CHAPTER XVIII

_ETRUSCAN AND SOUTH ITALIAN POTTERY_

Early Italian civilisation—Origin of Etruscans—Terramare civilisation—Villanuova period—Pit-tombs—Hut-urns—Trench-tombs—Relief-wares and painted vases from Cervetri—Chamber-tombs—Polledrara ware—Bucchero ware—Canopic jars—Imitations of Greek vases—Etruscan inscriptions—Sculpture in terracotta—Architectural decoration—Sarcophagi—Local pottery of Southern Italy—Messapian and Peucetian fabrics.

In the succeeding section of this work we propose, by a natural transition, to deal with Italian pottery, that is, Etruscan and Roman, as distinct from Greek. The subject naturally falls under three heads—the first two dealing with the pottery of the period previous to the Roman domination of Italy, and therefore contemporaneous with the Greek pottery; the third with Roman pottery from the second century B.C. onwards, and of necessity including also remains of similar pottery from Gaul, Britain, and other countries over which that civilisation extended.

In the present chapter the first two branches of the subject—namely, Etruscan pottery, and the local fabrics of Southern Italy—will be discussed; the period of time which they cover is, as has been said, coincident with that covered by the history of Greek pottery, extending from the Bronze Age down to the end of the third century B.C.

§ 1. ETRUSCAN POTTERY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Helbig, _Die Italiker in der Poebene_; _Ann. dell’ Inst._ 1884, p. 108 ff., 1885, p. 5 ff.; Karo, _Cenni sulla cronologia preclassica_, Parma, 1898; Von Duhn in _Bonner Studien_, p. 21 ff., and in _J.H.S._ xvi. p. 125 ff.; Martha, _L’Art Étrusque_, _passim_; Dennis, _Cities and Cemeteries of Etruria_, 2nd edn. (good for topography; archaeology out of date); _J.H.S._ xiv. p. 206 ff. (C. Smith on Polledrara ware); Gsell, _Fouilles de Vulci_; Pottier, _Cat. des vases ant. du Louvre_, ii. p. 285 ff. (the best general survey); _Notizie degli Scavi_, _passim_, for excavations; _Brit. Mus. Cat. of Bronzes_, p. xliv ff.

(1) EARLY ITALIAN CIVILISATION

As regards Etruria, it will be seen that the art of the people was largely imitative, being derived mainly from Greece, but in some measure also from the East. Few remains of their productions have reached the present day, with the exception of large numbers of vases, bronzes, and jewellery; these, however, afford a very clear notion of the characteristics of Etruscan art. It is hardly possible to treat the subject of working in clay in Etruria with such fulness as can be done in the case of Greece and Rome, owing to the greater dearth of literature; but in our previous chapter (III.) on this subject much has already been said with reference to what is known on this head. In regard to the pottery, careful scientific excavations, such as those undertaken by M. Gsell at Vulci (Vol. I. p. 77), have done much to increase our knowledge of all periods, and to place chronological certainty within the reach of the inquirer.

In dealing with the history of art in Italy, we are naturally first met with two questions: (1) Who were the earliest inhabitants of the country, particularly in the region afterwards known as Etruria, in which the first signs of artistic development appear? (2) At what period and from what quarter did the Etruscans occupy this region, or are they aboriginal? It will therefore be necessary to devote a few preliminary paragraphs to these much-debated questions,[2246] in order to gain a better understanding of the subsequent history.

The question of the origin of the Etruscans, to take the second first, is as old as Herodotos.[2247] As is well known, the Father of History held to the view that they originally came from Lydia, a view which found general support in antiquity, and is referred to by Horace,[2248] and many other writers. His fellow-townsman Dionysios was, however, of the opinion that they were autochthonous.[2249] However much of truth there may be in either of these theories, the fact remains that with certain modifications each of the two alternatives has found supporters even down to the present day, though to Niebuhr first is due the suggestion that the immigration of the Etruscans was by land and not by sea, and that they came from Central Europe by way of the Rhaetian Alps. He has been followed by most writers since—above all by Mommsen, who was the first to point out the absurdity of identifying the Lydian Τυρρηνοί or Τυρρηβοί with the Italian _Tusci_ or _Etrusci_. It follows from this that the whole of the civilisation of Northern and Central Italy is due to this race, which would obviously have left its impress on each district as it passed through it; and, secondly, that it was this same race that was afterwards known by the name of Etruscan.

