← History of Ancient Pottery: Greek, Etruscan, and Roman. Volume 2 (of 2)

XX. ROMAN LAMPS…

Part 7 of 9 · H. B. Walters · Public domain text

About this edition

Source: Project Gutenberg e-text #48155, public domain in the United States · text not rewritten or summarized · How RedLectern is built

 

Contents (56)
  1. Opening about 1 min
  2. III. THE SUBJECTS ON GREEK VASES under 1 min
  3. XIII. DIONYSOS AND MISCELLANEOUS DEITIES under 1 min
  4. XIV. HEROIC LEGENDS under 1 min
  5. XV. SUBJECTS FROM ORDINARY LIFE under 1 min
  6. XVI. DETAILS OF TYPES, ARRANGEMENT, AND ORNAMENTATION under 1 min
  7. XVII. INSCRIPTIONS ON GREEK VASES under 1 min
  8. XVIII. ETRUSCAN AND SOUTH ITALIAN POTTERY under 1 min
  9. XIX. TERRACOTTA IN ROMAN ARCHITECTURE AND SCULPTURE under 1 min
  10. XX. ROMAN LAMPS under 1 min
  11. XXI. ROMAN POTTERY: TECHNICAL PROCESSES, SHAPES, AND USES under 1 min
  12. XXII. ROMAN POTTERY, HISTORICALLY TREATED; ARRETINE WARE under 1 min
  13. XXIII. ROMAN POTTERY (continued); PROVINCIAL FABRICS about 5 min
  14. XII. INTRODUCTORY—THE OLYMPIAN DEITIES about 1 h 30 min
  15. XIII. DIONYSOS AND MISCELLANEOUS DEITIES about 1 h 4 min
  16. XIV. HEROIC LEGENDS about 34 min
  17. I. 187 ff. The dispute of Agamemnon and Achilles under 1 min
  18. II. 50 ff. Agamemnon in council under 1 min
  19. III. 259 ff. Priam setting out in his chariot under 1 min
  20. V. 95–296. Combat of Diomedes and Pandaros (a reminiscence of) under 1 min
  21. VI. 215 ff. Diomedes and Glaukos exchanging arms under 1 min
  22. VII. 162 ff. Combat of Ajax and Hector under 1 min
  23. VIII. 89 ff. Combat of Hector and Diomedes under 1 min
  24. IX. Achilles lying sick (apparently a contaminatio or confusion of ix. 168 ff. and xviii. 35 ff.).[1394] under 1 min
  25. X. 330–461. Episode of Dolon; his capture by Odysseus under 1 min
  26. XI. The fight at the ships under 1 min
  27. XIV. Combat of Ajax and Aeneas (? l. 402 ff.) under 1 min
  28. XVI. 666 ff. Sarpedon carried off by Hypnos and Thanatos under 1 min
  29. XVII. 60 ff. Combat of Menelaos and Euphorbos, and fight over his body under 1 min
  30. XVIII. 367 ff. (1) Thetis in the smithy of Hephaistos under 1 min
  31. XIX. 1–18. Thetis and the Nereids bringing the armour to Achilles under 1 min
  32. XXI. 114 ff. Combat of Achilles and Lykaon under 1 min
  33. XXII. 188 ff. Achilles pursuing Hector round the walls of Troy under 1 min
  34. XXIII. 157 ff. Funeral games for Patroklos under 1 min
  35. XXIV. 16 ff. Achilles dragging Hector’s body past the tomb of Patroklos about 5 min
  36. II. 94 ff. Penelope at her loom under 1 min
  37. III. 12 ff. Arrival of Telemachos at Nestor’s house in Pylos under 1 min
  38. IV. 349 ff. The story of Menelaos’ interview with Proteus under 1 min
  39. V. 228 ff. Odysseus navigating the sea on a raft under 1 min
  40. VI. 126 ff. Nausikaa washing clothes under 1 min
  41. IX. 345 ff. Odysseus offering wine to Polyphemos under 1 min
  42. X. 210 ff. Odysseus and Kirke (see J.H.S. xiii. p. 82) under 1 min
  43. XI. 23 ff. Odysseus sacrificing before his visit to Hades under 1 min
  44. XII. 164–200. Odysseus passing the Sirens under 1 min
  45. XVIII. 35 ff. Odysseus and Iros under 1 min
  46. XIX. 385 ff. Odysseus recognised by Eurykleia under 1 min
  47. XXI. 393—XXII. 5 ff. The slaying of the suitors about 15 min
  48. XV. SUBJECTS FROM ORDINARY LIFE about 1 h 29 min
  49. XVI. DETAILS OF TYPES, ARRANGEMENT, AND ORNAMENTATION about 1 h 9 min
  50. XVII. INSCRIPTIONS ON GREEK VASES about 1 h 1 min
  51. XVIII. ETRUSCAN AND SOUTH ITALIAN POTTERY about 1 h 16 min
  52. XIX. TERRACOTTA IN ROMAN ARCHITECTURE AND SCULPTURE about 1 h 36 min
  53. XX. ROMAN LAMPS about 1 h 1 min
  54. XXI. ROMAN POTTERY: TECHNICAL PROCESSES, SHAPES, AND USES about 1 h 8 min
  55. XXII. ROMAN POTTERY, HISTORICALLY TREATED; ARRETINE WARE about 34 min
  56. XXIII. ROMAN POTTERY (continued); PROVINCIAL FABRICS about 2 h 43 min

Continue:

XX. ROMAN LAMPS

Introduction of lamps at Rome—Sites where found—Principal parts of lamps—Purposes for which used—Superstitious and other uses—Chronological account of forms—Technical processes—Subjects—Deities—Mythological and literary subjects—Genre subjects and animals—Inscriptions on lamps—Names of potters and their distribution—Centres of manufacture.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bartoli, Le antichi lucerne sepolcrali; Antichità di Ercolano, vol. viii.; Kenner, Die antiken Thonlampen des k.-k. Münz- und Antiken-Cabinetes zu Wien, 1858; Wieseler in Göttinger Nachrichten, 1870 (Kestnersche Sammlung); La Blanchère and Gauckler, Cat. du Musée Alaoui, 1897; Daremberg and Saglio, Dict. des Antiqs, iii. art. LUCERNA (an admirable résumé by Toutain); Fink in Sitzungsber. d. Münchener Akad. d. Wissensch. 1900, p. 685 ff.; C.I.L., passim, s.v. Instrumentum Domesticum, but above all vol. xv. pt. 2, p. 782 ff. (Dressel).

Lamps (lucernae) were often made of terracotta, and these are in many ways of special interest. Originally they appear to have been called lychnus, from the Greek λύχνος, and this word is used by Ennius, Lucilius, Lucretius, and Virgil.[2721] Varro[2722] says that the word lucerna, from lux, was invented when the want of a Latin word was felt, and that previously candelae or torches had been alone in use, there being no oil known in Italy suitable for this purpose. Even in Greece lamps were comparatively rare all through the best period (cf. Vol. I. p. 106). The oldest lamps found in Rome date from the third century B.C., and are thought to be of Campanian fabric; they were found on the Esquiline, and are of quite different character from the ordinary Roman types.[2723] It would appear, therefore, that originally the Romans borrowed lamps from Southern Italy. By the time of the Empire their use had become general, and they are found everywhere. The increase in their manufacture was mainly due to growing taste in house decoration, and also to use in funeral ceremonies and for public purposes, such as illumination. Of the latter use in imperial times there is plenty of evidence (see below, p. 396).

The sites on which Roman lamps have been found are far too numerous to discuss in detail, as they embrace every part of the Roman Empire. In Rome and the neighbourhood they are especially plentiful, as is implied by the fact that a large portion of the fifteenth volume of the Latin Corpus Inscriptionum is devoted to those with potters’ stamps alone. They are found in all parts of Italy, in Gaul, Germany, Britain, Spain, North Africa, Sicily, Greece, Egypt, Cyprus, and Asia Minor. The question of centres of manufacture is discussed elsewhere (p. 427) in connection with the potters’ stamps; but it may be noted that those found on Greek soil are often of a distinct character from those of Western Europe, and the stamps on them form a distinct group, being usually in Greek letters (cf. Vol. I. p. 108). Of provincial sites, Knidos, Ephesos, Carthage, and some of the German towns have proved particularly rich in this respect. Large numbers have been found in London, mostly of the later types, some perhaps of local fabric, and those in the Romano-British collection of the British Museum are nearly all from that city or from Colchester. Not the least remarkable fact of their wide distribution is the occurrence in the most widely separated regions of the same potter’s stamps and the same subjects, implying in the former case extensive export from one centre, in the latter systematic commercial intercourse between the potters of different districts.

* * * * *

The principal parts of a Roman lamp[2724] are: (1) the reservoir or body, which contained the oil (infundibulum); (2) the flat circular top, known as the discus, sometimes with an ornamented rim (margo); (3) the nozzle, with a hole for the insertion of the wick (rostrum,[2725] nasus, myxus[2726]; the wick was called ellychnium); (4) the handle (ansa, manubrium), which was not indispensable. In the discus was a filling-hole for pouring in the oil, sometimes protected by a cover or stopper, and sometimes a second smaller hole, the purpose of which has been disputed (see p. 406). The number of nozzles was not limited, though there is usually only one; a lamp with two is known as bilychnis[2727]; one with several, as polymyxus. Martial in one of his epigrams says: “Though I illuminate whole banquets with my flame, and have so many nozzles (myxos), I am known as a single lamp.”[2728] The wicks were made of a plant known as verbascum φλόμος or thryallis,[2729] but tow, papyrus, and sulphur were also employed[2730]; the oil was a vegetable oil of some kind. Sometimes the lamps were provided with a sort of snuffers or tweezers for extracting and trimming the wick,[2731] as described in a passage in the Moretum (10 ff.), which speaks of drawing out the wick of a dying lamp with a needle:

Admovet his pronam submissa fronte lucernam, Et producit acu stuppas humore carentes Excitat et crebris languentem flatibus ignem.

The purposes for which lamps were used by the Romans were various, but fall under three main heads: (1) for purposes of illumination in private houses, in public buildings, or on occasions of rejoicing; (2) as offerings in temples; (3) as funerary furniture.

In small houses they were placed either in niches in the walls or on brackets, or were suspended by chains, or even in some cases hung by the handle from a nail. An Etruscan terracotta lamp bears evidence of having been suspended in the last-named manner,[2732] but there is no doubt that this was more usual with lamps of bronze, there being few in terracotta which would have admitted of such a use. Sometimes the lamps were made resting on a kind of support, as is the case with two in the British Museum, and others found in Africa.[2733] On the support a figure of a deity was usually modelled in relief.[2734] Combinations of a lamp and altar are not uncommon, especially at Rome and Naples.[2735] There are numerous examples from Pompeii and Herculaneum illustrating their use in private life, although lamps of clay are confined to the poorer houses or to domestic service. For their use in the bedchamber at night evidence is afforded by Martial and other writers.[2736] A rough classification of the existing terracotta lamps might be made by dividing them into—(1) those with knobs for hanging, (2) those with handles for carrying, (3) those without handles for placing on tables or brackets.

Many passages in Latin writers afford evidence for the use of lamps in processions or for illuminations at times of public rejoicings, such as triumphs. They were thus used by Cleopatra, at the triumph of Julius Caesar, at the return of Nero, and so on.[2737] Caligula had theatrical representations performed by lamp-light at night, and Domitian arranged hunts and gladiatoral combats ad lychnuchos.[2738] Severus Alexander lighted up the baths with oil-lamps,[2739] and Tertullian speaks of assisting in political triumphs by defrauding the day with the light of lamps.[2740] Juvenal also speaks of their use in illuminations.[2741] Many lamps, especially those with subjects relating to the circus or games, are inscribed with the word SAECVL(ares), and it is possible that they were used in connection with the Ludi Saeculares, at which illuminations took place. But lamps with this inscription are not exclusively ornamented with such subjects.[2742]

Lamps were used for burning in temples, and were also the subject of votive offerings to the gods, in Greece as well as in Italy. One found at Oenoanda in Lycia was offered “to the most high God”[2743]; and those which Sir Charles Newton found in such large numbers at Knidos (Vol. I. p. 108) were also votive offerings in the temenos of Demeter. Votive lamps are recorded from Selinus,[2744] and at Carthage numbers were found round the altar of Saturnus Balcaranensis.[2745] To their use in the worship of Isis, as referred to by Apuleius, we allude below.

Nearly all lamps have been found in tombs, the custom of placing them there being one of Asiatic, not of Greek, origin; it became quite general under the Roman dominion. Christian lamps are found in the catacombs, but not in cemeteries, showing that the practice came to be regarded as pagan. At Avisford in Sussex they were found placed in open bowls with handles, on brackets along the side of a tomb.[2746] The Roman lamps found in tombs were placed there, like the Greek vases and the later glass, for the use of the dead, sometimes, though not necessarily, with the idea of their burning perpetually.[2747] An inscription on a sepulchral cippus in the British Museum[2748] directs the heirs of the deceased to place a lighted lamp in his tomb on the Kalends, Nones, and Ides of each month, and similarly L. Granius Pudens of the seventh cohort requests that his family should place oil in a lamp on his birthday.[2749] Another inscription in an elegiac couplet says: “Whosoever places a lighted lamp in this tomb, may golden earth cover his ashes.”[2750] A fourth inscription directs the daily offering of a lamp at the public expense to the manes of a deceased person.[2751] In the story of the matron of Ephesus, told by Petronius, a servant-maid is described as replenishing the lamp in a tomb as often as was required.[2752] Two lamps in the Athens Museum have the subject of a bear, and over it the inscription ΦΟΒΟC, “Fear”; being found in tombs, they must have been placed there with some significance, and as, on the evidence of a Cilician inscription, Phobos was regarded as a guardian of tombs who frightened off robbers and other evilly-disposed persons, it may be that the terrible bear was placed on the lamp as a symbol of this protector of the dead.[2753]

Other superstitious uses of lamps, not connected with the tomb, were not uncommon. Omens were drawn from the way in which the flame burned,[2754] and Chrysostom describes a method of naming children by giving names to lamps, which were then lighted, and the name of the child was taken from that last extinguished.[2755]

There are also a few other exceptional uses of lamps, as for instance when they were given as strenae, or New Year’s presents. Such lamps usually have a figure of Victory holding a shield, on which are the words ANNVM NOVVM FAVSTVM FELICEM, “A happy and prosperous New Year!”[2756] In the field are heads of Janus, or cakes, wreaths, and other objects also probably intended for presents. These all appear to date from the beginning of the first century after Christ.[2757] A lamp of the same class in the Guildhall Museum has on the shield FIILICTII, Felic(i)t(as).[2758] It is interesting to note that the New Year lamps are found in tombs[2759]; they may, of course, have been preserved and buried as mementoes; but at the same time, it is not essential that the subject on a lamp should have any relation to its purpose, as we have seen in the case of those inscribed Saeculares.[2760] The Helioserapis lamp (see p. 403) and those with Phobos as a bear may, indeed, be instances to the contrary, but on the whole it would seem that the same rule would apply as in the case of the terracottas (see Vol. I. p. 122).

The earliest Roman lamps are of rude shape, undecorated, with a long projecting nozzle and circular reservoir; they are not always provided with handles, but are often covered with black glaze, like the Greek examples. Lamps of this type are found on the Esquiline, in North Africa, as at Carthage, and in Sicily.[2761] One of the Esquiline examples, dating from the second century, has the engraved inscription VEVCADIA (Fig. 202).[2762] Like the Greek lamps, these are made on the wheel (τροχήλατοι), not, as later ones, in a mould. Names in graffito seem to imply a reference to the person in whose tomb the lamp was found, and such formulae as AVE, NOLI ME TANGERE, NII ATTIGAS NON SVM TVA M · SVM, PONE FVR (“Drop it, thief!”), which occur on the Esquiline lamps, also clearly refer to funeral usage.[2763]

In the first century B.C. the lamps, still mostly of black ware, and devoid of subjects, are distinguished by the straight-ended, concave-sided nozzle 20[26]nozzle with a shallow groove leading to the centre, small grooved ring-handle, and sometimes a lateral projection like a fin, from which some varieties are known as “delphiniform” (Fig. 203).[2764] These are often found in North Africa, but are also imported into Italy, and some have Greek stamps. The top is sometimes covered with globules, or with patterns of vine and ivy, and in the later examples figure-subjects are introduced.[2765] The earlier ones have large single letters or monograms underneath for potters’ marks; the later, the name of the potter or superintendent of the pottery.

We now come to the Roman lamps of the Imperial period, of which such large numbers exist in museums all over Europe and the basin of the Mediterranean. They have not as yet been very systematically studied and classified; but so far as the subject has been treated at all, those who have investigated the development of the forms are fairly unanimous in their general conclusions.[2766] The last writer on the subject, Herr Fink, of Munich, has advanced a step further, and by comparison of forms with potters’ signatures has arrived at some interesting results, which we need not hesitate to accept in the main.[2767] He adopted as the basis of his classification the form of the nozzle in each case, for the obvious reason that it is more essential to the character of a lamp than the handle; if the latter is removed, the form is in no way affected, as it would be by the absence of the nozzle.

Following, then, on the lines of Fink and the other writers, we may establish—apart from abnormal forms and lamps modelled in the shape of figures—four main classes, which are sufficient to include practically all the lamps with which we have to deal. They may be summarised as follows:

(1) Lamps with rounded nozzle or nozzles, flanked on each side by a kind of double volute, as in Fig. 204 and B.M. 167-352. The usual number of nozzles is one, but two are not infrequently found. These belong to the first century B.C., and, being convenient forms for a decorated top, are ornamented with all kinds of subjects[2768]; the handle when present is often ornamented as in the cut.

(2) Lamps of the same type as the last, except that the nozzle ends in an obtuse-angled termination, as Fig. 205 and B.M. 94-166. It is a form not adapted for more than one nozzle, and usually has no handle.[2769]

(3) A small but distinct class, almost devoid of figured decoration (Fig. 206 and B.M. 379-392), but usually with a potter’s name underneath; the form is elegant, and probably copied from bronze.[2770] The chief feature is the sunk centre, in which is usually placed a Bacchic or comic mask; round it runs a raised rim, through which a shallow groove passes to the somewhat elongated nozzle. This dates from the first century of the Empire or earlier, some being found with coins of Augustus, others at Pompeii; these lamps are of red clay, unglazed, and have no handle. On the sides are projecting knobs, either concealing the joins of the moulds (see p. 405), or for the attachment of chains. The names of the makers, Strobilus, Communis, Fortis, etc., are in good raised letters, impressed in the mould (see Fig. 210). They are found in all parts, but rarely south of Rome; most of them are from Gallia Cispadana,[2771] and they may have been made at Mutina.

(4) In this class (Fig. 207 and B.M. 393-567) the nozzle is small, and hardly projects beyond the rim of the lamp; it is semicircular or heart-shaped in form, and sometimes has an incised line or circles at the base. Fig. 208 represents a late development with the heart-shaped nozzle, in which the design is always surrounded by a wreath or ornamental pattern. Many of these lamps, especially those found in Greece (see Vol. I. p. 108), have no handle; there is also a somewhat late variety, described on the same page, which is confined to Greece and marked by potters’ signatures in Greek letters (B.M. 604-629). These lamps date from the time of Trajan onwards; the signatures are usually abbreviated, and are stamped hollow, or sometimes scratched in the wet clay; raised letters are rare. The subjects are very varied.

Some of the larger lamps in the first class, especially those with more than one nozzle, have a flat vertical projection attached to the top of the handle, triangular in form or crescent-shaped (as in Fig. 204), and this is often ornamented with figures in relief, either whole subjects or busts of deities, or such simple motives as a pair of dolphins, a leaf, or a palmette. The figure-subjects are often quasi-Egyptian, such as Harpocrates and Safekh on a British Museum example (No. 337 = Plate LXIII. fig. 3), or a lectisternium of Sarapis, Isis, Helios, and Selene.[2772] In a few cases this projection is replaced by a bust or even a seated figure of Sarapis enthroned in a niche. But in most cases the handle, when present, is of a simple form, either a ring with shallow parallel grooves or a solid projecting piece through which a hole is pierced.

------------------------------------------------------

PLATE LXIII

------------------------------------------------------

Lamps of terracotta often assume, like those in bronze,[2773] a more ornamental form, being modelled partly or wholly in the form of figures, heads, animals, and so on. In some cases the upper part or discus only is modelled, assuming the form of a mask—Satyric, theatrical, or grotesque.[2774] Among the entire-figures which form lamps occur Artemis,[2775] Eros,[2776] Victory slaying a bull,[2777] and various animals; more common are heads of Zeus Ammon,[2778] Pan, Seilenos,[2779] negroes,[2780] and animals such as oxen, birds, snails, frogs, or tortoises.[2781] A favourite shape is a lamp in the form of a foot or a pair of feet, shod in sandals or boots,[2782] and there are two lamps in the British Museum, one of enamelled ware, in the form of a gladiator’s helmet[2783]; others form fruit, pine-cones or crescents.[2784] In the lamps which are modelled in the form of a head, the chin usually forms the nozzle, and the orifice for filling is on the forehead; in those in the shape of a foot the nozzle is formed by the great toe. Occasionally lamps are found in the form of a ship, recalling that which, according to Apuleius, was used in the worship of Isis: a golden boat or cup (cymbium, see Vol. I. p. 186), which shone with a clear light and sent forth a long flame.[2785] An interesting commentary on this use of lamps is formed by a remarkable example in the British Museum (Plate LXIII. fig. 1),[2786] which is not only in the shape of a boat, but is decorated with subjects referring to the pseudo-Egyptian cults characteristic of Rome in the late republican and early imperial period. This lamp, which is no less than twenty inches long and has numerous holes for wicks along the sides, was dredged up from the sea at Pozzuoli, where it may originally have been in the temple of Isis and Sarapis. On it is the inscription [ΕΥΠΛΟΙΑ], signifying “a prosperous voyage,” perhaps as a prayer on behalf of the donor, and underneath are the words [ΛΑΒΕ ΜΕ ΤΟΝ] [ΗΛΙΟΣΕΡΑΠΙΝ], “Receive me, Helioserapis,” by which the name of the vessel may be intended.

