CHAPTER XI.

SIENA AND PESARO.

Well-nigh all the history we have of the early artistic pottery of SIENA

may be read upon the specimens of her produce, preserved in our museums

and private collections. A considerable number of pieces, evidently the

work of one able hand, has been variously assigned to the furnaces of

Faenza, of Caffaggiolo, and of Pesaro; to the first two from a general

similarity in the character of their design. On the other hand, the

initials I. P. occurring in large characters on the reverse of some of

the pieces were presumed to be those of the words “In Pesaro,” and led

to a confusion of them with others really painted at the Lanfranchi

works at Pesaro and marked with the same initials but in a smaller form;

standing for the signature of the artist, “_jiacomo pinsit_.” These

last, then unknown to collectors, were cited by Passeri who was supposed

to refer to the far more beautiful works now under consideration.

The acquisition, however, of a pavement of tiles from the Petrucci

palace at Siena, dated 1509, and the knowledge of the existence of

others of a similar stamp in the church of San Francesco in that city,

the style of handling as well as the design and colouring upon which

agreed closely with these works; a fine dish in the British museum in

the same manner, and on which occurs one of the same coats of arms as

those upon the pavement of the Petrucci; and the further acquisition of

a small plate, the painting of which in blue camaïeu is assuredly in the

manner of the finer examples above referred to, and which is signed on

the reverse “_fata i Siena da mº benedetto_;” form together a chain of

evidence conclusive as to the existence of this fabrique, and the origin

of the various pieces in question.

The South Kensington museum possesses very important specimens of this

master’s work; and the connexion of the

[Illustration]

several examples is very minutely traced in the large catalogue of

Maiolica. We need only, therefore, generally observe that they are

worthy of being ranked among the most excellent productions of the

potter’s skill in Italy during the earlier years of the 16th century;

and that in respect of their technical characteristics, and the tone and

manner of their colouring and design, they are more nearly allied to the

productions of the Caffaggiolo furnaces, from which in all probability

the inspiration of them was derived. We give woodcuts of three of these

beautiful pieces: nos. 1569, 1792, and 4487. The last of these is very

interesting on account of the mark and inscription upon the reverse

(also engraved p. 99), showing that the painter was probably Benedetto

himself, who was then the head of the establishment. The drawing of the

central figure is masterly and finished with the utmost care.

[Illustration]

[Illustration]

One of the finest specimens of this master belongs to Mr. Henderson; the

central subject is that of Mutius Scævola before Porsenna; it is painted

with great care and is surrounded by a border of grotesques on orange

ground. On the reverse is the mark in the accompanying woodcut. The

grotesques upon the border of a large dish in the British museum are

painted upon a black ground, an unusual style which also occurs on some

of the tiles of the Petrucci pavement, and is we believe almost peculiar

to this botega.

[Illustration]

[Illustration]

We lose sight of the Sienese pottery for two centuries, when it again

appears under the then best ceramic painter in Italy, Ferdinando Maria

Campani who is said, but we do not know on what exact authority, to

have worked also at Castelli and at San Quirico. A piece signed by him

is at South Kensington. His subjects, as in this instance, were

frequently taken from the Bible series of Raffaelle as rendered by Marc

Antonio’s engravings, and from the works of the Caracci. Some extremely

well executed tiles, plates, &c. copied and adapted from the old, have

also been produced within the last few years at Siena under the

superintendence of signor Pepi, a druggist, opposite the Prefecture. We

have occasionally met with some of these, scratched and chipped by other

_artists_ to suit the modern-antique market.

The small town of MONTE LUPO, nestling under its “rocca” on the southern

bank of the river at the opening of the Val d’ Arno inferiore, is on the

road from Florence and near to Empoli. Its pottery is distinguished (or

we should rather say notorious) for having produced the ugliest and most

inferior painted pieces that bear the signature of their maker and the

place where they were made.

But a ware of a different kind formed of a red clay and glazed with a

rich treacle-brown or black glaze, the forms of the pieces being

sometimes extremely elegant, has been also assigned to this locality.

