Antičko staklo iz Scupia i ostali makedonski nalazi

Povzetek

The author attempts to form a coherent picture of the ancient glass objects found in the graves in the East Necropolis of Scupi, and further to establish parallels between these objects and those found in the neighbouring towns, and to make a typological classification. Description of glass is given above. For what follows below cf. illustrative material in the Plates. The analogy of types and the possibility of determining the provenance. As regards the early Augustan finds, a review of them is given in the introduction. Among the early Roman glasswarl from the East Necropolis by far the most common form is unguentaria (46 instances). We find both basic types: tubulars (2) and those in the form of a candlestick (the remaining), granted that we adopt this division. Numerous variants of the latter type, reasonably well dated, suport the view that it is almost impossible to reconstruct a precise chronology through the development of the form. There exists a simultaneous and a parallel multitude of variants, with different life-tme. Grave No 137, with its 11 unguentaria in 7 different variants is a most obvious case in point. Still, the big number of unguentaria from our place of discovery maintains the already existing basic observations. The form of tubulars was more typical for the earlier period: Grave No 122 — early first century, Grave No 137 — Domitianus — Hadrianus. The specific later variant of this type — a long, spindle-shaped phial — is evidenced here in Grave No 112 (second quarter of the fourth century). The nearest where completely identical phials have been found is Dobri Dol near Skopje (from the same period). The manner of protracting the root of the neck above which a goitrous swelling is formed belongs to a somewhat later period. Our examples also belong to that period; a very high object from Grave No 81 (Hadrian), Grave No 137 (Domitian — Hadrian), and Grave No 155 (end of second or beginning of third century). Examples from the last two mentioned graves have a somewhat bell-like body, a high neck, and a funnel-like, widened mouth, where the edge of the glass is cut along the margin of the external boundary. This specific form appears also comparatively late. Two bigger and stocky variants extend in an unchanged form from the time of Augustus to at least that of Hadrian : the form with a big pear-shaped, conical body and a cylinder-shaped neck — in Graves No 110 (and 210, 211,213, 214; Augustus), No 148 (Flavians) and No 137 (and 372, Domitian — Hadrian) — all of which are identical in form, size, as well as in the quality and colour of glass. And the biggest variant — with an almost globular body and a high, strong neck — comes within the same framework: Grave No 110 (and 215), 124 (and 269; Flavians), and 137 (and 317). All three examples are cast in massive, thick, green glass and show the same irregularities even in the shaping of the body. The tender, slim variant, with a small, conical body passing imperceptibly into a rather long neck, is found already in Grave No 110 (and 212; Augustus), and recurs in 6 completely identical examples from Grave 136, from the early third century, all made of fine, light blue glass. The law of the development of the form is not observed here. The largest part of the third century has not given a single unguentarium. It is only Grave No 86 (from the second quarter of the fourth century) that we get one example — with a body in the form of a crudely shaped cube. This is in fact a form usual for this period, known also in Macedonia (the necropolis in the surroundings of Prilep), Naissus, and in the necropolis of Limes on the middle part of the Danube. To conclude with a few words about the glass. The big and the medium-sized stocky examples are made of greenish glass. Only in a few instances the quality of the glass is poorer and here we find a very strong irradiancy. According to most investigators, this will be the glass from eastern workshops. All the smaller examples, more slim and tender in design, are blown in fine glass of light-blue or aquamarine colour. One example only, from Grave 137, has a characteristic yellowishwhite colour, which might be suggestive of a possible Italic origin. The remaining forms of glass vessels are represented by only one or two specimens each. To the beginning of the early Roman period belong two small glasses: from Grave No 102 (Kaligula) and No 14 (middle of the first century). This form comes up throughout the territory of the Roman Empire, either in glass, or in clay, or in metal. Numerous finds come already from the first centuryJudging by the glass itself, our