Evidence for glass ‘recycling’ using Pb and Sr isotopic ratios and Sr-mixing lines: the case of early Byzantine Sagalassos

Degryse, Patrick; Schneider, Jens; Haack, U.; Lauwers, Veerle; Poblome, Jeroen; Waelkens, Marc; Muchez, Ph.

doi:10.1016/j.jas.2005.09.003

Cited by 76 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Excavations at Pompeii revealed the presence of glass workshops which, based on the eruption of Vesuvius, must date to pre-79 AD (De Francesco et al, 2010). Secondary production of glass dating from Imperial to early Byzantine times has also been found at Sagalassos, Turkey (Degryse et al, 2006a). The archaeological evidence for glassmaking in the western part of the Empire is scarce, but, by the late Roman period, glasshouses where vessels or window glass were fabricated were well established across this region (Foster and Jackson, 2010).…”

Section: The Archaeological Evidencementioning

confidence: 94%

“…If the raw glass was manufactured from a relatively pure silica source with only minor/trace level impurities and natron (also low in impurities), then this is likely to cause a homogeneous signature (Jackson, 2012). Likewise, the homogeneous signature of the Roman glasses could be promoted due to the practice of recycling Degryse et al, 2006a). Therefore, something more than just the bulk chemical data of the glasses is needed to enable successful provenancing.…”

Section: Glass Provenancingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Where the lime was derived from 'geologically aged' limestone, the Sr isotopic signature reflects that of seawater at the time the limestone was deposited, possibly modified by diagenesis. However, other minerals in the sand, such as feldspar and mica, can also influence the Sr budget of the glass batch (Freestone et al, 2003;Degryse et al, 2006a). The contribution of natron to the Sr content and Sr isotopic signature of glass is negligible (Freestone et al, 2003).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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

Degryse¹

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: The Archaeological Evidencementioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Glass Provenancingmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Degryse¹

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Especially Rare Earth Element (REE) patterns have proved promising to distinguishing between sand raw materials (Freestone et al, 2002b) as these may be typical for the geological environment of the sand, but these characterizations remain mostly unexplored. Conversely, recent advances (Wedepohl and Baumann, 2000;Freestone et al, 2003;Degryse et al, 2005Degryse et al, , 2006a have shown that the use of radiogenic isotopes, specifically those of strontium and neodymium, allows developing new approaches for provenance determination of primary glass, even after its transformation or recycling in secondary workshops.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pliny the Elder and Sr–Nd isotopes: tracing the provenance of raw materials for Roman glass production

Degryse

Schneider

2008

Journal of Archaeological Science

Self Cite

157

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Roman and Byzantine times, natron glass was traded throughout the known world in the form of chunks. Production centers of such raw glass, active from the 4th to 8th century AD, were identified in Egypt and Syro-Palestine. However, early Roman primary glass units remain unknown from excavation or scientific analysis. The ancient author Pliny described in 70 AD that besides Egyptian and Levantine resources, also raw materials from Italy and the Gallic and Spanish provinces were used in glass making. In this study, the primary provenance of 1ste3rd century AD natron vessel glass is investigated. The use of combined Sr and Nd isotopic analysis allows the distinguishing and characterizing of different sand raw materials used for primary glass production. The isotope data obtained from the glass samples are compared to the signatures of primary glass from known production centers in the eastern Mediterranean and a number of sand samples from the regions described by Pliny the Elder as possible sources of primary glass. Eastern Mediterranean primary glass has a Nile dominated Mediterranean Nd signature (higher than À6.0 3 Nd), while glass with a primary production location in the western Mediterranean or north-western Europe should have a different Nd signature (lower than À7.0 3 Nd). Most Roman glass has a homogeneous 87 Sr/ 86 Sr signature close to the modern sea water composition, likely caused by the (intentional) use of shell as glass raw material. In this way, strontium and neodymium isotopes now prove that Pliny's writings were correct: primary glass production was not exclusive to the Levant or Egypt in early Roman days, and factories of raw glass in the Western Roman Empire will have been at play.

show abstract

“…In this instance, the origins of the glass itself and of the finished objects differ, and require separate sourcing. Strontium isotopes have proved useful in determining the provenance of some of the glass (and the character and identity of its raw materials) from this area (Freestone et al 2003), and both Sr and Pb isotopes have been used to identify the recycling of glass at ancient glassworks (Degryse et al 2006). Recently, the isotopic compositions of Sb from various stibnite deposits have been determined to facilitate sourcing ancient Sb-bearing glass artifacts from the Middle East (Lobo et al 2013).…”

Section: How Old Is It?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Igneous Rock Associations 12. A Geologist’s Look at Archaeological Ceramics and Glass

Owen¹,

Greenough

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYCeramics and glass represent synthetic metamorphic rocks and obsidian, respectively. Consequently, it is not surprising that many archaeologists have collaborated with geologists on projects dealing not only with lithic artifacts, but with ceramic and glass objects as well. This paper presents an overview of these latter two materials from a geological perspective, considering in turn how they are characterized and classified, their ages constrained, provenance and in some instances use determined, and how they were made. SOMMAIRE INTRODUCTIONIn the course of their education, geologists become well versed in the traditional mainstays of their disciplinemineralogy, stratigraphy, petrology, geochemistry, paleontology, geochronology, structural geology, tectonics -along with a smattering of supporting sciences. Among other things, we learn to place time and space in a broader context than most other scientists aside from astronomers. Archaeologists are not much different, although their appreciation of time is on a much more restricted scale -typically centuries and millennia rather than mega-and gigaannum. Moreover, they usually map on a much more detailed scale than field geologists, and the third dimension of

show abstract

Evidence for glass ‘recycling’ using Pb and Sr isotopic ratios and Sr-mixing lines: the case of early Byzantine Sagalassos

Cited by 76 publications

References 16 publications

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

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

Pliny the Elder and Sr–Nd isotopes: tracing the provenance of raw materials for Roman glass production

Igneous Rock Associations 12. A Geologist’s Look at Archaeological Ceramics and Glass

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About