Introductory—Geographical and historical limits—Clay and glaze—Technical processes—Stamps and moulds—Barbotine and other methods—Kilns found in Britain, Gaul, and Germany—Use of earthenware among the Romans—Echea—Dolia and Amphorae—Inscriptions on amphorae—Cadus, Ampulla, and Lagena—Drinking-cups—Dishes—Sacrificial vases—Identification of names.

1. Introductory

Roman vases are far inferior in nearly all respects to Greek; the shapes are less artistic, and the decoration, though not without merits of its own, bears the same relation to that of Greek vases that all Roman art does to Greek art. Strictly speaking, a comparison of the two is not possible, as in the one case we are dealing with painted vases, in the other with ornamentation in relief. But from the point of view of style they may still be regarded as commensurable. Roman vases, in a word, require only the skill of the potter for their completion, and the processes employed are largely mechanical, whereas Greek vases called in the aid of a higher branch of industry, and one which gave scope for great artistic achievements—namely, that of painting.

It may perhaps be advisable to attempt some definition of the subject, and lay down as far as possible historical and geographical limits within which Roman pottery as a distinct phase of ancient art may be said to be comprised. The line which distinguishes it from Greek pottery is, however, one of artistic evolution rather than of chronology, one of political circumstances rather than of geographical demarcation. In other words, it will be found that during a certain period the ceramic art had reached the same stage of evolution throughout all the Mediterranean countries; in Greece and Asia Minor, in the Crimea and in North Africa, in Southern Italy and in Etruria, a point of development had been reached at which the same kind of pottery, of very similar artistic merit, was being made in all parts alike. In Greece and other regions which had up to the end of the fourth century, or even later, been famous for their painted pottery, this art had lost its popularity and was dying or dead; in other parts, as in Etruria, it had never obtained a very firm foothold, and the local traditions of relief-ware imitating metal were revived. Not the least remarkable feature of the art of the Hellenistic Age is the great impetus given to working in metal, as has already been indicated in a previous chapter (Vol. I. p. 498). The toreutic products of Alexandria and of the famous chasers of Asia Minor, whose names Pliny records,^[3080] became renowned throughout the Greek world, and the old passion for painted pottery was entirely ousted by the new passion for chased vases of metal.

But in spite of increased habits of luxury, it is obvious that the replacing of earthenware by metal could never have become universal. For ordinary household purposes pottery was still essential, and besides that, there were many to whom services of plate and gold or silver vessels for use or ornament were a luxury unattainable. Hence it was natural that there should follow a general tendency to imitate in the humbler material what was beyond reach in the more precious, and the practice arose, not only of adorning vessels of clay with reliefs in imitation of the chased vases, but even of covering them with some preparation to give them the appearance of metal. Instances of these tendencies have been given in Chapter XI., and no better example could be adduced than that of the silver phialae of Èze and their terracotta replicas in the British Museum (Vol. I. p. 502).

In the same chapter we saw that Southern Italy, in particular, was the home of the relief and moulded wares in the Hellenistic period. This was a time when there were close artistic relations between that region and Etruria, and we have already seen that this method of decoration had long been familiar in the latter district (see p. 292 ff.). Hence it is not surprising that we find springing up in the Etruscan region of Italy an important centre of pottery manufacture which proved itself to be the heir of more than one line of artistic traditions. The era of Roman pottery is generally assumed to begin with the establishment at Arretium, within the area of Roman domination, of a great manufactory in the hands of Roman masters and workmen. Evidence points to the second century B.C. as the time when Arretium sprang into importance as a pottery-centre; and thenceforward for many years its fabrics filled the markets and set the fashion to the rest of the Roman world.

The lower limit of the subject is, from lack of evidence, not much easier to define; but after the second century of the Empire, pottery, like other branches of working in clay, sank very much into the background, and the spread of Christianity after the time of Diocletian practically gave the death-blow to all Pagan art. M. Déchelette, in his account of the important potteries at Lezoux in Gaul, brings forward evidence to show that they practically came to an end about the time of Gallienus (A.D. 260-268)^[3081]; but it is probable that the manufacture of degenerate sigillata wares went on for about a century longer in Germany at any rate, if not in Gaul. Much of the pottery found in Germany and Britain is of an exceedingly debased and barbaric character.

In discussing the geographical distribution of Roman pottery we are met first with the difficulty, which has already been hinted at, of defining where Greek ends and Roman begins. But we must have regard to the fact that in most if not all Greek lands pottery, painted or moulded, was in a moribund condition, whereas in Italy the latter branch was rejuvenescent. It seems, therefore, more satisfactory on the whole to exclude the Eastern Mediterranean entirely from the present survey, and to consider that with the concluding words of Chapter XI. the history of pottery in that part of the ancient world came to an end. That is to say, that all later fabrics found in Greece or Asia Minor, even though they are sometimes of Roman date, belong to the lingering traces of a purely Hellenic development, and have no bearing on our present investigation.

The latter must therefore be limited to the countries of Western Europe, embracing—besides Italy—France, Germany, Britain, and Spain. The pottery found in these regions during the period of the Roman Empire is homogeneous in character, though greatly varying in merit, and so far as it can be traced to the victorious occupiers of those countries rather than to purely native workmanship, represents what we may call Roman pottery, as opposed to Greek or Graeco-Roman on the one hand and Celtic or Gaulish on the other.

2. Technical Processes

Roman pottery, regarded from its purely technical aspect, is in some ways better known to us than Greek, chiefly owing to the extensive discoveries of kilns, furnaces, and potters’ apparatus, such as moulds and tools, in various parts of Western Europe. On the other hand, its classification is a much more difficult matter, although it has for so long been the subject of study, for reasons which will subsequently appear. This is perhaps partly due to the overwhelming interest which the discoveries of recent years have evoked in the study of Greek vases; and partly, of course, to the artistic superiority and more varied interest of the latter; but the mass of material now collected in the Museums of Italy and Central Europe is gradually impelling Continental scholars to bring to bear on Roman pottery the scientific methods now universally pursued in other directions. Of their work we shall speak more in detail in another chapter; for the present we must confine ourselves to the technical aspect of the subject.

The Romans, who used metal vases to a far greater extent than the Greeks—at least under the late Republic and Empire—did not hold the art of pottery in very high estimation, and their vases, like their tiles and lamps, were produced by slaves and freedmen, whereas at Athens the potter usually held at least the position of a resident alien. These were content to produce useful, but not as a rule fine or beautiful, vases, for the most part only adapted to the necessities of life. There was, so far as we know, no manufacture of vases set apart for religious purposes, either for funerary use or as votive offerings, and for the adornment of the house metal had the preference. It is not, therefore, surprising that we should find them making use of a less fine and compact paste for the greater proportion of their vases. With the exception of the fine red wares with reliefs, which are now generally known to archaeologists as terra sigillata,^[3082] and which answered in public estimation to our porcelain, they made only common earthenware, and this was generally left unglazed.

All kinds of clays are used, varying with the different regions in which the pottery was made, and ranging in hue from black to grey, drab, yellow, brown, and red. In quality, too, the clay varies to a considerable extent, some being of a coarse, pebbly character. The red clay of the Allier district in France, where most of the Gaulish pottery was manufactured, is of a ferruginous nature; its natural colour is modified by baking, though it never becomes white.^[3083] The pottery of St. Rémy-en-Rollat in that neighbourhood is made of the same white clay as the terracotta figures (p. 382).^[3084] In Italy, as a rule, careful attention seems to have been paid to the preparing and mixing of the clay, and in the glazed red wares it is uniformly good. In fact, the remarkable similarity in technique and appearance of this ware throughout the Roman Empire has led to the view that there can only have been one centre from which it was exported. Against this, however, must be urged the undeniably provincial and almost barbarous character of the decoration on much of the pottery found in Central and Northern Europe; and therefore, without denying that exportation went on, as it undoubtedly did, we should prefer to suppose that this red glaze was produced in some special artificial manner, such as by using red ochre or iron oxide (see below), the knowledge of which became common property. As Semper said forty years ago^[3085]: “Not only did barbarians, Gauls, Britons, and Germans, learn to know and use Roman technique, but also Egypt, Asia, and the Greeks, already immortalised by their own pottery, dropped their local processes, and voluntarily adopted Roman forms and technique.” Clay and glaze, form and technical method, are in all parts the same; it is only the decoration that varies and reflects the spirit and taste of the locality.

