CHAPTER XIII.

URBINO.

Although not to be ranked with the earliest seats of the manufacture of

artistic pottery in Italy, there is no place so much associated with

these beautiful productions of the potter’s art as the small city of

Urbino, whence, indeed, was derived one of the names by which it is

distinguished. Crowning a steep among the many hills of Umbria,

remarkable in the landscape from her picturesque position and the

towering palace of her dukes, Urbino is one of those very curious cities

with which Italy abounds, and which centre round themselves an

individual history of the greatest interest. What giants of art and of

literature were born or nurtured in that little town! now so neglected

and unknown. He who, climbing the steep ascent and tortuous narrow

streets, has visited the deserted halls and richly decorated cabinets of

her palace, and has travelled through the beauteous scenery of her

neighbourhood, to where the delicious valley of the Tiber bursts upon

the sight, will never forget the impressions that they leave.

In proof of the antiquity of ceramic industry of a more ordinary kind in

the vicinity of this city, Pungileoni tells us that an antique amphora

was not long since discovered in the grounds of the Villa Gaisa, hard by

the river Isauro, and that near to it were also found remains of a

potter’s furnace. This, however, does not prove the early establishment

of a fabrique of glazed or enamelled decorative wares. Marryat states

that in a register of Urbino dated 1477 one Giovanni di Donino Garducci

is mentioned as a potter of that place, but it is not till 1501 that

any further record occurs. In that year an assortment of vases, dishes,

&c. were ordered to be made for the use of the cardinal di Carpaccio,

and among them are mentioned “bacili” having the arms of the cardinal in

the centre, and water “boccali” or jugs with little lions on the covers.

The earliest pieces now known to us, which can with any certainty be

ascribed to the potteries of Urbino, are probably those of the

Gonzaga-Este service, which are undoubtedly the work of Nicola da

Urbino; these must have been painted between the period of the marriage

of the marquis with Isabella d’ Este, in 1490, and before her death in

1539.

We have no account of the precise date at which the Pellipario,

afterwards Fontana, family came from Castel Durante and settled at

Urbino, but we have documentary proof that “Guido Niccolai Pellipario

figulo da Durante,” or “Guido, son of Nicola Pellipario, potter of

Durante,” was established at Urbino in 1520. From this period through

the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries a number of pieces are dated and

signed by various artists, or as having been made in the boteghe of

various maestri of Urbino.

We are obliged to refer the reader to the large catalogue, in detail, of

the South Kensington collection of maiolica, for an account of the works

of the more important of these artists under their respective names,

beginning with Nicola as the earliest of whom we have known examples;

the Fontana family, and of Guido Durantino; the works of Fra Xanto; of

Francesco Durantino; of the Patanazzi; not omitting those of other

artists of the fabrique, of whom we have smaller record in remaining

examples or documentary history. There seems little doubt that the

revival or perhaps the first introduction of artistic ceramic

manufacture to Urbino was under the influence of Guidobaldo I., and that

many of the potters and nearly all the more important artists immigrated

from Castel Durante. Long lists of names have been published by

Raffaelli, but it is difficult to distinguish between the more ordinary

potters and the artists, whose works we are unable to recognise from the

absence of signed specimens. Our space here will allow us to do little

more than mention their names.

Considerable uncertainty exists and some confusion has arisen among

connoisseurs in respect to the works of the very able artist Nicola da

Urbino, and as to his connection with the Fontana family and fabrique at

Urbino, the latter still a disputed and undecided question; as also to

the marks on various pieces attributable to his hand only, but which

have been assigned by M. Jacquemart to the fabrique of Ferrara, and by

other writers to various painters and localities. There are no pieces

marked or signed by this artist in the South Kensington museum, but it

possesses some examples of his work. A certain similarity in some of his

less careful pieces has caused them, not unfrequently, to be attributed

to Xanto, but a closer study of his manner will show it to be really

very distinct.

The first signed piece is in the British museum, a plate, representing a

sacrifice to Diana, and inscribed on the reverse as in the opposite

woodcut. Comparing this mark with those of the Gonzaga-Este service, Mr.

Franks arrived at the conclusion that they also were painted by Nicola

in his most careful manner; the clue thus found, he ingeniously

deciphered the monogram on the beautiful fragment in the Sauvageot

collection painted with a group from the Parnassus of Raffaelle, as

clearly and unmistakably by the same hand.