Some of them are enriched with gilding and with subjects painted in oil

colours, not by a ceramic artist. We are informed, however, by signor

Giuseppe Raffaelli that wares of this description were made at Castel

Durante, and that a fine example of them, with portraits of a count

Maldini and his wife, is preserved in the library at Urbania. He

describes them as made of a red earth covered with an intensely black

glaze, on which the oil painting and gilding were executed. It is

nevertheless probable that Monte Lupo produced a similar ware, and

pieces occur ornamented with reliefs and with raised work, _engobé_,

with a white or yellow clay on the brown ground, by the process known as

_pâte sur pâte_. Certain pieces marbled on the surface to imitate

tortoiseshell, agate, &c. are ascribed to this pottery.

At Sèvres is a tazza with ill painted subject on white ground and

inscribed,--

“_Dipinta, Giovinale Tereni_

“_da Montelupo._”

and a dish in the hôtel Cluny at Paris, painted with the subject of the

rape of Helen somewhat in the manner of the Urbino wares, has at the

back,

“_Vrate délina_

“_fate in Monte._”

[Illustration]

This, we think, more likely to have been the production of Monte Lupo

than of Monte Feltro, to which it has been ascribed.

There can be little doubt that potteries existed in the neighbourhood of

the important commercial city of PISA, and it is more than probable that

the painted and incised _bacini_, which are encrusted into her church

towers and façades, are mostly of local manufacture during the 12th,

13th, and 14th centuries. On this subject we must refer the reader to

the remarks in the chapter on Persian and Hispano-moresque wares. Among

the latter, references will be found to two writers who stated that a

commerce existed between Valencia and Pisa, from whence faïence was

imported into Spain in exchange for the wares of that country. It does

not however follow that this faïence was entirely of Pisan production,

although exported thence; but it is not improbable that a considerable

quantity was made there for exportation.

Antonio Beuter, praising the wares of Spain, says that they are equal in

beauty to those of Pisa and other places. This was about 1550. Early in

the next century Escolano says, speaking of the wares of Manises, “that

in exchange for the faïences that Italy sends us from Pisa, we export to

that country cargoes of that of Manises.”

In the collection of baron Alphonse de Rothschild, of Paris, is a large

and well formed vase with serpent handles, under which the name PISA is

inscribed on tablets. It is much in the manner of the later Urbino

wares, having grotesques on a white ground, but more nearly approaching

those examples at South Kensington (nos. 321 and 323) having the arms of

the Medici, which we have ascribed in the large catalogue to Caffaggiolo

or Florence. It has been suggested that this vase may be of the Pesaro

fabrique, and that the word upon it was merely a variation in spelling

the first half of the name Pisa_ro_; but we see no reason for accepting

such an explanation or that Pisa should be denied the small honour of

having produced this example, the only one inscribed with her name.

There can be very little doubt that a manufactory of glazed earthenware

existed at PESARO or in its immediate outskirts from a very early

period, and that it probably succeeded to the works established there in

Roman times, the remains of which have occasionally been brought to

light; but with the exception of the recorded names of certain potters,

occurring in deeds and records which are preserved among the public

archives of the city, we are uninformed, and unable to recognize the

produce of these potteries or to know their characteristics.

Anterior to 1540 we have no signed and dated example, and should

therefore be reduced to the position of entire ignorance as to their

previous productions but for the work of the indefatigable archæologist

Giambattista Passeri. Born in 1694 at Farnese in the Campagna di Roma

(where his father, of a patrician family of Pesaro, practised as a

physician) and educated at Rome, he subsequently settled in his parental

city and published the “Istoria delle pitture in Maiolica fatte in

Pesaro e in luoghi circonvicini,” in 1758. To him we are indebted for

the notice of the potters above alluded to, and in his work he gives us

an account of the mode pursued in the manufacture, much of which however

he appears to have derived from the earlier manuscript of Piccolpasso.

He tells us that the large early bacili enriched with a _madreperla_

lustre were the produce of Pesaro; and in corroboration states that many

of them are painted with the coats of arms and portraits of the members

of noble Pesarese families, instancing one with the arms of the

“Bergnana” family then preserved in the Casa Olivieri. It has been

objected that Passeri was influenced by local partiality in favour of

the native city of his family, and that he ascribed to her furnaces what

may in equal likelihood have been produced at Gubbio or Diruta; and the

discovery of a few pieces of lustred ware, marked as the produce of the

latter _Castello_ in the middle of the 16th century, was hailed by

several critics as conclusive evidence against his assertion.

