Etruscan Bucchero Ware

Bucchero ware, distinguished by its glossy black surface, was produced by the Etruscans in central Italy between the 7th and 5th centuries BCE. The first appearance of a ceramic type that can clearly be classified as bucchero occurred around 675 BCE at the coastal community of Caere (the modern-day Cerveteri), with somewhat later centers of production to be found at Veii and Tarquinia, both cities, like Caere, located in the southern part of the Etruscan heartland. Although the shapes of Villanovan pots provided the basics for the Etruscan potters, they added new types and forms largely inspired through intensified trade with the more advanced cultures at the eastern end of the Mediterranean, in particular the areas of Cyprus, Syria, and Phoenicia, as well as Egypt. Many of the new, exotic shapes were in imitation of the metalwares imported from these cultures. The potters of Etruria were able to offer their customers a locally produced and less-expensive ceramic equivalent to the desirable but costly metal products arriving from the east. Some of the Etruscan potshops even carried metalware imitation to the point of covering the surface of bucchero vessels with thin sheets of silver in an attempt to visually duplicate the luxurious imports. 

Bucchero ware was fired using the reduction method in which the vent holes of the kiln were closed to reduce the oxygen during firing.  In the smoke-filled atmosphere of the kiln, the oxygen-starved flames drew oxygen molecules from the iron oxide of the pottery. This process caused the fabric of the clay to change color from its natural red to black. Thus, in contrast to the black-glazed Campanian ware of the Greek colonists in southern Italy, the lustrous, shiny, black surface of many bucchero pots was achieved by diligent burnishing (polishing) or, occasionally, through the application of a thin slip (clay emulsion).  

Strangely, bucchero ware appeared to develop in reverse from a high level of refinement, known as sottile, from 675-626 BCE, to more Hellenized vessels between 625-575 BCE, and finally to objects referred to as "heavy" bucchero between 575-480 BCE.

As Rome began to nibble away at the territories of southern Etruria, centers for producing bucchero shifted northwards to the cities of Chiusi and Vulci. There, during the Classical period, potters put their stamp upon the bucchero tradition by introducing a new variety of the ceramic known as bucchero pesante, or heavy bucchero. In this final phase in the history of bucchero pottery, vessel walls become thicker and proportions squatter. The decoration of bucchero pesante ware typically consisted of mold-formed figures applied to the still-damp surface of the pot. By the beginning of the fifth century B.C.E., in part due to the growing availability of the elegant pottery of Greece, the demand for native bucchero ware was in a steep decline. Bucchero no longer was exported and, at home, consumers preferred the colorful pottery of the Greek artisans with their narrative and figurative panels so Etruscan potters devoted their attention instead to the production of provincial imitations of Greek red-figure vases.

In the 18th and 19th century in Europe a particular type Pre-Columbian pottery in a black color became popular among collectors. At the same time, in Italy, 'etruscheria' (Etruscan-style artefacts) was in high demand, too, and major digs were organized in Tuscany and Umbria in the quest for Etruscan antiquities. Because of the similarities with the popular South American ceramics, many excavated by the Portugese, the striking black pottery that was found in Etruscan tombs was called 'bucchero' derived from the Portuguese word búcaro, meaning "odorous clay", because this type of pottery was reputed to emit a special odor. 

Read more about it in Mark Cartwright's excellent article:

https://www.ancient.eu/Bucchero/

See even more examples at:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Bucchero

Etruscan cup in the form of a pig at the Metropolitan Museum of Art

Kyathos in bucchero with man among lions, from tomb 1 of the mound of S. Paul, 670-650 BCE now National Etruscan Museum in the Villa Giulia in Rome courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor Sailko

Etruscan oinochoe with molded decoration, 550-500 BCE courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor Sailko

Foculum (Serving Tray) with Jars and Implements Etruscan from Chiusi A Tomb Group 550-500 BCE at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City

Focolare, also known as a Foculum (serving tray) from Chiusi, Etruscan, 6th century BCE that I photographed at the Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology

Fragmentary figured bucchero amphora with stylized chariot, from Calabresi tomb, Cerveteri, 650-600 BCE, courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor Sailko

Vessel with human figure on the handle, 610-590 BCE, at the Museo Archeologico, Florence courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor Sailko

Focolare, Etruscan, 580-510 BCE at Museo Archeologico Nazionale (Florence) courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor Sailko

Pesante bucchero hydria with molded decorations 6th century BCE courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor Sailko

Etruscan bucchero ware with bovine protomes at the Gregorian Etruscan Museum in Vatican City courtesy of Jérémy-Günther-Heinz Jähnick.

Bucchero rhyton from the Necropolis of Cucifisso del Tufo at the NAM Orvieto 6th century BCE courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor Wolfgang Sauber

If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!

Brennus and the First Sack of Rome

I'm about two-thirds of the way through Steven Saylor's latest epic novel, "Roma", and am enjoying it very much. I just finished a section about the first sack of Rome by the Gauls under the command of Brennus. Most of my study has concentrated on the Late Republic so I didn't know much about this first sack other than when it occurred and it was the Gauls who did it.

However, Steven's characters are among the defenders that fortified themselves up on top of the Capitoline and held off the Gauls for seven months. I always assumed the sack was over in a few days like most sacks but it went on for quite a prolonged period. I also did not realize that the Veii question was so disruptive. I knew the Romans had conquered Veii but I assumed they simply added its people to the expanding Republic. I didn't realize the people were sold away into slavery and the city was left abandoned. Perhaps its people were treated so harshly because of the legendary massacre of the 300 Fabii at Cremora.

"Within a year of the victory at Cremora, the Etruscan navy, in conflict with Greece, was destroyed by Hieron of Syracuse, off of Cumae. The result was a military disaster for the Etruscans that they never really seemed to recover from. The various city states of the Etruscan league, including Veii, devolved more and more into separate unrelated entities, thereby losing the strength of mutual protection. Veii, despite its recent upper hand at Cremora, was forced to make a treaty with Rome.

Within this time frame a more consequential series of events were taking place, however. Celtic Gauls had been migrating into northern Italy from the 6th century BC and establishing themselves at or near Etruscan territory. Raids and warfare with these people would have a debilitating effect on the Etruscans and play directly into the growing strength of Rome. The Gauls so weakened the Etruscans that the Romans, between 406 and 396 BC, went on the offensive.

It's about this period in history that Livy tells us of the legendary Roman hero M. Furius Camillus. Under his command Fidemae was retaken from Veii, and then the city of Veii itself came under siege. According to the legend, the Siege of Veii lasted 10 years, but its description is so closely paralleled to the Homeric Siege of Troy, that we must take into account the propaganda used by ancient sources to inflate the glory of Rome. The actual siege probably lasted considerably less time, though the introduction of a paid professional legion during this course of events indicates that it was a protracted campaign. The siege was finally broken, in 396 BC, when the Romans supposedly drained Alban Lake. This not only would divert water supplies from the city but allowed access for Roman soldiers to sneak under the walls through empty stream beds. In the end, whatever the truth behind the legend may be, Camillus was credited with saving Rome and bestowed with the unending admiration of the Romans throughout its history.

Gaining Veii, the Romans, in stark contrast to their general conquest policies of incorporation, destroyed much of the city and drove out many of the Etruscan residents. The territory was allotted to Roman citizens, and four new tribes were created: the Stellatine, Tromentina, Sabatina and Aniensis." - Veii and the Etruscans, UNRV.com

Therefore, when the Gauls practically destroyed Rome, the hotly debated question became whether to rebuild Rome or to transfer her entire population to the empty city of Veii only twelve miles away. The hero Camillus was instrumental in persuading the people to rebuild Rome although those jealous of his success constantly complained that he was enriching himself through building contracts since he controlled most of the spoils and property from the Veii conquest. If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!