Chapter IV: Italy

Italian Art.--Whence Derived.--Greece and
Persia.--Divisions.--Ancient Roman and Etruscan.--Etruria and
Greece.--Questions Resulting from Discoveries at Vulci.--Early
Connection between Etruria and Greece.--Etruscan Art an Offshoot of
Greek.--Examples.--Best of Black Paste.--Why Etruscan Art
Declined.--Rome.--Nothing Original.--Its Debt to Etruria and
Greece.--Decline of its Art.--Unglazed Pottery and its
Divisions.--Glazed Pottery.--Samian
Ware.--Aretine.--Terra-cotta.--After Rome fell.--The
Renaissance.--Saracenic Influences.--Crusades.--Conquest of
Majorca.--Tin Enamel and Metallic Lustre.--Bacini at Pisa.--Lead
Glaze.--Majolica Made at Pesaro.--Sgraffiati.--Luca della
Robbia.--Sketch of his Life.--His Alleged Discovery.--What he
really Accomplished.--Where he Acquired the Secret of Enamel.--His
Works.--Bas-Reliefs.--Paintings on the Flat.--His
Successors.--Recapitulation of Beginnings of Italian
Majolica.--Chaffagiolo.--Siena.--Florence.--Pisa.--Pesaro.
--Castel-Durante.--Urbino.--Gubbio and Maestro Giorgio.--Faenza.
--Forli, Rimini, and Ravenna.--Venice.--Ferrara.--Deruta.--Naples.
--Shape and Color.--Modern Italy.

The ceramic art of Italy, beginning with the Roman and Etruscan, and coming down to the Renaissance in the fifteenth century, is the successor of those of Greece and the East, on the one hand, and of the Saracenic and Hispano-Moresque on the other. There have been two questions under discussion in reference to the latter period, viz., Where did Italy acquire her knowledge of the use of stanniferous enamel? and, Whence did she draw her skill in the application of metallic lustre? We shall find, on examining the evidence, that the great works of her artistic prime were the results of a derivative and not of an original art. They are only original in so far as they indicate a point in advance of Italy’s predecessors. We have said that Oriental art culminated in Greece. Italy presents us with a later point of union between two lines issuing from the East. We find subjects and forms recalling at once the ideals of Greece and the rich mythological and legendary sources from which were drawn the aids to her prolific imagination. We also find that the Greek restraint in the use of colors is thrown aside, and that Italy availed herself to the full of the skilful processes and methods of embellishment brought to her shores from Persia, and by the Saracens and Moors from their settlements in Africa and Spain.

There are thus two great divisions of Italian pottery: the ancient Roman and Etruscan, and that of the Renaissance. Between these two there is a long period of darkness, extending from the last smouldering glow of the art of Italy, after Constantine took the seat of the imperial power to Byzantium, to the entrance of the Saracens into Europe.

In considering the ancient epoch, one pertinent fact may be borne in mind, viz., that the best remains of the art of Greece have been found beyond its own borders, and that its history might be written from those discovered in Italy alone. Dividing Italy into three sections, we shall have Magna Græcia, Campania, and Etruria. Of these the latter has the greater antiquity, in so far as its ceramic remains are concerned. Greek colonies settled all along the southern part of the peninsula and in Sicily, and such relics as are found there may, in the mean time, be dismissed as corresponding in style with those of the same dates produced in Greece.

Although the same rule might be held in a less broad sense to apply to Etruria, it is deserving of more lengthened consideration. When, in 1825, the great discoveries were made at Vulci, the learned world was divided as to the places to which the vases should be credited. Some maintained that they were made in Greece and imported; others, that they were made in Etruria by Greek workmen; others, that they were really Etruscan; others, that they were partly native and partly imported from Greece; and still others, that many of them came from Magna Græcia and Sicily. To reconcile these suppositions, without affecting the eastern origin of Etruscan art, we are reminded that the Pelasgi--the name given to the ancient inhabitants of Greece--founded Agyllos, on the coast of Etruria. Bunsen places the first introduction of art into Etruria at this remote period. We come next to the arrival of Demaratus in Tarquinii, about the year B.C. 655. Demaratus was a wealthy Corinthian, of the family of the Bacchiadæ. On the usurpation by Cypselus of the government of Corinth, Demaratus fled, accompanied by all his family, and, landing in the above named flourishing city, married an Etruscan bride, and by her had a son, Lucumon, who afterward occupied the throne of Rome under the name of Tarquinius Priscus, the fifth king of the Romans and the first of the Tarquins. Demaratus was either accompanied or followed by certain of the artists who had brought celebrity to Corinth for its pottery, and thus the art of Greece, as it was at that period, might have been introduced into Etruria. It must, however, be admitted that the story of Demaratus is not as clear as might be wished, the authorities differing as to his status in Corinth, and as to Lucumon, who is considered by some as having been merely one of his companions. The Tyrrheno-Pelasgians were driven from the sea-coast probably in the sixth century before Christ. We would from these facts be led to expect specimens of ceramic art, firstly, rude and indigenous; secondly, showing signs of the same Oriental origin from which Greece derived its first lessons; and thirdly, examples of pure Greek fabrication mingled with Etruscan imitations. In regard to such a collection as that found at Vulci, it may thus be assumed that there is a modicum of truth in each of the suppositions above referred to. There cannot, in any case, be any reason for calling in question the statement that, in the main, Etruscan ceramic art was of Grecian birth. We are speaking of the productions of 2300 years ago. Etruria was open to the little world surrounding the eastern end of the Mediterranean. Its ships brought enamelled bottles from Egypt, which its citizens set in gold and placed in their tombs. It had maritime connections with Spain, Phœnicia, and perhaps with England, and with the southern ports of the Italian peninsula, and those of Sicily. It imported both potters and their wares, and turned from its own ancient standards to a higher. While the immigrant Greeks were making such wares as they had made at home, the native Etruscan artists were imitating, clumsily and awkwardly at times, but gradually improving and approaching their teachers more nearly. Etruscan art, with the exception of the earlier specimens of rude aboriginal skill, must, therefore, be studied as an offshoot of that of Greece.