Most lamps had only one wick, but the light which they afforded must have been feeble, and consequently the number was often increased. When the number is not large, or when the body is circular (as in Plate LXIII. fig. 4), they project beyond the rim of the lamp, as in Class I. already described, but the lamps which have a large number are usually boat-shaped or rectangular in form (see Plate LXIII.), and the nozzles do not then project, but are ranged along the sides, merely indicated by separate moulding underneath.[2787] Occasionally a conglomeration of small lamps was made in a row or group, but even in these cases the illumination given must still have been feeble. The average size of a lamp is from three to four inches in diameter across the body, the length depending on the form of the handle and nozzle, but averaging about an inch over the diameter, and they are mostly about an inch in height. The top of the lamp is almost always circular in form, occasionally oval, and rarely rectangular,[2788] and is usually slightly depressed, being thus shaped to enable any overflow of oil to run down through the filling-hole. Many Greek lamps, and Roman lamps from Greek sites, such as Cyprus, are convex above, with a small moulded disc on the raised centre, in which is the hole. These are either devoid of decoration, or only have an ornamental pattern or a frieze of figures on a small scale. Usually the subject is enclosed within a plain moulded rim, but in the later examples (Class IV.) especially it is more contracted in extent, and surrounded with a border of ornament, such as the egg-pattern or a wreath of some kind (see Fig. 208).

Christian lamps, which hardly come within the scope of this work, vary very little in form; they have ovoid instead of circular bodies, a plain rounded nozzle, and a small solid handle, and the design is always encircled by a band of ornamental pattern or symbolical devices.[2789]

* * * * *

The clay of which the lamps are made is usually of a red colour, due to the presence of red ochre (rubrica), but it varies both in quality and tone according to localities; those from Greek sites, such as Athens and Corfu, are often of a pale buff colour, those from Cyprus a light reddish brown, and so on. Martial refers to the red clay of Cumae,[2790] a place where lamps are sometimes found, and those from Naples are usually of a dull brown or yellow colour. Lamps found in France and England are often imported from Italy, and therefore of the ordinary red clay, but those of local manufacture are of a white or yellowish tone.

The earliest undecorated examples are made on the wheel, as are those from the Esquiline and from Carthage, in which the decoration is only incised; but subjects in relief required a different technique. Occasionally they are modelled by hand, but we find that from the first century B.C. onwards they are almost invariably made in moulds, modelled from a pattern lamp, in a harder and finer clay than the pattern.[2791] The mould was divided into two parts, adjusted by mortices and tenons, which, in the opinion of some writers, explains the lateral projections visible on certain varieties; the lower part formed the body of the lamp, the upper the decorated discus. The two parts seem to have been marked by corresponding letters to avoid errors, and there are two or three lower lamp-moulds in the British Museum from Ephesos and elsewhere, marked with an A on the under side for this purpose.[2792] Other examples of moulds have been found in Greece, Italy, and Africa,[2793] and there are also specimens both for the upper and lower half in the Guildhall Museum.[2794] They were either of terracotta or plaster.

The clay was impressed into the mould with the fingers, the figured decoration being applied by means of models or stamps, as with the Arretine ware (see below, p. 439), and the ornamental patterns probably produced with a kind of wheel or running instrument, as in Roman pottery (p. 441). Signatures in relief were taken from the mould, those in hollow letters were impressed in the lamp itself from a stamp before baking. Important potteries must have possessed a large number of moulds; for instance, at Rome alone ninety-one different subjects are found on the lamps of one potter (L. Caecilius Saevus), eighty-four on those of C. Oppius Restitutus, fifty-one on those of Florentius, and there must of course have been many more now lost. It is clear that the same types were used by different potters; the models must, therefore, have been handed about from one to another, each potter merely adding his own name.

The two portions of the mould were joined while the clay was moist, and pared with a tool, and the orifice for filling was then pierced. Glaze, when used, was applied before the baking, for which only a moderate temperature seems to have been required; this process followed as soon as the clay was dry. In some lamps a small hole or slit may be observed, which some have thought to be for the pin with which the wick was extracted,[2795] but it is more probable that it was for a piece of wood which held the top and bottom of the mould together until the clay was united; it was usually covered over before the baking, and may have taken the place of the knobs already spoken of which occur in other forms. The lamps were baked in batches, placed closely together or superimposed,[2796] and it sometimes happens that a number are found united together which had coalesced firmly in the furnace, as in Sir Charles Newton’s excavations at Knidos.

=Subjects= are first found on lamps in the second century B.C., though these are quite of a simple character. Lamps of this date from North Africa[2797] have such designs as an altar and fruit, a vase, or a caduceus, a head of an ibis, or a nude incised figure of Tanit; others have merely a wreath round the centre, and these apparently belong to the first century B.C.[2798] The number of figures is generally small, it being contrary to the principles of ancient art to crowd a work with minute figures and details. The majority of lamps have only one figure, and few beyond those of exceptional size have more than three. As a rule the treatment is careless and the figures very indistinct, but the lamps with Greek signatures (see Vol. 1. p. 108) form a notable exception.

It may be imagined that the lamp-maker sought to gratify the taste of his customers by ornamenting his ware with familiar subjects. Purchasers of terracotta lamps were, as has been noted, generally persons of inferior condition, and the subjects on the lamps are in many cases a popularising of well-known myths or even of works of art, such as the Venus types (p. 410) or the Maenads of the “new-Attic” reliefs (p. 411). The types of Victory and Fortune are reflections of statues of the period, and are repeated in many bronze statuettes. There are also, as we shall see, occasional references to literature. In Rome the stage exerted little influence, and subjects are rarely taken from the drama (masks are an exception); but the games of the circus and gladiatorial contests found a ready market, and form a large proportion of the designs. The subjects on the lamps, in fact, represent not so much the great masterpieces of art, as do coins or gems, but, like the Greek vases, the popular art of the day, and may be compared with the illustrations of the popular journals and magazines of our own time. On the whole, they are of great value to us as illustrating Roman life and religion, just as subsequently those on the Christian lamps are of inestimable importance for the light they throw on the early ages of our own religion.

As the number of published lamps and catalogues of collections is so very small, the subjects included in the following list are mostly confined to the collections in the British Museum, which are quite sufficiently comprehensive for the purpose.[2799] A few additional examples are given from the Guildhall, Vienna, and other collections, from the Antichità di Ercolano, Bartoli’s Lucernae veterum sepulcrales, the Musée Alaoui, and other isolated sources.[2800] References to Passeri’s work, Lucernae fictiles Musei Passerii, have been avoided, as it has been shown by Dr. Dressel[2801] that nearly all those published by him are false.

We proceed to note the principal subjects in detail, observing practically the same order that was adopted in describing the subjects on Greek vases. They may be roughly divided into eight classes:—

(1) Olympian deities. (2) Miscellaneous deities. (3) Heroic legends, etc. (4) Historical and literary subjects. (5) Genre subjects. (6) Animals. (7) Inanimate objects. (8) Floral and decorative devices.

The Olympian deities are not often represented, some not at all, except on a lamp in the Kestner collection at Göttingen, which has busts of all the twelve[2802]; they are not, however, clearly distinguished by attributes. Zeus is represented with Hera and Athena, the three Capitoline deities of Rome, whom the Etruscans knew as Tinia, Thalna, and Menerfa, the Romans as Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva.[2803] He also appears alone, seated on his throne,[2804] but more commonly his bust only is represented (Plate LXIV. fig. 4), accompanied by his eagle, which perches on a thunderbolt, sometimes conventionally rendered.[2805] The eagle and the thunderbolt also appear alone,[2806] or the former with Ganymede.[2807] A bearded horned mask may be intended for Dionysos, but is more probably Zeus Ammon.[2808] Sarapis is sometimes enthroned, with Cerberus at his side[2809]; sometimes only his bust occurs, surmounted by the usual kalathos[2810]; Cerberus is also found alone.[2811] Hera, except in the instance mentioned, does not occur. A very interesting lamp from Salamis, Cyprus, now in the British Museum, represents the contest of Athena and Poseidon for the possession of Attica[2812]; it is doubtless a reminiscence of the Parthenon west pediment, though rough and indistinct in execution. Athena is also seen as a single figure,[2813] seated, or standing in the usual Promachos attitude, or before an altar, or pursuing a panther[2814]; her head or bust are not uncommon.[2815] Apollo is usually represented seated, playing on his lyre, or with the Gryphon at his side[2816]; Artemis appears as a huntress, accompanied by her hound, or drawing an arrow from her quiver.[2817] A lyre or a crescent appearing alone may be the symbols of these two deities.[2818] There are one or two possible instances of Hephaistos and Poseidon,[2819] and Demeter may be indicated by a pair of torches[2820]; the latter also appears in her chariot, seeking for Persephone.[2821] Ares or Mars is found either as a single figure,[2822] in a chariot,[2823] or playing with Eros, who steals his armour.[2824] Hermes appears as a single figure, or accompanied by a sheep, goat, or cock[2825]; in one instance he presents a purse to Fortune, who is accompanied by Herakles.[2826] A common subject is his bust, along with his attributes of the purse and caduceus[2827]; the latter attribute, accompanied by two hands joined, may also have reference to this deity.[2828] Aphrodite occurs but rarely; she is either represented accompanied by lions,[2829] or riding on a goat,[2830] or at the bath or toilet,[2831] or in the Cnidian type,[2832] all these types being probably reproductions of known works of art. She is also accompanied by Eros, who assists in arming her; this type is known as Venus Victrix, and is seen in a group of Aphrodite and Eros in the Louvre.[2833]

More common than all the Olympian deities put together is Eros or Cupid, who appears in all sorts of attitudes and actions, besides those already mentioned.[2834] He sits on a chair or reclines on a couch,[2835] or is represented in motion, carrying a hare[2836] or a bird, a dish of fruit or a branch of vine or palm, a cup, situla, or torch[2837]; or plays on the lyre, flutes, or Pan-pipes[2838]; or sacrifices a pig, or pours wine into a krater.[2839] He rides on a donkey,[2840] a dolphin, or a crocodile,[2841] or sails in a boat[2842]; plays with a chained lion,[2843] or is himself tied to a tree.[2844] He is represented in the character of Ares, armed with spear and shield; or in that of Dionysos, with cup and thyrsos; or of Herakles, whose club he carries; also, probably in the character of Herakles, he shoots at a serpent.[2845] He is also associated with Psyche,[2846] and two Erotes sometimes appear together, in one instance in the character of gladiators fighting, in another of boxers.[2847] One of the most remarkable lamps in the Museum collection (No. 168) represents a number of diminutive Erotes playing with the club and cup of Herakles; it is unfortunately fragmentary, but another example in Dresden gives the complete design.[2848] One plunges head-foremost into the cup; three others raise the club with difficulty from the ground, one supporting it with his back, and a fifth, hovering in the air, pulls at it with his hands. In front of the last-named are the words ADIVATE SODALES, “Help, comrades!”

Dionysos is another surprisingly rare figure on the lamps, though his followers, the Satyrs and Maenads, have their full share of representation. He occurs as a single figure of youthful appearance,[2849] and also with his panther, to which he offers his kantharos to drink from[2850]; his mask or head may also be recognised.[2851] Pan is occasionally found,[2852] in one case in the form known as Aegipan (see p. 60) in company with Echo,[2853] in another as a grotesque bust.[2854] There is also an instance of Marsyas hung up for his punishment to the branch of a tree.[2855] A pastoral deity playing flutes on the handle of a lamp in the B.M. (No. 366) may be either Pan or Marsyas. Satyrs are represented seizing Maenads,[2856] dancing, drinking, and playing on the Pan-pipes,[2857] or carrying cups and wine-skins,[2858] or with a goat[2859]; both the bearded and beardless types are found, and their masks or busts are also common.[2860] The shaggy-haired Papposeilenos is occasionally represented.[2861] Maenads are depicted dancing, in frenzied attitudes, or sacrificing kids; the type is often that of the “new-Attic” reliefs, derived originally from Scopas, of the Maenad Χιμαιροφόνος.[2862] Their heads and masks also occur.[2863]

------------------------------------------------------

PLATE LXIV.

------------------------------------------------------

Among the minor deities we find that Helios and Selene (Sol and Luna) are often depicted together,[2864] or Selene alone,[2865] or else their busts together,[2866] or separately[2867]; in one case there is a simple representation of the solar disc for Helios.[2868] A curious subject in the British Museum collection is apparently a combination of the Christian “Good Shepherd” with Helios and the crescent for Selene.[2869] Asklepios and Hygieia occur in rare instances,[2870] and there is an example of Charon in his boat.[2871] Of marine deities and monsters, Triton or Proteus, wearing the pileus or mariner’s cap,[2872] Scylla,[2873] and a Nereid riding on a sea-monster (Plate LXIV. fig. 1)[2874] are found. The popularity of exotic religions at Rome is testified to by the occurrence, on the one hand, of Kybele with her lions,[2875] and Atys[2876]; on the other, of Egyptian deities such as Sarapis, already mentioned, and Harpocrates, who is found either alone, or with Isis, or with Isis and Anubis,[2877] or with Safekh (Plate LXIII. fig. 3)[2878]; Isis and Horus, and busts of Hermanubis and Isis are also found.[2879] On the handle of a lamp is a lectisternium with busts of Sarapis and Isis, and of Helios and Selene.[2880] The busts of the two Kabeiri also occasionally appear.[2881] Among personifications or quasi-personifications we find the three Charites or Graces[2882] and a Muse with lyre[2883]; others are all typically Roman, such as a bust of Africa on a lamp from Carthage,[2884] and such types as Abundantia[2885] (or two cornucopiae as her symbol[2886]), Vertumnus,[2887] Fortune with her steering-oar and cornucopia,[2888] and Victory.[2889] Many of these seem to be reflections of bronze statuettes of the Roman period.[2890] The latter goddess is frequently found, bearing a wreath, a trophy, or a shield,[2891] sometimes reclining or in a chariot[2892]; or again between two Lares[2893]; or two Victories are grouped together.[2894] Of special interest are what are known as the New Year lamps, given as strenae on January 1st (see p. 398),[2895] on which Victory is represented holding a shield, on which is inscribed an aspiration (see p. 420) for a happy New Year, the head of Janus, cakes, coins (stipes), and other emblems filling in the rest of the design (Plate LXIV. fig. 5).[2896]

Occasionally the inscription is varied, and appears as “For the safety of the state”[2897] or “Happiness” simply.[2898] Two Lares confronted, holding cornucopia, etc., are also found without Victory.[2899] Of representations of Phobos (Fear) we have spoken already (see p. 398). There are also representations of terminal deities,[2900] as well as unidentified goddesses.[2901]

Coming now to the heroes and heroic legends, we find that they play on the whole an inconsiderable part in the list of subjects on lamps. Leda is represented with the swan,[2902] and the Dioskuri sometimes appear as busts[2903]; also Kastor as a full figure, accompanied by his horse.[2904] Of the labours of Herakles we have the Nemean lion,[2905] the Erymanthian boar,[2906] the hydra,[2907] and the slaying of the serpent in the Garden of the Hesperides,[2908] as well as the combat with a Centaur[2909] and the freeing of Prometheus.[2910] He is also represented as a single figure, holding the apples of the Hesperides,[2911] leading kids,[2912] or with a jug or drinking-cup,[2913] or his head alone (both bearded and beardless types).[2914] Theseus slays the Amazon Andromache[2915]; Perseus is represented carrying the Gorgon’s head[2916]; Bellerophon is seen fallen from his horse Pegasos, or leading him to drink at Peirene[2917]; there are also possible representations of Kadmos and Meleager.[2918] Europa is depicted on the bull[2919]; Endymion asleep[2920]; Aktaeon devoured by his hounds[2921]; Telephos suckled by the hind[2922]; and Eos pursuing Kephalos.[2923] Icaros in his attempted flight is watched by Minos from the walls of Knossos (Plate LXIV. fig. 2).[2924] From the Theban legend we have only Oedipus before the Sphinx,[2925] a scene from the Phoenissae of Euripides (see p. 415), and Amphion and Zethos seizing the bull for the punishment of Dirke.[2926] Nor are scenes from the Trojan cycle much more common; but Achilles and Thetis are represented,[2927] and also Achilles dragging the body of Hector round the walls of Troy[2928]; there is a curious scene, somewhat grotesquely treated, of Odysseus and Neoptolemos stealing the bow of Philoktetes, who fans his wounded foot[2929]; Ajax is seen grieving after his madness[2930]; and Aeneas carries off his aged father and his son from Troy.[2931] Odysseus appears before Kirke,[2932] passing the Sirens,[2933] and offering a cup to Polyphemos,[2934] but sometimes also without the Cyclops. Orestes appears at his trial before Athena in the presence of a Fury.[2935] A Centaur is seen carrying off a woman, and in combat with a Lapith[2936]; also with a lion,[2937] carrying an amphora,[2938] or playing flutes.[2939] An Amazon wounded, standing at an altar, and accompanied by a crane, are also among the list of subjects.[2940] A single figure of Pegasos,[2941] and the Gorgoneion or Medusa-head,[2942] are not infrequently found. Combats of Pygmies and cranes,[2943] and a Pygmy on a crocodile,[2944] may also perhaps be included under this heading.

The next group of subjects includes those of a historical or literary character. In the British Museum there are two very interesting representations of Diogenes in his tub or pithos (see Vol. I. p. 152), presumably addressing Alexander, as in the well-known story,[2945] but the latter is not represented (Plate LXIV. fig. 6).

Among portraits are busts of Aesop,[2946] and various Roman personages, such as Hadrian, Antonia, Trajan, Marcus Aurelius, Septimius Severus, Commodus, Julia Domna,[2947] Lucius Verus,[2948] and others who cannot be identified.[2949] A scene from the Phoenissae of Euripides occurs on one lamp, with the combat of the two brothers and the death of Jocasta; the name of the play is actually inscribed on the lamp.[2950] With reference to Virgil’s first Eclogue we find a representation of the shepherd Tityrus on a lamp found at Pozzuoli[2951]; the shepherd, whose name is given, is seated among his flocks. Several lamps illustrate the well-known fable of Aesop, of the Fox and Crow.[2952] The fox, wearing a chlamys, stands on his hind-legs holding up a pair of flutes to the crow, which is perched on the top of a tree. Another subject, which doubtless has reference to some fable, is that of a stork holding in its beak a balance, in which a mouse is weighed against an elephant.[2953] The humour of the subject lies in the fact that the mouse is seen to weigh the elephant down. These two are illustrated on Plate LXV. figs. 3, 6. There is also a lamp in the British Museum (Plate LXIII. fig. 2) with a curious subject which may either be a scene from a comedy like those on the South Italian vases, or else a parody of “a visit to Asklepios.”[2954]

The subjects taken from ordinary life are eminently characteristic of the social life of Rome under the Empire. An almost inordinate proportion relate to the now popular gladiatorial shows, and many others deal with the events of the circus and arena. Of gladiatorial subjects there are three principal varieties, which occur again and again on lamps of all shapes and periods with little alteration.[2955] One class represents a single gladiator in the characteristic armour, with visored helmet, greaves, and arm-guards, sword and shield[2956]; the next represents a combat of two (Plate LXV. fig. 5), in which the one is usually worsted and falls at the other’s feet, his shield on the ground beside him.[2957] An interesting example in the British Museum (No. 526) shows a mirmillo or secutor in combat with a retiarius, who fought with net and trident. The third series has representations of gladiatorial armour ranged in a circle: swords, shields, arm-guards, greaves, and helmets.[2958]

------------------------------------------------------

PLATE LXV.

------------------------------------------------------

From the circus and games we have such subjects as a naval contest in the amphitheatre[2959]; a bull-fight[2960]; a bestiarius contending with boars[2961]; a man leaping over a bull[2962]; and boxers.[2963] A remarkable lamp in the British Museum (No. 164 = Plate LXV. fig. 4) gives a representation of a chariot-race in the circus; we have the colonnade of latticed barriers (carceres) from which the chariots started, the spina down the middle of the course, adorned with shrines and obelisks, and rows of seats full of spectators; four chariots take part in the race. Next there are scenes such as an athlete crowning himself, a victorious charioteer in his quadriga, or a victory in the horse-race.[2964] Of more miscellaneous character are such subjects as a chariot drawn by four men, a two-horse or four-horse chariot by itself, or a man or boy on horseback.[2965]

Military subjects are at all times rare, but a not infrequent subject is a mounted warrior charging with a spear[2966]; a soldier is also depicted with a bird,[2967] at an altar, taking an oath, and saluting an officer who rides past.[2968] There are also representations of an imperator on his triumphal car,[2969] of an eagle and standard,[2970] and of a trophy perhaps commemorating a victory over barbarians.[2971] A representation of a ship or galley is not uncommon, but sometimes it is not easy to distinguish these from the type of Odysseus and the Sirens.[2972] Some lamps have landscapes in the style of Alexandrine reliefs and chased metalwork, as for instance a harbour surrounded by buildings, in which two fishermen pursue their vocation (Plate LXV. fig. 1),[2973] or a hunter accompanied by a porter, with a town in the background.[2974] Among pastoral scenes we have also, besides the Tityrus already mentioned, shepherds and goatherds with their dogs, tending sheep and goats which nibble the foliage of trees[2975]; fishermen,[2976] and hunters, as already noted. Another interesting type is that of a juggler or mountebank accompanied by a dog and a cat, which climb ladders, jump through rings, and perform other tricks (Plate LXV. fig. 2).[2977] Of a more miscellaneous character are such subjects as a butcher slaughtering animals hung from a tree[2978]; a fuller at work[2979]; a slave washing a dog, and another washing a statue[2980]; slaves carrying casks or fasces[2981]; a mule turning a mill.[2982] Others, again, do not admit of any exact classification; such are a man and woman embracing; a woman scraping herself after the bath; a youth with a mortar; the sacrifice of a pig[2983]; a man riding on a camel or elephant,[2984] or driving a camel[2985]; a dwarf in a boat or playing on a flute[2986]; comic actors,[2987] and comic and tragic masks[2988] innumerable; and two skeletons dancing.[2989]

Animals form a large proportion of the representations on lamps,[2990] especially on the late class without handle from Knidos (Vol. I. p. 108), and include Gryphons, elephants, lions, panthers, boars, bears, wolves, deer, horses, oxen, sheep, goats, dogs, rabbits, eagles, storks, ostriches,[2991] peacocks,[2992] parrots,[2993] cocks and hens, and other birds; dolphins, sea-horses, cuttle-fish and other kinds of fish, scorpions,[2994] frogs, shell-fish, and so on. Those mentioned so far are single figures, merely decorative; in others there is more definite action. Such are a lion attacking a bull or crocodile, or seizing a hind or a donkey[2995]; two bears dancing[2996]; a monkey and vine[2997]; a dog on a couch,[2998] fighting with a goose, or attacking a stag,[2999] hind, or boar[3000]; two monkeys in a boat[3001]; a hare or rabbit nibbling at a plant[3002]; a bird on a twig, sometimes eating fruit[3003]; an eagle seizing a hare[3004]; an ibis and a serpent[3005]; a hen with chickens, cocks fighting, or a cock pursuing a hen[3006]; dolphins twisted round a trident or anchor; a crocodile and serpent; a lizard or sea-monster and eel; two serpents, sea-horses, or dolphins with an altar between[3007]; and a grasshopper eating grapes.[3008]

There are also a large number of lamps, the centre of which is only ornamented with some decorative motive, such as a carchesium (Vol. I. p. 188), situla, or krater, from which spring vine-branches, ivy, or other plants; an oinochoë, flask, or drinking-cup; palm-branches, wreaths of ivy, vine, oak, and myrtle, sprays of flowers; a cornucopia and caduceus,[3009] or other emblems of deities, such as two hands joined with a caduceus behind them (see p. 410); scallop-shells; or purely conventional patterns, such as large four-leaved flowers, stars, and rosettes. The latter are mostly found on lamps from Greek sites, especially in Cyprus, and at Tarsus and Knidos. Many lamps have no decoration on the discus, but only comic masks round the edge, or a border of foliage.

