wiki mentions that 116 of those have been found …(so a rather small number for a rather significant part of europe)
The fact that we haven’t found some of those in the Eastern Empire and North Africa does not mean that there weren’t any … we might just not have found them (yet)
well, what this movie taught us is that underwear was not a “thing” back then …
116 intact finds of a single kind of (non-coin) metal artifact is in fact a very high number. I mean, how many actual gladii do you think we’ve found? And yet every legionary had one.
We would expect a bit more of a spread, though, especially because metal preservation is actually better in the climates of the provinces in Asia and Africa.
I mean, sure, Roman Judea is probably the world’s most unstudied time and place, archaeologically-speaking … /s
Any method that didn’t require a bronze object could very well leave nothing behind. Especially since we don’t know what the methods is for - it could well have left traces that we just don’t recognise as such.
Artifacts to work with textiles are some of the most common finds we have (no surprise, considering that textile processing was the single biggest labour premodern humans engaged in). So if it was for spinning or weaving, we would have found something even if it was wooden or bone. Remember, the Asian and African provinces have much better preservation conditions.
The same would go for arrow sizing or coin measuring or any of the other “tool” alternatives - they all are proposing some sort of apparatus-style use, so the alternative would also be some sort of apparatus.
There’s nothing scientific about this argument from absence. It’s basically Russel’s Amphora.
The burden is on those proposing such a function to point out why it doesn’t occur Empire-wide - that means presenting the superior method they’re alluding to.
Gladii were made of iron, which will rust away. The same for more recent swords, that is from the Middle Ages. Very few of them survive.
Bronze corrodes too. I think recycling accounts for as much of the gap as corrosion does. And gladii seemed to often have copper alloy fittings, in any case, so not just iron.
But my actual point stands - 116 is not a small number of any particular intricate manufactured artefact, in an archaeological context.
Not nearly as fast as iron. Otherwise we wouldn’t have so many Roman coins, or for that matter, the bronze dodecahedrons.
Personally, I think the dodecahedrons are part of some fad that died out before reaching the rest of the Empire. Perhaps a game piece or some kind of decoration.
True, but then we’d find more sword fittings.
Also, coins are hoarded in ways that swords aren’t, which accounts for a lot of their numbers.
My gut feeling is some kind of mystery cultic thing.
It’s an appealing image, but knitting had not yet been invented.
Well, clearly the things had some function, or they wouldn’t have been made in the first place. And no matter what the function was, you still need to explain why they weren’t used all over the Empire.
It was a little joke based on DrDeth’s post.
The problem with that is they are different sizes to each other. Gauges by definition would have to be standardised.
I incline to the cult/mystic explanation myself, that accords more with the biased distribution. Soldiers in the west would be more likely to be drawn from local Germanic peoples for instance.
I also like the idea in wiki 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).
But then why the geographic distribution?
unless - of course - it is ART
Gladiator Master: “Right, the draco is coming at you, Septimus, and is about to breathe fire.”
Septimus: “I’m going to make a saving throw!”
[Septimus rolls bronze dodecahedron}
Gladiator Master: “What did you get?”
Septimus: “Undecim!”
Gladiator Master: “I have bad news, Septimus…”
Septimus: “I hate this game! I wish my brother had never brought it back from Britannia!”
If he didn’t save by rolling an 11, he was pretty much toast anyway.
I was assuming draconis aurei antiqui.
Maybe they were some sort of fastener. That held a cloak together, for instance.
They range in size from 4 to 11 centimetres, so I don’t think so.
By “such a function” I meant the various tool suggestions.
This is why I feel a cultic explanation or the fad one of @dtilque are better than a utilitarian one. Some mystery cults were regional, for instance.
Whereas when the Romans adopted a technology, they soon spread it Empire-wide - both the lorica hamata and gladius were Celtic in origin, but adopted and adapted by the legions and later found Empire-wide. Or look how there were periods when North African-style amphorae dominated globally, and then later, Gazan-produced ones did.
Only using a utilitarian tech regionally just doesn’t scan as very Roman to me.
Two-needle knitting as we know it today is a later invention, but a kind of single-needle “knitting” called nålebinding is prehistoric in origin, and was certainly used in the Roman Empire.
Yes, socks with sandals does make you look older than you think. 
Note that we have these Egyptian finds because of the good preservation conditions for textiles there. We don’t have conclusive finds for elsewhere, but we do find the same bone needles throughout the Empire. The Romans also used stitched woolen socks, and also used the sprang technique which also produces a stretchy fabric ,similar to knitting, so we can’t be certain what kind the stylish Vindolanda legionary was requesting. But I like to think, colourful stripy “knitted” ones, given where he was.
Then they’d have more wear marks (they generally don’t), and be more likely to be found in contexts with cloaks, not money and valuables. And how exactly would they work as fasteners?