In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

TYPE I. RAW GLASS Various sized chunks of raw glass represent about half (54) of all the cullet in the cargo (Fig. 42-1). A few pieces retained one smooth, curved surface that was formed by the receptacle in which the glass cooled. Unfortunately , they are too small to allow a determination of the sizes or shapes of their receptacles, and there are no obvious marks or impressions on them to indicate the materials of which the receptacles were made. Our study of these glass chunks was based primarily on four features: color, size, weight, and location in the wreck. In the first stages of research, all of the raw glass was sorted according to color and provenience and weighed, providing information concerning the distribution of colors in each grid square. Within color and provenience groups, the chunks were also grouped by size according to the approximate major dimension of each: Size 1, smaller than 4.9 cm; Size 2, between 5 and 9.9 cm; Size 3, between 10 and 14.9 cm; Size 4, between 15 and 19 cm; and Size 5, larger than 20 cm. Quantity/Weight Distribution of Raw Glass The total weight of raw glass recovered from the wreck is 1,642 kg. An examination of the distribution of this glass shows a large concentration in the cargo area between Frames 4 and 12 of the wooden hull. The largest amounts were found in Cullet is both raw, unworked glass, broken into pieces, and scrap glass collected for recycling. Here we present the different types of cullet other than those pieces of scrap glass assigned to recognizable glass vessels in other chapters, although they themselves were also cullet meant to be recycled and in many or all cases may represent factory waste. The Serçe Limanı raw glass and certain factory waste described in this chapter weighs 1,944.512 kg, or about two-thirds of the approximately three metric tons of cullet in the cargo (Pl. 37). The various forms of cullet described below are as follows: Type I: raw glass. Type II: moils or overblows, “the glass originally in contact with the lower end of the blowpipe, which becomes cullet after the vessel is removed from it.” Type III: pontil and blowpipe knock-offs and crack-offs, which are bits of excess glass that have adhered to the ends and sides of pontils or blowpipes and then been forcibly removed from them. Type IV: a miscellaneous group comprising test drops, trails, drops, “bizarre” lumps, tubes, rods, and other excess glass or by-products of glassmaking. Type V: defective pieces, or wasters, that were kept to be recycled. # C H A P T E R 42 Raw Glass and Factory Waste Sheila D. Matthews and Berta Lledó 444 part xii: raw glass and factory waste 42-2, 42-3 and Pl. 36). In the Serçe Limanı collection, there are only two types or shapes of moils: Types IIA “candle holders,” and IIB “other.” Type IIA: Moils (“Candle Holders”) Excavators, not knowing what they were, nicknamed Type IIA moils “candle holders” because of their distinct and uniform shape, which differs from that of other moil types, although all were formed between the blowpipe and the expanded parison. A Type IIA moil, or “candle holder,” is a doughnutshaped , thin-walled piece with nearly perpendicular outer wall. The smooth, finished surface around its central aperture protrudes slightly inward. The edge of the outer wall, on the other hand, is always roughly cut and unworked. This particular type of moil takes its specific form after the parison has been expanded into the beginning stages of vessel formation . When the pontil is attached and the blowpipe removed, leaving a hole in the end of the parison opposite the pontil, this area of the parison is reheated in order to allow it to be cut or cracked away. This would explain the smooth edge of the blowpipe hole and the rough-cut outer edge. On the other hand, the fact that the central hole in each Type IIA moil has been pushed in, just the opposite of those from, say, Jalame, suggests that a wetted solid wooden cone was thrust into the aperture so that steam expanding from it would give the parison its final shape. Cemal Pulak, who obtained such a cone after having had a vessel made by this method in Murano, has seen the use of cones in a variety of places: The idea behind using...

Share