The Christian lamps are as a rule easily to be distinguished from the pagan by their form, as well as by their subjects. These subjects are mainly taken from the Old Testament, from the life of our Lord, and from the sphere of symbolism; the Good Shepherd, the seven-branched candlestick, the cross or labarum, and the sacred monogram, are all favourites.[3010]

* * * * *

A considerable number of Roman lamps have inscriptions, either impressed in relief or hollow letters from a stamp, or engraved with a pointed instrument; the stamps were probably of bronze. Potters’ signatures and trade-marks are always underneath the lamp, and those found on the top usually relate in some way to the subject. Sometimes, as in lamps from Pozzuoli and Naples,[3011] the inscriptions are in relief on the surface, in small tablets. They may, however, be classified under four headings:—

(1) Inscriptions referring to the circumstances under which or for which the lamp was made, as, for instance, with reference to national events or public games, or for religious dedications.

(2) Inscriptions descriptive of the subjects.

(3) Acclamations or formulae addressed by the potter to the public.

(4) Signatures of potters or trade-marks; this class is by far the most numerous.

To the first class belong some of the formulae to which allusion has already been made (pp. 396, 398), such as those on the New Year lamps: ANNVM NOVVM FAVSTVM FELICEM MIHI HIC (or TIBI, or to some person whose name is given); occasionally this is varied by formulae such as FIILICTII (for FELICITAS?), “Happiness (to you)!”[3012] OB CIVES SERV(atos), “For the preservation of the state”[3013]; G · P · R · F, Genio populi Romani feliciter[3014]; EX·S·C, “By the decree of the senate”[3015]; FIDES PVBLICA, “The public trust,”[3016] and the SAECVLI, SAECVLO, SAECVLARES group of inscriptions,[3017] which may in a few cases refer to the Ludi Saeculares, but more probably are of similar import to the SAEC(ulum) AV(reum) DOM(ini), “The golden age of our lord,“ on a lamp from Antium.[3018] The last-named formula, it should be noted, is found both above and below the lamps. LVCER(na) PV(b)LICA probably refers to the use of the lamp in some public illuminations (see p. 396).[3019] A lamp in the Trier Museum[3020] has the names of the consuls for the year 235 (Severus and Quintianus). Among names of deities for whose sanctuaries the lamps were intended are Venus (SACRVM VENERI, with a figure of the goddess),[3021] and the Ephesian Artemis ([ΑΡΤΕΜΙΣ ΕΦΕΣΙΩΝ]).[3022]

Among the inscriptions relating to the subjects on the lamps are several which have already been mentioned, such as DIOGENES and TITVRVS, and also GA(ny)MEDES over a figure of the same.[3023] On a lamp representing the flight of Aeneas from Troy are the names AEN(eas), ANC(hises), ASC(anius), and the exclamation REX PIE, alluding to the former.[3024] On another, which represents the fight of Eteokles and Polyneikes and the death of Jocasta, subjects taken from the Phoenissae of Euripides, occur not only the letters PVL for Polyneikes, but also PHO(e)NISS(ae), leaving no doubt as to the source whence the scenes are taken.[3025] Another in the form of Eros or a Genius with the club and lion-skin of Herakles, lying asleep, has on it the curious inscription AIA STLACIA TVRA DORMIT, STERNIT SIR ...,[3026] the import of which is not quite clear. Similar inscriptions often occur in scenes from the circus or amphitheatre, giving the names of gladiators, as Afer, Helenus, Popillius, or Sabinus,[3027] or of charioteers in the circus-races, as C. Annius Lacerta and the horse Corax, which won him a race for the white faction at the Secular Games[3028]; another lamp has the name of a horse or his driver, INCITATVS, and a third the exhortation VIG(i)LA PRASINE,[3029] which may allude to a driver of the green faction. Over the figure of a warrior on a lamp from Carthage is PLVS FECISSES SI PLVS LICERET, “You would have done more if you had had the chance.”[3030] In other cases there seems to be a revival of the old Greek fashion of apostrophising the figures as Kalos—e.g. AQVILO CALOS, AXOLMVS (c)ALOS.[3031] There are also inscriptions put into the mouths of figures, as in the subject of Cupids with the club of Herakles, one of whom cries ADIV(v)ATE SODALES, “Help, comrades!”[3032] or the funerary Genius weeping over an urn and saying, LVGEO, “I mourn.”[3033]

To the third class belong such expressions as HAVE, “Hail!”[3034]; VIVAS or VALEAS, “Long life!”; VTERE, “Use this”[3035]; AVE ET VALE, “Greeting and farewell,” on a lamp from Cologne[3036]; and on another from the same site, HAVE · MACENA · VILLIS · HAVE · LASCIBA · VALE,[3037] which seems to have a somewhat coarse significance. Others allude to the future purchaser, as EME ME, “Buy me”[3038]; QVI FECERIT VIVAT ET Q(ui) EMERIT, “May the potter and purchaser flourish”; EMITE LVCERNAS AB ASSE COLATAS, “Buy lamps for an ass”[3039]; BONO QVI EME(rit), “May it be for his good who shall buy it.”[3040] The latter class are chiefly found in North Africa. Mention has already been made of the inscriptions on the Esquiline lamps, such as PONE FVR; these are not found on lamps of imperial times, and appear to be peculiar to the early fabrics. Μὴ ἅπτου has been found on a lamp at Athens.[3041] On a lamp from Spain is inscribed G · IVLIVS · ARTEMIDOR ... LVCERNAS · II · D D, “C. Julius Artemidorus makes a present of two lamps.”[3042] A very curious inscription is found written in ink on a lamp at Rome, to this effect: “Helenus delivers his name to the nether world; he carries down with him coins, a New Year’s gift, and his lamp; let no one deliver him except us who have made them.”[3043]

* * * * *

Potters’ signatures are almost invariably to be found on the under side of the lamp, where they are arranged on the diameter at right angles to the axis of the lamp; sometimes they are placed in a panel or tablet, or within the outline of a foot. In rare instances they are found on the handle, or on the top.[3044] Greek lamps which are not of Roman origin are never signed, nor are those of Christian origin; the oldest signatures are to be found on the Esquiline lamps, but they rarely appear before imperial times, when they become fairly general. Among these earlier instances are PRAESE(ntis)[3045] and FL(a)BIA (Flavia), the latter found at Carthage.[3046] More frequently, lamps of this kind have a single letter or monogram by way of stamp[3047]; a “delphiniform” lamp in the Musée Alaoui has a monogram of Α and Π. A single letter sometimes occurs above or below the inscription, which may be regarded as a sort of trade-mark indicating the potter (figulus), the full name being that of the officinator or master; on a lamp in the British Museum from Knidos (No. 132) the name ROMANE(n)SIS is accompanied by the letter X; on another, FORTIS by the letter N. On the lamps signed by L · HOS · CRI, a Gaulish potter, are found the letters G, I, L, M, P, S, T, V, N, Z, and other signs.[3048] These trade-marks are not confined to letters; Fortis uses a wreath and palm-branch, as in Fig. 210; L. Caecilius Saevus a palm-branch or a foot-shaped stamp; L. Fabricius Masculus the letters H and X, a wheel, or a star.[3049] Other lamps have no name underneath, but some simple pattern, such as five circles in quincunx form, or the favourite device of the foot-shaped stamp (cf. p. 333). These varieties of marks were probably intended to distinguish different series in the products of a single pottery.

The signatures are usually abbreviated, the full form being ex officina (officinatoris), the name being consequently in the genitive. On a lamp from Rome is EX · OF · AIACIS, ex officina Aiacis.[3050] Sometimes, but rarely under the Empire, the nominative is used: A.B. fecit, or more commonly A.B.f. Thus we have AVGENDI, ATIMETI, C . IVLI NICEPHORI, or ASPRENAS, FELIX, TROPHIMVS. But where a single name occurs it is rarely full enough to show the case. On a lamp at Dresden the potter Diomedes calls himself LVCERNARIVS.[3051] From the second century down to the time of Augustus the name may be either in the nominative or genitive, either the praenomen and nomen, or the nomen or cognomen only; these signatures were all incised while the clay was moist. In the period represented by the third class (see p. 401) nearly all the signatures are cognomina simply, as ATIMETI, COMMVNIS, FORTLS, STROBILI, all in the genitive. In the fourth class, or lamps of the second century, the nominative is very rare; the names are usually abbreviated, and one (cognomen), two (nomen and cognomen), or three may be found. Potteries were, as we have seen, often owned by women, hence female names are not uncommon. Abbreviations of a particular name vary considerably; for instance, L. Caecilius Saevus appears as L · CAEC · SAE, L · CAE · SAE, L · CA · SAE (see below, p. 428); L. Fabricius Masculus as L · FABRIC · MASC, L · FABRIC · MAS, L · FABR · MASC, FABRIC · MAS, and so on.[3052] Or the praenomen may vary, and for C · OPPI · RES we find L · OPPI · RES; or, again, the cognomen, as in the case of C. Junius, where it may be Alexis, Bitus, or Draco,[3053] or of L. Munatius, found with Adjectus, Restitutus, Successus, Threptus, and Philemo.[3054] The variations in the names may denote potteries in connection, or successive holders of one business. In one instance the name of a workman PVLCHER occurs with that of Fabricius Masculus, in another that of PRIMVS with C. Oppius Restitutus.[3055] Greek names, where they occur, seem to imply that the potters were freedmen, as in the case of Dionysius, Phoetaspus, and others.

The following list gives the names most frequently found, with the localities in which they occur[3056]:—

Annius Serapiodorus (ANNI · SER): Rome, Ostia.

C. Atilius Vestalis (C · ATILI · VEST): Rome, Italy, Gaul, Britain.

Atimetus: Italy, Gallia Narbonensis, Pannonia.

L. Caecilius Saevus (L · CAE · SAE): Rome, Southern Italy, Sicily, Sardinia, Gallia Narbonensis, Britain.

Clodius Heliodorus (CLO · HEL): Italy, Africa, Spain, Gaul.

C. Clodius Successus (C · CLO · SVC): Rome, Gaul, Sardinia, Africa.

Communis: Rome, Pompeii, Gallia Cisalpina, Pannonia.

Crescens: Gaul, Pannonia.

L. Fabricius Masculus (L · FABR · MASC): Rome, Gallia Cisalpina, Africa.

Florentius (FLORENT): Rome, Italy, Sicily, Tunis, Gaul, Germany, Britain.

Fortis: Rome, Italy, Sicily, Dalmatia, Germany, Gaul, Britain.

Gabinia: Italy, Sardinia, Africa, Gaul.

L. Hospidius Crispus (L · HOS · CRI): Gaul.

C. Julius Nicephorus (C · IVLI · NICEP): Italy, Gaul.

C. Junius Alexis: Rome, Campania, Sicily, Sardinia, Africa.

C. Junius Bito: Italy, Sicily, Gaul.

C. Junius Draco: Rome, Italy, Sicily, Sardinia, Africa, Gallia Narbonensis.

L. Mar. Mi.: Rome, Campania, Sicily, Spain, Gallia Cisalpina.

L. Munatius (with various cognomina): Rome, Africa.

N. Naevius Luc. (N · NAEV · LVC): Italy, Sardinia, Spain, Gaul.

M. Novius Justus (M · NOV · IVST): Rome, Naples, Sicily, Sardinia, Africa, Gallia Narbonensis.

C. Oppius Restitutus (C · OPPI · RES): Rome, Italy, Sicily, Sardinia, Africa, Gallia Narbonensis, Cyprus.

Passenus Augurinus (PAS · AVG): Italy, Gaul.

Phoetaspus: Italy, Gaul, Pannonia.

Strobilus: Rome, Italy, Africa, Pannonia, Dalmatia, Gaul, Britain.

Vibianus: Gaul, Pannonia.

C. Viciri Agathopus (C · VICIRI · AGAT): Italy, Sardinia, Gallia Cisalpina.

It will be noted that nearly all are found at Rome, but that the others fall into geographical groups; the same name is seldom found both in the north and south of the Empire. Thus Fortis is not found in Africa, Oppius Restitutus only rarely in Gaul. Certain names are entirely localised, as Annius Serapiodorus at Rome and Ostia, L. Hos. Cri. and Marcellus in Gaul, Q. Mem. Kar. and Pudens in Sardinia. The name of Vindex, a maker of terracotta figures at Cologne (see above, p. 383), is found on lamps at Trier and Nimeguen.[3057]

The distribution of the Fortis lamps in particular is remarkable. They have been found in several places in Gallia Cisalpina, such as Aquileia[3058]; at Lyons, Aix, Orange, and elsewhere in France[3059]; at Nimeguen in Holland[3060]; at Trier, Cologne, Mainz, and Louisendorf in Germany[3061]; in London[3062]; in Spain[3063]; and over the region of Dacia, Pannonia, and Dalmatia,[3064] as well as in Rome and Italy.[3065] The most natural conclusion to be drawn from these results is that the majority of the lamps seem to have been made in Italy, and it has been thought probable that there were three principal centres of fabric whence exportation went on in different directions—Rome and its environs, Campania for the lamps found in Southern Italy, Africa, and the Mediterranean, and Gallia Cisalpina for those found in Central Europe.[3066] It has also been suggested that the last-named fabric centred in Mutina (Modena) and that this was the place where the lamps of Class III. (see p. 401) were chiefly made.[3067] Outside Italy there may well have been manufactures in North Africa, where lamps are so plentiful, and in Gallia Narbonensis, to which region some signatures are peculiar. Evidence of a lamp-manufacturer in Africa seems to be afforded by the mention of praedia Pullaenorum in an inscription from Tunis,[3068] the lamps of Pullaenus occurring in Sardinia and Africa. Local fabrics of very poor lamps were doubtless numerous.

A certain number of Roman lamps have Greek signatures, not differing in character but only in alphabet from the Latin inscriptions. The most curious instance is that of [ΚΕΛΣΕΙ] [ΠΟΜΠΕΕΙ] for Celsi Pompeii, which is found on lamps in Southern Italy[3069]; Πομπιλίου is also found at Naples, and even Ἀβασκάντου and Πρείμου, which are usually associated with lamps made in Greece (see Vol. I. p. 108), occur on some found in Italy.[3070] In Sicily we find the signatures of Apollophanes of Tyre ([ΑΠΟΛΛΟΦΑΝ] [ΤΥΡΙΟ]) at Himera and Proklos Agyrios ([ΠΡΟΚΛ ΑΓΥΡ]) at Gela and Catania[3071]; Ῥήγλου for Regulus occurs at Tarentum.[3072] Greek names are often found in Cyprus,[3073] and conversely a large number of lamps found at Knidos by Sir Charles Newton bore the signature ROMANE(n) [ROMANE(n)SIS], in Latin letters with the S reversed, apparently suggesting that the lamps were made by a Roman abroad.[3074] Greek signatures are even found in Gaul and Germany.[3075]

Mention must also be made here of the recent researches of Herr Fink[3076] with the object of ascertaining the chronological succession and general distribution of the signatures on lamps of the Imperial period. Starting with the four main classes of forms which have already been laid down as the basis[3077] (the distinction resting mainly on the various forms of the nozzle), he has obtained, by comparison chiefly of the lamps in the British Museum, Berlin, and Munich collections, the following interesting results.

Certain stamps appear to be peculiar, or almost peculiar, to each class: thus, in Class I. only, we find P. Cessius Felix and L. Munatius Successus; in Class II. only, L. Fabricius Masculus; in Class III. only, Atimetus, Fortis, Phoetaspus, and other single cognomina; in Class IV., which contains by far the larger number of stamps, Clodius Helvidius, C. Junius Bitus,[3078] L. Munatius Threptus, and C. Cornelius Ursus. The lamps of the Gaulish potter L. Hospidius Crispus are all of one peculiar form, a transition between Fink’s I. and IV.[3079] Cross-instances are very rare, but C. Junius Draco is found in Classes I. and IV., C. Oppius Restitutus in Classes II. and IV., Florentius and Celsus Pompeius in Classes III. and IV. It is also interesting to note that there are lamps in Class IV. with the Christian monogram and the figure of the Good Shepherd. In Class I., generally speaking, signatures are very rare; in Class III. they are almost invariable, but the total number of lamps is relatively small. Another curious result is that certain signatures, such as L. Caecilius Saevus, Bassus, Cerialis, Sextus Egnatius Aprilis, and Romanensis, are not confined to one type of lamp, but in these cases it is to be noted that each type has a variation of signature: thus, in Class I., L·CAEC·SAE; in II., L·CAE·SAE; in III., L·CA·SAE; while in IV., L·CAE·SAE occurs no less than 140 times.

His conclusions are that one workshop did not necessarily set itself to produce only one form, but that the differences in form are merely due to changes of fashion. In Class I. Greek technical instincts are still strong as regards form and choice of subjects, but in ornament the taste of Southern Italy prevails; the subjects are mainly mythological. In Class II. the typically Roman motives appear: gladiators, combats, and hunting-scenes; this form, according to Fink, is more developed than Class I. Evidence which has been obtained from Regensburg shows that Class III. belongs to the time from Augustus to Hadrian, and, as we have seen, it is chiefly confined to the north of the Apennines. Where provincial potteries can be traced, as at Westerndorf and at Westheim in Bavaria, the lamps are usually of this form, but it was doubtless imitated in Italy. Form IV. is essentially Italian, but is also found in Central Europe, and is evidently of late date.

-----

Footnote 2721:

See Macrobius, Sat. vi. 4, 18. Lucilius uses this word and lucerna in the same line.

Footnote 2722:

L.L. v. 119.

Footnote 2723:

Ann. dell’ Inst. 1880, p. 265 ff.: see below, p. 399.

Footnote 2724:

Cf. Dressel in C.I.L. xv. p. 784.

Footnote 2725:

Pliny, H.N. xxviii. 163.

Footnote 2726:

The corresponding Greek word was μύξα.

Footnote 2727:

Petronius, Sat. 30 (Teubner edn. p. 21); Orelli, Inscr. 3678.

Footnote 2728:

xiv. 41.

Footnote 2729:

Pliny, H.N. xxv. 121.

Footnote 2730:

Moretum, 11; Pliny, H.N. xix. 17, xxviii. 168, xxxv. 175.

Footnote 2731:

La Blanchère and Gauckler, Mus. Alaoui, p. 193, Nos. 487-88; Ant. di Ercolano, viii. pl. 52.

Footnote 2732:

Daremberg and Saglio, s.v. Lucerna, p. 1335, fig. 4605.

Footnote 2733:

No. 393 and Cat. of Terracottas, C 421 (Plate IV. fig. 4); Mus. Alaoui, No. 484.

Footnote 2734:

B.M. Nos. 2, 393.

Footnote 2735:

C.I.L. xv. 6609-10; Daremberg and Saglio, fig. 4607; Ant. di Ercol. viii. pl. 12: see also p. 387.

Footnote 2736:

Epigr. xiv. 39; Moretum. 10 ff.

Footnote 2737:

Plutarch, Ant. 26; Suetonius, Vit. Caes. 37; Dio Cass. 63, 4.

Footnote 2738:

Suet. Calig. 18; Domit. 4.

Footnote 2739:

Lampridius, Vit. 24.

Footnote 2740:

Apol. 35: cf. ad uxorem, ii. 6.

Footnote 2741:

xii. 92.

Footnote 2742:

Cf. C.I.L. xv. 6221; and B.M. Nos. 476, 506, 507, 534, 535.

Footnote 2743:

Θεῷ ὑψίστῳ λύχνον εὐχήν, Boeckh, C.I.Gr. iii. p. 1169, No. 4380 n^2.

Footnote 2744:

Notizie degli Scavi, 1894, p. 205.

Footnote 2745:

Mélanges de l’École franç. de Rome, xii. (1892), p. 116 ff.

Footnote 2746:

Roach-Smith, Collect. Antiq. i. pl. 44, p. 123.

Footnote 2747:

Cf. Roach-Smith, Ill. Rom. Lond. p. 111, and C.I.L. vi. pt. 4, No. 30102 (semper vigilet lucerna nardo).

Footnote 2748:

Ellis, Townley Gallery, ii. p. 250.

Footnote 2749:

Orelli, 4416.

Footnote 2750:

C.I.L. x. 633 (from Salerno).

Footnote 2751:

Ibid. ii. 2102.

Footnote 2752:

Sat. 111 (Teubner ed. p. 77).

Footnote 2753:

See Athen. Mitth. 1902, p. 257 ff.; and cf. Amer. Journ. of Arch. 1903, p. 344.

Footnote 2754:

Virg. Georg. i. 390; Apul. Metam. ii. 28.

Footnote 2755:

Homil. in Ep. ad Cor. i. 12 (Pusey’s Library of the Fathers, p. 164).

Footnote 2756:

Cf. C.I.L. ii. 4969, 3; x. 8053, 5; xv. 6196-210: see also pp. 413, 420, and Plate LXIV. fig. 5.

Footnote 2757:

Ibid. xv. p. 785.

Footnote 2758:

Cat. p. 47, No. 26.

Footnote 2759:

Cf. C.I.L. ix. 6081, 1.

Footnote 2760:

See also the lamps from the altar of Saturnus Balcaranensis (Daremberg and Saglio, iii. p. 1339).

Footnote 2761:

B.M. 27-30, 67, 68; Ann. dell’ Inst. 1880, pl. O; Mus. Alaoui, pl. 34, Nos. 6-12, pp. 147-48.

Footnote 2762:

See Ann. dell’ Inst. 1880, p. 275.

Footnote 2763:

C.I.L. xv. 6631, 6900 ff.; Ann. dell’ Inst. 1880, p. 315.

Footnote 2764:

B.M. 25-26; C.I.L. xv. part 2, plate, No. 2; Daremberg and Saglio, s.v. Lucerna, p. 1323.

