From what I can tell off of Yale
, this is probably 4th- 5th-century C.E. Earlier ones usually had
more dainty strings of glass
lightly and tastefully applied to accentuate a vessel, but later on the popular style
was to, in some cases, obscure the vessel with strings of glass
: and, indeed, the strings of glass
on this vessel do take away from the shape.
It was probably a perfume bottle
in origin. The bottle
was blown into a mould and finished off while being held by a punty rod. Thus, we have a sharp pontil
scar on the base.
exhibits extreme decomposition in some areas that were low in silicates, in which what was the glass
now crumbles; and, in others, retains most of the original surface layer of glass
from where there were heavier silicates. The bottle
has a crack
along the main body and some splits in the strings of glass
. I'm not sure, but I'm guessing this one was an apprentice piece as it just isn't quite pretty or that well-done.
My only real concern with its authenticity is the teal-coloured patination, or minseralisation, on some of it. I have never dug up antique glass
with a tealy patination. It does not fluoresce, but that only helps say, "It's not guaranteed a fake
", as some other falsely applied patinations do under a U.V. light.