The oldest examples, more distinctly indigenous than any of the succeeding styles, are of a brownish color and rude shape, and are decorated with bands and knobs or studs in relief. One peculiar shape bears a resemblance to a miniature rustic cottage, and belongs to the sepulchral class. Others, which are painted, recall the art of Greece in its first devotion to Phœnician or Egyptian models. They may, therefore, be referred to the age when the Tyrrheno-Pelasgians still held their settlements in Etruria, and are probably the work of these settlers and of the aboriginal inhabitants who preceded them. When the Etruscans overran the settlements of the Pelasgi, a red and black ware was introduced, and soon afterward we are brought more directly into contact with Grecian art by importations.

The best Etruscan works are of black paste (Fig. 197), toward which the brown changed as it improved. The ornaments are incised flowers, and bas-reliefs of animals and human faces, executed, designed, and arranged in styles decidedly Oriental. On one found at Vulci are monsters like the Egyptian sphinx, winged and woman-headed. It is probable that, of the two styles of ornamentation, the incised is the more ancient, and that the black ware, as a whole, belongs to between the seventh and third centuries before Christ. The prevalence of Egyptian forms and symbols in connection with this class, such as the scarabæus and ostrich eggs painted with strange winged monsters, gives additional probability to our estimate of their age, and shows how far Etruria availed herself of the act of Psammetichus I. of Egypt, who, B.C. 654, threw open the ports of that country to foreign traders. Contemporaneous with these are large vases of red ware corresponding with the Greek _pithoi_. The decoration displays a knowledge of the art of Egypt and the East, mingled with examples of that of Greece. The yellow ware is allied to the Doric; and specimens of a still paler color, ornamented with Grecian subjects, modified and adapted to Etruscan ideas, mark the close of the art. It at no time attained to any very great excellence, and declined early. Both of these facts are easily explained. In the wonderful collection of Signor Alesandro Castellani are many beautiful specimens of Etruscan bronze, carved gems, and work in gold. These are ascribed to the third, fourth, and fifth centuries before the Christian era; and it is only natural to suppose that the delicate skill acquired in the manipulation of such materials should have given rise to a distaste for the humbler though more obedient clay. Many of the vases suggest the transition from pottery to bronze in the evidence which their decoration gives of having been imitated from metal.

When we turn to Rome, little investigation is required to satisfy us that there is no such thing as an independent Roman ceramic art. Whatever Rome possessed was acquired from without, not developed from within. One could expect no artistic sense to manifest itself among the horde of refugees, outcasts, and criminals who surrounded Romulus in his little castle on the Palatine hill. His successor, Numa Pompilius, in aiming a blow at idolatry, may have also retarded the growth of art. He forbade the use of images, and for one hundred and sixty years after his death no statue appeared in the temples of Rome. This brings us down to the Etruscan monarch, Tarquinius Priscus, who placed in the Roman capitol a terra-cotta statue of Jupiter, by an Etruscan artist. Whatever the Romans required they obtained from Etruria, until they found a new source of supply in Magna Græcia. That they made very slow progress in the arts may be inferred from one incident which happened nearly five hundred years after Numa had issued his order against idolatry. While the second Punic war was raging, the Roman consul, Marcellus, besieged Syracuse, a Corinthian city in Sicily, and, after taking it, sent its paintings and statues to Rome, in order that his countrymen might learn from the art of Greece, and acquire a taste for such works. Syracuse fell B.C. 212, and eleven years afterward the war was brought to an end. It was by thus acquainting themselves with the beauty of Grecian art that the Romans began to display a desire for the artistic embellishment of their homes and capital. When their arms were directed against Greece, and Athens fell under their assaults, in the first century before Christ, Greek artists flocked to Rome, and for a time made it the workshop in which they labored and the school in which they taught. But with the sun itself its rays of golden light must disappear, though for a time they gild the earth and clouds with their departing glory. Greece was enslaved. Her ancient spirit was crushed. She had taught the world the lesson intrusted to her, and with political independence sank art and literature, though not without leaving imperishable monuments behind. As the tree withered, so did the branches; and the expatriated Greeks in Rome and the long-subdued colonies of Magna Græcia, deriving no longer any warmth from the centre from which they came, were quickly lost to sight. There also, as in Etruria, richness took the place of beauty. Gold, silver, and gems were more to the luxurious Romans of the empire than ceramic art, and that which had embellished the palaces of kings was left to the gods and the poor.

The different kinds of unglazed Roman ware may be divided, according to the color of their pastes, into yellowish white, red, gray, and black. The yellow paste was the coarsest, and was used for large pieces, such as the _dolia_ and _amphoræ_. The smaller pieces of this color are of a better quality. Many of the household vessels were of red ware, such as plates, bottles, and jars. Some of it, as, for example, the false Samian, was dipped in a slip. The gray class comprises _amphoræ_, and flat cooking-pans, and includes some specimens which have all the characteristics of modern stone-ware. The black paste was largely employed in making dishes and other table utensils, such as cups and candle-sticks.

The leading kinds of glazed pottery were the Aretine and red Samian wares. The latter of these is the more celebrated (Fig. 199). Its prototype is to be found in the red ware of the Greek islands. The paste is close and fine, and the glaze is clear and very thin. The similarity in texture of all the specimens points to the conclusion that they were made in one place. The Samian ware has, like the legionary tiles, been found wherever the arms of Rome were carried. Like the unglazed red pottery, it was extensively used for table services, and may broadly be said to have been the chief domestic ware of the Romans. The ornamentation consists of mouldings in relief, incised rings, and intaglio patterns.

The Aretine ware is also red, and is very like the Samian in many respects, but of a lighter shade, and more finely decorated, chiefly in relief. There are also two kinds of black Roman ware, one of dark paste, the other of red paste colored black. The ornamentation of the first is generally very simple, while that of the latter, in some cases, resembles the mouldings on red ware. Like the Samian, it is found over the greater part of Europe.

One of the most interesting branches of Roman ceramics--the various uses of terra-cotta, we pass with a brief reference. The oldest statues are terra-cotta, and of the same material are water spouts, window frames, friezes, capitals, and pillars. Terra-cotta statues were made from the early days, when Etruria was the centre from which Rome supplied itself, down to the Empire, although in the interim the conquest of Magna Græcia and Greece had rendered the beautiful Greek marbles and bronzes accessible to the Romans. The architectural bas-reliefs were highly esteemed by the Romans themselves, and show that the Greeks, both at home and residing in Italy, applied themselves to this particular branch of art with devotion and success. The subjects are generally Greek, and are taken from both mythology and history. The gods of both greater and lesser orders appear under many of the characters ascribed to them, and the adventures of Ulysses and Achilles, the feats of Theseus, and the labors of Hercules, are a never-failing treasury of effective subjects.

The result of all our inquiries may be summed up in this contradiction, that Roman ceramic art deserving of the name is Greek, and that the potters who were Roman have left little beyond household wares to attest their skill.

With the fall of the Roman Empire the art, which had long been declining, disappeared from view. Pottery must, no doubt, have been produced. The household necessities of the people must have been satisfied, even amidst internal disruption and barbarian invasions; but there is no evidence that anything worthy of being called an art was kept alive. The revival of the ceramic art of Italy must be dated from the time of Luca della Robbia, in the fifteenth century. To account for the forms it took, an endeavor must be made to join it on to the different branches which preceded it elsewhere. The only danger to be incurred is that of being confused by the multiplicity and yet substantial unity of its sources. Without repeating what has been said in the chapter devoted to the fountains of European art, let it be remembered that, in the year 827, the Saracens conquered Sicily, and that they introduced into that island a manufacture similar to that found in Spain. They embellished the mosque of Palermo with tiles like those of the Alhambra, and these tiles were afterward imitated in works produced in Sicily itself. Afterward, in the fourteenth century, Moorish works were established at Calata Girone, or Caltagirone, in Sicily, and some pieces attributed to them are decorated with copper lustre upon stanniferous enamel. To this period belong the Siculo-Moresque vases in the Castellani collection, which date from the fourteenth century downward (Fig. 201). It is observable that the metallic lustre does not appear in the earlier pieces, which have an unmistakably Persian style of decoration. One specimen will suffice, viz., an oval vase covered with a silicious glaze, and decorated in blue and black, with gazelles and inscriptions. Meanwhile Venice and other maritime cities on both sides of the Italian peninsula were developing an extensive trade with the East. The Crusaders had been converting the old battle-ground of the Jews into the scene of another strife, in which Judaism was ignored. Mohammed preached the gospel of the sword, and the Christians took up the gauntlet thrown down by the Saracens. Is it not possible that by these two courses--trade, and the movements of followers of the Cross--some inklings of Persian art may have crept into Italy?

The crusading spirit of the twelfth century was a most potent agency. In 1113 the Pisans were roused to a sense of the wrongs suffered by Christians from the piratical Saracens of Majorca. They set sail, and in 1115 the island was in their power; and their galleys returned home freighted with the spoils of war. An extensive trade between the Balearic Islands and Italy was maintained in the fourteenth century. Looking at these facts, does it appear improbable that Moorish wares and Moorish potters may have reached Italy from Majorca? Coming still later, we find Moorish refugees from Spain flocking toward Italy in vast numbers. Leaving the Saracens and Moors entirely out of the question, the art of enamelling might have reached Italy from the Byzantine Greeks.

With all these facts before us, the bacini, or plates found incrusted in the walls of the old churches of Pisa, need give us little trouble. Mr. Fortnum found one Persian piece. Mr. Marryat thinks them of Moorish origin. Mr. Fortnum is of the further opinion that many of the bacini, both of Pisa and other Italian cities, are of native Italian manufacture. Each specimen must be judged separately, and it may be pointed out that with the highway of the sea open to the East and to the Saracenic settlements in Africa and Spain, with Saracens already settled in Sicily, and with the known early connection by commerce between Italy and Spain, it is difficult to specify the route by which any special ware or process _must_ have reached Italy. We shall afterward see that in Germany tin enamel was known in the thirteenth century. If it should be asked, How did it get there? the question would illustrate a good deal of idle speculation indulged in regarding its introduction into Italy. The same rule will apply to the metallic lustre.

The Italians used lead glaze on their pottery from a very early period. According to Passeri, mezza-majolica covered with marzacotto was made at Pesaro as early as the beginning of the fourteenth century. Sgraffiato ware was made in a similar manner, and derived its name from the incised ornaments which were cut into the white engobe or slip (with which the ware was covered), so as to show the original color below the slip. In the example here given (Fig. 202) the incised decoration is combined with figures and flowers in relief. But the brilliant importations from Spain made a deep impression upon the public taste. The wares of Majorca were those best and most generally known, and its name, as changed to majolica, had been given to the entire class of lustred wares, although the art of lustring was already known in Italy. It is well to discriminate between the name and the article. It is quite possible that the name of the best known type should come to be applied to the entire class. Jacquemart finds the early wares of Pesaro very suggestive of Persian influence. He concludes, also, that the art of applying the metallic lustre may have been communicated by Persian potters, or by others who had learned it from them, to the eastern potteries of Italy. We may conclude that, as the Majorca ware surpassed that of the early Italian potteries, the potters of Italy endeavored to derive what benefit they could from calling their own productions by the same name. Metallic lustres were used before stanniferous enamel was adopted. The invention of the latter in Italy has been generally ascribed to Luca della Robbia, but there is every reason for believing that this is incorrect. It is impossible to suppose that the Saracen and Moorish potters in Italy were unacquainted with it. It is much more likely that, being satisfied with the results of the processes to which they were accustomed, and the beauty of lead glaze, they did not care to use it.

To tell what Robbia _did_ accomplish we must glance at his personal history. Luca della Robbia (Fig. 203) was born at Florence in the year 1399 or 1400. At first he turned his attention to the business of a goldsmith, but afterward aspired to sculpture. About 1438 his marble bas-relief of “The Singing Boys” was placed in the Duomo of Florence, and was so great a success that orders quickly multiplied. He had also done some work in bronze, but neither chiselling nor casting was sufficiently speedy. Statues must be copied from a clay model. The model was his own; the copy was, in the general case, the work of an assistant; and probably, even if he chiselled the marble himself, he could not reproduce the effects so easily reached in the plastic clay.

Luca was an enterprising artist, and it occurred to him that if he could only dispense with the chiselling and casting, his art and profit would both improve. But how could he make the clay as hard as bronze and as white as marble? Remember that Luca was a sculptor, not a potter. Whatever he did afterward, there can be no doubt that his attention was first turned to statuary. He probably decided upon applying to the men who were accustomed to working in clay, to coloring it and glazing it, to help him in his difficulty. He inquired, and learned that by dipping his statuary in tin enamel and firing it, his object would be accomplished. These considerations give his supposed discovery a new aspect. If we consider that for centuries stanniferous enamel had been in use by Eastern potters, and that the Saracens were perfectly familiar with it, the secret is divested of all mystery. Luca probably acquired his knowledge in one or other of the Italian potteries. What, then, are we to credit to him? He must be admitted to have improved the enamel after a series of experiments, and to have succeeded in bringing it to the degree of fineness and opacity demanded by his purpose (Fig. 204). His first work was a bas-relief of the Resurrection, made about the year 1440, and still standing in the Cathedral of Florence. This piece is of blue and white, the latter for the figures, the former for the ground. He afterward introduced green and yellow, but these colors are very sparingly used. His best works are in and around Florence. Of a Madonna in the circle above a chapel door, Ruskin, in his “Mornings in Florence,” says: “Never pass near the market without looking at it; and glance from the vegetables underneath to Luca’s leaves and lilies, that you may see how honestly he was trying to make his clay like the garden stuff.” The same colors are introduced in a bas-relief in the Castellani collection, in which the Madonna kneels before the Infant Saviour, and angels look down from above. The figures are white, the ground blue, and green is introduced in the grass. Of the same class is the preceding example (Fig. 205) from Boston.

While producing these works in enamelled earthen-ware, Robbia also painted on the flat. Of this work there are twelve circular medallions in the South Kensington Museum, and several specimens in Florence--a tondo, some tiles, and a lunette. The medallions are enamelled, and the paintings are allegorical representations of the months (Fig. 206). Vasari says in regard to the tiles: “For the bishop of Fiesole, in the church of San Brancazio, he also made a marble tomb, on which are the recumbent effigy of the bishop and three other half-length figures besides; and on the pilasters of that work he painted, on the flat, certain festoons and clusters of fruit and foliage so skilfully and naturally, that were they even painted in oil on panel, they could not be more beautifully or forcibly rendered.”

Luca died in 1481, leaving the full knowledge of the process he had perfected to his nephew Andrea, who, however, was less successful than his uncle. His art is less pure (Fig. 207). He becomes elaborate where Luca was simple, especially in his heavy borders of fruit. Andrea was born in 1457, and died in 1528, and left the transmissible part of his art to his four sons, Giovanni, Luca, Ambrosio, and Girolamo. Of these, Girolamo became a monk, and one specimen of his work is said to be at Siena. Giovanni’s works are signed, and cannot, therefore, lead to any confusion. Luca, junior, settled in Rome, and Girolamo went to France, where he executed several works. Luca, the elder, had also two assistants, Agostino and Ottaviano, the former of whom displayed great talent, and worked in Perugia. The special art was carried to Spain by Nicoloso Francesco, of Pisa, who made some bas-reliefs for a church in Seville. Of the other successors of Luca we need only refer to Maestro Giorgio Andreoli, of Gubbio, who is said to have produced some pieces after the Della Robbia type (Fig. 209). The style finally passed away in the earlier part of the sixteenth century. The demand for it appears to have failed about that time. Stanniferous enamel continued to be used here and there after Luca’s death, and after the lapse of some years came gradually into general use. The oldest piece not of his style is dated 1475. For the sake of lucidity it may also be here mentioned, that the metallic lustre, for which the first pressure of public demand was felt toward the close of the fourteenth century, passed into oblivion in less than a hundred years, until revived in more modern times.

Besides that of perfecting a special process, to Luca della Robbia must be assigned the credit of paving the way to the revival which culminated in the products of Gubbio. The distinction between mezza-majolica and majolica must not be forgotten, viz., that the former name was originally applied to wares covered with a white slip, then painted, lead-glazed, and lustred, and the latter to tin-enamelled ware similarly lustred. The latter was thus the highest representative of the combination of two processes, both of Oriental origin. The application of metallic lustre was Persian. Stanniferous enamel was successively Egyptian, Babylonian, and Saracenic--the Saracens undoubtedly acquiring a knowledge of it in Persia, where the beautiful silicious glaze kept it in subordination. The Moors in Spain brought it more freely into use in decoration, and with Luca della Robbia, who perfected the process still farther, raised it from the desuetude into which it had fallen in Italy, where, however, it was already known to Saracenic settlers and their pupils.

With this recapitulation of the beginnings of real Italian majolica, we may now continue our history. The impetus Italian ceramic art received from foreign contact, and from the knowledge acquired by trade, was kept up by the wisdom and devotion to the cause of art manifested by several of the ducal houses. From Pesaro, under the house of Sforza, from Urbino, under that of Montefeltro, and from Florence and Chaffagiolo, under the Medicis, and from other centres, the art spread over all Italy. It is, therefore, by inquiries at these places that our investigations must be continued. Leaving out of view the questions as to the priority of Chaffagiolo to Faenza and Pesaro’s precedence in metallic lustring, we may begin with Tuscany.

The leading Tuscan towns were Chaffagiolo, Florence, Siena, and Pisa. The first of these produced the earliest Tuscan majolica. Its leading features are a thick dark blue, made from cobalt; a bright orange and yellow; a fine clear green, red, brown, and purple. Before the artists of Chaffagiolo had awakened to the spirit of the Renaissance, they issued some works enamelled on one side, with central designs of a Gothic character, and borders of orange, white, and blue. In the fifteenth century a marked improvement was made, but it was not until the beginning of the sixteenth century that the best Chaffagiolo ware was made. Their colors then become more brilliant, and are more daringly handled. Some of these pieces are dated 1507 and 1509. Metallic lustres were used about the same period. Later, the brilliancy of the enamels is toned down, and the execution of the designs is more careful and refined. Chaffagiolo continued to make majolica to the end of the sixteenth century. The pieces frequently show heraldic designs (Fig. 210) and mottoes, the letters S. P. Q. F. (the senate and people of Florence), and the letters P. S. sometimes with I. and sometimes without.

The works made at Siena (Fig. 211) are in many cases undistinguishable from those of Chaffagiolo. An artist named Benedetto produced at Siena some very fine pieces.

The majolica of Florence, if such were ever made, is now unknown. Lazari states that an artist was brought by the Grand Duke Francesco Maria to decorate Florentine vases; but assuming the truth of the statement, his works are now either destroyed or lost among those ascribed to other places. We have already learned something of Pisa as fitting out a Balearic crusade and exchanging pottery with Spain. Probably the wares it exported came from other parts of Tuscany, although it had a majolica manufactory of its own. The Pisan decoration closely resembles that of Urbino.

In the Duchy of Urbino, Pesaro, Castel-Durante, Urbino, and Gubbio are the leading centres, and absorb a large share of the interest surrounding the pottery of Italy. When the Sforza family acquired the lordship of Pesaro, they instituted pottery works there, and in 1486 and 1508 passed edicts against the importation of earthen-ware into Pesaro. The first of these protective measures was granted by Giovanni Sforza and Camilla, his father’s widow, and was commemorated by a dish called the Sforza dish, a very wonderful specimen of majolica (Fig. 212). The centre is occupied by portraits of the granters of the edict, shaded with blue on an indigo ground, and having gold and ruby lustred hair, dresses, and head-dresses. A scroll representing the edict forms a white back-ground to the faces, and is finished with ruby lustre. The borders are blue, with ruby and gold lustre. Under the house of Sforza the manufacture of mezza-majolica improved, and in 1500 fine, or tin-enamelled, majolica was introduced. Up to 1530 it steadily improved, and in that year the wife of the reigning Duke of Urbino, who had succeeded the Sforza lords of Pesaro, erected a palace near Pesaro. From 1540 to 1568, under Duke Guidobaldo II., the art continued to rise, until it reached its highest point of perfection. The duke first employed Battisto Franco, an eminent Venetian artist, and Raffaelle del Borgo. Girolamo Lanfranco and Giacomo Lanfranco were also employed as artists at Pesaro. After 1560 the art began to decline.

The earliest Pesarese works very closely resemble the Persian, and are the best indications to be found of the presence of an art brought directly from Iran to Italy. These are lustred and painted in green and blue. At Pesaro we first meet with pieces showing the portraits and love mottoes by which the lovers of the day celebrated the beauty of their mistresses and gave lasting tokens of their passion. If we seek peculiar features in this majolica, we shall find them in the strong execution and finely blended tints of the early pieces, and in the yellow of the _madreperla_ lustre combined with blue. As the art rose under the second Guidobaldo, historical scenes after the great masters present themselves, taken from both profane and sacred history--the brave Horatius defending the bridge at Rome against the army of Lars Porsenna, Samson, Brennus, Mutius Scævola, Judith, and other characters. In 1567 the Giacomo Lanfranco already mentioned applied real gold to majolica, and several of his pieces thus decorated are still in existence.

Castel-Durante appears to have produced faience as early as 1361, but none of its pottery can be recognized until we come down to 1508, after which the specimens multiply. With the year 1580 the art passed its meridian, and declined steadily for nearly two hundred years. The characteristic decoration consists of scrolls with fantastic chimerical terminations. The colors are at first a dull green upon blue, and about 1550 lustrous rich yellows appear, and led to the decline thirty years later.

The city of Urbino was the great centre at once of majolica painting and of the ducal patronage, which gave the entire duchy its pre-eminence. From 1477, when Garducci was working in a comparatively humble way, down to 1530, the history of Urbino hardly demands notice. Its highest glory came with Francesco Xanto (Fig. 216), whose broad and generally true drawing and masterly composition mark him as one of the great artists of the Renaissance. His subjects are taken from the Latin classical and the later Italian poets, and from Raffaelle. Living at the time when the demand for metallic lustre was at its height, he applies it with a boldness and effectiveness in harmony with his brilliant coloring. All his works are signed. From him we turn to the equally illustrious Fontana family--Guido, Camillo, and Orazio, the latter of whom is specially deserving of study. He attained to a higher mechanical excellence than any of his predecessors, his best works dating from after 1540, when Xanto’s career was closing; and his paintings are in consequence characterized by a softness of color and a fineness of glaze which leave him without a peer. Few pieces by the Fontana family are signed. Their most famous works are the vases for the Spezieria, ordered by the Duke Guidobaldo II., and painted from designs by Raffaelle Battista Franco, Michael Angelo, Giulio Romano, and others. Nicola da Urbino and Francesco Durantino are among the other artists who contributed to the fame of Urbino.

The lustres of Gubbio (Fig. 219) are inseparably associated with the one great name of Giorgio Andreoli, or, as he is usually called, Maestro Giorgio. He was a native of Pavia, and was originally a sculptor; and after he went to Gubbio, in 1498, executed some works in the Della Robbia style (Fig. 209). A piece dated 1489, and signed “Don Giorgio,” is ascribed to him while he was still at Pavia, but the first piece characteristic of the master, signed and lustred, is dated 1519, and the last 1541. We have said that Xanto of Urbino lustred his own pieces, but the matter is not free from doubt. Maestro Giorgio certainly was master of the art of lustring, and the brilliancy of his ruby reds, copper, and mother-of-pearl is unrivalled. But the statement of many writers that artists at other places sent their works to Gubbio to be lustred, and allowed Giorgio to affix his name to them, is too repulsive to be accepted without protest or reservation. One can hardly imagine a more unworthy course than that ascribed to Giorgio, of laying aside his proper artistic functions and becoming merely a decorator with lustres, “indifferent,” as Marryat says, “by whose hands they were executed or from what fabric they proceeded.” It is in this capacity of decorator that the otherwise finished paintings of Xanto and others are said to have been sent to him to be enriched with lustre. The earlier Gubbio wares generally have a pale-blue ground, with grotesques and scrolls terminating in animals’ heads, and mingled occasionally with cherubs’ heads. The grounds afterward became more brilliant, and the designs include mottoes and busts in celebration either of the great men of the time or of its fair ladies. It is to be noted that Giorgio lived before the accession of Guidobaldo II., and consequently did not partake of the benefits enjoyed by the Fontana family at Urbino.

From the Duchy of Urbino we may turn to Faenza. It has already been referred to as supplying an etymology for the word faience. Ganzoni, writing in 1485, speaks of the whiteness and polish of the Faenza majolica, and Lazari praises its soft tints and good drawing, which manifested themselves after the first quarter of the sixteenth century. The earlier fabrics bear strong evidences of Oriental influences, and, as seen in the Castellani collection, would carry us back to a very early stage of the art. The glaze is either lead or litharge, and some of the designs consist of geometrical combinations in manganese and copper. Other primitive pieces are of a very pale blue or white, changing at times to a blue border surrounding heads with beards terminating in acanthus leaves and scrolls attached. A slight examination of these pieces shows that the strength of the artists of this period lay in the accessories, and that they were weak and uncertain in their attempts at figure-drawing. The pieces ascribed to Casa Pirota, of which Signor Castellani has some notable examples, are those in which we discover the point of Lazari’s encomiums. These date from 1525 downward, and show the excellence of drawing and brightness of decoration which gave the Faentine majolica its celebrity. The borders frequently consist of grotesques in shaded white on pale or dark blue or gray grounds. Dishes with chiaroscuro arabesques on grounds of blue, surrounding figures, busts, or heraldic designs, represent a prevailing Faentine style. A plate belonging to Signor Castellani has a blue ground in the centre, on which a coat-of-arms is laid in yellow, and the broad border of pale gray finishes with a rim of green and yellow. An exceptional piece is described as black with white reserved arabesques. Forli, Rimini, and Ravenna may be dismissed briefly. Forli produced pottery at least as early as 1396; but it was not until the sixteenth century that it made any majolica which we can recognize, and even then it might easily be confounded with the productions of Chaffagiolo and Faenza. The Rimini majolica is chiefly remarkable for its wonderful glaze.

Venice had majolica factories at least as early as 1520, and probably half a century before that date. The earlier wares are illustrated by certain pieces of faience pavement. Of the sixteenth century the earliest specimens are dated 1540 and 1543, and of this period the designs are chiefly in blue and white, sometimes soft and undecided. The ware is thin and hard, and the rims of plates are frequently decorated with fruit and flowers in relief. Scrolls on a deep blue ground, and oak leaves on pale blue, are also met with.

With Ferrara, Deruta, and Naples we may conclude our enumeration. Ferrara was an offshoot of Faenza, whence we find Fra Melchiorre coming in 1495, Biagio in 1501, Antonio in 1522, and Catto in 1528. The artist Camillo who painted vases, the Dossi brothers who designed, “El Frate,” Grosso, and Zaffarino are among those who gave Ferrara its reputation. It is probably to the Dossis that the grotesques on a white ground are to be attributed. Deruta takes us back to Robbia, whose pupil, Agostino di Antonio di Duccio, went to Perugia in 1461, and thence certainly influenced the Deruta school. With such teaching Deruta produced, early in the sixteenth century, majolica of a very high order of merit, with blue grounds and yellow lustred cherubs’ heads in relief, and arabesques. Within such borders are white enamelled inner circles, with scrolls mingled with birds and chimeras, surrounding a raised centre of deep blue bearing a bust or head. Several pieces subsequent to 1544 are signed “El Frate,” and are, as a whole, weak and unpleasing, although some others are strong and beautiful. As a rule, the artists of Deruta appear to have been the direct opposites of those of early Faenza, _i. e._, they expend their resources upon their principal figures, and make the details entirely secondary. The earliest Deruta vases are conical, and decorated in lustre and white enamel with blue. Naples and Castelli are both surrounded with more or less mystery, although evidence is not wanting that the latter at least produced excellent majolica. With the end of the sixteenth century appear some large vases of Naples, painted in dark colors with religious subjects.

The shapes which engaged so much of our attention in Greece, are in Italy too manifold and varied for classification. We are in presence of an entirely new order of things, when we find artists expending their best efforts upon decoration with enamels, lustres, arabesques, grotesques, and wonderful scrolls turning in their sweeping folds round all manner of impossible monsters, of a plain, broad-bordered dish, with no pretension to form. When the Italian artists concede something to shape, they frequently become wilful, embellishing a vase reminding us of Greece with serpent handles, or running off into elaborate inkstands or quaint table wares. In the Italy of the Renaissance we are in the presence of the triumph of decoration, and it is upon decoration that we, in common with all inquirers, must concentrate attention, thankful if at times we detect a harmony between the gracefulness of a vase and the beauty of its brilliant colors.

Possibly it may be reserved for the United Italy of the nineteenth century to turn back to the earlier pages in her ceramic history, and, having filled herself with the spirit of the potters of Magna Græcia and Apulia, to pass down to the brilliancy of the sixteenth century, and, with both in full view, to execute something worthy of the later prime of her unity. Endless repetitions of the famous fabrics of the Renaissance have led her into spiritless imitation and boundless fraud. Some of the pieces displayed at the Centennial Exhibition were by no means destitute of merit. Faenza can still produce good drawing and effective coloring, and Della Robbia ware is still manufactured with tin-enamelled figures, which look considerably better than whitewashed terra-cotta. But let us imagine the energy and skill devoted to imitation with intent to deceive, and the painstaking labor of honest men who make no attempt to rise above the rank of copyists, to be together thrown into an endeavor to reach a new originality. Might not Italy be raised from the rank of a country resting upon a brilliant past into that of one working in the present to reach an equally brilliant future?

PORCELAIN.

Florence and Earliest Artificial Porcelain.--Theory of Japanese
Teaching.--La Doccia.--Venice, and the Question of its First Making
European Porcelain.--Le Nove.--Capo di Monte.

To Italy and to the family of the Medici, as we have seen, belongs the honor of making the first artificial European porcelain of which any specimens have come down to our time. The result of recent researches has been to throw much light upon the interesting discovery made at Florence. Dr. Foresi, of that city, was the first whose attention was drawn to the matter. He collected several pieces of porcelain, evidently of European manufacture; and his curiosity having been aroused as to their origin, he found that the Grand Duke Francis I. had a private factory in the Boboli gardens, that there experiments had been made with a view to discovering the composition of porcelain, and that success had been attained. The marks on the pieces are the letter F. and a dome, the arms of the Medici, and on one, the arms, the letters F. M. M. E. D. II.--the initials of Franciscus Medici Magnus Etruriæ Dux Secundus--the letter F. and the dome. The latter of these were clearly the initial letter of Florence or of Francis, and the dome of the city’s magnificent cathedral. A fine specimen of the Florentine porcelain was brought to America in the Castellani collection (Fig. 223). It is a fluted dish, with the figure of St. Mark and the lion painted in blue on the bottom (Fig. 224). Under the lion’s paw is a volume bearing the letters G. and P., supposed to be the artist’s initials, and on the reverse are the letter F. and the dome. In the same collection is a plate, also decorated in the Japanese style, light blue and white, and having the dome and letter on the under side. There are not thirty pieces of this ware known. In connection with the fact that the decoration, as we pointed out when speaking of this ware under Japan, is undoubtedly Japanese, an interesting question has been raised by Mr. B. Phillips. He expresses the belief that the presence of Japanese--composing the embassy to the Pope--in Italy may have had a direct influence, not only on the ornamentation but on the manufacture of the Medicean porcelain. He then says: “That these Japanese nobles visited the Grand Duke in Florence cannot be doubted. Now, as to the Medicean porcelain, we have been careful not to use the word ‘discovery’ in connection with its early manufacture in Florence. We are strongly of the opinion that the method of selecting and preparing the material from which porcelain had to be made was derived directly from the Japanese. If the decoration, as we believe has been undoubtedly proved, was taken from the Japanese, might not the method of making porcelain have been derived from the same source?” That Italy may have full credit for the Grand Duke’s success, it may be pointed out that there are two objections to the above theory.

It is nowhere stated that the Japanese were acquainted with any other than natural kaolinic porcelain, and it is exceedingly improbable that the members of an embassy had any knowledge of the combination of materials in an artificial paste. The Medicean was not a pure kaolinic porcelain, but “a composite paste having for basis quartz and a vitreous frit, with a small quantity of the kaolin of Vicenza.” In the second place, the embassy did not leave Japan until 1583, and only reached Italy in 1585. “In 1581,” says Jacquemart, “the experiments of the Grand Duke had produced their fruits, and he already sent presents of his translucent pottery to the other sovereigns of Europe.” The porcelain was, therefore, made before the Japanese arrived in Italy.

Were anything further needed to preserve for Italy the exclusive credit of one of the greatest contributions to ceramic art, it may be found in the styles of decoration of the Medicean porcelain. These are divisible into two classes: the Oriental and the Italian. The latter resembles that of faience, and consists chiefly of grotesques. Such are the pieces upon which appear the arms of the Medicean family, for whose use they were reserved. The specimens with Oriental decoration were gifts made to spread abroad the renown of the Grand Duke’s laboratory. Such a purpose could certainly not have been fulfilled with inferior works, and this class, to which the Castellani porcelain belongs, may be taken as representing the best Medicean paste. In this view the fabric was at its highest before the Japanese left their own country, as we have seen that pieces of this character were being sent over Europe in 1581.

The probability is that the Grand Duke, or Bernardo Buontalenti, who really made the discovery, arrived at it by independent investigations prompted by Oriental porcelain, and that the latter and the finer specimens of majolica suggested the decoration.

About one hundred and fifty years later, or in 1735, the Marquis Carlo Ginori established a manufactory at La Doccia, near Florence. The enterprise of the founder was so great, manifesting itself in the introduction of the chemist Wandelein as director, and the importation of material from China, that in a few years the Doccia porcelain had become famous. The earlier pieces bear a close resemblance to the Chinese. The artists of Doccia excelled in modelling, and many of their groups are beautifully executed. It is unfortunate that from an early period of the existence of the workshop its artists should have engaged in imitation. After following Chinese models they turned to Sèvres, and then to Capo di Monte. More lately, Doccia has won an unenviable notoriety by its spurious imitation of old majolica and the wares of Luca della Robbia. Early in the last century Doccia became possessed of some of the moulds of Capo di Monte, and as the Doccia mark does not appear upon the pieces made from them, a wide opening was offered for fraud. It is worth noting, however, that it is by its copies and imitations that the Doccia manufactory reached its greatest financial success. The success of the counterfeit has destroyed the genuine, and the artistic is overshadowed by the commercial.

In Venetia, porcelain was made at Venice and Le Nove. The history of the manufacture in Venice is somewhat obscure. Early in the sixteenth century--and, therefore, before the Medicean ware was produced--experiments, the success of which cannot now be measured, were made by a Venetian artist. He seems, after making a few pieces, to have relinquished the enterprise for lack of support and patronage. His story is thus told: “There was an old potter in Venice about 1504-1519, whose name is unknown, of whom, in fact, we know nothing except from a few notes discovered by the Marquis Campori among the relics of the Duke Alphonso I. of Ferrara, but whose name ought to be blazoned in gold as the first European who made porcelain. In 1504 the Duke was in Venice, and his book of expenses shows an item of two liri and a fraction, paid for a piece of porcelain. Fifteen years afterward his ambassador in Venice wrote him a letter, sending with it a plate and bowl of porcelain, from the ‘master,’ from whom the Duke had ordered them. And the ambassador goes on to say that the master declined to take more, as his experiments cost him too much time and money; and, further, he declines to accept an invitation of the Duke to remove to Ferrara and make porcelain there, pleading that he is too old, and does not want to leave Venice. Enthusiastic collectors imagine that a few specimens to which they can assign no other origin are works of the old Venetian, but there is no satisfactory evidence that any of his work remains.” In the absence of any relics of this ancient Venetian to substantiate his claim to the invention of a true porcelain, the honor will probably continue to be ascribed to Florence. However this may be, the existence of Venetian specimens with decoration suggestive of seventeenth century styles, would indicate that the industry was at least kept alive, and that there were several predecessors to the manufactory founded by Francesco Vezzi early in the eighteenth century. Some very beautiful works are attributed to the Casa Vezzi. In or about 1765 another manufactory was established by Geminiano Cozzi, and from it were turned out table-sets, groups, statuettes, and vases. The establishment at Le Nove, founded in 1752 by Pasquale Antonibon, produced majolica, terraglia--a mixed composition of pottery and porcelain--and artificial porcelain. Of the latter (Fig. 225) some magnificent examples have been preserved.

The most famous Italian porcelain is that of Capo di Monte. This manufactory was founded in 1736 by Charles III., whom we have already seen introducing the art into Madrid, after he left Naples to mount the throne of Spain. The founder does not appear to have been indebted to any extent whatever to the discoveries made at Meissen, but to have set on foot a perfectly independent and national industry. The king frequently worked in the factory, and under his guidance and the favor of his consort, Queen Amelia of Saxony, its products rapidly improved after the first essays, which closely followed the Japanese. The Capo di Monte forms assume a distinctive character. Her artists turned to the sea, as became citizens of the Queen of the Sea, and there found inspiration. They took the shells of the Mediterranean for their models, and by combining them with coral and sea-plants, and coloring all after nature, produced some of their most beautiful works. A very handsome ewer is thus composed, the body representing an ingenious combination of shells set in a foot of coral, a branch of which climbs up the side, and, arching to the lip, forms the handle. A basin is similarly designed, and is dotted with smaller shells. Or again, a salt-cellar is modelled after a boat steered by a youth. These examples will suffice to show that not the least merit of the artists of Capo di Monte is their originality. The table services present us with some of the finest porcelain made in Europe. The paste is fine and transparent, and many of the pieces are as thin and light as the egg-shell of China.

When Charles III. set out for Spain, he took a number of the artists with him, and left to his successor in Naples the work of maintaining the industry. In this Ferdinand was not successful, and Capo di Monte rapidly sank, and disappeared altogether in 1821.

The porcelain made at all the places named was artificial. The only Italian manufactory of natural porcelain was that of Vineuf, near Turin, which began to work toward the end of last century. The body contains magnesia. The workshop was founded by Dr. Gioanetti.