Further Studies in the Compositional Variability of Colourless Romano‐british Vessel Glass*

Abstract

Previous studies of colourless Romano-British vessel glasses have suggested that, regardless of vessel type, they show considerable compositional homogeneity. Intriguing differences in variability (as opposed to mean composition) have, however, also emerged. This paper reports on a compositional study of 243 vessels, that is larger and more carefully controlled than in previous studies of this kind. Unexpected compositional differences have been found both between and within the four vessel types studied. We discuss the implications of these results in the context of different models that have been proposed for glass-making and glass-working in the Roman world.

Analyses of colourless Roman glass from Binchester, County Durham

“…Therefore the Lincoln soda data were not used. The concentration of soda in the Binchester and Colchester samples was accurately quantified because the sample solution was diluted prior to analysis, as discussed by Heyworth et al [13] and Baxter et al [2]. However, the correlation for the SEM and ICP soda data from the Colchester study was also poor (R 2 ¼ 0.07) because of an anomalous result for one of the samples, C466.…”

Glass Making in the Greco-Roman World: Results of the ARCHGLASS project

“…Supporters of both production models have attempted to explain this phenomenon. Those in favour of the local production model claim that the compositional consistency is due to the use of similar, strictly controlled recipes and production techniques or the reuse of glass in the form of cullet (Baxter et al, 2005). While the supporters of the centralised production model say that the compositional homogeneity is due to the use of raw materials from a limited number of locations.…”

“…This in conjunction with a comparison of the compositional data between archaeological sites can potentially reveal patterns in the production and trade of glass (Schibille, 2011). So, in order to fully understand glass manufacture in the Greco-Roman world, in the absence of identifiable primary glass production locations, a structured analysis of glass must be undertaken using contextual, chronological, typological and technological evidence from a wide group of assemblages (Baxter et al, 2005). This fundamentally leads to two methods of provenance determination; the first compares the composition of the unknown samples with the composition of known material in order to narrow down the potential source origins.…”

“…For the rest of this volume, the 'typical' Roman composition has been taken from Foster and Jackson (2009). So, analysis of assemblages consisting of vessels of different forms, believed to have been produced in different locations, are generally indistinguishable compositionally (Baxter et al, 2005). Likewise, basic utilitarian vessel forms have rarely been attributed with a specific origin and so the exact provenance of these is often difficult to determine (Gibbins, 1991).…”

PIXE–PIGE investigation of Roman Imperial vessels and window glass from Mt. Kosmaj, Serbia (Moesia Superior)

“…However, it is also apparent that natron was transported to various sites in the Empire, where local sand was used to produce primary glass. This is described in the writings of Pliny the Elder in the 1st century AD (Silvestri at al., 2006), and can be concluded from finds in western Germany (Wedepohl and Baumann, 2000), in Britain (Baxter et al, 2005) and partly from colourless glass of Iulia Felix shipwreck (Silvestri et al, 2008 and references therein). Isotope ratio analyses of Sr and Nd were made by several authors to indicate the source of the sand (Wedepohl and Baumann, 2000;Degryse and Schneider, 2008;Freestone et al, 2003;Brems et al, 2012Brems et al, , 2013Ganio et al, 2012).…”