The Fitzwilliam Museum's page about this artefact: http://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/opac/search/cataloguedetail....

Tangent: I like the catalog display that you link to (aka, from the 'old version of their collections database') better than their new revised version http://webapps.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/explorer/index.php?oid=7...

The new version has more information available at a glance, but I like the larger text of the previous entry, and I like having the full images at the bottom of the previous entry. Not to mention the previous version has six images while the new entry only has four.

I didn't check to see how hard it was to actually find something in their old collections database, but I ended up having to snag the Accession Number from the old entry to actual get to a detailed view in the new collections database. For some reason, I could find the thumbnail view easily through several searches, but when I clicked any the thumbnail, it always took me to a different search results page with nothing but coins on it.

The 2 pictures which are not a part of the new collection look to be from a reproduction piece as the steel blade appears to be way to pretty for 2000 years old

FYI The blade is not made of steel, the iron age started 1200 BC and the rest of the body of the tool is made from silver. And for an encore, it could have been made of steel since steel has been produced for a very long time but the better bet would be for this to be iron from a meteorite which is high in nickel content and so already quite hard and oxidation proof.

I believe ZoZoBee was referring to the blade in the reproduction piece [1, 2]. I didn't see any information on the reproduction piece itself.

[1] http://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/opac/search/cataloguedetail.... [2] http://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/opac/search/cataloguedetail....

To bad it doesn't say where the knife was found and how it did go to the museum.

I imagine the person who owned this silver tool was pretty upset when they lost it (if they didn't perish along side it).

Something excavated in the '90s in the Mediterranean probably officially belongs to the country it was found in, as such it was probably smuggled. If the museum were to say how they got it and where it was found, the rightful owners might claim it…

Turns out pocketknives are the most lost thing in the world. Almost everybody loses them almost instantly. The kind with a lanyard last better - if you remember religiously to reattach them after using them.

But their handy, pocket-sized dense nature makes them ideal for slipping out of hand or pocket, or being left on a tree stump or post, or plunk! gone in any body of water.

I say leave it in your car or your bag.

The first rule of owning a pocket knife: You can't use it if you don't carry it.

In all seriousness, I've battled with this for quite a while and any scheme that involves not carrying your pocket knife on your person, leads to you not having it when you need it most.

Turns out you're making that up without any statistical proof what so ever, and if you're attaching a knife to a lanyard it is you yourself who becomes the tool

I read it as hyperbole, not a serious factual statement.

Cute. No statistics at all? I didn't know the Amazing Kreskin posted on HN! I yield to superior argument.

Well you kind of pulled that stat straight out of your back pocket

Again with the mentalist act. Clearly others know more about me than I do. Again, I submit to a superior intellect.

I thought Daily Mail was banned? If not it should be.

Care to comment on the actual article?

I was surprised to see the DailyFail on HN too.

shouldn't it be ancient "roman army knife" instead of "swiss army knife"?

Wonder if this will count as prior art and invalidate a bunch of multitool patents?

Modern multitools like this one are more than 20 years old, so I don't see how there could be active multitool patents this would invalidate. Unless they did something especially clever in their design that would be specially patented?

I've been trying to find a reference, but the story goes that Tim Leatherman and a friend created the first multi-tool that had a full-sized set of pliers on it. They patented it, then shopped the design around to the various knife companies (Gerber, etc), none of whom showed interest. So they started their own company, selling the original pocket survival tool through Cabella's mail-order catalog.

i forgot my /s

That may be true, we'd have to consult an attorney.

But what is undeniably true, is that whoever got the money from patented multi-tools since the collapse of the Roman Empire was a THEIF and a PIRATE. The original "IP" belongs to somebody else! And they deserve their money!

I call for an international inquiry from the WIPO to determine who actually invented the multi-tool. After that, it should be a simple matter to determine heirs, get today's multi-tool PIRATES to disgorage funds, and award that money to the legitimate IP owners.

> "Experts believe the spike may have been used by the Romans to extract meat from snails."

Now I'm no expert, but I wager it was used for anything that needed picked or poked, particularly dirt under fingernails. Just going by modern usage patterns, if it can be used for something, it will be used for that, even if it isn't the intended use of the tool.

'We know almost nothing about the person who owned this ingenious knife, but perhaps he was one of those who profited from the vast expansion of Rome - he would have been wealthy to have such a real luxury item.

'Perhaps he was a traveller, who required a practical compound utensil like this on his journeys.'

Or perhaps he was a desperate knife seller, traveling from city to city trying to offload this ungodly expensive silver behemoth, where at every city he tried to explain the benefits the crowd would shout 'but I can buy a wooden toothpick for a 1/100 of a copper!', 'I already have a spatula made with olive wood!', 'I already have a bone pick to pull snails out of their shell!'.

The knife seller eventually took his own life by iron blade to the eye.

Ha! I like that idea. But ordinary things have a history of being outlandishly ornamented, usually to show off wealth. People have been buying this crap for millennia. The Amish actually banned buttons(!), not because they want to look funny with hooks and zippers, but because in the 1800's it became a fad to have enormous brass buttons with inlay and ivory and embossed scenes. They rebelled against the pride and wastefulness.

Url changed from http://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/4587, which points to this.

Whoops.

Thanks.