Footnote 2765:

Cf. Mus. Alaoui, pl. 34, p. 149, Nos. 17-8: see also B.M. 69-82.

Footnote 2766:

See Dressel in C.I.L. xv. p. 782 ff.; Toutain in Daremberg and Saglio, art. Lucerna; Fink, Formen u. Stempel röm. Thonlampen, in Sitzungsberichte d. Münchener Akad. 1900, p. 685 ff.

Footnote 2767:

On the evidence yielded by the potters’ signatures see also below, p. 428.

Footnote 2768:

See the examples given on Plates LXIV.-LXV.

Footnote 2769:

I am inclined to agree with Dr. Dressel in placing this type earlier than Fink’s Class I. It seems to be intermediate in form between the delphiniform and other types with blunt nozzles, and the type given in Fig. 204. Cf. C.I.L. xv. pl. 3.

Footnote 2770:

Cf. C.I.L. xv. pl. 2, No. 5 = Fig. 206, and Dressel, ad loc., p. 783.

Footnote 2771:

Cf. C.I.L. v. 8114.

Footnote 2772:

See Daremberg and Saglio, s.v. p. 1011, fig. 4381.

Footnote 2773:

Cf. for bronze examples, B.M. Cat. 2514 ff.

Footnote 2774:

B.M. 3, 13.

Footnote 2775:

Plate IV. fig. 4.

Footnote 2776:

C.I.L. xi. 6699, 5.

Footnote 2777:

In the Louvre.

Footnote 2778:

C.I.L. xv. 6701.

Footnote 2779:

Ibid. xv. 6513; Kenner, Ant. Thonlampen, No. 431.

Footnote 2780:

B.M. 9-12: see also Guildhall Mus. Cat. p. 49, No. 50, for negro’s head combined with camel’s.

Footnote 2781:

B.M. 18-21 (bulls’ heads); 22 (eagle); Mus. Borb. xiv. 38; C.I.L. xv. 6739, 6334, 6393; Ant. di Ercol. viii. 27; Kenner, 437, 437a; Mus. Alaoni, pl. 36, No. 485.

Footnote 2782:

B.M. 14-17; C.I.L. xv. 6287; Kenner, 434-35.

Footnote 2783:

Greek and Roman Department, from Cologne; British and Mediaeval Department, from Britain; others in Guildhall Museum, and C.I.L. xv. 6450.

Footnote 2784:

C.I.L. xv. 6387, 6627; ibid. 6393 (artichoke); B.M. 24 (walnut); Ant. di Ercol. viii. 5.

Footnote 2785:

Metam. xi. 245.

Footnote 2786:

No. 1 = Cab. Durand, 1777: cf. Lafaye, Culte des Divinités d’Alexandrie, pp. 122, 303, No. 132; also Vol. I. pp. 209, 216.

Footnote 2787:

See for examples in B.M., Nos. 58-66.

Footnote 2788:

Cf. Anzeiger, 1889, p. 170, and B.M. Nos. 90, 91.

Footnote 2789:

See Dalton, B. M. Cat. of Early Christian Antiqs. pl. 32, p. 148.

Footnote 2790:

xiv. 114.

Footnote 2791:

See on the subject Daremberg and Saglio, iii. p. 1334; Blümner, Technologie, ii. pp. 71, 108.

Footnote 2792:

Cat. of Terracottas, E 81-83: see Fig. 209.

Footnote 2793:

Mus. Alaoui, p. 253, Nos. 396-97 (Christian).

Footnote 2794:

Cat. p. 51, Nos. 117-18 (from London Wall).

Footnote 2795:

See also p. 395 above.

Footnote 2796:

Cf. Avolio, Fatture di argille in Sicilia, p. 123.

Footnote 2797:

Cf. Rev. Arch. xxxiii. (1898), p. 86; Mus. Alaoui, p. 148, No. 13.

Footnote 2798:

Mus. Alaoui, p. 156, Nos. 74-81: cf. the Roman lamps of the same date (C.I.L. xv. p. 782).

Footnote 2799:

The numbers given in the following notes are those of the forthcoming Catalogue of Roman lamps in the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities.

Footnote 2800:

See also C.I.L. xv. 6195-751 for mention of many interesting subjects.

Footnote 2801:

Röm. Mitth. 1892, p. 144 ff.

Footnote 2802:

Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen, Nachrichten, 1870, p. 174: cf. Roach-Smith, Ill. Rom. London, p. 111.

Footnote 2803:

B.M. 511; Ant. di Ercol. viii. 1.

Footnote 2804:

Cyprus Mus. Cat. 1394; B.M. 604 = Plate IV. fig. 1.

Footnote 2805:

B.M. 270, 315, 330, 331, 394, 472-475: cf. also Roach-Smith, _Ill. Rom. Lond._ pl. 30, 1; Ant. di Ercol. viii. 1; Bartoli, ii. 4; Kenner, Antike Thonlampen, Nos. 4-6.

Footnote 2806:

Göttinger Nachrichten, p. 177, No. 18; Kenner, Nos. 227, 228, 425.

Footnote 2807:

B.M. 605; Ann. dell’ Inst. 1866, pl. G.

Footnote 2808:

Kenner, No. 7: cf. Cyprus Mus. Cat. 1385-86.

Footnote 2809:

Kenner, No. 8; B.M. 358 (handle).

Footnote 2810:

B.M. 395; 360-363 on handle.

Footnote 2811:

Kenner, No. 137.

Footnote 2812:

No. 679 = J.H.S. xiii. p. 93.

Footnote 2813:

B.M. 307, 402, 466, 573: see also p. 415, note 2935.

Footnote 2814:

Kenner, No. 10.

Footnote 2815:

B.M. 607-609, 681, 707; Cyprus Mus. Cat. 1384.

Footnote 2816:

B.M. 271, 398, 571; Cyprus Mus. Cat. 1356.

Footnote 2817:

Kenner, Nos. 17-22; Bartoli, ii. 32-3; B.M. 332, 512, 680.

Footnote 2818:

Kenner, No. 230; Guildhall Mus. Cat. p. 48, No. 43 (from Royal Exchange).

Footnote 2819:

B.M. 572; Mus. Alaoui, No. 151.

Footnote 2820:

Kenner, No. 229.

Footnote 2821:

Mus. Alaoui, No. 115.

Footnote 2822:

B.M. 94; with Sphinx, ibid. 574.

Footnote 2823:

Mus. Alaoui, No. 142.

Footnote 2824:

B.M. 69.

Footnote 2825:

B.M. 554, 614; Kenner, No. 28.

Footnote 2826:

B.M. 174.

Footnote 2827:

B.M. 175, 176, 333, 411-413; Kenner, No. 26; Bartoli, ii. 17.

Footnote 2828:

B.M. 432, 433; Kenner, Nos. 231-2; Ant. di Ercol. viii. 32.

Footnote 2829:

Kenner, No. 23.

Footnote 2830:

Masner, Wiener Vasensamml. No. 684: cf. Anzeiger, 1890, p. 27.

Footnote 2831:

B.M. 575; Kenner, Nos. 24-5; Guildhall Mus. Cat. p. 48, No. 46; Mus. Alaoui, No. 181.

Footnote 2832:

Mus. Alaoui, No. 180.

Footnote 2833:

B.M. 70: cf. Clarac, Musée de Sculpt. iii. 343, 1399; B.M. Terracottas, D 286.

Footnote 2834:

See Kenner, Nos. 37-57.

Footnote 2835:

B.M. 410, 477.

Footnote 2836:

B.M. 172; Roach-Smith, Ill. Rom. Lond. pl. 30, 6 (Brit. and Mediaeval Dept.).

Footnote 2837:

B.M. 516, 610, 611, 405, 515, 364, 553.

Footnote 2838:

B.M. 407-409, 461, 479, 612, 654.

Footnote 2839:

B.M. 478, 406.

Footnote 2840:

Anzeiger, 1889, p. 168.

Footnote 2841:

B.M. 308, 97.

Footnote 2842:

B.M. 170, 171.

Footnote 2843:

Göttinger Nachrichten, p. 179, No. 43.

Footnote 2844:

Anzeiger, loc. cit.

Footnote 2845:

B.M. 92, 613; 98; 95, 96, 156; 403, 404.

Footnote 2846:

B.M. 272; Bartoli, i. 7.

Footnote 2847:

B.M. 173, 89, 576; Bartoli, ii. 25.

Footnote 2848:

Anzeiger, 1889, p. 168: cf. C.I.L. xv. 6230.

Footnote 2849:

B.M. 517, 577; Bartoli, ii. 20.

Footnote 2850:

B.M. 78.

Footnote 2851:

B.M. 273, 499.

Footnote 2852:

B.M. 616, 709.

Footnote 2853:

Arch. Zeit. 1852, pl. 39 (in Berlin).

Footnote 2854:

Anzeiger, 1889, p. 169.

Footnote 2855:

Kenner, No. 36.

Footnote 2856:

B.M. 481: cf. 316, 519.

Footnote 2857:

B.M. 102, 180, 579; 183; Kenner, No. 34.

Footnote 2858:

B.M. 101, 182; Kenner, No. 33.

Footnote 2859:

B.M. 518.

Footnote 2860:

B.M. 184, 274, 275, 326, 462, 500; Kenner, No. 35.

Footnote 2861:

B.M. 181.

Footnote 2862:

B.M. 58, 99, 578; 178, 179, 480, 618; Bull. Comm. Arch. 1887, p. 366, No. 8: cf. Hauser, Neuattische Reliefs, p. 154, Nos. 25-32.

Footnote 2863:

B.M. 100, 582.

Footnote 2864:

B.M. 476.

Footnote 2865:

B.M. 514.

Footnote 2866:

B.M. 513; Bartoli, ii. 13.

Footnote 2867:

B.M. 83, 334, 399, 400, 157, 606; Masner, Wiener Vasens. 695; Bartoli, ii. 11.

Footnote 2868:

B.M. 401.

Footnote 2869:

No. 535: cf. also C.I.L. xv. 6221, 20.

Footnote 2870:

B.M. 463, 482, 615; C.I.L. x. 8053, 157.

Footnote 2871:

Guildhall Mus. Cat. p. 48, No. 40.

Footnote 2872:

B.M. 396, 397; Göttinger Nachrichten, 1870, p. 184, Nos. 103-4.

Footnote 2873:

B.M. 523; 191, 591 (bust); Kenner, No. 71; Mus. Alaoui, No. 164; Ant. di Ercol. viii. 30.

Footnote 2874:

B.M. 167; Masner, 685; Fiedler, Castra Vetera, pl. 8, No. 3.

Footnote 2875:

B.M. 465; Ant. di Ercol. viii. 11; Mus. Alaoui, No. 113; C.I.L. xii. 5682, 71 (K. adored by a Gallus); Kenner, No. 3, and see No. 23.

Footnote 2876:

Kenner, No. 77.

Footnote 2877:

B.M. 370, 467, 508; 190, 297, 280; Kenner, No. 1; Ant. di Ercol. viii. 2: cf. B.M. Terracottas, D 285.

Footnote 2878:

B.M. 337.

Footnote 2879:

B.M. 369; Mus. Alaoui, No. 134.

Footnote 2880:

Daremberg and Saglio, iii. p. 1011, fig. 4381.

Footnote 2881:

B.M 281.

Footnote 2882:

B.M. 468-470; Bartoli, ii. 42.

Footnote 2883:

B.M. 104, 185(?).

Footnote 2884:

Mus. Alaoui, No. 82.

Footnote 2885:

Kenner, Nos. 66-7.

Footnote 2886:

Ibid. Nos. 233-4.

Footnote 2887:

Ibid. Nos. 72-3.

Footnote 2888:

B.M. 276-278, 348, 484, 510, 586; Kenner, Nos. 58-9; Bartoli, ii. 46.

Footnote 2889:

See generally, Ant. di Ercol. viii. 6; Bartoli, iii. 3 (with wreath).

Footnote 2890:

E.g. B.M. Bronzes, 1510 ff.

Footnote 2891:

B.M. 189 (see p. 420), 335, 367, 520; 336; 103, 187, 188, 483: cf. Roach-Smith, Collect. Antiq. ii. pl. 15.

Footnote 2892:

Rev. Arch. xxxiii. (1898), p. 229.

Footnote 2893:

B.M. 583; Bartoli, iii. 2; Arch. Zeit. 1852, pl. 39.

Footnote 2894:

B.M. 186.

Footnote 2895:

See Marquardt, Privatalterthümer, p. 245; C.I.L. x. 8053, 5; ii. 4969, 3, and xv. 6196 ff; Ovid, Fasti, i. 189 ff. These lamps date from the time of Augustus and his successors.

Footnote 2896:

B.M. 309, and cf. 368, 584, 585; Bartoli, iii. 5. For a similar subject on a money-box see above, p. 389.

Footnote 2897:

B.M. 189; Ant. di Ercol. viii. pl. 6; Bartoli, iii. 4.

Footnote 2898:

Guildhall Mus. Cat. p. 47, No. 26. See for these two p. 398 above, and p. 420 below.

Footnote 2899:

B.M. 84, 105, 485; Kenner, No. 83; Bartoli, i. 13-14.

Footnote 2900:

Rev. Arch. xxxiii. (1898), p. 229.

Footnote 2901:

B.M. 710 (archaic xoanon).

Footnote 2902:

Kenner, No. 76; Mus. Alaoui, Nos. 139-40.

Footnote 2903:

B.M. 415.

Footnote 2904:

B.M. 521.

Footnote 2905:

B.M. 337 (Plate LXIII.), and 486.

Footnote 2906:

Anzeiger, 1889, p. 167; Mus. Alaoui, No. 131.

Footnote 2907:

B.M. 619.

Footnote 2908:

B.M. 192, 587.

Footnote 2909:

Cyprus Mus. Cat. 1358.

Footnote 2910:

B.M. 416.

Footnote 2911:

B.M. 620; 338, 339; Ant. di Ercol. viii. 4 (in the three latter only with club and lion’s skin).

Footnote 2912:

Cyprus Mus. Cat. 1393.

Footnote 2913:

B.M. 506, 566, 588.

Footnote 2914:

B.M. 106, 417.

Footnote 2915:

B.M. 487.

Footnote 2916:

B.M. 621.

Footnote 2917:

B.M. 193; Kenner, No. 81.

Footnote 2918:

Kenner, No. 82; B.M. 107.

Footnote 2919:

Mus. Alaoui, Nos. 126-27; Rev. Arch. xxxiii. (1898), p. 229.

Footnote 2920:

Göttinger Nachrichten, 1870, p. 182, No. 72.

Footnote 2921:

B.M. 158, 589; Bartoli, ii. 24; Ant. di Ercol. viii. 33; Guildhall Mus. Cat. p. 48, No. 39.

Footnote 2922:

B.M. 108; Göttinger Nachrichten, p. 188, Nos. 235-36.

Footnote 2923:

Mus. Alaoui, No. 100.

Footnote 2924:

B.M. 194 = Arch. Zeit. 1852, pl. 39.

Footnote 2925:

Mus. Alaoui, Nos. 153-56.

Footnote 2926:

Ibid. No. 123.

Footnote 2927:

Kenner, Nos. 79, 80.

Footnote 2928:

B.M. 371.

Footnote 2929:

B.M. 590 = Roscher, Lexikon, iii. p. 2338.

Footnote 2930:

Masner, Wiener Vasens. No. 674: cf. Bull. Arch. Nap. N.S. iv. pl. 10, fig. 4.

Footnote 2931:

B.M. 555; Von Rohden, Terracotten von Pompeii, p. 49: cf. C.I.L. xv. 6236.

Footnote 2932:

Arch. Zeit. 1865, pl. 194; B.M. 282: cf. 109, 195.

Footnote 2933:

B.M. 319-321; Bartoli, iii. 11.

Footnote 2934:

Mus. Alaoui, No. 192.

Footnote 2935:

Masner, No. 676. Cf. a lamp with Athena voting for him, Daremberg and Saglio, Dict. iii. p. 1329, fig. 4601.

Footnote 2936:

B.M. 199, 623.

Footnote 2937:

C.I.L. x. 8053, 194.

Footnote 2938:

Mus. Alaoui, No. 110; Guildhall Mus. Cat. p. 48, No. 41 = Roach-Smith, Collect. Antiq. ii. pl. 15 (from Colchester).

Footnote 2939:

Mus. Alaoui, No. 111.

Footnote 2940:

B.M. 196-198, 522, 622.

Footnote 2941:

B.M. 130, 340, 418; Kenner, No. 136: cf. Masner, No. 686.

Footnote 2942:

B.M. 524, 525; Cyprus Mus. Cat. 1351; Kenner, Nos. 68-70.

Footnote 2943:

B.M. 682.

Footnote 2944:

Rev. Arch. xxxiii. (1898), p. 230.

Footnote 2945:

B.M. 110, 593: see Plutarch, Vit. Alexandri, 14.

Footnote 2946:

Mon. dell’ Inst. iii. pl. 14, fig. 3; see Bernoulli, Gr. Ikonogr. i. p. 56.

Footnote 2947:

B.M. 128(?), 598; Kenner, Nos. 85-6, 88-90.

Footnote 2948:

Arch. Zeit. 1861, Anzeiger, p. 157; Kenner, No. 87.

Footnote 2949:

Guildhall Mus. Cat. p. 47, Nos. 14-15.

Footnote 2950:

C.I.L. xi. 6699, 4.

Footnote 2951:

Bull. Arch. Nap. iv. (1856), pl. 10, fig. 3, p. 166; examples also in B.M. (No. 216 = Plate LXIV. fig. 3) and C.I.L. xv. 6240. The companion lamp given in the Bull. Arch. Nap. pl. 10, fig. 4, does not represent Meliboeus, as there supposed, but Ajax.

Footnote 2952:

B.M. 224; Roach-Smith, Ill. Rom. Lond. pl. 30, fig. 3; Jahn in Mitth. d. ant. Gesellsch. zu Zürich, xiv. pl. 4, fig. 9; Göttinger Nachrichten, 1870, p. 190, No. 282; and see Daremberg and Saglio, s.v. Lucerna, p. 1326.

Footnote 2953:

B.M. 139: cf. Bull. dell’ Inst. 1867, p. 35 = Mitth. d. ant. Gesellsch. zu Zürich, xvii. p. 149; in the latter instance a man weighs an ant against an elephant.

Footnote 2954:

Coll. H. Hoffmann (Paris, 1886), p. 39; and in B.M. (No. 59).

Footnote 2955:

See for example Ant. di Ercol. viii. 7; Rev. Arch, xxxiii. (1898), p. 230; Daremberg and Saglio, Dict., ii., s.v. Gladiator, with the bibliography on p. 1600; also B.M., passim. Similar types occur on the Gaulish terra sigillata (p. 507 below, and Déchelette, Vases ornés, ii. p. 97 ff.).

Footnote 2956:

B.M. 111-114, 341, etc.

Footnote 2957:

B.M. 115-117, 201, etc.

Footnote 2958:

B.M. 121, 159, 160, 207, 285, 317, 342.

Footnote 2959:

Mus. Alaoui, No. 222.

Footnote 2960:

Ant. di Ercol. viii. 9.

Footnote 2961:

C.I.L. xii. 5682, 74.

Footnote 2962:

B.M. 558.

Footnote 2963:

B.M. 318; Rev. Arch. xxxiii. (1898), p. 231, fig. 27.

Footnote 2964:

B.M. 557, and cf. 165; 208, 531; 311 and Cyprus Mus. Cat. 1364. See under the first-named head, Zeitschr. für Numism. xxiv. p. 357, for an athlete placing a prize vase on his head.

Footnote 2965:

B.M. 507; 122, 211, 422; 209, 210; 125, 213, 214.

Footnote 2966:

B.M. 75, 123, 124, 154, 212, 421.

Footnote 2967:

C.I.L. x. 8053, 127.

Footnote 2968:

Mus. Alaoui, No. 223 = Daremberg and Saglio, iii. p. 1327, fig. 4590.

Footnote 2969:

Kenner, No. 98; Mus. Alaoui, No. 200.

Footnote 2970:

Cyprus Mus. Cat. 1339.

Footnote 2971:

B.M. 328: cf. Cyprus Mus. Cat. p. 80, No. 1365.

Footnote 2972:

See B.M. 423, 424, 532, 533, 701; and cf. p. 415, note 2933.

Footnote 2973:

Mus. Alaoui, Nos. 233-34; also B.M. 79. Cf. B.M. Cat. of Bronzes, No. 884.

Footnote 2974:

Mus. Alaoui, No. 227; B.M. 625 (hunter only).

Footnote 2975:

B.M. 126, 425; Kenner, Nos. 117-122.

Footnote 2976:

B.M. 79 = Plate LXV. fig. 1; Rev. Arch. xxxiii. (1898), p. 230.

Footnote 2977:

B.M. 217; Rev. Arch. xxxiii. (1898), p. 233; Urlichs, Verzeichn. d. Antikens. d. Univ. Würzburg, p. 39, No. 37.

Footnote 2978:

C.I.L. xv. 6718.

Footnote 2979:

Roach-Smith, Collect. Antiq. ii. pl. 15.

Footnote 2980:

Rev. Arch. xxxiii. (1898), pp. 230, 231.

Footnote 2981:

B.M. 534, 218, 219: cf. Kenner, Nos. 123-24.

Footnote 2982:

Roach-Smith, Ill. Rom. Lond. pl. 30, fig. 4: cf. the well-known graffito at Pompeii, and Collect. Antiq. iv. pl. 11.

Footnote 2983:

B.M. 27; 222; 127; 74.

Footnote 2984:

B.M. 215, 489; Rev. Arch. xxxiii. (1898), p. 230.

Footnote 2985:

C.I.L. xv. 6221, 24.

Footnote 2986:

Ibid. x. 8053, 126 and 192.

Footnote 2987:

Anzeiger, 1889, p. 169.

Footnote 2988:

Roach-Smith, Ill. Rom. London, pl. 30, 2.

Footnote 2989:

Göttinger Nachrichten, 1870, p. 186, No. 182.

Footnote 2990:

B.M., passim; Kenner, No. 139 ff.

Footnote 2991:

Mus. Alaoui, No. 278.

Footnote 2992:

B.M. 441, 494, 501; Masner, Wiener Vasens. No. 694; Cyprus Mus. Cat. 1379.

Footnote 2993:

Kenner, No. 181.

Footnote 2994:

Ant. di Ercol. viii. 23.

Footnote 2995:

B.M. 560, 226, 561.

Footnote 2996:

B.M. 562.

Footnote 2997:

Fiedler, Castra Vetera, pl. 7, No. 2.

Footnote 2998:

B.M. 544.

