The second technology was represented by Gr-4 and Gr-5 groups, which were coloured by cuprite crystals. The process required to produce cuprite crystals, which included chemical composition and heat treatments, was extremely different from the technology of metallic copper. Dendritic cuprite crystals were tens of micrometre in magnitude in the sealing wax red glass (Gr-4), while in the orange samples, the crystals were usually smaller than 800 nm and mainly present in cubic and hexagonal forms (Gr-5). Furthermore, the yellowish orange hues were characterized by high numbers of small cuprite crystals (<300 nm), while on the contrary the number of particles were slightly diminished in the red orange samples, promoting larger cuprite hexagonal crystals between 400–800 nm in size.
In both technologies, the comparison between the average chemical composition (glassy phase + crystals) and the punctual EDS analyses on the glassy phase among the copper-rich particles, highlighted only small differences in the concentration of copper. It suggests that only a small percentage of copper precipitates to form Cu° or Cu2O, while the majority remain in the form of Cu+, or Cu2+ ion. It is possible to observe that, in general, the amount of Cu+ that precipitated to form cuprite crystals was higher than that of Cu°, highlighting the strong colouring power of the metallic copper. For instance, the modern copper red glass, coloured by Cu°, is usually manufactured with only 0.1 wt.% of copper and the addition of a strong reducing agent, such as tin or coke.
The technological aspects involved in the manufacturing of each group is discussed in the following paragraphs.
4.1. Cu° Colouring Technique
The three groups showed the use of two different types of base glass—natron base glass in the Gr-2 and Gr-3 groups and a soda plant ash base glass in the Gr-1 group.
The high concentrations of K
2O, MgO and CaO with low content of Na
2O suggest the use of soda plant ash base glass, rather than the addition of potash ash to a natron base glass. P
2O
5 content was higher than the usual soda plant ash base glass but this could be due to two factors—(a) the high variable composition of the plants, which depends on the nature of the substrate and how the specific elements are synthesized in their tissue [
79] and (b) the addition of fuel ash to a soda plant ash base glass.
In the opaque red glass, the use of a soda plant ash base glass, seemed to correspond to a well-mastered recipe, especially diffused in the early period of the Roman age (1st-4th century AD), as well as several studies that highlighted this [
36,
41,
42,
43,
45,
47]. This recipe could be engineered to solve the most crucial aspect of the opaque red glass production, the correct redox oxidation state in the melt. As mentioned in the introduction, the addition of an internal reductant is fundamental to reducing copper in its elemental state (Cu°). In our case, iron is the reducing agent, confirmed by its moderate concentration in the Gr-1 group, which interacts with copper, according to the redox equation (Equation (2)).
The proportion of Cu
+/Cu° and Fe
2+/Fe
3+ depends on the temperature, but during cooling, the equilibrium (Equation (2)) was displaced toward the right, inducing the formation of Cu° and Fe
3+ [
11,
18].
In the case of our red glass
sectilia, the use of partially burned soda ashes, containing carbonaceous compounds, produced a reduced base glass, which needs less iron for the formation of Cu° nanoparticles [
41,
80]. This technical benefit could bring the Roman glassmakers to prefer the use of soda plant ash as a fluxing agent, in order to achieve a vivid or light red hue. In fact, the higher the iron content, the darker or more brownish is the red hue [
16], as was clear in sample R31, which showed a higher concentration of iron than the other samples of Gr-1 group and its colour moved slightly toward reddish brown hue. It was remarkable that distinguishing brick red glass (Gr-1) from the sealing wax (Gr-4) by the naked eye was a difficult task (
Figure 26). It underlined that Roman glassmakers were able to obtain a colour very close to the sealing wax by using Cu°. Additionally, the colourimetric measurements showed only few differences in the chromatic coordinate, making them very similar.
The heterogeneity, which microscopically characterized these samples of the Gr-1 group, was due to the presence of dark transparent layers in which no particles were detected, and because layers with different ratios of number and size of Cu° were formed. Identifying the cause that lead to this heterogeneity was complex and it was probable that several factors concerning the melting condition or how the molten glass was cooled, play a crucial role. No significant compositional differences were detected through the chemical analyses. Therefore, it is probable that the glass was not in the correct oxidation state to promote the precipitation of the Cu° particles. Hence, it is likely the proper redox conditions were not achieved in the dark transparent layers. It could be due to the stirring of the melt. This operation, for instance, is often mentioned in the Venetian recipe manuscripts, to avoid the formation of dark transparent layers. This procedure helps to mix the more oxidized upper layer of the molten glass (green transparent) with the inner and more reduced part of the melt (red opaque).