It appears to the writer that such evidence is equally unsatisfactory,

inasmuch as the works in question were produced some century and a half

anterior to the earliest dated piece of Diruta ware. Passeri wrote in

the middle of the last century, when the art was no longer in existence

and its specimens only preserved in the cabinets of the curious; but he

was a man of erudition and research and probably had means of obtaining

information with which we are unacquainted; we think therefore that as

his statements have not yet been met by proofs of their incorrectness,

or by counter-statements of greater weight, we are bound to accept them

until additional light be thrown upon the subject. He tells us that

remains of antique furnaces and ruins of a vase shop of classic times,

with fragments of red and black wares and lamps marked with the letter

G, were found in the locality known as the “Gabbice” where the

Lanfranchi works were afterwards established in the 16th century, and

where the earth is of fine quality. He traces the use of this earth in

the time of the Goths, and states that it again revived under the

government of the Malatesta; and that soon afterwards a mode of adorning

churches was adopted by the insertion of discs of earthenware at first

simply glazed with the oxide of lead, but that coloured ones were

subsequently used.

The wares were made by covering the crude baked clay with a slip or

_engobe_ of white earth, the “_terra di San Giovanni_” from Siena, or

with that of Verona, and glazing it with “_marzacotto_,” a mixture of

oxide of lead, sand and potash. The colours, used were yellow, green,

manganese black, and cobalt blue (from the “_zaffara_” of the Levant).

During the government of the Sforza the manufacture greatly developed

and was protected, for on 1st April 1486 a decree was made prohibiting

the introduction of earthenwares for sale from other parts, except the

jars for oil and water. This was confirmed in 1508. In 1510 a document

enumerates “_Maiolica_” as one of the trades of Pesaro, naming also

“_figoli_,” “_vasai_,” and “_boccalari_;” and we must bear in mind that

there is good reason for believing that at that period “Maiolica” was a

name technically understood as applying only to the lustred wares.

Passeri states that about 1450 the “_invetriatura_” or glazing had

already begun to perfect itself under the Sforza, when those early

pieces were produced decorated with “arabesque” borders encircling coats

of arms, portraits, and ideal heads outlined with manganese and

coloured with the “_madreperla_” lustre, leaving the flesh white. He

ascribes the improvement in the manufacture by the use of the

stanniferous glaze to the discovery of the Della Robbia, and adds that,

although the art of making it was known

[Illustration]

earlier at Florence, the fine ware was only introduced at Pesaro about

1500: near which period the beautiful portrait dish which we engrave

(no. 4078 at Kensington) was probably made. Here he again says that the

lustred ware derived its name from the pottery of Maiolica, and that the

earlier and coarser varieties were known as “_Mezza-maiolica_.” Guid’

Ubaldo II. greatly encouraged the art, and in 1552 granted to Bernardin

Gagliardino, Girolamo Lanfranchi, Ranaldo and others an edict

prohibiting the importation of other wares for sale, thus confirming the

former acts, which would appear to have fallen into neglect: and in the

year 1562, on the 1st of June, he granted another, confirming to Giacomo

Lanfranco a protection of his art or patent for applying real gold to

his wares.

Passeri then (after some further historical details) describes examples

of the glazed and enamelled pottery of Pesaro which he had seen, and the

earliest he refers to are floorings of tiles existing in his time, upon

one of which, brought to him by a workman, was inscribed

+----------------+

| adi 4 de Genar |

| o. in Pesaro. |

+----------------+

and on the other

+-------+

| 1502. |

+-------+

A considerable period elapses between this and the next dated example, a

plate, with the subject of Horatius Codes, inscribed,--

_Orazio solo contro Toscana tutta._

_Fatto in Pesaro. 1541._

On another (a companion of a plate preserved in the Louvre),

_l Pianetto di Marte_

_fatto in Pesaro 1542_

_in bottega da Mastro Gironimo Vasaro. I.P._

He further mentions a plate having a mark consisting of the initials O A

connected by a cross, and a bas-relief with the same initials which

again occur sculptured over a door, which he suggests may have been that

of the potter’s house; we should, however, be more disposed to regard it

as a conventual or cathedral monogram.