Footnote 2999:

B.M. 135, 291, 563; C.I.L. x. 8053, 127.

Footnote 3000:

B.M. 230, 493; Guildhall Mus. Cat. p. 49, No. 57; Cyprus Mus. Cat. 1341.

Footnote 3001:

Rev. Arch. xxxiii. (1898), p. 232.

Footnote 3002:

B.M. 234, 293, 439, 545; Kenner, Nos. 163-166.

Footnote 3003:

B.M. 238-241, 296, 443, 444; Masner, No. 693.

Footnote 3004:

Ant. di Ercol. viii. 5.

Footnote 3005:

Rev. Arch. xxxiii. (1898), p. 232.

Footnote 3006:

Ibid.; B.M. 242, 295, 626.

Footnote 3007:

B.M. 76, 82; Masner, Nos. 654-59.

Footnote 3008:

B.M. 77: cf. 145.

Footnote 3009:

Roach-Smith, Ill. Rom. London, p. 110.

Footnote 3010:

See generally Dalton, B.M. Cat. of Early Christian Antiqs. p. 139 ff.; Daremberg and Saglio, iii. p. 1328; Mus. Alaoui, Nos. 497 ff.; Ant. di Ercol. viii. 45-7; De Rossi, Roma Sotterr. ii. p. 498 ff.; Delattre, in Revue de l’Art Chrétien, 1889-93, etc. (Carthage).

Footnote 3011:

C.I.L. x. 8053, 36, 143, 193; B.M. 201, 310, from Pozzuoli.

Footnote 3012:

Guildhall Mus. Cat. p. 47, No. 26.

Footnote 3013:

See B.M. 189 and C.I.L. xv. 6211-18; these all date from the time of Augustus: cf. his coins and those of his successors.

Footnote 3014:

C.I.L. xv. 6195.

Footnote 3015:

C.I.L. xv. 6219.

Footnote 3016:

Ibid. 6222.

Footnote 3017:

See ibid. 6221; B.M. 164, etc.

Footnote 3018:

Ibid. x. 8053, 4.

Footnote 3019:

Ibid. xv. 6223.

Footnote 3020:

Ibid. xiii. 10001, 4.

Footnote 3021:

Ibid. xiii. 10001, 2.

Footnote 3022:

Inscr. Gr. xiv. 2405, 6. This and the preceding are bronze lamps.

Footnote 3023:

C.I.L. xv. 6239 = Ann. dell’ Inst. 1866, pl. G.

Footnote 3024:

C.I.L. xv. 6236.

Footnote 3025:

Ibid. xi. 6699, 4.

Footnote 3026:

Ibid. 6699, 5.

Footnote 3027:

Ibid. xv. 6241-49.

Footnote 3028:

C.I.L. xv. 6250: cf. Pliny, H.N. viii. 160.

Footnote 3029:

Ibid. 6257, 6261.

Footnote 3030:

Daremberg and Saglio, Dict., s.v. Lucerna, p. 1330.

Footnote 3031:

C.I.L. xv. 6254-55.

Footnote 3032:

Ibid. x. 8053, 8; xv. 6230: see above, p. 411.

Footnote 3033:

Ibid. xv. 6234.

Footnote 3034:

Ibid. x. 8053, 6.

Footnote 3035:

Ibid. xi. 6699, 8-10.

Footnote 3036:

Ibid. xiii. 10001, 14.

Footnote 3037:

Ibid. 10001, 20.

Footnote 3038:

Ibid. xv. 6232.

Footnote 3039:

Ibid. viii. 10478, 1; xiii. 10001, 19. The meaning of colatas is doubtful. Mr. F. H. Marshall suggests “well-made,” lit. “sifted,” referring to the quality of the clay.

Footnote 3040:

Ibid. xv. 6752; xi. 6699, 7.

Footnote 3041:

Bull. dell’ Inst. 1868, p. 59: see Vol. I. p. 107.

Footnote 3042:

C.I.L. ii. 4969, 1.

Footnote 3043:

Ibid. xv. 6265: see Arch. Zeit. 1861, p. 167.

Footnote 3044:

Mélanges de l’École Franc. de Rome, xii. (1892), p. 118, Nos. 31-3, pl. 4, No. 5; C.I.L. xv. 6520; Mus. Alaoui, No. 369; and see above, p. 420, for examples on Campanian lamps.

Footnote 3045:

Ann. dell’ Inst. 1880, p. 291.

Footnote 3046:

Daremberg and Saglio, Dict., s.v. Lucerna, p. 1330.

Footnote 3047:

E.g. A, B, C, H, I, R: C.I.L. x. 8053, 209-14; xii. 5682, 131; xv. 6266, 6334, 6342.

Footnote 3048:

C.I.L. xii. 5682, 57.

Footnote 3049:

See Fink in Münchener Sitzungsberichte, 1900, p. 690, for examples.

Footnote 3050:

C.I.L. xv. 6282.

Footnote 3051:

Anzeiger, 1889, p. 170 = C.I.L. xv. 6263.

Footnote 3052:

C.I.L. xv. 6350, 6433.

Footnote 3053:

Ibid. 6501-03.

Footnote 3054:

Ibid. 6560-65.

Footnote 3055:

Ibid. 6434, 6593.

Footnote 3056:

See Daremberg and Saglio, s.v. Lucerna, p. 1331; also the lists given by Fink in Sitzungsb. d. Münch. Akad. 1900, pp. 689, 692 ff., and the various volumes of the Corpus under Instrumentum Domesticum, especially vol. xv.

Footnote 3057:

Blanchet, Mélanges Gallo-romaines, ii. p. 112.

Footnote 3058:

C.I.L. v. 8114, 54.

Footnote 3059:

Ibid. xiii. 10001, 136; xii. 5682, 50; B.M. 383, 391.

Footnote 3060:

C.I.L. xiii. 10001, 136.

Footnote 3061:

Ibid.: also Steiner, Cod. Inscr. Rom. Danub. et Rheni, i. p. 185, ii. p. 238.

Footnote 3062:

C.I.L. vii. 1330, 15; Roach-Smith, Ill. Rom. London, p. 112; Guildhall Mus. Cat. p. 47, Nos. 27-8.

Footnote 3063:

C.I.L. ii. p. 665, No. 24.

Footnote 3064:

Ibid. iii. 3215, 7; ibid. Suppl. 1, 8076, 16.

Footnote 3065:

C.I.L. ix. 6081, 33; x. 8053, 83; xi. 6699, 89; xv. 6450.

Footnote 3066:

Daremberg and Saglio, s.v. p. 1332: cf. C.I.L. xv. p. 783.

Footnote 3067:

From vol. v. of the Corpus it may be seen how common the signatures peculiar to this class are in this region; e.g. 8114, 11, 28, 54, 126, 137.

Footnote 3068:

Carton, Découvertes, p. 254: cf. C.I.L. viii. 10478, 33-4.

Footnote 3069:

C.I.L. x. 8053, 46; Inscr. Graec. xiv. 2405, 18. Cf. Proc. Soc. Antiqs. xx. (1904), p. 96.

Footnote 3070:

C.I.L. xv. 6869, 6886.

Footnote 3071:

Boeckh, C.I.Gr. iii. p. 660, No. 5685; Inscr. Graec. xiv. 24053, 34; and B.M. 303.

Footnote 3072:

Inscr. Gr. xiv. 2405, 35.

Footnote 3073:

Cf. Cesnola, Salaminia, p. 284.

Footnote 3074:

See C.I.L. iii. Suppl. 1, 7310, and Vol. I. p. 108. He also occurs in Africa (C.I.L. viii. 10478, 37) and elsewhere.

Footnote 3075:

Inscr. Graec. xiv. 2574.

Footnote 3076:

Münchener Sitzungsberichte, 1900, p. 685 ff. On p. 692 a table of signatures on the British Museum lamps is given.

Footnote 3077:

See above, p. 400.

Footnote 3078:

The names of this and other potters in Class IV. also occur on terracotta money-boxes (see above, p. 389).

Footnote 3079:

See C.I.L. xv. pt. 2, pl. 3, No. 15.

XXI. ROMAN POTTERY: TECHNICAL PROCESSES, SHAPES, AND USES

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]:

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Silica 55·08 52·87 52·054 54·75 66·70 Clay earth 23·10 23·95 — 18·82 21·01 Iron oxide 14·13 4·78 13·966 14·48 5·89 Carbonate of lime 5·22 13·80 — 5·30 3·20 Magnesia 0·75 2·35 1·850 3·38 1·26 Potash 0·79 0·89 1·852 1·55 1·02 Carbonate of sodium 0·28 0·45 0·523 0·53 0·57

2. With glaze[3088]:

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Silica 54·18 — 51·924 53·70 — Clay 21·31 — — 16·93 — Iron 15·00 — 12·168 14·70 — Carbonate of lime 6·01 — — 5·82 — Magnesia 1·94 3·12 2·201 5·72 2·05 Potash 0·95 1·06 2·210 1·82 1·27 Carbonate of sodium 0·37 0·49 0·921 0·62 0·69

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]:—

Amphora cepit Institui; currente rota cur urceus exit?

And, again, in the phrase totus, teres, atque rotundus[3098] he is doubtless referring to a vase just turned off the wheel. Tibullus speaks of “slippery clay fashioned on the wheel of Cumae”[3099]; and there are also allusions in Plautus and other writers.[3100] The simile has also been drawn upon by English poets.[3101] Specimens of potters’ wheels have been found at Arezzo and at Nancy; these are made of terracotta, pierced in the centre for the axis of the pivot, and furnished at the circumference with small cylinders of lead, to give purchase for the hand and steadiness to the whirling wheel.[3102] Another from Lezoux, now in the Museum at Roanne, is figured by M. Déchelette.[3103] Most of the common wares were made by this process, except the dolia, or large casks, which were built up on a frame like the Greek pithos (Vol. I. p. 152).

But for the ornamented vases with reliefs an additional process was necessary in order to produce the raised ornament, and they were in nearly all cases produced from moulds, like the lamps or terracotta figures and reliefs.[3104] The vases were still fashioned on the wheel, but this was done in the mould from which the reliefs were obtained. Occasionally the reliefs were modelled by hand or with the aid of tools, or even produced with a brush full of thick slip (en barbotine), but moulding was the general rule. This method entailed three distinct stages, of which the first alone required artistic capacity; the other two were purely mechanical, requiring only a certain technical dexterity. The first was that of making the stamps from which the designs were impressed; the second, the making of the moulds; the third, impressing the clay in the mould.

The stamps were made of clay, gypsum, wood, or metal, and had a handle at the back for holding while pressing them into the mould; they were used not only for figures and ornamental designs, but also for the potter’s signature (see below). Only clay examples, however, have been preserved, but some of these are admirable specimens. Frequently the subjects on the Arretine vases were taken, like those on lamps and mural reliefs, from existing works of art, especially from the “new Attic” reliefs to which allusion has already been made (p. 368), and the stamps are directly copied from these sources. An instance of this is a stamp from Arezzo in the British Museum, with a beautiful figure of Spring (Plate LXVI. fig. 2), which finds its counterpart on a complete vase from Capua (Fig. 219), and also on a mural relief (B.M. D 583). Another good example in the same collection represents a slave bending over a vessel on a fire, and shielding his face from the heat with one hand. From the same site are two others representing respectively a boar and a lion. A fourth stamp found at Arezzo, with a tragic mask, is given in Fig. 211.[3105] The stamps must have been articles of commerce, and handed down from one potter to another, as the subjects are found repeated in different places; the majority were probably made at Arezzo and other important places in Italy.

Among examples from the provinces may be mentioned one in the British Museum (Romano-British collection), with the figure of a youth, inscribed OFFI(cina) LIBERTI; it is of fine terracotta, and was found at Mainz. A stamp with the figure of Paris or Atys is in the museum of the Philosophical Society at York.[3106] Other stamps in the form of a hare and a lion in the Sèvres Museum are inscribed with the name of Cerialis, a well-known German potter, whose name also occurs on a mould for a large bowl with a frieze of combatants in the British Museum, and in the former museum are six others, including one of a wolf, with the name of a Gaulish potter, Cobnertus.[3107] Von Hefner mentions one found at Rheinzabern with a figure of a gladiator at each end, inscribed P · ATTI · CLINI · O(fficina), and others from Westerndorf with a lion and a horse.[3108] Dies for stamping the potters’ names have been found at Lezoux in Auvergne, and in Luxemburg, with the names of Auster (AVSTRI · OF) and Cobnertus, and Roach-Smith possessed one with the latter name[3109]; in the Sèvres Museum is also a stamp for making rows of pattern (see below),[3110] and at Rheinzabern one for an egg-and-tongue moulding was found.[3111] Specimens of these stamps are given in Fig. 211.

The moulds were made of a somewhat lighter clay than that of the vases, but it was essential that the material should be sufficiently porous to absorb the moisture of the pressed-in clay of the vase; sometimes holes for the water to escape through are visible. They were made on the wheel, and had a ridge on the exterior for convenience in handling; they were made whole, not in halves, but sometimes the vase was first made plain, and the figures were then attached from separate moulds, or rather made separately, as in the case of the “Megarian” bowls (Vol. I. p. 499).[3112] Vases have been found in the Rhone valley ornamented with large appliqué medallions, and the separate moulds for these also exist; they seem to have been made at Vienne.[3113] The figures and ornaments were impressed into the moulds from the stamps while the paste was still soft, leaving hollow impressions to receive the clay of the vases. Similarly, continuous patterns, such as rows of beads or dots, were traced in the mould with a roller or wheel-like instrument on which the pattern was cut in relief.[3114] Any defects or careless arrangement in the completed vase would of course be due to a careless insertion of the stamps in the mould.

There are large numbers of moulds for Roman and provincial vases in existence,[3115] and the British Museum has a fine though fragmentary series from Arezzo, intended for some of the finest specimens of the local ware; of these more will be said in the following chapter. Many of these moulds have been found on sites of potteries in Gaul, especially in the Auvergne and Bourbonnais districts, and are collected in the Moulins, Roanne, St. Germain, and other museums. Lezoux was an important centre in this respect, and here also were found moulds for patterns and ornaments.[3116] In the British Museum (Romano-British collection) there is part of a mould for a shallow bowl, found at Rheinzabern, with stamped designs of a lion, boar, and hare pursuing one another; it is similar to the mould with Cerialis’ name already described. These matrices are usually of fine bright red clay, unglazed; they are very porous, rapidly absorbing moisture, and easily allowing the potter to withdraw the vessel from the mould. The importance of the discovery of moulds can hardly be overrated for the evidence they afford as to the site of potteries and centres of fabrics[3117]; it is obvious that where they are found, and only in such places, the vases must have been made; and that the discovery of a potter’s name on any mould establishes his workshop at the place where it was found. Various tools for working the moulds, or touching up details or damaged parts of bronze and ivory, have been found on the sites of ancient potteries,[3118] as at Arezzo, but their use cannot be accurately determined.

The method of decoration known as en barbotine, which is a sort of cross between painting and relief, was achieved by the laying on of a semi-liquid clay slip with a brush, a spatula, or a small tube. The pattern was probably first lightly indicated, and the viscous paste was then laid on in thick lines or masses, producing a sort of low relief. The process was, as a rule, only employed for simple ornamentation, such as leaves, sprays, and garlands; but on the provincial black wares it finds a freer scope. On vases found in Britain and the adjoining parts of the Continent (p. 544) figures of animals are rendered in this manner, and on another class peculiar to Germany (p. 537) inscriptions are painted in a thick white slip. The colour of the slip did not necessarily correspond to the clay of the vase, and was, in fact, usually white. These vases are, however, technically poor, and the reliefs heavy and irregular. The process has been aptly compared to the sugar ornamentation on cakes.[3119]

Painted decoration is almost unknown in Roman pottery, and is, in fact, confined to the POCOLOM series described in Chapter XI. It occurs in a rough and primitive form on some of the provincial fabrics, such as the Castor and Rhenish vases (see pp. 537, 544), but its place is really taken by the barbotine method.

Engraved or incised decoration is exceedingly rare, and practically confined to provincial wares, which sometimes have incisions or undulations made over the surface with the fingernail in the moist clay.[3120] In the north of England, as at York, pottery is commonly found with wreaths and fan-patterns cut in intaglio in the clay while moist. Others have patterns of four leaves 20[19]four-leaf cut in the soft clay, or continuous ornaments round the vase made with the toothed roller-like instrument of which we have already spoken. Some of this ornamentation may be in imitation of contemporary glass vases. M. Déchelette has traced this fabric to Lezoux,[3121] and the specimens found in Britain are doubtless imported. A Gaulish example from the Morel Collection in the British Museum is given on Plate LXIX. fig. 4.

The feet and rims of the vases were made separately, and attached after their removal from the wheel, as were also the handles when required; but the rarity of handles in Roman pottery is remarkable. It is perhaps due to the difficulty of packing them safely for export. The next process was the preparation of the glaze, for those vases to which it was applied, followed by the baking.

3. ROMAN POTTERY-FURNACES

The remains of pottery-kilns and furnaces discovered in various parts of Europe have furnished a considerable amount of valuable information on the system employed in baking the vases. On this particular point, indeed, we know far more in regard to Roman pottery than to Greek, although, as we have seen in Chapter V., the painted vases themselves sometimes yield information on the appearance and arrangement of the furnaces. But remains of actual furnaces have been found in many places in Western Europe, notably in Germany, France, and Britain, in a more or less complete state, as also in Italy, at Pompeii, Modena, and Marzabotto.[3122] A complete list of those known in 1863 has been given by Von Hefner,[3123] supplemented by Blanchet’s lists of furnaces found in France (1898 and 1902).[3124] In Gaul the best examples are at Lezoux, near Clermont, at Châtelet in Haute-Marne,[3125] and at Belle-Vue, near Agen, in the Department of Lot-et-Garonne.[3126] The latter was circular in form, below the level of the soil. In Germany important remains have been found at Heiligenberg in Baden, Heddernheim near Frankfort, Rheinzabern near Karlsruhe, and Westerndorf.[3127] All these in general arrangement differ little from those in use at the present day; the Heddernheim furnace (Fig. 212) was found in the most perfect preservation, but was subsequently destroyed, not, however, before satisfactory plans and drawings had been made.[3128] In Britain by far the most important discoveries have been made at Castor, Chesterton, and Wansford in Northants, where the remains extend for some distance along the Nene valley.[3129] They were first explored by Artis in 1821-27, who published a magnificent series of plates in illustration, entitled Durobrivae; these he supplemented by a full description in the Journal of the British Archaeological Association.[3130] Castor and Chesterton (the latter in Hunts) are both on the site of Roman towns, and were the centres of a special local ware, described in a succeeding chapter. The potteries, being so numerous, are probably not all of the same age.

In 1677 four Roman kilns were discovered in digging under St. Paul’s Cathedral for the foundation of Sir C. Wren’s building, at a depth of 26 feet. They were made of loam, which had been converted into brick by the action of the fires, and were full of coarse pots and dishes; they measured 5 feet each way. A drawing made at the time is preserved among the Sloane MSS. in the British Museum.[3131] In the kilns was found pottery of the kind typical of London and the neighbourhood. In 1898 two kilns, one of large size, with pottery bearing the name CASTVS FECIT, were found near Radlett in Herts,[3132] and another was excavated in 1895 by Mr. C. H. Read at Shoeburyness.[3133] In Norfolk a kiln of somewhat curious form was found in the Roman settlement of Caistor by Norwich; the shape is that of a shallow concave depression with partitions, and it contained vases placed ready for baking.[3134] Another found between Buxton and Brampton was recorded by Sir Thomas Browne,[3135] and a third at Weybourne.[3136] In the South of England kilns have been found in the New Forest, where there was a manufacture of local pottery[3137]; in Alice Holt Forest near Petersfield, Hants; at Shepton Mallet in Somerset; and a potter’s workshop at Milton Abbas, Dorset.[3138] The British Museum contains a model of a kiln unearthed at Worcester about forty years ago, on the site of the modern porcelain works. Finally, discoveries of kilns and pottery were made in 1819 at Colchester, and again in 1878, when five kilns, all of different forms, with local pottery, came to light.[3139]

To describe all these different types of furnaces in detail would of course be impossible, but much may be learnt from the very full, though now somewhat antiquated, descriptions of the Castor kilns given by Artis.[3140] It will be found more satisfactory to describe the generally-prevailing arrangements, noting the more important variations where they occur. It may further be laid down that the system was practically the same for terracotta figures and tiles as for pottery, and that in many cases both were made in the same furnace. But this was not invariably the case, and at Rheinzabern, for instance, the kilns for tiles were quadrangular, those for pottery circular.

The kilns were constructed partly of burnt, partly of unburnt brick, the interior, floor, and outside of the roofs being covered with a strong layer of cement. They consisted of two main portions, the fire-chamber with its adjuncts, and the vaulted chamber above, in which the objects to be baked are placed. The fire-chamber was usually circular, with a projection in front, the praefurnium[3141] which had either a vaulted roof, as at Castor and Heiligenberg, or a gabled roof formed of pairs of tiles, as at Rheinzabern. Through this the fuel was introduced, consisting chiefly, as charcoal remains show, of pine-wood. The fire-chamber was either divided up, as at Castor, by walls radiating from a central pillar which supported the roof, or by rows of pillars in a line with the entrance, as at Rheinzabern and Heiligenberg. Holes were bored in the roof to allow the heat to penetrate through, but the arrangement varies; at Heiligenberg each division of the furnace was vaulted, making grooves along which the holes were bored. The oven where the pots were placed has been destroyed in most cases, but we know that it consisted of a floor, a wall with entrances, and a vaulted dome. The pots were ranged partly on the floor, partly on terracotta stands over the holes, as at Rheinzabern and Heiligenberg[3142]; at Lezoux there are remains of holes in the walls for iron bars to support them. Special arrangements seem to have been made for baking the finer wares, in order to ensure the proper spread of heat, and to guard against their being blackened or otherwise injured. In the Romano-British Room of the British Museum is a lump of bowls of red ware from Lezoux, fused together in the baking and cast aside.[3143]

One of the kilns at Castor (Fig. 213) is described by Artis as a circular hole 3 to 4 feet deep and 4 feet in diameter, walled round to a height of 2 feet; the praefurnium was about a foot in length. In the centre of the circular hole was an oval pedestal (with one end pointing to the furnace-mouth), on which and on the side wall the floor was supported, being formed of perforated angular bricks meeting in the centre. The vaulted dome was composed of bricks moulded for the purpose,[3144] and the sides of the kiln of curved bricks set edgeways in a thick slip of the same material. Brongniart[3145] compares the Castor kiln with that at Heiligenberg, near Strasburg, and others in the Rhine valley in which “Samian” ware was made.

Another kiln found in 1844 Artis describes as having been “used for firing the common blue or slate-coloured pottery, and had been built on part of the site of one of the same kind, and within a yard and a half of one that had been constructed for firing pottery of a different description. The older exhausted kiln ... presented the appearance of very early work; the bricks had evidently been modelled with the hand, and not moulded, and the workmanship was altogether inferior to that of the others, which were also in a very mutilated state; but the character of the work, the bricks, the mouths of the furnaces, and the oval pedestals which supported the floors of the kilns, were still apparent.”

Artis was also of opinion that “the blue and slate-coloured vessels found here in such abundance were coloured by suffocating the fire of the kiln, at a time when its contents had acquired a degree of heat sufficient to ensure uniformity of colour.” Hence he denominated kilns in which this ware was baked, “smother kilns.” He further notes that the bricks of this kiln “were made of clay mixed with rye in the chaff, which being consumed by the fire [i.e. in the baking of the bricks] left cavities in the room of the grains, which might have been intended to modify expansion and contraction, as well as to assist the gradual distribution of the colouring vapour. The mouth of the furnace and top of the kiln were no doubt stopped; thus every part of the kiln was penetrated with the colouring exhalation.” From experiments made on the local clays he proved to his own satisfaction that the colour could not have been produced by any metallic oxide, inherent or applied from without; and this view was supported by the appearance of the clay wrappers of the dome of the kiln. But in view of recent researches, such as those of Blümner, it is doubtful whether Artis’ theories can now be upheld. As Mr. Haverfield has pointed out,[3146] the dark colour may be due to the chemical action of the carbonaceous vapour of the smothered kiln rather than to any “colouring exhalation.”

The process of packing the kiln in order to secure uniform heat in firing is thus described by the same writer: “The kilns were first carefully loose-packed with the articles to be fired, up to the height of the side walls. The circumference of the bulk was then gradually diminished, and finished in the shape of a dome. As this arrangement progressed, an attendant seems to have followed the packer, and thinly covered a layer of pots with coarse hay or grass. He then took some thin clay, the size of his hand, and laid it flat on the grass upon the vessels; he then placed more grass on the edge of the clay just laid on, and then more clay, and so on until he had completed the circle. By this time the packer would have raised another tier of pots, the plasterer following as before, hanging the grass over the top edge of the last layer of plaster, until he had reached the top, in which a small aperture was left, and the clay nipt round the edge; another coating would be laid on as before described. Gravel or loam was then thrown up against the side wall where the clay wrappers were commenced, probably to secure the bricks and the clay coating. In consequence of the care taken to place grass between the edges of the wrappers, they could be unpacked in the same-sized pieces as when laid on in a plastic state, and thus the danger in breaking the coat to obtain the contents of the kiln could be obviated.”

In the course of his excavations Artis discovered a singular furnace,[3147] “of which I have never before or since met with an example. Over it had been placed two circular earthen fire vessels (or cauldrons); that next above the furnace was a third less than the other, which would hold about eight gallons. The fire passed partly under both of them, the smoke escaping by a smoothly-plastered flue, from seven to eight inches wide. The vessels were suspended by the rims fitting into a circular groove or rabbet, formed for the purpose.” He was strongly of opinion that this furnace was used for producing glazed wares by means of iron oxide. Whether this is so or not, it is interesting to note that in the British Museum and Museum of Geology there are cakes of vitreous matter from Castor, probably used as a glaze, and consisting of silicates of soda and lime.[3148]

The kiln found at Caistor, in Norfolk, was apparently used for baking the grey Roman ware, and differed in form from those described, which were for the black, being only calculated for a slight degree of baking. It was a regular oval, measuring 6 feet 4 inches in breadth. The furnace holes were filled in below with burnt earth of a red colour, and in the upper part with peat; the exterior was formed of strong blue clay of 6 inches in thickness, and the interior lined with peat; the kiln was intersected by partitions of blue clay. Some of the vases were inverted and filled with a core of white sand.[3149]

The furnaces at Heiligenberg and Rheinzabern present the following further peculiarities.[3150] The former, which were evidently used for the baking of red wares, had a flue in the form of a long channel with arched vault, the mouth being over 8 feet from the space where the flames and heat were concentrated under the oven (Fig. 214). Numerous pipes of terracotta, of varying diameter, diverged from the upper part or floor of the oven, to distribute the heat; in the outer wall of the oven was a series of smaller ones, and twelve or fifteen of larger size opened under the floor of the oven to distribute the heat and flame round the pots (Fig. 215). The mouths of the pipes were sometimes stopped with baked clay stoppers to moderate the heat. The upper part or dome of the kiln is never found entire, having been generally destroyed here, as elsewhere, by the superincumbent earth. Walls of strong masonry separated and protected the space between the mouth of the flue and the walls of the oven, and the floor of the latter was made of terracotta tiles.

At Rheinzabern, where excavations were made in 1858, fifteen furnaces were found, some round and others square, but all constructed on the same plan. The floor of the oven was over 3 feet below the top of the walls, and was covered with tiling, the walls being formed of rough slabs of clay, about 28 by 16 inches in size. The floors of the ovens were in some cases supported by bricks covered with a coating of clay. Stands of baked clay in the shape of flattened cylinders supported the pots in the oven, and these rested on pads of a peculiar form, roughly modelled in clay.[3151] In all, seventy-seven pottery-kilns and thirty-six tile-kilns were discovered on this site.[3152]

The following list, though by no means claiming to be exhaustive, gives the names of the chief potteries where actual furnaces have been discovered.

1. ITALY

Arezzo See p. 479 ff. Marzabotto Mon. Antichi, i. p. 282. Modena Bull. dell’ Inst. 1875, p. 192. Oria Ibid. 1834, p. 56. Pompeii Mau-Kelsey, Pompeii, p. 386. Pozzuoli Bonner Jahrb. xcvi. p. 54.

2. FRANCE

Dept. Ain St.-Martin-du- Blanchet, Melanges, p. 107. of Mont

Allier Champ-Lary Blanchet, p. 89.

Lubié ” p. 95.

St.-Bonnet ” p. 96.

St.-Didier-en- ” p. 96. Rollat

St.-Rémy-en- ” p. 96; Déchelette, i. Rollat p. 41 ff.

Vichy Blanchet, p. 95.

Aube Nogent-sur- ” p. 106. Seine

Aveyron Graufesenque ” p. 97; Déchelette, i. p. 64 ff.

Dept. Bouches-du- Arles Roach-Smith, Collect. Antiq. of Rhône vii. p. 13.

Auriol Blanchet, p. 98.

Marseilles ” p. 98.

Charente Jarnac ” p. 101.

Chez Ferroux ” p. 102.

Eure-et-Loire Chartres ” p. 104.

Gard Uzès ” p. 99.

Haute-Garonne Vieille- ” p. 101. Toulouse

Haute-Marne Châtelet Brongniart, Traité, i. p. 439.

Haute-Saône Luxueil Blanchet, p. 107.

Ille-et-Vilaine Redon ” p. 102.

Indre-et-Loire Nouâtre ” p. 104.

Loire Montverdun ” p. 96.

Loire- Herbignac ” p. 102. Inférieure

Loire-et-Cher Thoré ” p. 104.

Lot Cahors ” p. 100.

Mélines ” p. 101.

Lot-et-Garonne Agen ” p. 101; Rev. Arch. xviii. (1868), pl. 23.

Lozère Banassac Blanchet, p. 97; Déchelette, i. p. 117.

Nièvre Chantenay Blanchet, p. 96.

Gravier ” p. 96.

Oise Bois-Ibert ” p. 105.

Compiègne ” p. 104. (Forest of)

Mont-de-Hermes, ” p. 105. Beauvais

Sampigny ” p. 105.

Orne Chandai ” p. 103.

Pas-de-Calais Avesnes-le- ” p. 106. Comte

Puy-de-Dôme Clermont- ” p. 95. Ferrand

Lezoux ” p. 93; Déchelette, i. p. 141 ff.

Thiers Blanchet, p. 94.

Rhône Lyons ” p. 100.

Sarthe Grand-Lucé ” p. 103.

Seine Paris ” p. 104.

Seine- Incheville ” p. 103. Inférieure

Somme Amiens Blanchet, p. 106.

Tarn Montans ” p. 97.

Tarn-et-Garonne Castelnau-de- ” p. 97. Montratier

Muret ” p. 97.

Vendée Trizay ” p. 102.

Yonne Sens ” p. 106.

[See also Blanchet, p. 90 ff. for sites of furnaces for terracotta figures.]

3. GERMANY

Alttrier, Luxemburg Von Hefner, p. 60.

Bergheim Blanchet, Mélanges Gallo-rom. ii. p. 108.

Bonn Bonner Jahrb. lxxiv. p. 152; lxxxiv. p. 118.

Cannstadt Von Hefner, p. 61.

Cologne Bonner Jahrb. lxxix. p. 178.

Commern Ibid. iv. p. 203.

Dalheim, Luxemburg Von Hefner, p. 61.

Dieburg ” p. 61.

Güglingen Bonner Jahrb. i. p. 74.

Heddernheim Ann. dell’ Inst. 1882, p. 183.

Heidelberg Bonner Jahrb. lxii. p. 7.

Heiligenberg Brongniart, Traité, i. p. 427; Blanchet, Mélanges Gallo-rom. ii. p. 108.

Heldenbergen Westd. Zeitschr. für Gesch. u. Kunst, xviii. (1899), pl. 4, p. 227.

Herbishofen Von Hefner, p. 61.

Nassenfels ” p. 61.

Petzel, Luxemburg ” p. 61.

Rheinzabern ” p. 61; Brongniart, i. p. 429.

Riegel Von Hefner, p. 61.

Rottenburg Bonner Jahrb. iv. p. 141.

Schönbuch, Würtemberg Blanchet, p. 108.

Trier ” p. 108.

Waiblingen Von Hefner, p. 61.

Westheim ” p. 62.

Westerndorf ” p. 62.

4. ENGLAND

Dorset, Milton Abbas Roach-Smith, Collect. Antiq. vi. p. 191.

Essex, Ashdon Arch. Journ. x. p. 21.

” Colchester Roach-Smith, Collect. Antiq. ii. p. 38, vii. pls. 1-3, p. 1 ff.; Journ. Brit. Arch. Assoc. xxxiii. p. 267.

” Shoeburyness Proc. Soc. Antiqs. 2nd Ser. xvi. p. 40.

Hampshire, Alice Holt Forest Vict. County Hist. i. p. 306.

” New Forest Ibid. p. 326.

Hertfordshire, Radlett Proc. Soc. Antiqs. 2nd Ser. xvii. p. 261.

Huntingdon, Sibson and Water Newton Vict. County Hist. Northants, i. p. 175.

Kent, Upchurch Roach-Smith, Collect. Antiq. vi. p. 178; Archaeologia, li. p. 467.

Lancashire, Warrington Reliquary, 1900, p. 263.

Middlesex, London (St. Paul’s) Roach-Smith, Ill. Rom. Lond. p. 79.

Norfolk, Brampton Vict. County Hist. i. p. 314.

” Caistor-by-Norwich Ibid. p. 291; Archaeologia, xxxvi. p. 413.

” Caistor-by-Yarmouth Journ. Brit. Arch. Assoc., xxxvi. p. 206.

” Weybourne Vict. County Hist. i. p. 322.

Northants, Castor, Wansford, Bedford Vict. County Hist. i. p. 166 ff., Purlieus 206 ff.

Oxfordshire, Headington Journ. Brit. Arch. Assoc. vi. p. 60.

” Littlemore Ibid. liv. p. 349.

Somerset, Shepton Mallet Gentleman’s Mag. 1864, ii. p. 770.

Suffolk, West Stow Heath Journ. Brit. Arch. Assoc. xxxvii. p. 152.

Worcester Vict. County Hist. i. p. 207 (a model in Brit. Mus.).

[On the subject generally reference may be made to Brongniart, Traité, i. p. 426; De Caumont, Cours d’ant. Monum. ii. (for Heiligenberg); Von Hefner, Römische Topferei, in Oberbayr. Archiv für vaterl. Gesch. xxii. (1863), p. 60 (where a complete list of furnaces up to date is given); Bonner Jahrbücher, lxii. 1878, p. 7 ff.; Wolff in Westdeutsche Zeitschrift für Gesch. u. Kunst, xviii. (1899), p. 211 ff.; Blümner, Technologie, ii. p. 23 ff.; Smith, Dict. of Antiqs. i. p. 845 (art. FICTILE); and for Gaulish sites, Blanchet, Mélanges Gallo-romaines, ii. p. 93 ff.]

4. POTTERY IN LATIN LITERATURE; SHAPES AND USES

Vessels of earthenware were extensively used by the Roman people in the earlier days of the Republic for all purposes of domestic life,[3153] and later writers often contrast their use with that of the costly vases of precious metal then customary. “Gold,” says Persius, “has driven away the vases of Numa and the brass vessels of Saturn, the urns of the Vestals and Etruscan earthenware”[3154]; and Juvenal speaks of those who laughed at “Numa’s black dish and bowl, and fragile saucers from the Vatican hill.”[3155] Even under the Empire fictile vases continued to be used by the poorer classes, and the use of the finer red glazed wares must have been even more general. But Juvenal, satirising the luxury of Domitian’s time, says that it is considered a reproach to dine off earthenware.[3156] In Republican times it was the proud boast of a Curius to prefer his earthenware service to Samnite gold,[3157] and in 167 B.C. the consul Q. Aclius Tubero was found by the Aetolian ambassador dining off earthenware[3158]; Seneca also tells how he, at his entertainment given in the temple of Jupiter, placed fictile vessels before his guests.[3159] But when Masinissa entertained the Romans in 148 B.C. the first course was served on silver, the second in golden baskets, which Ptolemy Euergetes describes respectively as the Roman and Italian fashions.[3160] Athenaeus says that up to Macedonian times dinners were served in fictile vessels, but that subsequently the Romans became more luxurious, and Cleopatra spent five minae a day on gold and silver wares.[3161] Subsequently earthenware was replaced by glass as well as metal, especially for unguent-bottles and drinking-cups, of which large numbers are found in Roman tombs, where they virtually take the place of pottery. Vases of immense size were sometimes made under the Empire, and stories are told of the absurdities perpetrated by some of the Emperors in this respect. Juvenal, in describing the turbot prepared for Domitian,[3162] says no dish could be found of sufficient size to cook it in, and Vitellius had a dish made which from its huge dimensions acquired the name of “the shield of Minerva.”[3163] Elsewhere it is scoffed at as a “swamp of dishes” (patinarum paludes).[3164] Pliny speaks of terracotta vases which sold for even more than precious crystal or myrrhine ware,[3165] and were therefore presumably of great size.

The principal use of earthenware was for the transport and storage of wine, oil, corn, figs, honey, and other commodities, answering to the casks of the present day. Martial speaks of a jar (testa) reddened with the blood of tunnies exported from Antipolis (Antibes).[3166] Of the shapes used for this purpose and their names we shall speak presently in detail. Vases were also used in religious rites, but metal was probably more general; Plautus describes a miser who sacrificed to the Lares in earthenware (vasis Samiis) because he was afraid that they might steal silver vessels.[3167] They were also used for various operations in agriculture, medicine, and household economy; but above all for the domestic purposes of the table. Some of the peculiar uses have already been referred to (p. 387), and another that may be mentioned is the use of jars as bell-glasses for rearing vine-sprouts.[3168]

Although the custom of burying vases with the dead was not so general among the Romans as among the Greeks, they were yet frequently used in graves in the form of cinerary urns, in the shape of a covered jar (olla or obrendarium[3169]) of coarse ware and globular in form (p. 550). Vases containing ashes have often been found in England, as at Bartlow and Litlington in Cambridgeshire.[3170] At the latter place a tomb contained a sort of colander perforated with holes which formed the letters INDVLCIVS.[3171] Similar finds are recorded from Arnaise in France. Pliny states that many persons expressed their desire to be buried in coffins of terracotta.[3172] Roman sarcophagi of terracotta have been found at Saguntum in Spain, but for these stone and lead were the ordinary materials. The cinerary urns were often formed from large dolia or amphorae, the neck being broken off so as to produce a globular vessel. Examples have been found in England at Chesterford, Essex,[3173] at Southfleet in Kent,[3174] and in the Bedford Purlieus near Kingscliffe, Northants (now at Woburn Abbey); another is in the Cathedral Library at Lincoln.[3175] Roach-Smith also mentions specimens found in Lothbury, London, and in Kent, the latter being now in the Maidstone Museum.[3176]

Vitruvius, in his chapter on Echea, or vases distributed around the ancient theatres for acoustic purposes, mentions that they were often made of earthenware for economical reasons[3177]; but they were usually of bronze. Seneca, too, alludes to this practice when he speaks of the voice of a singer falling upon a jar (dolium).[3178] It is certain that the Greeks and Romans often made use of earthenware jars in architecture, but it is probable that this was more often done with the object of diminishing weight than for acoustic reasons, or, as some have thought, for want of better material. The dolium, amphora, and olla seem to have been the forms most usually employed. There are various examples in walls and substructures of the Augustan period, and they are also found in vaults, where their purpose is undoubtedly to lighten the weight.[3179] In the circus of Maxentius a number of large amphorae were found embedded in the vaulting and upper part of the walls, arranged neck downwards and with their axis inclined obliquely to the wall.[3180] All are now broken, but they illustrate the ingenious method in which the upper parts of the arches supporting the rows of seats were lightened. In the dome of the tomb of St. Helena, outside the Porta Labicana, rings of pots are embedded for the same purpose, whence the building is usually known as Torre Pignattara (from pignatte, pots).[3181] An oven found at Pompeii had a vaulted top formed of ollae fitted into one another, each about a foot in height, of ordinary red ware; the span of the arch was 5 feet 6 inches, and the object here was to ensure extreme dryness as well as lightness.[3182] A similar arrangement occurs in the Stabian Thermae at Pompeii, and also in the church of San Stefano alla Rotonda at Rome, and the dome of San Vitale at Ravenna, built by Justinian in the sixth century, is similarly constructed, with an elaborate system of tubes and jars.[3183] The practice seems to have been continued during the Middle Ages, and an example occurs in England, at Fountains Abbey, where the purpose was acoustic.[3184]

* * * * *

We now proceed to describe in detail the principal shapes of Roman vases, so far as they can be identified from literary or epigraphical evidence or from other sources, on the same lines as in our previous chapter on the shapes of Greek pottery. Some of these shapes, it will be seen, they had in common with the Greeks, such as the amphora, the krater, and the phiale or patera, and in several instances (such as the cyathus and the scyphus) the Greek name is preserved.

Beginning with vases used for storage, whether for liquids, as for wine and oil, or for solids, as for corn or fruit, which were chiefly kept in cellars, we take first the dolium, a gigantic cask corresponding to the Greek πίθος (Vol. I. p. 152), which from its general usage gave rise to the generic term opus doliare, for common work in clay. It was large enough to contain a man, as we know from the story of Diogenes illustrated on the Roman lamp already given (Plate LXIV. fig. 6); the vessel thereon depicted may serve to give an idea of its appearance. Columella[3185] speaks of dolia sesquiculearia, i.e. holding one-and-a-half culei or thirty amphorae. They were buried in the earth of the cellars, and have been found thus in Italy at Anzi, in France at Apt, Vaucluse, and near Clermont, and at Tunis.[3186] They were used for wine, oil, corn, and salted meat, and Juvenal tells us that dolia were used for new wine, being lined with wax, pitch, or gypsum.[3187] In 1858 a large number were found at Sarno in Campania, some being stamped with the makers’ names, as ONESIMVS FECIT, VITALIS F, L · TITI · T · F · PAP, and M · LVCCEI · QVARTIONIS.[3188] On one was incised L · XXXIV, or thirty-four lagenae (see p. 446). One of the prodigies which was supposed to predict the future fortune of the Emperor Antoninus Pius was the discovery above ground of some dolia which had been sunk in the earth in Etruria.[3189] An old name for the dolium was calpar,[3190] and another smaller variety was the seria,[3191] containing only seven amphorae. A diminutive form of the latter, seriola, is described as a wine-vessel invented in Syria.[3192]

Dolia were made in separate pieces, the base and other parts being secured by leaden cramps, and they were also hooped with lead, as we learn from Cato.[3193] Pliny speaks of repairing casks by fitting on handles, scraping the hoops, and stopping up cracks.[3194] They are made both of white and red clay, baked in a slow furnace, great care being required to moderate the heat aright. Their makers were known as doliarii. Part of a large dolium bound with leaden hoops was found near Modena, at Palzano; also at Spilamberto, one with the name of T. Gavelius and the numerals XXX, XIII, another of the capacity of 36 amphorae.[3195] On the mouth of one found in the Villa Peretta at Rome was the name of L. Calpurnius Eros,[3196] on another the name of T. Cocceius Fortunatus.[3197] Two good examples of dolia were at one time preserved in the gardens of the Villa Albani, about 4 feet in diameter and as many in height, and of a coarse gritty pale red clay. This kind of vase was often used for sepulchral purposes, bodies having being found actually buried in them (see above, p. 457).

Next in size and importance to the dolium is the amphora, resembling in form the Greek wine-jar[3198]; it usually has a long cylindrical body with pointed base, a long narrow neck, and two straight handles. Hölder[3199] notes several varieties: the Canopic, the wide-bellied, the cylindrical, the globular, and the spheroidal, the former of which is a typical early form in the provinces.[3200] It was often without neck or handle, and was seldom ornamented, not being used for artistic purposes like its Greek prototype, but only for strictly utilitarian ends, that is, for the storage and transport of wine. It is usually of coarse red earthenware, made on the wheel, with a clay stopper to close the mouth, and the name of the maker in a rectangular label on the handle, like the diota or wine-amphora of the Greeks. It was in fact often known as a diota, as in a familiar line of Horace[3201]:

Deprome quadrimum Sabina, O Thaliarche, merum diota.

The amphora was pitched internally to preserve the wine[3202]; the pointed base was of course adapted for fixing it in the ground in the cellar, but when brought up it was placed in a tripod-stand of metal or wood (incitega).[3203] In Cicero’s time the regulation size was equivalent to a quadrantal or two urnae.[3204] The use of this vase was very varied and extensive among the Romans; it was employed not only in cellars and granaries, but also at the table and for many other purposes of ordinary life, even where nowadays vessels of wood or iron would be preferred.

D’Agincourt[3205] mentions the discovery at Rome, near the Porta del Popolo, of a row of amphorae in a cellar in 1789, and at Pompeii a hundred were found in the house of Arrius Diomedes, a hundred and fifty in that of the Faun; a hundred and twenty were found in a cellar near the baths of Titus, and many more at Milan in 1809, and at Turin. Numbers have been found in London, varying in capacity from four to twelve gallons, and others at Colchester and Mount Bures in Essex.[3206] But they are so universal all over the Roman Empire that to enlarge the list would be tedious. Many, however, evoke a special interest by reason of their stamps and inscriptions, and a few typical examples may profitably be given.[3207]

The inscriptions vary in form and character; some amphorae give the name of the maker in the genitive, officina being understood; others the consuls for the year in which they were filled; others, again, the name of the wine or other phrases descriptive of their contents; and others complimentary inscriptions to their owners. Among names of makers both single, double, and triple names are found, and among the former are many of a Gaulish or barbarian character, such as Bellucus, Dicetus, and Vacasatus, son of Brariatus; the last-named from Nimeguen, the first-named from London.[3208] Among the triple names, showing that the potters were Roman citizens or freedmen, are M. Aemilius Rusticus from Caerleon, and C. Antonius Quintus, also found in Britain.[3209] Sometimes the name is in the nominative with F for fecit, or with the genitive OF for officina occurs. The stamps are in the form of oblong rectangular labels on the handle or neck, the letters in relief. One of the most curious stamps was on an amphora found in the Pontine marshes near Rome, a square one with a caduceus and other symbols arranged in twelve compartments; the inscription runs M · PETRON · VETERAN · LEO · SER · FECIT, “Leo, the slave of M. Petronius Veteranus, made it.”[3210]

The names of Vespasian and Titus as consuls are found on an amphora from Pompeii: VESPASIANO III ET FILIO CS, the year being A.D. 74[3211]; that of M. Aurelius (but not necessarily as consul) occurs on an amphora found at Newington in Kent[3212]; and on one in the British Museum from Leptis in Africa is L · CASSIO · C · MARIO · COS, the date being A.D. 107.[3213] On the neck of a fourth amphora, found at Pompeii, was FVNDAN · CN · LENTVL · M · ASINIO · COSS, “wine of Fundi in the consulship of Cn. Lentulus and M. Asinius (Agrippa),” of the year A.D. 26.[3214]

The character or origin of the wine or other commodity stored in the amphorae is given by such inscriptions as BARCAE, KOR · OPT (“best Corcyrean”),[3215] RVBR · VET · [=V] · P CII (“old red wine, 102 lbs. weight”), all from Pompeii, painted in red and black.[3216] MES · AM · XVIII, also on an amphora from Pompeii, appears to mean “eighteen amphorae [not measures] of Mesogitan wine” (from Mesogis in Lydia[3217]); or, again, we find at Pompeii SVRR · XXI, “twenty-one amphorae of wine of Surrentum”[3218]; TOSCOLA(n)ON (ex) OFFICINA SCAV(ri), “Tusculan wine from the manufactory of Scaurus.”[3219] On the other hand, LIQVAMEN OPTIMVM (“best pickle”), or such expressions as SCOMBRI (“mackerel”), GARVS (“brine”), etc., imply that the vessel has been used for conveying pickled fish.[3220]

Among expressions of a complimentary nature are: FABRILES MARCELLAE N · AD FELICITATEM, “the workmen of our Marcella to wish her joy”[3221]; (pr)OMO(s) FAMELIAI DONO(m) V(otum dedit), or DONO V(rnam dat), “Promus gave (an urn) as a gift and vow to his family” (from Ardea in Latium).[3222] The list may be concluded with the inscription on an amphora found in the garden of the Villa Farnese, among the ruins of the Aurea Domus of Nero, which held eight congii; on its neck was traced in ill-formed letters: L(iquaminis) FL(os) EXCEL(lens) L · PVRELLI GEMELLI M(...), “Finest brand of liquor, belonging to L. Purellus Gemellus.”[3223] An amphora was found at Pompeii with the name of Septimius or Stertinius Menodotus in Greek letters.[3224] There are occasional references in the classics to the practice of placing such stamps on vases, as when Plautus makes the slave say, with reference to the drinking that went on in his master’s house, “There you may see epistles written with letters in clay, sealed with pitch; the names are there in letters a foot and a half long.”[3225] Or, again, another slave, fearing to be caught with a jar in his possession, reflects, “This jar is lettered; it proclaims its ownership.”[3226] Juvenal speaks of wine whose country and brand had been obliterated by old age through long hanging in the smoke.[3227]

Another vase used much in the same way as the amphora, and particularly for keeping wine, was the cadus, the shape of which is not exactly known. It held about twelve congii, or seventy-two sextarii (pints), and is frequently mentioned by Horace and Martial.[3228] The former in the Odes refers to his jar of Alban wine nine years old, and in another passage to one stored in Sulpicius’ cellars[3229]; the latter speaks of cadi Vaticani, which may mean made of clay from the Vatican hill or containing Vatican wines[3230]; elsewhere he speaks of taking yellow honey from the ruddy jar (implying an earthenware vessel), and of the red jar which pours out home-made wine.[3231] We also learn from him that the cadus was hung in the chimney to give the wine a mellow flavour.[3232] From other passages we learn that the cadus was used for oil,[3233] fruit,[3234] and money,[3235] and also as a measure equivalent to one-and-a-half amphorae or three urnae.[3236] The orca is described by Isidorus as a kind of amphora, of which the urceus (see below) was a diminutive.[3237]

The Romans were presumably, like the Greeks, in the habit of mixing their wine with water, but we only find the crater mentioned rarely, and that in a poetical manner.[3238] Moreover it was probably made in metal as a rule, and the rare instances of the crater which occur in the Arretine ware are obvious imitations of metal prototypes; there is a fine example in the British Museum from Capua (see Fig. 219). Ovid, however, speaks of the rubens crater,[3239] implying terracotta, as in the case of the rubens cadus of Martial mentioned above. The vinarium,[3240] the acratophorum (for holding unmixed wine),[3241] and the oenophorum were probably of the same character, but the latter was portable, as we know from Horace’s jeer at the man who took his cooking-stove and wine-jar (oenophorum) with him everywhere.[3242]

The urna, the equivalent of the Greek hydria, was similarly used for carrying water, and also for casting lots, or as a voting-urn[3243]; in the latter sense Cicero actually uses the word hydria.[3244] Its size was half that of the amphora. Both the urna and the hydria are found in connection with funerary usages, and appear to have held the ashes of the dead.[3245] The situla, or bucket, with its diminutive sitella, was also used for water and for lots,[3246] but was principally of metal. Isidorus says it is the Greek κάδος (Vol. I. p. 165).[3247] The cupa and the cumera seem to have been of wood rather than earthenware[3248]; the former was a kind of tub, the latter was used for keeping grain, and also by brides for conveying their effects to their new home.[3249] Another large vessel for holding liquids was the sinus, or sinum, used both for water and milk.[3250] The nasiterna, so called from its long spout or nasus, had three handles, and was used as a watering-pot.[3251] The fidelia appears to have been a kind of large pail or bucket; Cicero in one of his letters[3252] cites the proverb, de eadem fidelia duos parietes dealbare, which answers to our “killing two birds with one stone.” It implies that it would be used for holding paint or whitewash.

Of smaller vases for holding liquids, such as jugs, bottles, and flasks, the principal were the urceus (with its diminutive urceolus), the ampulla, and the lagena or lagona. The hirnea is also mentioned as a jug which was filled from the jar or cadus.[3253] The urceus seems to be a small jug, the equivalent of the Greek οἰνοχόη, having one handle; it was also used as a measure.[3254] The ampulla was used both as a wine-flask and an oil-flask, corresponding thus to the Greek λήκυθος, as is seen in its metaphorical use.[3255] It was used for bringing the wine to table, like a decanter,[3256] and is described by Apuleius[3257] as lenticular in form, being therefore like a flat round-bodied flask with two handles.

An interesting example of an ampulla of this kind, of red ware with a coarse reddish-brown glaze was found some years ago near the Hôtel Dieu, Paris.[3258] It bore two inscriptions round the body, one on either side, with letters in relief; on one side was OSPITA REPLE LAGONA CERVESA, “Mine host, fill the flask with beer”; on the other, COPO CNODI TV ABES EST REPLETA, “Innkeeper, (?), be off, it is full.” Similar vases have been found in Hainault and at Trier, and are said to be still made in Spain. Another of the same kind, but with only one handle, recently acquired by the British Museum from the Morel collection, has on it the word AMPULLA painted in white (Fig. 216). The lagena (Greek, λάγυνος) was a jug or bottle with narrow neck, wide mouth, and handle, and was used as a sign by wine-sellers.[3259] It was sealed up until required for use,[3260] and being proverbially brittle, was protected, like a modern Italian wine-flask, by wicker-work.[3261] It was also used as a travelling-flask, and carried by hunters and fishermen[3262]; the younger Pliny exhorts Tacitus, when he goes hunting, to take not only a “sandwich-box and brandy-flask” (panarium ac lagunculam), but also a notebook to jot down ideas.[3263] The Roman barmaid carried a lagena at her side when serving in the tavern,[3264] and it was used as a wine-jug at the table.[3265] A jar found at Saintes in France has engraved on it MARTIALI SOL(i)DAM LAGONAM, “A whole flask to Martialis,”[3266] and gives a clue to the form associated with this word (see Fig. 217).

The words in use for a ladle are cyathus, corresponding to the Greek κύαθος (Vol. I. p. 179),[3267] in measure equivalent to one-twelfth of the sextarius or pint, and simpulum or simpuvium. The latter were chiefly associated with sacrifices, and will be dealt with later (p. 471); the cyathus was regularly used at the table for measuring out the wine into the drinking-cups. We learn from Martial that in drinking a toast it was customary to use the number of cyathi that corresponded to the letters in the name of the recipient, as in the epigram

Laevia sex cyathis, septem Justina bibatur, Quinque Lycas, Lyde quattuor, Ida tribus.[3268]

Of drinking-cups the Romans had almost as large a variety as the Greeks, the majority of the ornamented vases preserved to this day being apparently for this purpose; the number of names recorded in literature is, however, much less, as many of those given in the long list on pp. 181-183 of Vol. I. are mere nick-names for ordinary forms. The generic name for a drinking-cup was poculum,[3269] the Greek ποτήριον, just as vas was the generic name for a larger vessel; it occurs constantly in the poets, who, indeed, use it somewhat loosely, and has already been met with in the series of small bowls with Latin inscriptions described in Chapter XI. (p. 490). Many forms of drinking-cups used by the Romans were only made in metal, such as the cantharus,[3270] carchesium,[3271] and scyphus[3272] (see Vol. I. pp. 184, 187). All these were forms borrowed from the Greeks, as were the calix (kylix), the cotula (chiefly used as a measure = half-a-pint), and the scaphium[3273] and cymbium,[3274] which were boat-shaped vessels. The ciborium (a rare word, but used by Horace[3275]) was supposed to be made in the form of the leaves or pods of the colocasia, or Egyptian bean.[3276] Its later ecclesiastical use is well known. Other names of which we hear are the batioca,[3277] the gaulus,[3278] the scutella (see below),[3279] and the amystis, or cup drained at one draught (see Vol. I. p. 181).[3280] Like the Greek kylix, the calix appears to have been of all these the one most commonly in use, and is constantly referred to by poets and prose writers. Those of terracotta could often be purchased at a very low price, and formed, it is evident, the ordinary drinking-cups of the Roman citizen; they were also frequently of glass. Juvenal speaks of “plebeian cups purchased for a few asses”[3281]; and Martial describes a man buying two calices for an as and taking them home with him.[3282] We have no exact information as to its form, but it must have been something like the Greek kylix, only probably without handles; it was also used for solid food such as herbs.[3283] Seneca speaks of calices Tiburtinae, which seem from the context to have been of earthenware.[3284] Varieties of the calix are probably represented by the typical Gaulish forms illustrated in Chapter XXIII., Figs. 221-223.

Of dishes and other utensils employed for food at the table, the largest were the lanx and the patina. The former is described by Horace and Juvenal as large enough to hold a whole boar,[3285] and was probably of metal; the patina is described as a dish for holding fish, crabs, or lobsters,[3286] but that it was not necessarily limited in size is shown by the stories already alluded to of Domitian and Vitellius (p. 456). The latter, when dragged to his death, was insulted by the epithet of patinarius, or dish-maker.[3287] The patina was flat, and made of clay, and is also described as a wide and shallow vessel for cooking.[3288] It is contrasted with the lagena in the well-known fable of the fox and the stork.[3289] Smaller dishes for sweetmeats and other dainties were the catinum and catillum, and the patella.[3290] The discus and paropsis[3291] appear to have been, like the lanx, principally of metal; the former was like a shield (whence scutula and scutella); the latter is mentioned by Isidorus, who describes it as quadrangular, and by Martial, together with some obscurely-named dishes[3292]:

Sic implet gabatas paropsidesque Et leves scutulas cavasque lances.

Martial speaks of the patella as a dish for a turbot, and also as a vessel of black ware which was used to hold vegetables[3293]; the catinus (a fictile dish) was large enough to hold a good-sized fish, such as a tunny,[3294] and the catillus appears to have been a sort of porringer. Sauces were placed in small dishes or cups, known as acetabula (the Greek ὀξύβαφον), which were evidently of earthenware[3295]; the catellus held pepper,[3296] and the concha or shell was used for a salt-cellar, also for unguents.[3297] The latter was probably a real shell, not of earthenware. Another kind of dish which is only once mentioned, in Horace’s account of Nasidienus’ banquet, was the mazonomum, probably a kind of lanx, in metal, which held on that occasion a sort of ragoût of game.[3298] His own table, however, he boasts, was adorned only by a cyathus and two cups, an echinus or rinsing-bowl, a guttus, and a patera or libation bowl.[3299] The guttus seems to have corresponded to the Greek lekythos or askos, and is the general name for an oil-flask or cruet.[3300] It was either a small, long-necked bottle or a squat flask with a narrow spout, which allowed the oil to pour slowly. Roach-Smith published a relief dedicated by Egnatius, a physician, to the Deae Matres, on which small vases of the first-named form appear, indicating that he consecrated his medicine bottles to these divinities.[3301]

Of vessels for cooking, washing, and other common domestic purposes, the olla was that in most general use[3302]; the word is, in fact, a generic name for a jar or pot (Gk. χύτρα), as in the play of Plautus, the Aulularia, the name of which embodies an archaic form of the word, aula, aulula. Here it was used for hiding a hoard of gold. It was also, as has been noted, used as a funerary urn, and some inscribed examples of marble ollae have been found in tombs. The pelvis was more particularly a washing basin, but Juvenal speaks of it as scented with Falernian wine.[3303] It is usually identified with the mortarium, a large, shallow, open bowl with a spout, frequently found in Britain and Central Europe (see below, p. 550); it is of coarse light-red clay, and often has the potter’s name stamped upon it. That it was used for pounding substances is shown by the fact that it often has small pebbles embedded in the surface of the interior. The scutra is mentioned by Cato and Plautus,[3304] and appears to have been used only in Republican times; its Imperial successor was the cacabus.[3305] The trua or trulla[3306] was a saucepan with a flat handle; numerous examples in bronze, silver, and earthenware have been preserved, and some have elaborate designs in relief on the handle.[3307]

A number of obscure and archaic names of vases are recorded by the etymologists and other writers, especially in regard to those used for sacrificial purposes and libations. The capis or capedo was probably a kind of jug (from capere, to contain)[3308]; Cicero refers to the capedunculae which were a legacy from Numa.[3309] The praefericulum[3310] was not, as usually supposed in popular archaeology, a jug, but a shallow basin of bronze without handles, like a patera. The lepasta or lepesta (cf. Greek λεπάστη) is recorded as used in Sabine temples,[3311] and the futile was used in the cult of Vesta for holding water[3473]; the cuturnium[3313] is also mentioned. The simpulum[3314] and simpuvium[3315] represent similar utensils, though the words are distinct; they were small-sized ladles used almost exclusively in religious rites, and sometimes regarded as old-fashioned. With reference to the size, fluctus in simpulo excitare[3316] became a proverbial expression for “a storm in a teacup.” They seem to have been usually of metal, but Pliny speaks of fictile simpula[3317]; the simpuvium is represented on coins and sacrificial reliefs. The lanx appears to have been used for offerings to Bacchus,[3318] and the guttus, cymbium, and other forms also appear in a sacrificial connection[3319]; conversely the patera, which is for the most part exclusively a libation bowl, was sometimes used for secular purposes[3320]; there is evidence that its use as a drinking vessel is older than its use for libations. The last-named corresponds to the Greek φιάλη (Vol. I. p. 191),[3321] and is constantly referred to or represented; its essential feature was the hollow knob or omphalos in the centre, and it was either made of metal or earthenware. The patella was also used for libations or for offering first-fruits to the household gods.[3322]

Other obscure words referring to vases of secular use are the pollubrum (Greek, ποδανιπτήρ)[3323] and malluvium (Greek, χέρνιψ),[3324] meaning respectively basins for washing the feet and hands; the aquiminarium for washing vessels[3325]; the galeola, a variety of the sinus[3326]; the pultarius, a vessel used for warm drinks, for must, for preserving grapes, for coals, for fumigating, and as a cupping-glass[3327]; and the obba, which Persius describes as sessilis, i.e. squat and flat-bottomed.[3328] The culeus, congius, hemina, and sextarius appear to have been measures only, not vases in general use; the congius was one-eighth of an amphora, or six sextarii, about six English pints.[3329]

In the case of the majority of the names discussed in the foregoing pages, any attempt at identification with existing forms is hopeless; we have very few clues in the literature to the shapes of the vases described, and little evidence from themselves, as is often the case with Greek shapes; nor is any Roman writer except Isidorus, whose date is too late to be trustworthy, so explicit as Athenaeus. At present little has been done in the way of collecting the different forms of existing vases, but a valuable treatise on the subject was recently issued by the late O. Hölder, a Würtemberg professor, who collected all the forms found in Germany and Italy,[3330] and although he did not attempt to identify them by Latin names, he has done much service in grouping them together, classified as urns, jars, jugs, and so on, in a series of twenty-three plates of outline drawings.

There is, in fact, in Roman pottery no clear line of distinction to be drawn between the various forms of drinking-cups or of jugs or dishes, as is the case with Greek vases; different forms again are found in different fabrics, and those typical of ornamented wares are not found in plain pottery, and so on. Nor must it be forgotten that in Roman pottery the ornamented wares are the exception rather than the rule. Where the Greeks used painted vases, the Romans used metal; and apart from the plain pottery, the forms are almost limited to a few varieties of cups, bowls, and dishes. Comparisons with the Greek equivalents illustrated in Chapter IV. may give a probable idea of what the Roman meant when he spoke of an urceus or an olla, but for the rest the modern investigator can do little beyond attempting to point out what types of vases were peculiar to different periods or fabrics, and in most cases any attempt to give specific names can only be regarded as arbitrary.

-----

Footnote 3080:

H.N. xxxiii. 154 ff.: see below, p. 489.

Footnote 3081:

Vases ornés de la Gaule Romaine, i. p. 190 ff.

Footnote 3082:

The term is applied to clay suited to receive stamps (sigilla) or impressions.

Footnote 3083:

Déchelette, Vases ornés de la Gaule Romaine, ii. p. 335.

Footnote 3084:

Ibid. i. p. 41 ff.

Footnote 3085:

Der Stil, ii. p. 148.

Footnote 3086:

Bonner Jahrbücher, xcvi. p. 20.

Footnote 3087:

In the case of fragment No. 3 the clay and lime could not be differentiated.

Footnote 3088:

In the case of fragments 2 and 5 no definite general result was obtained.

Footnote 3089:

Brongniart, Traité, i. p. 421; Blümner, Technologie, ii. p. 91. See also Handbook to Collection of Pottery in the Museum of Practical Geology, 1893, p. 65, for an analysis made on a fragment of glazed red ware by Dr. Percy:

Silica 54·45 Alumina 22·08 Peroxide of iron 7·31 Lime 9·76 Magnesia 1·67 Potash 3·22 Soda 1·76 ——— 100·25 ======

Footnote 3090:

Storia degli ant. vast aretini, p. 65.

Footnote 3091:

Ueber die rothe Topferwaare, p. 16.

Footnote 3092:

Brongniart, Traité, i. p. 423; Déchelette, ii. p. 339.

Footnote 3093:

Blümner, Technol. ii. p. 91.

Footnote 3094:

Op. cit. i. p. 381: cf. Blümner, ii. p. 64.

Footnote 3095:

Roman Art in Cirencester, p. 77.

Footnote 3096:

Plaut. Epid. iii. 2, 35; Pliny, H.N. vii. 198.

Footnote 3097:

Art. Poet. 21.

Footnote 3098:

Sat. ii. 7, 86.

Footnote 3099:

ii. 3, 48.

Footnote 3100:

Capt. ii. 3, 9; Persius, iii. 23; Avianus, Fab. 41, 9.

Footnote 3101:

Shakespeare, 1 Henry VI., Act 1, scene 5, line 19.

Footnote 3102:

Smith, Dict. of Antiqs.[3312] i. p. 844: see below, p. 480; also Vol. I. p. 207.

Footnote 3103:

Vases ornés, ii. p. 338.

Footnote 3104:

See Brongniart, Traité, i. p. 423 ff.; Blümner, Technol. ii. p. 106; Von Hefner, in Oberbayr. Archiv für vaterl. Gesch. xxii. (1863), pp. 23, 35; and Röm. Mitth. 1897, p. 286.

Footnote 3105:

See Fabroni, Storia degli vasi aretini, pl. 5, fig. 4.

Footnote 3106:

Handbook to Mus. (1891), p. 111.

Footnote 3107:

Brongniart and Riocreux, Mus. de Sèvres, pp. 16, 128. For Cerialis see p. 536 and C.I.L. xiii. 10010, 544; for Cobnertus, ibid. 592, and Déchelette, i. p. 179.

Footnote 3108:

Oberbayr. Archiv für vaterl. Gesch. xxii. (1863), pp. 23, 24.

Footnote 3109:

Blümner, Technologie, ii. p. 104, fig. 21; Brit. Arch. Assoc. Journ. iv. p. 19. Déchelette states that about fifty in all are known (op. cit. i. p. 337).

Footnote 3110:

Brongniart, Traité, i. p. 424, pl. 30; Mus. de Sèvres, p. 128, and pl. 9, fig. 8.

Footnote 3111:

Oberbayr. Archiv, 1863, p. 24.

Footnote 3112:

Examples of this technique often occur in Gaul and Britain: see Déchelette, ii. p. 169 ff., and cf. Roach-Smith, Ill. Rom. Lond. p. 91, and a fine vase from Felixstowe in the British Museum. See also Plate LXIX. fig. 2, and p. 529.

