History of Ancient Pottery: Greek, Etruscan, and Roman. Volume 2 (of 2) by Walters et al.
1. INTRODUCTORY
1090 words | Chapter 157
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.
Reading Tips
Use arrow keys to navigate
Press 'N' for next chapter
Press 'P' for previous chapter