2. ETRUSCAN SARCOPHAGUS (THIRD CENT.)

(BRITISH MUSEUM). ] ------------------------------------------------------ The existing remains of Etruscan monumental sculpture in clay are, as has been indicated, not large. Some of the architectural antefixes are almost important enough to be included under this head, especially those in the form of figures or groups modelled almost in the round. These belong mostly to the fifth century B.C., and the finest example is the group in the Berlin Museum from the Cervetri find already mentioned, representing Eos carrying off Kephalos[2357]; it is in the style of about 480 B.C. A smaller but still very effective example is the antefix from Civita Lavinia in the British Museum, representing a Satyr and Maenad awaiting the advent of Dionysos (Plate II.).[2358] With these must be reckoned the sculptured friezes from Cervetri in the British and Berlin Museums, and the reliefs on the British Museum sarcophagus from the same site.[2359] In all these the same prevalence of Ionic Greek influence may be observed, which is characteristic of so much Etruscan work of the late archaic period, both in terracotta and bronze, as in the reliefs of the Polledrara bust.[2360] This influence, which is due to the strong Hellenic element in the civilisation of Caere and the Campanian cities, we have also seen at work in the vase-paintings of the period.[2361] One of the earliest instances, and perhaps the most remarkable, of Etruscan clay modelling in the round, for its size and execution, is the group on the top of the famous sarcophagus in the British Museum (Fig. 183).[2362] The figures, a man and woman reclining on a couch, are life-size, of somewhat slender proportions, with smiling features, the drapery of the woman stiff and formal. Sir Charles Newton has described the style as “archaic, the treatment throughout very naturalistic, in which a curious striving after truth in anatomical details gives animation to the group, in spite of the extreme ungainliness of form and ungraceful composition.” The same difficulties that beset the sculptor of the Polledrara bust, in working in the round instead of relief, are visible here; and the contrast with the Hellenic style of the reliefs round the lower part is very marked. There are similar sarcophagi in the Louvre, and in the Museo Papa Giulio at Rome.[2363] M. Martha notes in regard to the figures on the former that the faces are remarkable for individuality and precision of type, but the limbs are stiff and rude. This is not an infrequent feature of early Greek art.[2364] Signor Savignoni claims these three monuments as purely Ionic Greek work, but repudiates much of the British Museum sarcophagus as un-antique. [Illustration: FIG. 183. ARCHAIC TERRACOTTA SARCOPHAGUS (BRITISH MUSEUM).] Of later sculpture in terracotta the instances are comparatively few, by far the best being the pedimental sculptures from Luni in Northern Tuscany, discovered in 1842, and now at Florence.[2365] Their date is about 200 B.C., and they include figures of the Olympian deities, Muses, and a group of Apollo and Artemis slaying the Niobides. A few remains of similar figures were found at Orvieto.[2366] [Illustration: FIG. 184. PAINTED TERRACOTTA SLAB FROM TOMB (LOUVRE). ] It may be convenient to speak here of a small group of monuments in terracotta which illustrate in an interesting manner the achievements of Etruscan painting in the archaic period. This is a series of terracotta slabs, which were inserted into the walls of small tombs at Cervetri to receive the painted decoration which the Etruscans considered such an important feature of their sepulchral arrangements.[2367] Two sets have been found, one of which is in the Louvre, the other in the British Museum; both are of similar character, and belong to the beginning of the sixth century, but the style varies in some degree. Fig. 184 gives one of the slabs in the Louvre. The surface of the slabs was covered with the usual white slip or λεύκωμα of early Greek paintings,[2368] on which the designs were sketched with a point and filled in with red and black outlines or washes. The white ground was left for the flesh of women and for white drapery, the flesh of the men being coloured red. Of the two the Louvre slabs seem the more advanced, and more directly under Ionic influence, while the others are more provincial in character. The