We will now leave the work of Passeri and quote another record of the

pottery made at Pesaro a short time before the 16th century, returning

to him for information on the revival of the art at that locality in the

last.

Dennistoun in his history of the dukes of Urbino (vol. 3, p. 388)

refers to a letter among the diplomatic archives of the duchy preserved

at Florence dated 1474, from pope Sextus IV. in which he thanks Costanzo

Sforza, lord of Pesaro, for a present of

[Illustration]

most elegantly wrought earthen vases which for the donor’s sake are

prized as much as gold or silver instead of earthenware. Another letter

from Lorenzo the magnificent to Roberto Malatesta of Pesaro, thanking

him for a similar present, says, “they please me entirely by their

perfection and rarity, being quite novelties in these parts, and are

valued more than if of silver, the donor’s arms serving daily to recall

their origin.” There is every reason for assuming that both these

presents consisted of wares produced at the Pesaro furnaces.

These wares must have been looked upon as “novelties” at Florence, not

simply because they were painted on flat surfaces covered with

stanniferous glaze (for Luca della Robbia had done this many years

before) but because, being decorated with rich metallic glaze and

madreperla lustre, they probably were novelties to the Florentines as

productions of an Italian pottery. If this inference be correct, may not

another be drawn from it? That these presents being the produce of

Pesaro, and enriched with the metallic lustre, we may derive from the

whole matter an additional proof that the early lustred pieces, whose

origin has been disputed, were really made at that city; and that we may

agree with Passeri in ascribing the well-known “bacili” to that place.

Engraved p. 107 is a fine lustred _bacile_ at South Kensington, probably

of Pesaro ware, and about the year 1510.

The earliest dated Pesaro piece is in the possession of the writer. It

is a “_fruttiera_” which is painted the creation of animals by the

Almighty, Who, moving in the midst, is surrounded by animals rising out

of the ground; a distant landscape, with a town (!) on the side of a

steep mountain, forms the background.

On the reverse is inscribed as in the woodcut on the next page,

1540.

_Chrianite anim_

_allis Christtus_

_fatto in Pesaro._

We have seen some large dishes decorated with raised masks, strapwork,

&c. and painted with grotesques on a white ground, and subject panels,

and other grandiose pieces which are ascribed to the Urbino artists, but

which may in equal likelihood be attributed to the Lanfranchi of Pesaro.

A triangular plateau in the possession of Mrs. Hope has the character

of their finest productions.

[Illustration]

The art at Pesaro rapidly declined after 1560, wanting the encouragement

of a reigning ducal court; and Passeri ascribes much evil influence to

what he considers the bad taste of preferring the unmeaning designs of

the oriental porcelain, which was greatly prized by the wealthy, and the

painting after the prints of the later German school of Sadeler, &c. to

the grander works of the old masters; the landscapes were, however, well

executed. He gives us also a history of the revival of the manufacture

in his own time, under the influence and encouragement of the cardinal

prelate Ludovico Merlini. In 1718 there was only one potter at Pesaro,

Alfonzo Marzi, who produced the most ordinary wares. In 1757 signor

Giuseppe Bertolucci, an accomplished ceramist of Urbania, in conjunction

with signor Francesco di Fattori, engaged workmen and artists and

commenced a fabrique, but it was soon abandoned. Again in 1763 signors

Antonio Casali and Filippo Antonio Caligari, both of Lodi, came to

Pesaro and were joined by Pietro Lei da Sassuolo of Modena, an able

painter on Maiolica; they established a fabrique producing wares of

great excellence hardly to be distinguished from the Chinese. In the

Debruge-Labarte collection was a one-handled jug or pot, painted with

flowers in white medallions on a blue ground, and on the foot engraven

in the paste--

“Pesaro 1771.”

A manufacture at present exists of painted tiles for pavement, removed

to Pesaro from Urbania, and which at one time produced vases and plates

in the manner of the Urbino istoriati pieces as also lustred wares after

the style of M. Giorgio. It has, we are informed, ceased making these

imitations and now confines itself to the first-named class of goods.

Maiolica · 第 11 / 16 章