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/64 "2011-06-23T13:07:47Z")
The coin sizer theory does fit with the huge currency problems the empire was facing at the time dodos were around. Easily tested theory. We should see lots of coins of the time that precisely match the holes. But wouldn’t weight be a better measure of clipping? Also coin measuring doesn’t account for the shape or the knobs which are there in all sizes and designs. Looking at google images only the better crafted objects had the variable hole sizes. ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2011, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/65 "2011-06-23T13:09:58Z")
Here’s one found in England. [Chunky knobs](http://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/museumonlinecatalogue/ItemDetail.aspx?ID=20357). ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2011, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/66 "2011-06-23T14:42:48Z")
The isocahedron looks like a pomander or incense burner to me. Although it shares some features, I’m not convinced it’s the same category of object. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2011, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/67 "2011-06-23T15:37:46Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > Coin clipping was a big problem in the time of the Roman Empire - could these be coin gauges? > [@Billerius](#): > > The coin sizer theory does fit with the huge currency problems the empire was facing at the time dodos were around. The problem with the coin sizer theory is that [Roman coins of the dodecahedron period were not uniformly round](http://www.romancoins.info/Adoptivkaiser.html#Commodus), being hand stamped with crude dies. Some can only loosely be called even round. It is pointless to create a tool to measure coins that are so rarely uniform. ---
**Author:** ![Bad\_News\_Baboon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/5fc32e/32.png) [@Bad\_News\_Baboon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bad_News_Baboon)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2011, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/68 "2011-06-23T15:54:04Z")
Having cast metal via the lost wax technique, I can assure you no wax could survive the molten bronze being poured into the cast. The precision and the fact that the seem to be found individually spread throught northern Europe suggests they are a tool. Casting can be time consuming to finish as they are. To me they would have to be something special that requires precision. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2011, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/69 "2011-06-23T17:00:12Z")
> [@Bad\_News\_Baboon](#): > > Having cast metal via the lost wax technique, I can assure you no wax could survive the molten bronze being poured into the cast. Agreed. I’ve had bits of wax survive pewter casting but bronze is a lot hotter when poured. ---
**Author:** ![Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b38774/32.png) [@Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Attack_from_the_3rd_dimension)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2011, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/70 "2011-06-23T22:35:08Z")
> [@jjimm](#): > > Here’s one found in England. [Chunky knobs](http://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/museumonlinecatalogue/ItemDetail.aspx?ID=20357). Interesting. That one is much more knobby than holey, by which I mean the knobs are much more prominent than in the other examples. ---
**Author:** ![T.Slothrop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3e96dc/32.png) [@T.Slothrop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/T.Slothrop)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2011, 8:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/71 "2011-06-24T08:22:57Z")
To the OP: Interesting. I was not even aware of these things. Thanks for the post. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2011, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/72 "2011-06-24T12:43:02Z")
Universal Eggcup. ---
**Author:** ![BMalion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e274bd/32.png) [@BMalion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BMalion)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2011, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/73 "2011-06-24T14:12:22Z")
Something involving tachyons, I just know it. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2011, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/74 "2011-06-24T14:18:24Z")
> [@BMalion](#): > > Something involving tachyons, I just know it. A flux capacitor? ---
**Author:** ![ZenBeam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/3ab097/32.png) [@ZenBeam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZenBeam)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2011, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/75 "2011-06-24T22:11:44Z")
> [@Bad\_News\_Baboon](#): > > Having cast metal via the lost wax technique, I can assure you no wax could survive the molten bronze being poured into the cast. > [@Mangetout](#): > > Agreed. I’ve had bits of wax survive pewter casting but bronze is a lot hotter when poured. Wax could have been spilled into a completed dodecahedron, when they were working on other castings. Regardless, them being candle holders isn’t the only way wax could be in one, and I agree with **jjimm** that if they _were_ candle holders, more than one would have wax in it. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2011, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/76 "2011-06-24T22:45:36Z")
> [@ZenBeam](#): > > Regardless, them being candle holders isn’t the only way wax could be in one, and I agree with **jjimm** that if they _were_ candle holders, more than one would have wax in it. Or, someone needed something to hold a candle, and re-purposed a dodecahedron. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2011, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/77 "2011-06-24T23:55:49Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Or, someone needed something to hold a candle, and re-purposed a dodecahedron. Clytemnestra! Have you been playing with Daddy’s dodecahedron again?!?! ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2011, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/78 "2011-06-25T00:04:11Z")
> [@carnivorousplant](#): > > Clytemnestra! Have you been playing with Daddy’s dodecahedron again?!?! you’ve been cracking me up lately. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2011, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/79 "2011-06-25T00:34:54Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > you’ve been cracking me up lately. 🙂 I also do Bar Mitzvahs and children’s parties. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![T.Slothrop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3e96dc/32.png) [@T.Slothrop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/T.Slothrop)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2011, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945/80 "2011-06-25T06:03:37Z")
thimbles for masochists. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/roman-dodecahedron-what-do-you-think-it-was-for/585945.md?page=5)