Caeretan hydriae seem to have left some traces on the former, and in the latter it is interesting to note the use of borders of white dots for the drapery, such as we see on the Daphnae vases (Vol. I. p. 352). These paintings may also be compared with those in the Grotta Campana at Veii (Vol. I. p. 39), which, in spirit at any rate, if not in date, are the oldest examples of Etruscan painting, while still under Oriental influence. But not being works in terracotta, they do not strictly concern us here. * * * * * Although the more important sarcophagi of the Etruscans were made of alabaster, tufa, and peperino, a considerable number, principally of small size, were of terracotta. All of these belong to a late stage of Etruscan art. Some few were large enough to receive a body laid at full length. Two large sarcophagi, from a tomb at Vulci, now in the British Museum, may be taken as typical.[2369] The lower part, which held the body, is shaped like a rectangular bin or trough, about three feet high and as many wide. On the covers are recumbent Etruscan women, modelled at full length. One has both its cover and chest divided into two portions, probably because it was found that masses of too large a size failed in the baking. The edges at the point of division are turned up, like flange tiles. These have on their fronts in one case dolphins, in the other branches of trees, incised with a tool in outline. Other sarcophagi of the same dimensions are imitations of the larger ones of stone. Many of the smaller sort, which held the ashes of the dead, are of the same shape, the body being a small rectangular chest, while the cover presents a figure of the deceased in a reclining posture. They generally have in front a composition in relief, freely modelled in the later style of Etruscan art, the subject being often of funeral import: such as the last farewell to the dead; combats of heroes (Plate LIX.), especially that of Eteokles and Polyneikes; a battle in which an unarmed hero is fighting with a ploughshare[2370]; the parting of Admetos and Alkestis in the presence of Death and Charun; and the slaying of the dragon by Kadmos at the fountain of Ares.[2371] Some few have a painted roof. All these were painted in _tempera_ upon a white ground, in bright and vivid tones, producing a gaudy effect. The inscriptions were also traced in paint, and rarely incised. A good and elaborate example of the colouring of terracotta occurs in the recumbent figure on a small sarcophagus in the British Museum (Plate LIX.).[2372] Here the flesh is red, the eyes black, the hair red, the wreath green, and the drapery of the figure is white, with purple and crimson borders; the phiale which the figure holds is yellow (to imitate gilding), and the cushions on which he reclines are red and blue. This system of colouring is maintained to an even greater degree in the relief on the front of the sarcophagus, the subject of which is a combat of five warriors. The background is coloured indigo, and every detail is rendered in colour, except the nude parts, which are covered with a white slip throughout. The pigments employed are red, yellow, black, green, and purple, and the inscription above is painted in brown on white, all the colours being marvellously fresh and well preserved; but the general effect is gaudy, fantastic, and scarcely appropriate. It may also be said in regard to the whole series that the subjects are monotonous and unpleasing, and the compositions crowded to excess. By far the finest example of these terracotta sarcophagi is one found at Cervetri not many years ago, now in the British Museum (Plate LX.).[2373] It is known from the inscription in front to be the last resting-place of a lady named Seianti Thanunia, whose effigy, life-size, adorns the top—a most realistic specimen of Etruscan portrait-sculpture, and in splendid preservation. Within the lower part her skeleton is still preserved, together with a series of silver utensils. A very similar specimen, that of Larthia Seianti, is in the Museum at Florence,[2374] and from the coins found therewith the date of these two may be fixed at about 150 B.C. The figure of the lady was cast in two halves, the joint being below the hips; she is represented as a middle-aged matron, her head veiled in a mantle which she draws aside with her right hand. In her left she holds a mirror in an open