ANCIENT HAND BLOWN ROMAN GLASS BOTTLE!!??

[Digger George]

I bought this ancient hand blown glass artifact at an auction in a $10 dollar box lot. It has a pontil scar and an applied handle. It is very crude with lots of tiny bubbles. It has iridescence, staining and little bits of dirt that can be flaked off of the surface of the glass. I know that there are fakes out there that are made with iridescence to make them look ancient but this one looks to be truly ancient. I don't know the age or origin of this. Does anyone know if this is truly ancient? If so what is its age and origin?

 

[bearswede]

Hey, George...

Has the look of ancient glass to me... Especially the frothy batch with bubbles...

I bought mine from a reputable dealer, so I'm confident it's authentic... Most of these come from the Syrian desert...

Here's a link where you can compare yours:

http://www.trocadero.com/directory/Antiques:Regional_Art:Ancient_World:Roman:Glass.html


Ron

 

[bottlediger]

Aint no spider pig bitters.....

 

[GuntherHess]

It has the general look of Roman glass but the patina is a bit weak and the form is a bit odd. It would be best to have an expert at a museum or gallery look at it.
If it is real it would a moderately good peice. Dont try to clean it with anything other than water.

 

[bearswede]

the patina is a bit weak

Patina thickness and coverage varies widely on Roman-era glass, depending mostly on the composition of the matrix/soil...

Ron

 

[cowseatmaize]

Alright, here goes another I "REALLY!!!" hope I get proved wrong.
I don't like the sharp ridge on the mouth. I'm not sure the ancients would have been that perfect. The squared off sides I'd question to a lesser point.
It's definatly an old style making but I don't think ancient. Maybe 1600-1700 but that would be as far back as I would say before fake came into question. A good amount of chemicals and some creativity could fake it, I know I could.
I await all further comments in hopes of learning more. Again, prove me wrong, PLEASE!

 

[GuntherHess]

My first thought was just the opposite, it didnt look like good enough workmanship to be Roman glass. The Romans were actually pretty darn good glass makers. Of course you had the cheap ungent bottles and provincial stuff.
Your item looks topheavy and not very utilitarian. I would guess its not ancient. More likely something recent from the Middle East. Just my opinion of course.

Compare this 2nd Century similar pitcher to yours...
http://www.ancienttouch.com/13.jpg


A few links...

http://www.ancienttouch.com/roman_glass.htm

http://mcclungmuseum.utk.edu/specex/romglass/romglass.htm

http://www.cmog.org/index.asp?pageId=1187#1

http://www.sisecam.com/museum/muze/M5E.HTM

 

[capsoda]

Fine lip work and the top heavy look were common on early Roman glass. It is a ulitarian piece probably an oenochoe. Could be an aryballoc But they usually had two handles and were blue or green.

The Roman and mediterainen glass blowers had the ability to create works of art that would blow your mine. They had colors and clear glass down pat but items like this were for the rich and not for common use so fewer pieces exsist.

If you study as many websites as you can you will soon learn that the amount of 2000 to 3000 year old glass that has survived is amazing. The more common pieces were made quickly and crudely. Doctors an alchemists would have used more comon ulitarian glass also like Ron's unguentarium which came in many shapes, sizes and colors.

Get a few books and check out the web. You will be surprised how much info there is out there on that type of glass.

 

[Digger George]

yes! obi-wan capsoda has spoken! Thanks to you and Matt and everyone for the info, links and speculations. Keep it coming!

 

[huffmnd]

Capsoda is the man!!!!