This heterogeneity was almost absent in the samples of the Gr-2 group. It could be due to the higher concentration of iron and copper, which stabilized the glass redox environment through a buffering effect. As observed above, the Gr-2 group samples had lower numbers but larger crystals than the red brick samples (Gr-1). This was the result of a higher concentration of copper and of a specific heat treatment.
The high concentration of copper aided the aggregation of the Cu° atoms in large crystals, while the presence of high iron content hampered the formation of cuprous ions [
16]. When copper-containing glass was rapidly cooled, metallic copper crystals were chilled in sub-micrometric sizes, caused by the increase of viscosity that prevented the crystal growth, creating an opaque red glass [
2,
16,
81]. On the contrary, crystal growth was favoured when the molten glass was maintained at a temperature that favoured a low viscosity, for a prolonged period and it was slowly cooled. As result, the copper-containing glass would be brown, or in an extreme case, crystals visible to the naked-eye would form [
16,
81]. This process is driven by Ostwald ripening, which favours the growth of thermodynamically stable particles of a specific size, while the smaller particles dissolve in the glass matrix [
82]. Since this technology is temperature and time-dependent, through specific heat treatment, it is possible to control the growth of a few large particles or the high amount of small crystals.
These samples seemed to prove that the Roman glassmakers knew these principles. Likely in an empirical way, however, they foresaw the technological production of aventurine glass, first produced in high amounts by the Venetian glassmakers at the end of the 16th century AD. Aventurine glass was an extreme consequence of a long and slow cooling phase (some Venetian recipes said that it took one week), through which large crystals gave off a clear sparkling effect [
83]. The chemical analyses confirmed that the samples of the Gr-2 group were typical Roman natron glass [
32,
33]; however, the concentrations of copper and iron were very close to those detected in the Venetian aventurine [
83].
The samples of the Gr-3 group present red bands in a dark transparent glass. The chemical analyses did not highlight any compositional differences. A redox difference could be suspected to originate from the disproportion of iron (R1: 4.5 wt.%; R22: 3.9 wt.%) and copper (R1: 0.27 wt.%; R22: 0.31 wt.%). The Cu2S particles (frequently detected in both layers) were the result of a first crystallization, in which the two elements reacted below the melting temperatures. Once the sulphur available to react was consumed, a second crystallization occurred, leading to the formation of metallic copper nanoparticles.
Although iron was abundantly used in the three groups and in general in the production of opaque red glass, it is still unknown what acted as the iron-bearing material. Inclusions comparable with the chemical composition of magnetite and hematite were detected by the FEG–SEM analyses. The use of only iron-rich mineral (such as magnetite) is unlikely because it presents both oxidation states of iron, which makes it a weak reducing agent. Hematite could be ruled out due to its oxidizing action. On the contrary, the use of hammer scale from the beating of incandescent iron could be an alternative hypothesis. Previous studies on Roman black glass from the 2nd century AD observed that iron flakes were used as a colouring agent. This metallurgical by-product could contain wustite (FeO), magnetite and metallic iron, supplying enough reducing agents; furthermore, this is easy to reduce into powder [
84,
85,
86]. Additionally, this is commonly indicated in the Venetian manuscripts. Hence, the presence of hematite or magnetite could be the relicts of the iron bearing material used as reducing agent.
Beyond the iron, no other reducing agents seem to have been used. The concentrations of tin and antimony were probably not enough to bring any technical benefits. Hence, they probably entered as impurity of metallurgical by products, or as contaminants of glass cullet. The levels of lead oxide were very low. Although, it was usually supposed that lead at a concentration below 5 wt.% did not generate any technical advantage for the manufacturing of the red colour [
13], it was not excluded that low contents of lead could decrease the viscosity of the melt, facilitating the crystal growth [
77]. The inclusion detected in samples R16, composed of silver–copper–antimony, could indicate the use of litharge or slags obtained from a silver-refining process, such as a lead oxide source, as reported by Freestone [
13]. Nevertheless, chemical analyses involving the detection of trace elements were necessary to confirm this argument.