case; she wears a _sphendone_ in her hair, and much jewellery. On the right arm are bracelets, and on the left hand six rings, the bezels of which are painted purple to imitate sard-stones; in her ears are pendants painted to imitate amber set in gold. The nude parts are painted flesh-colour, and colouring is freely employed throughout, the cushions being painted in stripes. The dimensions of the sarcophagus itself are 6 ft. by 2 ft. by 1 ft. 4 in.; it has no reliefs on the front, but is ornamented with pilasters, triglyphs, and quatrefoils. For antefixal ornaments, masks, and the decoration of the smaller sarcophagi and other products of ordinary industry, the clay seems to have been invariably made in the form of a mould; but for the larger sarcophagi and the Canopic figures a rough clay model was made by hand and itself baked. Probably both processes were employed concurrently—large statues, for instance, being made in several pieces; in these it will generally be noted that the head and torso are modelled more carefully than the limbs. ------------------------------------------------------ PLATE LX [Illustration: SARCOPHAGUS OF SEIANTI THANUNIA (SECOND CENT. B.C.) (BRIT. MUS.)] ------------------------------------------------------ M. Martha[2375] explains the invariable colouring of Etruscan terracottas on the supposition that the Etruscans did not profess to make figures in this material, but looked down on it as a common substance, to be concealed wherever possible. However this may be, the polychromy was not only a necessary artifice, but an admirable means of imparting life and realism to the figures. In the archaic period there is much less variety, yellow, red, brown, and black being the only colours employed as a rule.[2376] The dark red pigment usually applied for flesh-colour on the sarcophagi may suggest the _minium_ with which the statue of Jupiter Capitolinus was smeared. In later work the tints are lighter and much more varied, as we have seen, and this is especially noticeable on the figures from the Luni pediments, in which rose, yellow, green, and blue are employed with the same delicate _nuances_ that we see in the Tanagra figures. § 3. SOUTHERN ITALY In dealing with the indigenous non-Hellenic people of Southern Italy and their pottery, we are almost more at a disadvantage than in regard to the Etruscans. The peoples are almost unknown to us, and are vaguely characterised as “Iapygian,” “Messapian,” “Oscan,” and so on; but this does not really carry us much further. Moreover, this part of Italy has never been scientifically or thoroughly excavated, like Etruria, and even where finds have been made they are small and poor; nothing of very remote date appears to have come to light, and very few early Greek importations. Hence there has been until quite recently no attempt made at a scientific study of the pottery, or even to distinguish local from imported wares; in Heydemann’s catalogue of the Naples vases it is practically ignored. Recently, however, Herr Max Mayer, and Signor Patroni, whose laudable investigations of the Graeco-Italian vases have already received attention (Chapter XI.), have turned their attention to the study of the less promising indigenous fabrics.[2377] The region with which the present section deals is that comprised by the three districts of Apulia, Lucania, and Campania. The barbarian races by which it was occupied in classical times were known by various names, used with some vagueness; but roughly we may divide them into two groups: the Iapygians or Messapians and the Peucetians, occupying the south-east portion of the peninsula from modern Bari to the end of the “heel”[2378]; and the Osco-Samnites, who occupied Campania and the mountainous district of Samnium on its north-eastern border. In Lucania the district of Sala Consilina has yielded local pottery.[2379] The Osco-Samnites appear to have been more amenable to the influence of Greek civilisation than the others, owing to the existence in their midst of such centres of culture as Cumae, Capua, and Poseidonia (Paestum); hence we find that the pottery of that region shows a much more Hellenic character than that of Apulia, and is more like that of Etruria in its attempts to imitate the Greek imported fabrics (see Vol. I. p. 484). Greek painted vases are found in Southern Italy as early as the seventh century B.C., though even in “Aegean” times they had penetrated as far as Sicily, and even Marseilles (see Vol. I. pp. 69, 86).