The manner of Nicola is remarkable for a sharp and careful outline of

the figures, the features clearly defined but with much delicacy of

touch, the eyes, mouth, and nostrils denoted by a clear black spot, the

faces oval, derived from the Greek model, a free use of yellow and a

pale yellow green, a tightening of the ankle and a peculiar rounding of

the knee, the hair and beard of the older heads heightened with white;

the architecture bright and distinct; the landscape background somewhat

carefully rendered in dark blue against a golden sky; and lastly, the

stems of the trees, strangely tortuous, are coloured brown, strongly

marked with black lines, as also are the rolled up clouds; these are

treated in a manner not very true to nature.

[Illustration]

Few Maiolica painters have produced works of greater beauty than the

plates of the Gonzaga-Este service, which are equally excellent in the

quality of glaze and the brilliancy of colour.

With regard to the Fontana family, chiefs among Italian ceramic artists,

we quote from the notice by Mr. Robinson appended to the Soulages

catalogue. He tells us that “The celebrity of one member of this family

has been long established by common consent. Orazio Fontana has always

occupied the highest place in the scanty list of Maiolica artists,

although at the same time nothing was definitely known of his works.

Unlike their contemporary, Xanto, the Fontana seem but rarely to have

signed their productions, and consequently their reputation as yet rests

almost entirely on tradition, on incidental notices in writings which

date back to the age in which they flourished, and on facts extracted

at a recent period from local records. No connected account of this

family has as yet been attempted, although the materials are somewhat

less scanty than usual. There can be no doubt that a considerable

proportion of the products of the Fontana ‘boteghe’ is still extant, and

that future observations will throw light on much that is now obscure in

the history of this notable race of industrial artists. Orazio Fontana,

whose renown seems to have completely eclipsed that of the other members

of his family and in fact of all the other Urbinese artists, is first

mentioned by Baldi, at the beginning of the seventeenth century, in his

eulogy of the state of Urbino pronounced before duke Francesco Maria

II.” “From documents cited by Raffaelli, it is established beyond doubt

that the original family name was _Pellipario_, of Castel Durante,

Fontana being an adopted surname; and it is not immaterial to observe

that down to the latest mention of any one of the family (in 1605) they

are invariably described as of Castel Durante.” “The Fontana were

undoubtedly manufacturers as well as artists, _i.e._, they were the

proprietors of ‘vaserie.’ Of the first Nicola, as we have only a brief

incidental notice, nothing positive can be affirmed: but with respect to

his son Guido, we have the testimony both of works still extant, and of

contemporary documents. We know also that Guido’s son Orazio also had a

manufactory of his own, and the fact is established, that between 1565

and 1571 there were two distinct Fontana manufactories,--those of father

and son. What became of Orazio’s establishment after his death, whether

continued by his brother Camillo, or reunited to that of the father,

there is no evidence to show. With respect to the remaining members of

the family, our information is of the scantiest kind. Camillo, who was

inferior in reputation as a painter only to his elder brother, appears

to have been invited to Ferrara by duke Alfonso II., and to have

introduced the Maiolica manufacture into that city. Of Nicola, the third

(?) son, we have only incidental mention in a legal document, showing

that he was alive in the year 1570. Guido, son of Camillo, lived till

1605; and of Flaminio, who may either have been son of Camillo or of

Nicola, Dennistoun’s vague notice asserting his settlement in Florence

is all I have been able to collect. No signed pieces of Camillo,

Flaminio, Nicola the second, or Guido the second, have as yet been

observed.

