Roman pottery mentioned by ancient writers—“Samian” ware—Centres of fabric—The pottery of Arretium—Characteristics—Potters’ stamps—Shapes of Arretine vases—Sources of inspiration for decoration—“Italian Megarian bowls”—Subjects—Distribution of Arretine wares.

In the present chapter we propose to discuss the origin and character of the finer Roman pottery, or red glazed ware with designs in relief, which is usually known to modern writers under the convenient designation of terra sigillata, a phrase which has already been explained (p. 434). Not only in clay and glaze but in decoration these wares are characteristically Roman; but the question as to the actual centre or centres of their manufacture still admits of some discussion.

Relying principally upon the testimony of Pliny, Martial, and other ancient writers, archaeologists have been accustomed to classify the red ware with reliefs, on a rough system of distinction according to artistic merit, as Arretine, Samian, and “false Samian.” The latter term “Samian” has indeed acquired such popularity that it has passed into the language as a conventional term of almost every-day use; but to the scientific investigator it has long been apparent that in point of accuracy it almost stands on a level with that of “Etruscan vase.” That of “false Samian” has usually been applied to a certain class of provincial wares, technically inferior to the “Samian.” But though both terms may still retain currency in popular language for the sake of convenience, it must not be supposed that they are impressed with the hall-mark of scientific terminology.

Before however we attempt to distinguish the different fabrics on the basis of recent researches, it may be as well to investigate the statements of the classical writers and weigh the evidence which they afford on the various kinds of pottery in use in Italy under the Roman Empire.

The most valuable information is found in the pages of Pliny, supplemented by Isidorus of Seville, who, writing in the seventh century, probably gives merely second-hand information. The former^[3331] says: “The majority of mankind use earthenware vessels. Samian ware is commended even at the present day for dinner services; this reputation is also kept up by Arretium in Italy, and for drinking-cups by Surrentum, Hasta, Pollentia, Saguntum in Spain, and Pergamum in Asia. Tralles is also a centre for pottery, and Mutina in Italy ... and exportation from the celebrated potteries goes on all over the world.” Isidorus, who largely quotes from Pliny, gives the tradition that Samos was the seat of the original invention of pottery, “whence too came Samian vases.”^[3332] He goes on to say that “Arretine vases are so called from Arretium, a town in Italy where they are made, for they are red.” But in regard to “Samian ware” he admits that there is another explanation of the term, namely that it is a corruption of Samnia. Herein he is possibly not far from the truth, for we have already seen that the adjacent region of Campania was in the last few centuries of the Republic famous as a centre for relief-wares, and it is possible that the manufacture of such pottery was carried on in the district, as for instance at Puteoli, long afterwards. We also know that Allifae in Samnium was a seat of this industry,^[3333] and that a special class of pottery was made at Ocriculum and at Mevania in Umbria about 200 B.C. (see below, p. 490).

On the other hand there is no doubt that Samos had a reputation for its pottery for many centuries, as is implied by the tradition which Isidorus quotes and by the words of Pliny: “even at the present day it is commended.” In a previous chapter it has been suggested that the so-called Megarian bowls, which undoubtedly are a prototype of the Roman wares, represent the Samian pottery of the Hellenistic period; but whether this is so or not, the most probable conclusion is that the term “Samian” connotes in the first instance a Greek, not a Roman, fabric; that this Greek ware was imported into Italy; and that it became so popular that the term really came into use for native products, just as now-a-days we are able to speak of “China” which has travelled no further than from Worcester, Sèvres, or Dresden. It may thus have become a generic name for table-ware. Plautus mentions Samian ware more than once (see above, p. 456), usually with reference to its brittleness, as in the Menaechmi,^[3334] where Menaechmus says, “Knock gently!” to which the parasite Peniculus replies: “I suppose you are afraid the doors are Samian.” Again in the Bacchides,^[3335] with a jesting allusion to Samos as the home of one of the two heroines: “Take care, please, that no one handles her carelessly; you know how easily a Samian vase gets broken.” In another passage he speaks of a Samiolum poterium.^[3336] And Tertullian, speaking of Numa’s times, says that only Samian vases were as yet in use.^[3337]

Pliny also mentions Pergamum and Tralles as centres of fabrics, and speaks of the firmitas or toughness of that of Kos, but of these we know nothing further. It has been pointed out by Dragendorff that there was some manufacture of terra sigillata in Asia Minor under the Empire,^[3338] probably an imitation of the Italian ware, as the examples known present the same characteristics as the provincial wares of Central Europe, and the forms are also those of the Arretine vases. The same writer has shown that there were also manufactures of terra sigillata in Greece itself, in Egypt, and in Southern Russia, which were of similar character.