[2380] At Cumae in particular, and also at Nola, “Proto-Corinthian” and Corinthian wares have been found; during the sixth century Ionic and Attic B.F. wares make their appearance, but never in large quantities, as in Etruria. They, however, gave rise to a class of imitative fabrics found chiefly in Campania: small amphorae and other forms rudely painted with black silhouettes, dating from the fifth century. At Tarentum the finds of vases have been mainly Greek, but even these are comparatively rare. The principal examples of local wares are to be seen in the museums of Bari, Lecce, Taranto, and Naples; the British Museum, Louvre, and Berlin only possess isolated specimens.[2381] The general scarcity of imports is due, Signor Patroni thinks, to the restricted intercourse between the colonies on the coast and the interior districts peopled by hostile local tribes. After the fifth century, when large numbers of Greek artists were established in the towns of Southern Italy, the circumstances became different, and we have already made in Chapter XI. a general survey of the various fabrics produced from that time in the various centres down to the total decay of the art. All Italiote pottery, before this direct influence of Hellenism made itself felt, may be called “archaic”; but it must at the same time be borne in mind that these archaic types still went on during the time of Greek influence. They formed, in fact, a “domestic” style, as opposed to the “high-art” style of the Graeco-Italian wares, just as the early Geometrical pottery of Athens is thought to have been in relation to the Mycenaean vases (see Vol. I. p. 279). They must not, however, be regarded—as has been done by some writers—as deliberate archaistic revivals of older fabrics. It is true that they bear a remarkable resemblance in many cases to Aegean, Cypriote, and Geometrical wares; but this likeness is due to other causes, being the result of development, not of direct imitation. A learned Italian, on first seeing some of the local pottery excavated in Apulia, exclaimed, “This is the Mycenaean style of Italy.” Chronologically and ethnographically he was wrong, but artistically he was right; and as Signor Patroni has pointed out, parallels to nearly all the ornamental motives of local Apulian fabrics may be traced in Mycenaean pottery. There is also a favourite shape, that of a large double-mouthed _askos_, examples of which may be seen in the British Museum (F 508 = Fig. 185, and F 509), which is obviously derived directly from the Mycenaean “false-necked amphora” (see Vol. I. p. 271). It is not a Hellenic type, although it is the forerunner of a form of askos found among the painted vases of Apulia.[2382] Another favourite form, which Signor Patroni calls the _orcio appulo_, a jar with three vertical handles round the nearly spherical body, and wide-spreading mouth, may similarly be derived from the Mycenaean three-handled _pyxis_ (Vol. I. p. 272). Other forms, again, are parallel with those of Cyprus, as is in some cases the system of geometrical decoration, a figure or pattern in a panel with borders of geometrical ornament. The writers above-mentioned distinguish two main classes of the local pottery of Apulia (including the south-eastern extremity or “heel” of Italy). The central portion of this district was inhabited by a tribe known as the Peucetii, and the extremity by Messapians, or, as they are also styled, Iapygians. The vases, which appear to be the product of the latter race, are found in various places—such as Brindisi, Egnazia or Fasano, Lecce, Nardo, Ostuni, Otranto, Putignano, Rugge, Taranto, and Uzento—and they may best be studied in the museum at Bari. The pottery of the Peucetii, which Signor Patroni calls Apulian, covers the region round Bari, including Putignano on the south, Bitonto and Ruvo on the north, where the local civilisation seems to have been modified by the influence of such centres as Canosa. [Illustration: FIG. 185. ASKOS OF LOCAL APULIAN FABRIC (BRITISH MUSEUM).] The typical form of Messapian pottery is a krater with high angular handles, at the highest and lowest points of which are pairs of discs (_rotelle_), a spherical body, and neck sloping inwards, without lip. The form is one which, as we have seen in Chapter XI., was adopted by the Greek vase-painters in Lucania at a later date.