Formerly it was thought that the red glaze was obtained in the baking, after careful polishing of the surface, and that special means were adopted to this end. In the kilns of Castor (see below) Artis thought that he detected contrivances for this purpose; but it is now generally agreed that the glaze is artificial, not natural. In ordinary wares and in the lamps a red glaze is produced by a mere polishing of the surface, and this varies in tone and lustre with the proportion of oxide of iron in the paste, and the degree of heat employed in the baking. But in the terra sigillata the red glaze reaches a high and uniform state of perfection. This seems to have been produced by a kind of varnish, the elements of which are not absolutely certain; but it would appear that the substance added to produce the effect was of an essentially alkaloid nature. This has been deduced by Dragendorff^[3086] from a series of analyses made from fragments of different wares, both without and with the glaze; in the latter case the alkaloid constituents show a marked increase in quantity, whereas the proportion of the iron oxide and other elements remain constant. These investigations were made by Dr. Lilienthal, of Dorpat, on five fragments: (1) from a vase of the Republican period found at Corneto; (2) from a bowl of fine terra sigillata of the first century after Christ; (3) from a deep cup of the same style; (4) from late provincial ware of the second or third century; (5) from a degenerate fabric with rough clay and inferior glaze, the results being as follows:—

1. Without glaze^[3087]:

2. With glaze^[3088]:

It must be borne in mind that, although the final effect is due to the alkaloids, the red colour of the vases is produced by the iron oxide which was inherent in the composition of the clay, none being added with the varnish, as the quantities show. All the fragments also showed traces of manganese and sulphuric acid. Previously analyses had been given by Brongniart and Blümner,^[3089] with results approximately similar, but not so definite. Fabroni had thought that the iron oxide was combined with a vitreous paste,^[3090] and Keller, by practical experiments, essayed to show that borax was employed to provide the required appearance,^[3091] and further maintained that the furnace at Castor already alluded to was used for dissolving that substance. He was not far from the truth, but the results obtained by Dragendorff seem to militate against his conclusions.

In any case the glaze is very perfect, of so bright a red as to resemble coral, and serving, as Blümner says, to enhance the ground colour where a modern glaze would only conceal its imperfect tone. It is so fine and so carefully laid on that it does not interfere with any outlines or details, in this again evincing its superiority to modern glaze. It seems to have been applied not with the brush, but by dipping the vase into the liquid.^[3092] Black glaze, such as occurs on the earlier Italian fabrics (p. 481), was produced from an alkaline silicate.^[3093]

The ordinary unglazed wares were classified by Brongniart under four heads^[3094]: (1) pale yellow; (2) red (dark red to red-brown; first century of Empire); (3) grey or ash-coloured (down to the end of the Western Empire); (4) black (mainly provincial). This distribution was in its general lines adopted by subsequent writers, such as Buckman^[3095] and Birch, but was felt to be inadequate, and some slight modifications were adopted. For practical purposes, however, it will be found to work fairly well as a convenient method of grouping the commoner wares. None of them as a rule have any decoration. They will be considered in fuller detail in a subsequent chapter.

In the manufacture of vases the Romans used the same processes as the Greeks. They were made on the wheel (rota figularis or orbis),^[3096] to which allusion is not infrequently made by the Latin poets, as in the well-known line of Horace^[3097]:—