“A considerable proportion of the Fontana maiolica is doubtless still

extant; and it is desirable to endeavour to identify the works of the

individual members of the family, without which the mere knowledge of

their existence is of very little moment; but this is no easy task;

although specimens from the hands of one or other of them are to be

undoubtedly found in almost every collection, the work of comparison and

collation has as yet been scarcely attempted. The similarity of style

and technical characteristics of the several artists moreover, working

as they did with the same colours on the same quality of enamel ground,

and doubtless in intimate communication with each other, resolves itself

into such a strong family resemblance, that it will require the most

minute and careful observation, unremittingly continued, ere the

authorship of the several specimens can be determined with anything like

certainty. The evidence of signed specimens is of course the most to be

relied on, and is indeed indispensable in giving the clue to complete

identification in the first instance; but in the case of the Fontana

family a difficulty presents itself which should be noticed in the

outset. This difficulty arises in determining the authorship of the

pieces signed ‘_Fatto in botega_,’ &c. &c.; a mode of signature, in

fact, which proves very little in determining individual

characteristics, inasmuch as apparently nearly all the works so

inscribed are painted by other hands than that of the proprietor of the

Vaseria. In cases, however, in which the artist has actually signed or

initialed pieces with his own name, of course no such difficulty exists,

but the certainty acquired by this positive evidence is as yet confined

in the case of the Fontana family to their greatest name, Orazio.” We

regret that our limits prevent further quotation from Mr. Robinson’s

valuable remarks.

It is a matter of uncertainty whether Guido Fontana and Guido Durantino

were the same person or rival maestri; and we are disposed to the former

opinion, from the fact that in the documents quoted by Pungileoni no

other “Vasaio” named Guido, and of Castel Durante, is named. The pieces

inscribed as having been made in their boteghe although painted by

different hands may, by the wording of their inscriptions afford some

explanation; thus, on the Sta. Cecilia plate painted by Nicola, he

[Illustration]

writes in 1528, “_fata in botega di Guido da Castello d’Urante in

Urbino_,” from which we argue a connexion with the Fontana.

Unfortunately, we know no piece signed as actually painted by the hand

of Guido Fontana, but as he took that cognomen after settling in Urbino

it would be more probable that he would himself apply it on his own

work; whereas Nicola (presumably his father), on a piece of earlier

date, retained the name of their native _castello_. By others the

botega would long be known as that of the “durantini,” and that it

retained that appellation

[Illustration]

even in the following generation is proved by the occasional reference

to Orazio Fontana as of Castel Durante. We give a woodcut of an example

of the highest quality; a pilgrim’s bottle, at South Kensington, no.

8408.

The manner of the painter of these pieces approaches very much to that

of Orazio but is less refined and rich in colouring wanting that harmony

and power of expression for which he was remarkable; the drawing is more

correct and careful than on some of Orazio’s work, but is more dry and

on the surface; there is great force and movement in the figures and the

landscape backgrounds are finished with much care and effect, sometimes

covering the whole piece; the foliage of the trees is also well

rendered.

The celebrated vases made for the spezieria of the duke were produced at

the Fontana fabrique, and subsequently presented to the Santa Casa at

Loreto where many of them are still preserved. Those shown to the writer

on his visit to that celebrated shrine some few years since did not

strike him as being of such extraordinary beauty and great artistic

excellence, as the high-flown eulogy bestowed upon them by some writers

would have led him to expect. The majority of the pieces are drug pots

of a not unusual form, but all or nearly all of them are “istoriati,”

instead of being, as is generally the case, simply decorated with

“trofei,” “foglie,” “grotesche,” the more usual and less costly

ornamentation. Some of the pieces have serpent handles, mask spouts, &c.

but he vainly looked for the magnificent vases of unsurpassed beauty,

nor indeed did he see anything equal to the shaped pieces preserved in

the Bargello at Florence. The work of the well-known hands of the

Fontana fabrique is clearly recognisable, and several pieces are

probably by Orazio. Some, more important, preserved in a low press were

finer examples. We have said that the pieces individually are not so

striking but taken as a whole it is a very remarkable service, said to

have originally numbered 380 vases, all painted with subjects after the

designs of Battista Franco, Giulio Romano, Angelo, and Raffaelle; and as

the work of one private artistic pottery in the comparatively remote

capital of a small duchy, it bears no slight testimony to the

extraordinary development of every branch of art-industry in the various

districts of Italy during the sixteenth century. They were made by

order of Guidobaldo II., but on the accession of Francesco Maria II. in

1574 he found the financial condition of the duchy in a state so

embarrassed that he was obliged to devote less attention to the

encouragement of art. He abdicated in favour of the Holy See and died in

1631. The vases of the Spezieria were presented to our Lady of Loreto,

while his valuable art collections were removed to Florence.