The chief objection to the theory of an autochthonous origin is that, as we shall presently see, a break in the civilisation of Northern Italy which can be traced about the beginning of the ninth century B.C. is of such a marked and rapid character that it cannot be regarded as due to any cause but the irruption of a new race. Moreover, there is probably, as M. Pottier points out,[2250] more truth in the words of Herodotos than appears at first sight. It is true that there are no grounds for accepting the Lydian theory absolutely; but apart from this, it is to be noted that Herodotos nowhere states that the Tyrrhenians landed on the west coast of Italy—_i.e._ in Etruria. What he does say is that, “after having visited (or coasted along) many nations, they arrived at the Umbrians, where they founded cities and inhabit them to this day; and instead of Lydians, their name was changed to that of Tyrrhenians.” Additional evidence is given by Hellanikos,[2251] who explicitly states that they landed at the mouth of the Po; and as the Umbrians probably occupied a larger territory in prehistoric than in classical times,[2252] we may fairly place here the city of Tyrsenia or Tyrrhenia, which Herodotos gives as the name of their first new home. Thus the Umbrians will represent the early aborigines whose civilisation, known as the Terramare, we shall presently describe, and it was this civilisation, transformed and developed, which was carried by the invaders over the Apennines into the region now to be known as Etruria. It will be noted that this theory at least satisfactorily combines the land and sea migrations of the Etruscans into Etruria, though it does not profess to dogmatise as to the region whence they first started. The idea that they first landed on the west coast is entirely due to Roman ideas, fostered by poets like Virgil; and though it is in one passage accepted by Dionysios of Halicarnassos, he expressly contradicts himself in another.[2253]

The two chief characteristics of this new Etrusco-Umbrian civilisation are the development of geometrical decoration and the predominance of a metallurgic element, both of which are obviously derived from Eastern sources, whether Hellenic or Oriental. It will suffice here to point out that the “Tyrrhenians” during their previous voyages (see above) might well have come in contact with the other civilisations of the Eastern Mediterranean, such as Cyprus, Asia Minor, Mycenae, and the Greek islands, and that their natural acquisitiveness and capacity for imitation, which we shall find illustrated throughout their history, enabled them to pick up and use artistic ideas from all these quarters. Even their earliest art yields many points of comparison with that of the Eastern Mediterranean.

The earliest civilisation of which traces have survived in Italy is, as we have already seen, that of the Terramare, so called from the remains discovered in that district, covering the basin of the Eridanus or Po, but chiefly between Piacenza and Bologna. We have further seen that the aboriginal people to whom these remains belong are probably to be identified with the Umbrians, but it is perhaps safer to style them Italiotes. They were lake-dwellers, living in wooden houses built on piles in the water or in the marshy lagoons of the district which they inhabited, and their civilisation was of the rudest description.

We find among their remains, besides rude objects in bronze and other substances, pottery of the very simplest kinds, hand-made and roughly baked. This is not found in tombs, but mingled with the débris of the dwellings. The shapes comprise cups and pots, and there are few attempts at decoration beyond rows of knobs or bosses. A crescent-shaped or lunulated handle is attached to many of the vases, serving as a support for the thumb; but this is a feature also found in other parts of Italy and in Sicily. Iron, glass, and silver are quite unknown, and gold only represented by a doubtful specimen; on the other hand, along with the finds of bronze, which include weapons, tools, and objects of toilet, are survivals of the Neolithic Age in the shape of axes, spear-heads, and tools of stone. In several of the settlements actual moulds for bronze-casting were found.

