Ancient CyprusAncient Cyprus

Article · 2010

The provenance of some glass ingots from the Uluburun shipwreck

C. M. Jackson and P. T. Nicholson

Journal of Archaeological Science 37 295-301

An article on the chemical composition of three glass ingots from the Uluburun shipwreck, and what it shows about where the glass was made and where it travelled.

Jackson and Nicholson analyse three glass ingots from the Uluburun wreck, two deep blue and one turquoise, to establish where the glass was made. Major and minor elements were measured by SEM-EDS and trace elements by LA-ICP-MS, and the results are set beside published analyses of Egyptian and Mesopotamian glass, including rare earth element patterns.

They argue that trace elements, particularly chromium and lanthanum, separate Egyptian from Mesopotamian glass where major-element compositions overlap. All three ingots fall within the Egyptian range, and their similarity to some Mycenaean glasses leads the authors to suggest that Egyptian raw glass travelled by sea in ingot form to be worked in the Mycenaean world (pp. 299–300). The route and destination of the cargo stay open, and they caution that analysis of more ingots could show other origins.

What it records

  • Professor Cemal Pulak took the three Uluburun ingot samples that were analysed.p. 297
  • Two of the analysed Uluburun ingot samples are deep dark blue and the third is turquoise or light blue.p. 297
  • Jackson and Nicholson state that the major-element concentrations of the Uluburun glasses are consistent with sodium-rich plant ashes typical of about 1600–1000 BCE.p. 297
  • The three analysed Uluburun ingots, whatever their colourant, fall within the Egyptian glass range, with chromium-to-lanthanum ratios between 1.4:1 and 2.1:1.p. 299
  • Whether the Uluburun ingots were loaded at an Egyptian port or carried out of Egypt to be loaded at a foreign port is not known, the authors state.p. 299
  • Two of the analysed Uluburun ingots are deep blue and coloured with cobalt; the third is turquoise and coloured with copper.p. 300

Where to read

  • Elemental analyses and ingot sample compositionspp. 297–299
  • Trace-element comparison with Egyptian and Mesopotamian glasspp. 298–299
  • Trade routes and possible Aegean destinationspp. 299–300

Contents

  • 1. Introduction295
  • 2. Late Bronze Age glass, manufacture and trade296
  • 3. Chemical analysis of glasses from Egypt and Mesopotamia296
  • 4. Analysis and instrumentation297
  • 5. Composition of the Uluburun ingots297
  • 5.1. Major element compositions297
  • 5.2. Trace element compositions298
  • 6. Discussion299
  • 7. Conclusions300
  • Acknowledgements300
  • References300

Objects published here

3
  • Deep blue glass ingot sample, Uluburun wreck, LOT4110 (p. 297)
  • Deep blue glass ingot sample, Uluburun wreck, KW1422 (p. 297)
  • Turquoise glass ingot fragment, Uluburun wreck, TURQ (p. 297)

People, places and institutions

People

  • Cemal Pulaksampled the ingots for analysis

Places

  • Uluburunwreck that yielded the analysed ingots
  • Egyptregion whose glass the ingots match
  • Mesopotamiaglass-producing region used for comparison
  • AmarnaEgyptian glass production centre
  • QantirEgyptian glass production centre
  • MalkataEgyptian glass production centre
  • Mycenaean Greecepossible destination for Egyptian glass
  • Tirynssite with glass of Egyptian composition

Also named: Kharga oasis, Dakhla, Mycenae, Knossos.

Extent pp. 295–301, figs 1–3

Late Bronze AgeGlass and FaienceTradeSeafaringTechnologyForeign Contacts

Cited on Ancient Cyprus

1 page