| 2. France | |||
| Dept. of | Ain | St.-Martin-du-Mont | Blanchet, Melanges, p. 107. |
| Allier | Champ-Lary | Blanchet, p. 89. | |
| Lubié | ” p. 95. | ||
| St.-Bonnet | ” p. 96. | ||
| St.-Didier-en-Rollat | ” p. 96. | ||
| St.-Rémy-en-Rollat | ” p. 96; Déchelette, i. p. 41 ff. | ||
| Vichy | Blanchet, p. 95. | ||
| Aube | Nogent-sur-Seine | ” p. 106. | |
| Aveyron | Graufesenque | ” p. 97; Déchelette, i. p. 64 ff. | |
| Dept. of | Bouches-du-Rhône | Arles | Roach-Smith, Collect. Antiq. 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-Toulouse | ” p. 101. | |
| 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-Inférieure | Herbignac | ” p. 102. | |
| 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 (Forest of) | ” p. 104. | ||
| Mont-de-Hermes, Beauvais | ” p. 105. | ||
| Sampigny | ” p. 105. | ||
| Orne | Chandai | ” p. 103. | |
| Pas-de-Calais | Avesnes-le-Comte | ” p. 106. | |
| Puy-de-Dôme | Clermont-Ferrand | ” p. 95. | |
| 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-Inférieure | Incheville | ” p. 103. | |
| Somme | Amiens | Blanchet, p. 106. | |
| Tarn | Montans | ” p. 97. | |
| Tarn-et-Garonne | Castelnau-de-Montratier | ” p. 97. | |
| 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 Purlieus | Vict. County Hist. i. p. 166 ff., 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]]