To return to Italy and its local fabrics. It is not to be supposed that there was any one principal centre, for different towns excelled in their respective wares, and these were imported from one to the other, and especially into Rome. This city was of course originally supplied with earthenware by the Etruscans, whose mantle fell on the town of Arretium, but it cannot be doubted that the manufacture of pottery must have been carried on to some extent in Rome itself after the absorption of the Etruscan people. We read that even in Numa’s time there was a Guild of Potters (see p. 372), but it never appears to have excelled in any of the finer wares, and is ignored by Pliny, though we have evidence from other sources. Thus Martial speaks of cadi Vaticani,^[3339] and Juvenal of fragile dishes from the Vatican hill.^[3340] Cato says dolia are best bought in Rome, tiles at Venafrum.^[3341] And the evidence of a pottery in the third and second centuries B.C. on the Esquiline which is given by the find of lamps described in Chapter XX. is supported by Festus.^[3342]

Pliny, as we have seen, mentions Arretium, Hasta and Pollentia, Mutina and Surrentum with commendation; he also couples the pottery of Hadria with that of Kos for firmitas.^[3343] He further implies that Arretium kept up the old pre-eminence of the Samian ware, and this is borne out, not only by what we gather from Martial and other writers, but still more by modern discoveries, of which we shall shortly speak in detail. Of the other potteries less is known, but remains have been found at Hasta and Pollentia (Asti and Pollenza in Piedmont)^[3344] and the figlinae of Velleia in the same region were also well known in antiquity.^[3345] At Mutina (Modena) remains of a pottery were found (see Vol. I. p. 71), together with vases of Arretine type, and the potter Fortis, whose name so often occurs on lamps (p. 426), appears to have had his workshop here.^[3346] His stamps are also found on tiles and on pottery of all kinds, even Arretine. Here, too, were found vases of black ware, of “Graeco-Campanian” style, sometimes with stamps impressed from gems, and unglazed red plates stamped with small palmettes like the Greek black-glazed wares (Vol. I. p. 212). Livy mentions that in 176 B.C. a great destruction took place here of “all kinds of vases, made more for use than for ornament.”^[3347] In their general results the pottery-finds are instructive as showing the transition from black to red wares, which may also be observed in the vases of Popilius and the early Arretine fabrics (see below).^[3348]

Campania in general seems to have maintained the traditions of the Calene and Etrusco-Campanian fabrics of the third century (Chapter XI.), and there is evidence of manufacture and export in the first century B.C. Horace’s table was supplied with Campana supellex.^[3349] Surrentum ware is mentioned by Martial^[3350] as well as Pliny, and, as indicated in the preceding chapter (p. 462), supplied amphorae of local wine to Pompeii.^[3351] The pottery of Cumae, which place was at an earlier date an important centre for painted vases (Vol. I. p. 80), is mentioned by Martial^[3352] It would also seem to have supplied clay for the vases made at the neighbouring Puteoli, which had no local clay suitable for the purpose, and is not mentioned by ancient writers. The latter has however yielded large numbers of vases of a type closely resembling the Arretine, and a pottery was discovered in 1874, with moulds.^[3353] Some of the vases have Arretine stamps,^[3354] which imply importations during the first century B.C., but names of local potters are also known, chief of whom is Numerius Naevius Hilarus, who employed eleven slaves. Q. Pomponius Serenus and L. Valerius Titus are also found here and elsewhere in Southern Italy and at Nismes.^[3355] Some fragments of this Puteoli ware from various sources are in the British Museum.^[3356]

Horace speaks of pottery from Allifae in Samnium,^[3357] and Pliny mentions the popularity of that made at Rhegium and Cumac^[3358]; this exhausts the list of sites known to us from ancient writers. In the provinces the only place which had any fame was Saguntum, alluded to by Pliny and more than once by Martial, who speaks of cups (pocula and cymbia) fashioned from Saguntine clay^[3359]; also of a synthesis septenaria or nest of seven cups, “polished by the potter’s coarse tool, of clay turned on the Spanish wheel.”^[3360] But modern researches on the site have not thrown any light on the character of the local fabric (p. 540)^[3361]; it is only at Tarragona that terra sigillata has been found.

The pottery of Arretium is more than once referred to by Martial, who notes that it compared unfavourably with the splendour of crystal vessels, but at the same time begs his hearer not to regard it altogether with contempt, for Porsena was well served with his Tuscan earthenware^[3362]: