This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from Roman glass appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 22 February 2008, and was viewed approximately 6,200 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
Typology
editI recognise that this page could do with a discussion of the typological analysis of Roman glasswares, although there is a seperate page dedicated to glass blowing, so a typology of blown object may belong there, and a typology of cast/slumped wares could be added here. Ruth Fillery-Travis (talk) 14:47, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Composition
editI don't see the value of a large compositional table like the one in Anglo Saxon glass, and the literature argues against comparability of glass analyses at the moment, but are there other opinions? Ruth Fillery-Travis (talk) 14:47, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
no place for this, but ...
editThis article is so beautifully and thoughtfully illustrated that there's no useful place to put this, but I thought I'd point out this interesting depiction of a very large transparent glass bowl of fruit from Pompeii. Any Roman glass I've seen in person (not a vast amount) has been much smaller in scale, even if these grapes and pomegranates would've been nowhere near as large as specimens today. Cynwolfe (talk) 18:36, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
No Latin word for glass?
editI'm surprised by the claim that there was no Latin word for glass in the 1st century AD. Doesn't vitrum count? --Florian Blaschke (talk) 22:55, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
- OK, apparently the word is not attested in this sense before Cicero ... how curious. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 23:20, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Broken Link
editThis guy doesn't exist: "modern glass colors" http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Glass_container_industry#Colors 121.216.63.143 (talk) 10:28, 30 October 2014 (UTC)