Footnote 3113:

See below, p. 530, and Déchelette, ii. p. 235 ff.

Footnote 3114:

Blümner, Technol. ii. p. 112.

Footnote 3115:

E.g. Blümner, Technol. ii. pp. 106, 107, figs. 22, 23.

Footnote 3116:

Gaz. Arch. 1881-82, p. 17; Brongniart, Traité, pl. 30, figs. 2-4: see also Déchelette, i. p. 141 ff., and below, p. 525 ff.

Footnote 3117:

Cf. Déchelette in Revue des Études Anciens, v. (1903), p. 42.

Footnote 3118:

Blümner, ii. p. 110, fig. 25: cf. Von Hefner in Oberbayr. Archiv, 1863, p. 56; Fabroni, Storia degli antichi vasi aretini, pls. 3, 5, p. 63.

Footnote 3119:

Blümner, ii. p. 111; Daremberg and Saglio, ii. art. Figlinum, p. 1130.

Footnote 3120:

Cf. von Hefner in Oberbayr. Archiv für vaterl. Gesch. xxii. (1863), p. 55.

Footnote 3121:

Vases ornés, ii. p. 312.

Footnote 3122:

Mau-Kelsey, Pompeii, p. 386; Bull. dell’ Inst. 1875. p. 192; Mon. Antichi, i. pl. 8, 7, p. 282.

Footnote 3123:

Oberbayr. Archiv für vaterl. Gesch. xxii. (1863), p. 56 ff.: see also Blümner, ii. p. 23 ff., and Daremberg and Saglio, ii. art. Figlinum.

Footnote 3124:

Bullet. Arch. 1898, p. 18 ff., and Mélanges Gallo-romaines, ii. (1902), p. 93 ff.

Footnote 3125:

Brongniart, i. p. 439.

Footnote 3126:

Rev. Arch. xviii. (1868), pl. 23, p. 297.

Footnote 3127:

See for a full account of the last-named Von Hefner in op. cit. p. 8 ff., p. 56, pl. 4.

Footnote 3128:

See Ann. dell’ Inst. 1882, pl. U, to which the letters in the cut refer. Other kilns found at Heddernheim are described in Westdeutsche Zeitschrift, xviii. (1899), p. 215 ff.

Footnote 3129:

See Haverfield in Victoria County Hist. of Northants, i. pp. 167, 207 ff.

Footnote 3130:

Journ. Brit. Arch. Assoc. i. p. 1 ff., ii. p. 164: see also Wright, Celt, Roman, and Saxon^1, p. 264 ff.; Roach-Smith, Coll. Antiq. iv. p. 81, vi. p. 181 ff.

Footnote 3131:

No. 958, fol. 105; reproduced by Roach-Smith, Collect. Antiq. vi. pl. 37, fig. 4, and Ill. Rom. Lond. p. 79; Proc. Soc. Antiqs. 2nd Ser. xvi. p. 42.

Footnote 3132:

Proc. Soc. Antiqs. xvii. 1898, p. 262.

Footnote 3133:

Ibid. xvi. (1895), p. 40.

Footnote 3134:

Vict. County Hist. of Norfolk, i. p. 291, fig. 7: see below, p. 449.

Footnote 3135:

Op. cit. i. p. 314.

Footnote 3136:

Ibid. p. 322.

Footnote 3137:

Archaeologia, xxxv. p. 91; Vict. County Hist. of Hants, i. p. 326.

Footnote 3138:

Roach-Smith, Collect. Antiq. vi. p. 191 ff.; Vict. County Hist. of Hants, i. p. 306.

Footnote 3139:

Roach-Smith, op. cit. ii. p. 38; vii. p. 1 ff., pls. 1-3.

Footnote 3140:

Wright, Celt, Roman, and Saxon^1, p. 264 ff., and Haverfield in Vict. County Hist. of Northants, give the most satisfactory epitomes of Artis’ descriptions.

Footnote 3141:

Cato, Agricult. 38.

Footnote 3142:

Cf. Von Hefner, op. cit. pl. 4, 28-31: see also Arch. Journ. vii. p. 176, and an example from Switzerland in the British Museum (Romano-British Collection).

Footnote 3143:

See also Déchelette, ii. p. 341.

Footnote 3144:

See Haverfield in Vict. County Hist. of Northants, i. p. 207.

Footnote 3145:

Traité, i. p. 426.

Footnote 3146:

Vict. County Hist. of Northants, i. p. 209.

Footnote 3147:

See Haverfield, op. cit. p. 210, fig. 31.

Footnote 3148:

Haverfield, ibid.; Handbook of Pottery in Mus. of Pract. Geol. 1893, p. 71.

Footnote 3149:

Archaeologia, xxii. pl. 36, p. 413; Vict. County Hist. i. p. 291.

Footnote 3150:

See Brongniart, Traité, i. p. 428, pl. 1; Artis, Durobrivae, pl. 27, figs. 3 and 6; Daremberg and Saglio s.v. Fornax, figs. 3201-02.

Footnote 3151:

Brongniart, i. p. 429.

Footnote 3152:

Von Hefner in Oberbayr. Archiv (1863), p. 58.

Footnote 3153:

Cf. Tibull. i. 1, 38:

“Nec e puris spernere fictilibus. Fictilia antiquus primum sibi fecit agrestis Pocula de facili composuitque luto.”

Footnote 3154:

Sat. ii. 60.

Footnote 3155:

Sat. vi. 342.

Footnote 3156:

Sat. iii. 168.

Footnote 3157:

Florus, i. 18, 22.

Footnote 3158:

Pliny, H.N. xxxiii. 142.

Footnote 3159:

Ep. 95, 72.

Footnote 3160:

Apud Athen. vi. 229 D. He uses the curious expression, κέραμος ἀργυροῦς, which, as in the use of the word κέραμος for marble tiles (Vol. I. p. 100), implies the antiquity of the use of fictile ware. See the next note.

Footnote 3161:

vi. 229 C, where the use of κέραμος or dinner-service is discussed.

Footnote 3162:

iv. 72, 131: cf. Mart. xiii. 81.

Footnote 3163:

Suet. Vit. Vitell. 13 (clypeum Minervae, αἰγίδα πολιούχου).

Footnote 3164:

Pliny, H.N. xxxv. 164.

Footnote 3165:

Ibid. 163.

Footnote 3166:

iv. 88.

Footnote 3167:

Capt. ii. 2, 41.

Footnote 3168:

Virg. Georg. ii. 351.

Footnote 3169:

Orelli, Inser. 4544; Gruter 607, 1; and see C.I.L. i. p 209.

Footnote 3170:

See above, p. 351; and cf. Archaeologia, xxv. p. 1 ff.

Footnote 3171:

C.I.L. vii. 1335, 1. The vase is now at Clare College, Cambridge.

Footnote 3172:

H.N. xxxv. 160 (fictilibus soliis).

Footnote 3173:

Arch. Journ. x. (1853), p. 230.

Footnote 3174:

Archaeologia, xiv. pl. 6, p. 37 (in B.M.).

Footnote 3175:

Arch. Journ., loc. cit.

Footnote 3176:

Ill. Rom. Lond. p. 88, and see p. 550.

Footnote 3177:

v. 5, 8.

Footnote 3178:

Quaest. Nat. vi. 19: cf. Arist. Probl. xi. 8, and Pliny, H.N. xi. 270, doliis inanibus.

Footnote 3179:

Krause, Angeiologie, pp. 126, 463.

Footnote 3180:

See Middleton, Remains of Ancient Rome, ii. p. 56.

Footnote 3181:

Middleton, loc. cit.

Footnote 3182:

Nissen, Pompeian. Studien, p. 64.

Footnote 3183:

Nissen, ibid.

Footnote 3184:

See Yorks. Arch. Journ. iii. p. 1 ff., xv. p. 303; _Trans. Roy. Inst. of Brit. Architects_, 1881-2, p. 65 ff.; _Journ. Brit. Arch. Assoc._ xxxv. p. 95, xxxviii. p. 218.

Footnote 3185:

xii. 18.

Footnote 3186:

Brongniart, Traité, i. p. 407 ff.

Footnote 3187:

ix. 58.

Footnote 3188:

Bull. Arch. Nap. N.S. vii. 1859, p. 84; C.I.L. x. 8047, 10, 18.

Footnote 3189:

Capitolinus, Vit. Anton. Pii, 3.

Footnote 3190:

Varro ap. Non. p. 26; Paul, ex Fest. p. 46 (Müller).

Footnote 3191:

Columella, xii. 28, 1; Plaut. Capt. iv. 4, 9 (“preserve-jar”).

Footnote 3192:

Isid. Etym. xx. 6.

Footnote 3193:

Agricult. 39.

Footnote 3194:

H.N. xviii. 236.

Footnote 3195:

Bull. dell’ Inst. 1846, p. 34.

Footnote 3196:

Marini, Inscr. Ant. Doliari, p. 406, No. 2.

Footnote 3197:

Marini, No. 4.

Footnote 3198:

See Fig. 22, Vol. I. p. 154.

Footnote 3199:

Formen der röm. Thongef. p. 16, pls. 1-8.

Footnote 3200:

Cf. Koenen, Gefässkunde, pls. 10-12.

Footnote 3201:

Od. i. 9, 7.

Footnote 3202:

Pliny, H.N. xiv. 135.

Footnote 3203:

Cf. Jahn, Wandgem. d. Villa Pamph. pl. 5, p. 42.

Footnote 3204:

See Hultsch, Metrologie, p. 113.

Footnote 3205:

Recueil, p. 46.

Footnote 3206:

Roach-Smith, Ill. Rom. Lond. p. 87; Collect. Antiq. ii. p. 26.

Footnote 3207:

General reference may be made to the various volumes of the Latin Corpus, under the headings Instrumentum Domesticum, sub-heading Vascula, e.g. vii. 1331 for those found in Britain; for examples from Spain see Arch. Journ. lvi. p. 299.

Footnote 3208:

C.I.L. vii. 1331, 22, xiii. 10005, 25; Steiner, Cod. Inscr. Rom. Danubii et Rheni, ii. pp. 271, 287; and see generally C.I.L. xiii. part 3, No. 10002.

Footnote 3209:

C.I.L. vii. 1331, 6, 13.

Footnote 3210:

C.I.L. x. 8056, 260.

Footnote 3211:

Ibid. iv. 2555.

Footnote 3212:

Ibid. vii. 1332, 1.

Footnote 3213:

Ibid. viii. 10477, 1.

Footnote 3214:

Ibid. iv. 2552.

Footnote 3215:

See Vol. I. p. 158.

Footnote 3216:

C.I.L. x. 8055, 11; iv. 2584, 2616: cf. Vol. I. p. 158.

Footnote 3217:

C.I.L. iv. 2603: cf. Pliny, H.N. xiv. 75.

Footnote 3218:

C.I.L. iv. 2555.

Footnote 3219:

Ibid. 2625.

Footnote 3220:

Ibid. 2589-94, 2575 ff. On inscribed amphorae from Pompeii see also Mau-Kelsey, Pompeii, p. 505.

Footnote 3221:

Doni, p. lxxxvi. Found on the Aventine, now in the Museo Kircheriano.

Footnote 3222:

Ber. d. sächs. Gesellsch. 1857, p. 199.

Footnote 3223:

C.I.L. xv. pt. 2, No. 4719.

Footnote 3224:

Ibid. iv. 2584.

Footnote 3225:

Poen. iv. 2, 14: literatas fictiles epistolas; the double play on the words cannot be expressed in English.

Footnote 3226:

Rud. ii. 5, 21.

Footnote 3227:

v. 33.

Footnote 3228:

Cf. also Plaut. Amph. i. 1, 273; Virg. Aen. i. 195 (for the wine of Acestes).

Footnote 3229:

Od. iv. 11, 2; 12, 17.

Footnote 3230:

i. 19, 2: cf. Juv. vi. 344, and p. 477.

Footnote 3231:

i. 56; iv. 66.

Footnote 3232:

x. 36.

Footnote 3233:

Mart. i. 44, 8; Pliny, H.N. xviii. 307.

Footnote 3234:

H.N. xv. 82.

Footnote 3235:

Mart. vi. 27, 6.

Footnote 3236:

H.N. xiv. 96; Isid. Etym. xvi. 26, 13.

Footnote 3237:

Hor. Sat. ii. 4, 66; Varro, R.R. i. 13, 6; Isid. Etym. xx. 6.

Footnote 3238:

As often by Virgil and Ovid, usually in the form cratera: cf. Isid. Etym. xx. 5.

Footnote 3239:

Fasti, v. 522.

Footnote 3240:

Hor. Sat. ii. 8, 39; Cic. in Verr. iv. 27, 62.

Footnote 3241:

Cic. de Fin. iii. 4, 15; Varro, R.R. i. 8, 5.

Footnote 3242:

Hor. Sat. i. 6, 109: see also Juv. Sat. vi. 426; Persius, v. 140; Isid. Etym. xx. 6.

Footnote 3243:

Cic. in Vatin. 14, 34; Lucan, v. 394: cf. Marquardt, Privataltert. vii. p. 629, note 3.

Footnote 3244:

In Verr. ii. 51, 127: cf. Plutarch, Vit. T. Gracch. 11; also Isid. Etym. xx. 6: Vasis genus aquatilis.

Footnote 3245:

See Orelli, 4546, and for urna, Suet. Calig. 15; Lucan, vii. 819; Ovid, passim.

Footnote 3246:

Plaut. Cas. ii. 6, 11; Livy, xxv. 3. 16.

Footnote 3247:

Etym. xx. 6.

Footnote 3248:

Cf. Caes. Bell. Civ. ii. 11; Lucan, iv. 420.

Footnote 3249:

Paul, ex Fest. ed. Müller, p. 63, 12.

Footnote 3250:

Plaut. Curc. i. 1, 75; Rud. v. 2, 32; and see Virg. Ecl. vii. 33; Varro, L.L. v. 123.

Footnote 3251:

Plaut. Stich. ii. 2, 28; Cato, Agricult. 11; Varro, Re Rust. i. 22: cf. Juv. v. 47 for nasus, applied to a cup.

Footnote 3252:

Ad Fam. vii. 29: cf. also Plaut. Aulul. iv. 2, 15; Pers. iii. 22.

Footnote 3253:

Plaut. Amph. i. 1, 273; Cato, Agricult. 81; Varro, ap. Non. 546, 23.

Footnote 3254:

Martial, xiv. 106; Juv. iii. 203 (urceoli sex); Varro, R.R. i. 22; Treb. Poll. Vit. Claud. 17; Plaut. Merc. v. 2, 86; id. Pers. i. 3, 43; Cic. Fin. iv. 12, 30.

Footnote 3255:

Hor. A.P. 97: cf. the ληκύθιον episode in the Frogs (Vol. I. p. 196); also the word ampullari.

Footnote 3256:

Plin. Ep. iv. 30, 6; Mart. xiv. 110.

Footnote 3257:

Florida, ii. 9, 2: cf. the terracotta vessels with reliefs in the British Museum, D 204-5; also Mus. Greg. i. pl. 10; Micali, Mon. Ined. pl. 52. Isidorus derives the word from ampla bulla, in reference to its rotund form (Etym. xx. 5).

Footnote 3258:

Rev. Arch. xviii. (1868), pl. 22, p. 225.

Footnote 3259:

Mart. vii. 61, 5.

Footnote 3260:

Hor. Ep. ii. 2, 134.

Footnote 3261:

Cf. the episode in Petronius, Sat. 22.

Footnote 3262:

Pliny, H.N. xvi. 128.

Footnote 3263:

Pliny, Ep. i. 6: cf. Juv. xii. 60.

Footnote 3264:

Juv. viii. 161.

Footnote 3265:

Hor. Sat. ii. 8, 41.

Footnote 3266:

C.I.L. xiii. 10008, 4.

Footnote 3267:

Hor. Od. iii. 8, 13; 19, 12.

Footnote 3268:

i. 71: cf. viii. 51, 21; ix. 95; xi. 37; Hor. Od. iii. 19, 11 ff.

Footnote 3269:

See Varro, L.L. v. 122; Isid. Etym. xx. 5, where the derivation from potare is given.

Footnote 3270:

Virg. Ecl. vi. 17; Plaut. Asin. v. 2, 56; Hor. Od. i. 20, 2; and see Daremberg and Saglio, s.v.

Footnote 3271:

See Macrob. v. 21.

Footnote 3272:

Hor. Od. i. 27, 1; Epod. ix. 33; Isid. Etym. xx. 6, describes it as a wash-hand basin.

Footnote 3273:

Plaut. Stich. v. 4, 11; Cic. in Verr. iv. 17, 37 and 24, 54.

Footnote 3274:

Mart. viii. 6, 2; Isid. Etym. xx. 5.

Footnote 3275:

Od. ii. 7, 22.

Footnote 3276:

Porphyrion ad Hor. loc. cit.

Footnote 3277:

Plaut. Stich. v. 4, 12.

Footnote 3278:

Id. Rud. v. 2, 32.

Footnote 3279:

Cic. Tusc. iii. 19, 46.

Footnote 3280:

Isid. Etym. xx. 5.

Footnote 3281:

xi. 145.

Footnote 3282:

ix. 60, 22.

Footnote 3283:

Varro, L.L. v. 127; Ovid, Fast. v. 509.

Footnote 3284:

Ep. 119, 3.

Footnote 3285:

Hor. Sat. ii. 4, 41; Juv. v. 80.

Footnote 3286:

Hor. Sat. i. 3, 80; ii. 2, 95; ii. 8, 43, 55.

Footnote 3287:

Suet. Vitell. 17: cf. 13.

Footnote 3288:

Isid. Etym. xx. 4: dispansis patentibusque oris.

Footnote 3289:

Phaedr. i. 26.

Footnote 3290:

Hor. Sat. i. 3, 90; ii. 4, 75; i. 6, 115; Ep. i. 5, 2.

Footnote 3291:

Juv. iii. 142; Mart. xi. 28; Alciphr. Ep. iii. 20; Isid. Etym. xx. 4.

Footnote 3292:

xi. 32, 18: cf. vii. 47, 3. Isidorus, Etym. xx. 4, says gabata = cavata.

Footnote 3293:

xiii. 81; v. 79, 7: see Isid. Etym. xx. 8.

Footnote 3294:

Hor. Sat. ii. 4, 77; Pers. v. 182; Isid. Etym. xx. 6. For other uses see Juv. xi. 108; Pliny, H.N. xxxiii. 69. Isidorus says catinum is a better form.

Footnote 3295:

Isid. Etym. xx. 4.

Footnote 3296:

Hor. Sat. ii. 4, 75.

Footnote 3297:

Hor. Od. ii. 7, 23; Sat. i. 3, 14.

Footnote 3298:

Hor. Sat. ii. 8, 86.

Footnote 3299:

Sat. i. 6, 118.

Footnote 3300:

Juv. iii. 263; xi. 158: cf. Vol. I. pp. 200, 211, 503.

Footnote 3301:

Collect. Antiq. v. p. 8.

Footnote 3302:

Catull. 94, 2; Juv. xiv. 171. For examples of ollae, see Overbeck, Pompeii, p. 414, Daremberg and Saglio, s.v., and Pl. LXIX. fig. 2; see also pp. 389, 456, 550. Isidorus expressly states that it was used for boiling water (Etym. xx. 8).

Footnote 3303:

vi. 430. Isidorus (Etym. xx. 6) derives it from pedes.

Footnote 3304:

Cato, R.R. 157; Plant. Pers. i. 3, 8.

Footnote 3305:

Isid. Etym. xx. 8.

Footnote 3306:

Varro ap. Non. p. 19, 14.

Footnote 3307:

Cf. B.M. Cat. of Bronzes, Nos. 2461-2465; also Déchelette, Vases de la Gaule Romaine, ii. p. 316.

Footnote 3308:

Varro ap. Non. 547, 12; Pliny, H.N. xxxvii. 18; Livy, x. 7, 10; Cic. Rep. vi. 2, 11; id. Parad. i. 2, 11.

Footnote 3309:

De Nat. Deor. iii. 17, 43.

Footnote 3310:

The word is only given by Festus (p. 248, Müller).

Footnote 3311:

Varro ap. Non. 547, 19.

Footnote 3312:

Paul, ex Fest. p. 89, 4, with Müller’s note.

Footnote 3313:

Paul, ex Fest. p. 51, 1.

Footnote 3314:

Varro, L.L. v. 124; Paul, ex Fest. p. 337, 10 (non dissimile cyatho).

Footnote 3315:

Varro ap. Non. 544, 23; Cic. Rep. vi. 2, 11; Juv. vi. 343.

Footnote 3316:

Cic. Legg. iii. 16, 36.

Footnote 3317:

H.N. xxxv. 158. An example of a bronze simpulum may be seen in the Bronze Room of the British Museum (Case E).

Footnote 3318:

Virg. Georg. ii. 394.

Footnote 3319:

Id. Aen. iii. 66; Varro, L.L. v. 124.

Footnote 3320:

Varro, L.L. v. 122; Virg. Aen. i. 729.

Footnote 3321:

See Isid. Etym. xx. 5, who suggests a derivation from patere, “quod patentes sunt dispansisque labris.”

Footnote 3322:

Ov. Fast. ii. 634; Juv. v. 85: cf. Plaut. Cist. ii. 1, 46.

Footnote 3323:

Paul, ex Fest. p. 247, Müll.; Varro, 544, 19 (ap. Non.).

Footnote 3324:

Paul, ex Fest. p. 160.

Footnote 3325:

Digest, xxxiv. 2, 19, § 12.

Footnote 3326:

Varro ap. Non. 547, 14.

Footnote 3327:

H.N. vii. 185; Petron. 42; Colum. xii. 43, 7; Pallad. Agric. vii. 7; Cels. 2, 11.

Footnote 3328:

V. 148: see also Tert. Apol. 13; Varro ap. Non. 146, 8; 545, 2.

Footnote 3329:

Cato, R.R. 57; Livy, xxv. 2, 8; Pliny, H.N. xiv. 85, 144. For a bronze congius representing the standard measure see Hultsch, Metrologie, p. 123; also Daremberg and Saglio, s.v. On Roman metrology generally see Krause, Angeiol. p. 454, and Hultsch, op. cit. p. 112 ff.

Footnote 3330:

Die Formen der röm. Thongefässe, diesseits und jenseits der Alpen (Stuttgart, 1897). For the forms peculiar to the ornamented wares, reference should be made to Dragendorff’s article in Bonner Jahrb. xcvi. pls. 1-3, and Déchelette, Vases de la Gaule Romaine, passim.