specimens may well have their origin in eastern workshops. From the middle of the first century come also two ampullas (Grave No 24). These little bottles used for toilet purposes come chiefly from eastern workshops, while finds in West Europe are considered to have been imported. The often mentioned Grave No 137 has preserved also 5 delicate little vessels of specific forms. These are: — Aribalos (»Dolphin Aryballos«), confirmed by a series of direct analogies : in Dura Europe (Traian’s coins), several specimens in the National Museum in Warszaw (second century), in Victoria and Albert Museum in London (first and second centuries), in Museum of Fine Arts in Boston (late first or second century). All the articles have been produced in the east Mediterranean regions. — Amphorisc, with a ribbed body, in yellow glass with blue handles, is a Syrian product. Identical specimens come from Docleia (Grave No 130, with Hadrian’s coins), Karnuntum, Vienna, and Syria. — Alabastrons (ampullas), in the shape of a tropical fruit (.coco-nut?), made in dark-brown or yellowish-brown glass, also suggest an east Mediterranean origin. Direct analogies are not known. Otherwise molded forms of fruit are frequent in the second century, but they also turn up a little earlier. From Graves No 168 and 125 come cups, adorned with folds (Faltenbecher). This form is to be found already in the late first century (Vindonisia, Docleis), but in the second and third centuries it is very common indeed: Victoria and Albert Museum (second century, from Palastine), Boston Museum (2nd-3rd century, East Mediterranean), the surroundings of Solun (2nd-3rd century, eastern workshops), Warszaw Museum (late 2nd and 3rd centuries, Egyptian products). Also these found in Egypt come from a later period (from the end of the second until the beginning of the fourth century). Our specimens are dated by the coins of Domitian an Julia Mamea. The already mentioned Grave No 168 has preserved also two ball-like jugs — prohus. The date is roughly the time of Domitian. This type of vessel, with a pear-shaped or ball-like body, is one of the most common products of western workshops. Typological features indicate that our specimens belong to the first century. From the same period, i.e. from the end of the second and the beginning of the third century, come also three bottles. Smaller specimens, from the Graves No 73 and 167 (early third century), bear analogy to specimens from the same period: in the museums in Warzsaw (third century) and in Cairo (3rd to 4th century), etc. The delicately moulded bottle from Grave 140 is indeed outstanding. Its hugely blown body, with emphasized shoulders, and an almost funnel-like neck with a protracted root classify it for type No 103 according to C. Isings. The very thin walls and the glass of light brownish colour are features encountered also in analogous bottles in Docleia (Graves No 111 and 243 A), in Intercisa, and Kein. Their form, and even more the colour of the glass, classify them — according to Radnotti -— as Italic products. To conclude this presentation with a few remarks. The findings of glass in the north Macedonian region are few in number, or even quite scarce in comparison with other finds from the ancient period. This is true particularly of the early period of the Roman Empire. Scupi ranks as a Roman settlement in our provinces where early Roman necropolises abound in glass. Yet here we find a striking limitation as regards both the form and the kind of glass. Lacking are the usual forms from western workshops which are usual in places to the west (urns, vessels related to the Italyc manner of burial, bowls-plates, glasses, little pots, jugs, etc, as well as other categories of glass). On the other hand, we find mostly eastern forms —- beside the striking frequency of unguentaria we get here aryballos, amphoriscs, fruit-shaped forms, ampullas, and cups. Concerning the colour and the quality of the glass — hence its provenance — an opinion has already been stated. The elements generally indicate that the workshops producing these specimens were in East Mediterranean. Such a repertoire of glass from Scupi, with all the characteristic features enumerated, is closely related to finds from the same period in eastern parts of this country, like Butua, Doclea, Domavia, and Kosmaj, but it has little in common with finds from the western parts. And so our glass comes within that characterized by the already mentioned observations concerning the origin and cultural features of other, earlier finds in Scupi, as well as its close connections with the Hellenistic South and thus with the large community of the East mediterranean.