Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

xratedcheese t1_itp212v wrote

> You are probably right that a lot of people (not necessarily historians) are overly keen to identify something as a ritual item

If it looks like a dildo, it's a dildo. There's no need to concoct an elaborate non-dildo theory to explain the existence of a dildo. (Though they may indeed have used their dildos in rituals.)

2

snapmyhands t1_itp6wtv wrote

I don't know enough about Priapic cults to confirm or deny your last statement!

But yeah, not every artefact is loaded with meaning. Maybe someone just wanted to make a funny little trinket with a lump of clay or got bored and started whittling away at a piece of wood.

Also related: I follow a few mudlarkers/scavengers on Instagram and they often talk of enthusiastic amateurs finding 'neolithic arrowheads' which are in fact just chipped pieces of obsidian.

1