[2383] Mayer states that this form is only found in the “heel” of Italy, but Patroni seems to imply that it is typical of Central Apulia.[2384] It is painted in two colours—purple-red and dark brown or black; but the former colour is not found in the earlier examples. The decoration includes simple geometrical or vegetable patterns, such as wreaths, panels of lozenge-pattern, zigzags, and an ornament composed of two triangles point to point [hourglass], which Mayer calls the “hour-glass“ ornament. The more developed examples have figures in panels, ranging from rows of ducks to human figures. Among these are a man gathering fruit from a tree and two stags confronted. Lenormant published two very interesting specimens in the Louvre, one of which has two cocks confronted, the other a man swimming accompanied by a dolphin.[2385] The latter, with others of the same class, styled by Lenormant “Iapygian,” appear to be imitations of B.F. amphorae[2386]; but if they are imitations they must be almost contemporaneous with their prototypes, and cannot be later than the fifth century. The man with the dolphin recalls the story of Taras and the coin-types of Tarentum; but Lenormant pointed out that a similar legend was current relating to Iapys, the eponymous hero of Iapygia,[2387] and he may therefore be intended. Some of these vases have painted inscriptions, one of which runs, [ΙΑΡ]; but they are apparently nothing more than names, partly Hellenised. Among other shapes are a kind of askos with simple decoration, a jug or pitcher with discs attached to the handles, also with simple patterns, and a unique variety of the krater with four flat-topped column-handles. Signor Patroni[2388] calls attention to another class of Messapian vases from which the geometrical decorative element is absent, the ornament being arranged in bands of equal width, and varying between linear and natural forms. A characteristic motive is a sort of chain-pattern. The wave and rows of pomegranate-buds also occur, and animals, such as dogs and dolphins; also human heads and figures. The shapes are either the double-necked askos, as given in Fig. 185, with an arched handle between the mouths, or a kind of double situla, formed of two jars on a cylindrical stand with a vertical handle between. As Mayer has pointed out, there cannot here be any question of a very ancient class of vases, but rather of one of eclectic character. The Geometrical tendency appears chiefly in the north of the district, where the influence of Peucetia (see below) was felt. The vegetable ornaments, he suggests, have affinities with those of “Rhodian” vases.[2389] The date can hardly be earlier than the fifth century. [Illustration: From _Notizie degli Scavi_. FIG. 186. KRATER OF “PEUCETIAN” FABRIC WITH GEOMETRICAL DECORATION. ] The fabrics of Central or Peucetian Apulia centre, as has been noted, round Bari. They are all of a strongly Geometrical type, but the system of ornamentation is freer and more varied than in the Messapian class. They are easily recognisable by their forms and characteristic designs, painted only in brown or black. Here, again, the typical form is a krater, in which the handles are either arched in vertical fashion or else form flat bands. It has a shallow, spreading lip. The patterns are arranged in panels and bands, and are often executed with great care. Fig. 186 gives an example from Sala Consilina in Lucania.[2390] The favourite motives are chequers, zigzags, the “hour-glass,” hook-armed crosses, and lozenges filled with reticulated pattern, neatly arranged in friezes or saltire-wise. Round the lower part of the vase is often found what may be described as a comb-pattern, and on some vases is a curious rudimentary form of the maeander, arranged in triangles or diagonal crosses. Among the other shapes are a small askos with ring-handle on the back, a sort of high stand like a fruit-dish, large cups and bowls, and the _orcio_ already mentioned. One of the finest examples is a krater from Ruvo in the Jatta collection,[2391] with twisted handles and a very elaborate system of ornamentation, chiefly diaper and maeander patterns. Like the Messapian, the Peucetian or Apulian pottery seems to have flourished during the fifth century[2392]; but there are some vases which seem to form connecting-links with their Hellenic prototypes, and probably belong to the sixth century.