A Roman Glass Gaming Die
christies.com
christies.com
Description: "A number of polyhedra made in various materials are known from the Roman world. They may have been used in conjunction with an oracle inscribed on a pillar set up in a public place. The polyhedron was thrown in order to choose a letter at random. One consulted the inscription to find the matching letter and read the oracle's response. There would be twenty oracular messages, each beginning with a letter of the alphabet that corresponded to one side of the dice."
Glass would have been expensive for a mere gambling device, whereas bone dice were cheap.
It's a Platonic solid found in Egypt, the epicenter of Neoplatonism.
And the symbols on the sides are astrological.
It might have been just an object of contemplation. Like, you can see how all of the heavenly bodies fit snugly into a perfect geometric figure and just wonder at it.
If there's any rhyme or reason to how the symbols are arrayed on the sides, it could have been a mnemonic or instructional device for casting horoscopes.
And, while it's probably too opaque to have been used for scrying, there's that too.
(Can take this to PM if you prefer).
Even mundane games played in taverns were magically bound to your luck and well-being. More sophisticated (board) games were outright sacred and were seen as a way to communicate with gods.
Hidden bonus: +1 on any roll
Allow me to summarize the internet commentary since then:
Hur hur, D&D.
Repost.
Does anybody know what symbols appear on the other 19 faces of this die?
Also, has anybody run a Chi-Square test for determining the fairness of this die??? I wouldn't pay $17,925 for a loaded die.
I think the ethics of trading such goods (at high prices) are bit questionable. It is a piece of local cultural heritage which more than likely was acquired in a more or less exploitative way.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/this-1600-year-old-gob...
http://sohcahtoa.org.uk/pages/rolling-two-dice-experiment.ht...
This is a slightly conservative correction and Wikipedia agrees that no correction is required in this case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearson%27s_chi-squared_test#P...