Статтю присвячено публікації комплексу
знахідок, виявлених В. А. Богусевичем 1950 р. на
Київському Подолі та асоційованих ним зі склоробною майстернею. На підставі аналізу речового
матеріалу з колекції знахідок уточнене датування комплексу ХІІ—ХІІІ ст., а об’єкту, що безпосередньо передував йому і містив скупчення залізних шлаків, першою половиною — серединою ХІІ ст.
Наявність власне склоплавильного горна в розкопі
піддано сумніву. Виділено матеріали післямонгольської доби, що засвідчують обжитість цієї ділянки в ХІІІ—ХV ст.
In 1950 V. A. Bohusevich carried out the first stationary
excavations in Kyiv Podil which unearthed the
archaeological sites with remains of ironwork, glasswork
and woodworking. One of them, an assemblage
with the remains of glass processing was interpreted
as a workshop where bracelets, rings and smalt were
made. It was dated by a copper coin of Alexei Comnenus
to the years of his reign — 1081—1118. However,
despite such a craft complex was found in Podil for the
first time, and despite the extreme lack of archaeological
data on the only workshop, previously known in
Kyiv thanks to the excavations of Vikentiy Khvoika in
1907-1908, publications were limited to brief mentions
of it, leaving its complex of finds out of the context.
The collection of finds from V. A. Bohusevich excavations
as well as field documentation and the excavation
report are stored in the Institute of Archaeology
of the NAS of Ukraine which allows to refer to the
source base. The paper provides the publication of this
complex of finds at the first time, and interpretation of
the material in the light of modern archaeological concepts.
The attention, first of all, is directed to two main
categories of finds, which are the glass and fragments
of pottery, the most numerous in the collection. Both
of these categories as well as the amphorae fragments
highlight the analogies in later archaeological complexes
than previously thought. Well-dated archaeological
features show the similarities with materials from the
12th and 13th centuries. This allows us to refine the dating
of this assemblage towards a later one.
We cannot conclude confidently that the glass
manufacture was located here because these conclusions
require certain evidence, such as a glass-making
furnace, raw materials, remnants of production, and
rejected products. The remains of the real glass furnace
have not been found in situ as well as most of
the other components. However, given the presence of
certain materials such as: bricks with riveted liquid
glass, fragments of trading glass, bracelets of certain
types and colors with the same size ratio, it may indicate
that a certain glass-making complex may have
been located nearby.