The Neolithic remains are sufficient to indicate the early date of this civilisation, and it is probably contemporary in point of development (if not of date) with the earliest remains from Hissarlik and Cyprus. It may thus be traced back as far as 1500 B.C. at least, and seems to extend down to about the end of the tenth century B.C. The analogous pottery found at Thapsus in Sicily is mixed with Mycenaean vases, and may therefore be more precisely dated; but it is altogether more advanced than that of the Terramare. The influence of the latter no doubt spread gradually downwards during these thousand years through Central and Southern Italy.[2254]

(2) THE VILLANUOVA PERIOD (TOMBS _A POZZO_)

The next stage in the development of civilisation in Italy, probably separated from the preceding by a period of transition, is what is known as the Villanuova period, from a site of that name at Bologna. It begins with the ninth century B.C., and lasts for some two hundred years; its traces are much more widely spread than those of the Terramare people, being found not only to the north of the Apennines, but all over Etruria. It is interesting to note that the chief finds have been made in what afterwards became the principal centres of Etruscan civilisation, such as Bologna, Corneto, Vetulonia, etc. In almost every respect it shows a marked development on the preceding stage. Iron is already known, and the working of bronze better understood, the processes of hammering plates (σφυρήλατον) and working in _repoussé_ being introduced to supplement that of casting.[2255]

We now for the first time meet with tombs, the characteristic form of which is that of a well or pit, ending in a small circular chamber, in which the remains are deposited. Italian archaeologists have given to these tombs the name of _a pozzo_. The method of burial practised was almost exclusively that of incineration, but it appears certain that the inhabitants of Etruria never showed a special preference either for one method or the other, and the alternative method of inhumation already appears at Corneto before the next stage is reached with the eighth century.

It has been sometimes objected that the introduction of inhumation must connote the first arrival of the Etruscan people in these regions, on the ground that they did not practise incineration; but this idea rests on no sound basis. The introduction of the new system, which never entirely ousted incineration, can easily be explained as due to external influences; not indeed to the Phoenicians (although it was a universal Oriental custom), for their influence in Italy has been much exaggerated; but rather to the Greeks, who colonised Cumae in the middle of the eighth century, from which time onwards Hellenic influence gradually becomes more and more apparent.

We have seen, then, that the Villanuova civilisation may be fairly regarded as Etruscan. It was not, however, by any means confined to Etruria, for it is spread all over the country to the north of the Apennines, and two of its most important centres were at Bologna and Este. The whole of this region shows traces of having been for a long time under the early Etruscan domination. It is, in fact, in close dependence on the Terramare civilisation which here preceded it, the difference, as we have indicated, being brought about by commerce and foreign influences.

[Illustration:

From _Ann. dell’ Inst._ FIG. 178. TOMB _A POZZO_ WITH CINERARY URN. ]

The _pozzo_ tombs usually contain a large cinerary urn or _ossuarium_, in which the ashes were placed after being burnt (Fig. 178).[2256] These urns are fashioned by hand from a badly levigated volcanic clay, generally known as _impasto Italico_. It is to be distinguished from the later _bucchero nero_ (see p. 301) by its quality, and by the fact that vases of the latter clay are always wheel-made. The clay is irregularly baked over an open fire, and the colour of the surface varies from red-brown to greyish black. It is covered with a polished slip, and there is no doubt that it was the intention of the potter to give the vases a metallic appearance as well as form.

As regards their shape, they are of a peculiar but uniform type, with a small handle at the widest part, and cover in the form of an inverted bowl or saucer with handle (Fig. 179: see also Fig. 178).[2257] The ornamentation consists of geometrical ornaments incised or stamped in bands round the neck and body—such as maeanders, chevrons, stars, and dots—the incisions being made while the clay was moist. In rare cases we meet with painted ornaments in white applied directly to the surface. Besides the urns, which often almost fill the chamber, accessory objects in the form of common pottery, fibulae, and other bronze objects, spindle-whorls and amber objects, are found in the tombs.

The common pottery does not in its character exhibit much advance on that of the Terramare. The difference, indeed, consists not so much in development of technique as in a greater variety of decoration. It has points of resemblance with the far earlier pottery of Hissarlik and the early Bronze Age tombs of Cyprus (see