[2393] In any case, both fabrics must be regarded as much earlier than previously supposed; they are certainly not late archaistic work, and time must be allowed for their disappearance when the Hellenic fabrics of Apulia begin. In placing the majority of the products between 600 and 450 B.C., we shall probably not be far from the truth, although M. Pottier[2394] would throw the origin of the fabrics as far back as the eighth century. ----- Footnote 2246: See especially Pottier, _Louvre Cat._ ii. p. 285 ff., and Gsell, _Fouilles de Vulci_, p. 315 ff. Footnote 2247: i. 94. Footnote 2248: _Sat._ i. 6, 1. Footnote 2249: i. 30. Footnote 2250: _Op. cit._ p. 297. Footnote 2251: _Frag. Hist. Graec._ ed. Didot, i. p. 45: ἐπὶ Σπινῆτι ποταμῷ (the name of one of the mouths). He calls them here Pelasgians. Footnote 2252: Bertrand and Reinach, _Les Celtes dans les vallées du Po et du Danube_, p. 73 ff.: cf. Bertrand, _Arch. celtique et gauloise_, p. 205. Footnote 2253: Cf. i. 27 with vii. 3. Footnote 2254: See Helbig, _Die Italiker in der Poebene_, for a full account of this period; also Von Duhn in _J.H.S._ xvi. p. 128, whose ethnographical views seem to differ in many details from those of other writers previously cited. Footnote 2255: See _Brit. Mus. Cat. of Bronzes_, p. xlv. Footnote 2256: See _Ann. dell’ Inst._ 1884, p. 111. Footnote 2257: _Notizie degli Scavi_, 1881, pl. 5, Nos. 15, 16. Footnote 2258: _Il._ xi. 633; _Od._ iv. 615, vi. 232. See Dumont-Pottier, i. p. 152. Footnote 2259: On the ornamentation of the Villanuova period general reference may be made to Böhlau’s _Zur Ornamentik der Villanovaperiode_ (1895). Footnote 2260: Gsell, _Fouilles de Vulci_, p. 254. Footnote 2261: See _Brit. Mus. Cat. of Bronzes_, p. xlv, and references there given. Footnote 2262: The objects found at Hallstatt date from about the tenth to ninth centuries B.C., and are sometimes “sub-Mycenaean” in character. Footnote 2263: See on the subject of hut-urns the bibliographies given in Gsell, _Fouilles de Vulci_, p. 258; _Bonner Studien_, p. 24 (Von Duhn); and _J.H.S._ xvi. p. 127 (_id._). Footnote 2264: _J.H.S._ xvi. p. 125. Footnote 2265: See also for Narce _Mon. Antichi_, iv. pt. 1, p. 105 ff. Footnote 2266: M. Pottier states that a primitive kind of wheel was used for making the _impasto_ in the eighth century, and Helbig and Martha are certainly wrong in stating that it was not introduced till the sixth (see _Louvre Cat._ ii. p. 294). Footnote 2267: _Bull. dell’ Inst._ 1885, p. 118. Footnote 2268: _E.g._ _Brit. Mus. Cat._ Nos. 347 ff. Footnote 2269: _Op. cit._ p. 345 ff. Footnote 2270: _Notizie degli Scavi_, 1884, p. 186 = 338: cf. for the style a vase from Tamassos, Cyprus, in the British Museum (_Rev. Arch._ ix. 1887, p. 77). Footnote 2271: See generally Pottier, _Louvre Cat._ ii. p. 363 ff. Footnote 2272: See Vol. I. p. 153, and cf. Perrot, _Hist. de l’Art_, vi. p. 211, fig. 57, for examples from Troy. Footnote 2273: Abeken, _Mittelital._ p. 362 ff.; but see _Arch. Zeit._ 1881, p. 41. Footnote 2274: _E.g._ _Ann. dell’ Inst._ 1884, pl. C. Footnote 2275: Hdt. i. 14, 25; Paus. x. 16. Footnote 2276: For Greek examples of early vases with reliefs see Vol. I. p. 497, and Plate XLVII. Footnote 2277: See for specimens _Gaz. Arch._ 1881, pls. 28, 29, 32-3; Pottier, _Vases du Louvre_, pls. 33-4. Footnote 2278: Louvre D 151. Footnote 2279: _Bull. dell’ Inst._ 1884, p. 163. Footnote 2280: _Röm. Mitth._ 1886, p. 135. Footnote 2281: See Pliny, _H.N._ xxxv. 152. The names are doubtless descriptive. Footnote 2282: Cf. _B.M. Cat. of Bronzes_, p. xlvii, and references there given. Footnote 2283: Nearly all the contents of this tomb are now in the British Museum (Etruscan Saloon, Cases 126-35): see Micali, _Mon. Ined._ pls. 4-8; Dennis, _Etruria_^2, i. p. 457 ff.; C. Smith in _J.H.S._ xiv. p. 206. Footnote 2284: A most trustworthy reproduction of this vase and its decoration, made by Mr. F. Anderson, is given in _J.H.S._ xiv. pls. 6-7. Footnote 2285: Cf. throughout the François vase. Footnote 2286: Micali, _op. cit._ pl. 5, fig. 2. Footnote 2287: _Cat._ 1543. Footnote 2288: _Cat._ C 617-18. Footnote 2289: _Bull. dell’ Inst._ 1881, p. 167, No. 26. Footnote 2290: The hydria is a form of essentially Ionic origin, the earliest examples being found in the “Caeretan” and Daphnae fabrics (see