Several devitrification products, detected in the three groups, indicated that the molten glass was not rapidly poured but was probably laid at temperatures slightly below the liquidus temperatures, in order to facilitate the precipitation of Cu° particles.
4.2. Cu2O Colouring Technique
The base glass used in this colouring technique was a lead–soda–lime–silica glass. The differences in the alumina and silica contents could be indicative that different sands were employed for the manufacturing of sealing wax and orange samples. It was likely that, a careful selection of the different types of sand or pure silica pebbles for the sealing wax were used. Conversely, the sand of orange glass would be richer in alumina, K2O and MgO, suggesting high concentrations of feldspar and dolomitic minerals, in all likelihood.
Contrary to the Cu° colouring technique, the production of cuprite crystals required high concentration of copper and lead oxide. Strong reducing conditions should be avoided in order to prevent the precipitation of Cu° and metallic lead (Pb°). Since Cu
+ was more soluble than Cu°, high percentages of copper (Cu
+) should be used for the formation of cuprite crystals. Lead oxide plays a key role in this technology because—(a) it decreases the working temperature, reducing the viscosity and gives enough time for the copper ions to aggregate in dendritic shape and grow; (b) it shifts the Cu
2+/Cu
+ towards Cu
2O [
11,
18,
19].
Although modern laboratory reproduction obtained opaque red and orange glass only through management of the heat treatment [
17], Roman glassmakers would control the colour with the manipulation of the chemical composition of the glass.
The concentration of lead oxide was different in the two groups (Gr-4 and Gr-5), which could be related to the control of the number and the size of the particles. It was observed that the higher the concentration of lead, the larger the cuprite crystals were. On the contrary, a cut of the lead content aided the increase of small-sized Cu
2O particles [
18]. It could explain the higher concentrations of lead in the sealing wax (PbO 28–30.4 wt.%) more than the orange samples (PbO 8–22.4 wt.%).
It is usually accepted that antimony is used as a reducing agent in the sealing wax technology [
87]; however, the moderate concentrations revealed by the chemical analyses, complicates an accurate interpretation. Antimony probably acted as nucleant agent, favouring the aggregation of cuprous ions, rather than reducing agent [
87]. In Roman sealing wax, the content of antimony oxide is usually lower than 2 wt.%, while it was higher than 4 wt.% in the sealing wax produced before the Roman age [
6,
18,
70]. It suggests a change in the recipes, probably due to a different antimony-bearing material or because of an improvement in the heat treatment process. In the orange samples (Gr-5), antimony, iron and tin were often higher than 1 wt.%, suggesting an intentional addition to encourage an increase of the nucleus number. The reduction of Cu
2+ to Cu
+ was much easier than that of Cu
+ to Cu°, hence the moderate amount of reducing agent (such as Fe
2+, Sn
2+, Sb
3+) might hamper the precipitation of metallic copper. However, a strong reducing agent such as metallic iron, metallic tin and carbon should be excluded, in order to avoid the formation of metallic lead, which could damage the wall of the ceramic crucible.
The procedure to produce these two colours required different heat treatments for the formation of Cu
2O crystals of specific dimensions. In the sealing wax, it was important that the molten glass was laid at temperature slightly below the melting temperature (for a long period), to promote the formation of few nucleus. A second step was probably a gradual and prolonged cooling phase, in order to encourage the growth of crystal [
17]. On the contrary, to produce orange glass, the molten glass should be maintained at a temperature lower than the sealing wax, in order to increase the number of small cuprite crystals [
17].
The euhedral calcium antimonate crystals, detected in sample AR2, were not considered to be a possible opacifying agent or a voluntary addition to achieve a specific hue. It most probably formed as the glass started to cool or laid a temperature below the melting point, for a prolonged period [
18]. In sealing wax red glass, no devitrification products were detected. High concentrations of lead probably obstructed the formation of devitrification products that prevented the development of cuprite [
18].
The presence of sealing wax among the
sectilia of Lucius Verus villa could open a new path in the definition of the correct chronology of its production. Other authors encountered sealing wax in Roman mosaic tesserae and enamels, but only until the 1st century AD [
43,
44]. In our case, sealing wax was abundantly present, which could suggest that during the 2nd century AD, this technology was not abandoned but was still well-known. Likely, the control of colour in the sealing wax was more difficult than in the brick red (Gr-1), which needed less time in its production. These factors would have favoured the employment of sealing wax only for high-status clients and at special request.