On the vases of Loreto, says Mr. Marryat, “the subjects are the four

evangelists, the twelve apostles, St. John, St. Paul, Susannah and Job.

The others represent incidents in the Old Testament, actions of the

Romans, their naval battles and the metamorphoses of Ovid. On

eighty-five of the vases are pourtrayed the games of children, each

differing from the other. These vases are highly prized for their beauty

as well as for their variety. They have been engraved by Bartoli. A

Grand Duke of Florence was so desirous of purchasing them, that he

proposed giving in exchange a like number of silver vessels of equal

weight; while Christina of Sweden was known to say, that of all the

treasures of the Santa Casa she esteemed these the most. Louis XIV. is

reported to have offered for the four evangelists and St. Paul an equal

number of gold statues.”

With his other art treasures the ornamental vases and vessels of the

_credenza_, among which were doubtless some of the choicest productions

of the Urbino furnaces made for Guidobaldo, must have been in great part

removed to Florence; and there accordingly we find some remarkable

specimens. For many years neglected, these noble pieces were placed

almost out of observation on the top of cases which contained the

Etruscan and other antique vases in the gallery of the Uffizi. When more

general interest was excited on the subject of the renaissance pottery

these examples were removed to another room. They now occupy central

cases in one of the rooms of the Bargello, used as a museum of art

objects, and form a magnificent assemblage of vases, ewers, vasques,

pilgrim’s bottles, and other shaped pieces, dishes, and salvers,

perhaps the richest that has descended collectively to our days, and

among which may be recognised the works of all the more important

ceramic artists of Urbino.

Portions of a magnificent service of the best period of Orazio Fontana’s

botega are dispersed in various collections, as also some pieces of

equally rich quality made after the same models, but which were probably

of another “credenza.” Two of the former were exhibited at the loan

exhibition in 1862, by baron Anthony de Rothschild. They are large oval

dishes with raised medallion centres, and having the surface, both

internally and outside, divided into panels by raised strap work

springing from masks, with ornamental moulded borders, &c. These panels,

edged with cartouche ornament, are painted with subjects from the

Spanish romance of Amadis de Gaul, and on the reverse are inscriptions

in that language corresponding with the panel illustrations. The central

subject is not of the same series, but represents boys shooting at a

target, on one dish, and warriors fighting, upon the other. The border

is painted with admirable Urbino grotesques on a brilliant white ground.

The size of these pieces is 2 ft. 2 in. by 1.8½ in.

It appears that the Fontana botega was neither founded nor maintained

although greatly encouraged and patronised by the duke Guidobaldo, but

was solely created by the enterprise and sustained by the united

industry of the family. Orazio died on the 3rd August 1571. By his will

he left his wife 400 scudi, &c. and power to remain in partnership with

his nephew Flaminio, with a view to the benefit of his only daughter,

Virginia, who had married into the Giunta family when young. We think

there is every probability that the fabrique was so continued, and that

a numerous class, having the character of the wares of the botega but of

inferior artistic merit and showing the general decadence of the period,

may with probability be attributed to it.

On many of the grand pieces of the Fontana fabrique the work of another

hand is seen, which differs from the acknowledged manner of Orazio.

They are among the most decorative productions of the factory, large

round dishes with grotesque borders on a white ground, shaped pieces

similarly decorated, and having panels of subject executed by the artist

in question; others also where the subject covers the whole surface of

the dish. We have no clue to the name of this able painter, but we would

venture to suggest the great probability that these were the work of

Camillo, who is said to have been an artist only inferior in merit to

Orazio himself. In manner they approach nearly to, and are difficult to

distinguish from, the finer examples of the Lanfranchi fabrique at

Pesaro; less powerful and broad than the work of Orazio, and less

careful in drawing than those ascribed to Guido, they approach the

former in the blending of the colours and rich soft effect of surface,

while a similar mode of rendering various objects, as stones, water,

trees, &c. pervades all three, with slight individual variations. A

peculiar elongation of the figures, and narrowing of the knee and ankle

joints are characteristics of this hand, as also a transparent golden

hue to the flesh.

We are almost wholly in the dark as to the clever painters of the

grotesques on a pure white ground which so charmingly decorate many of

the noblest productions of Orazio’s furnace. The work of two or more

hands is manifest on various pieces of the best period; one, perhaps the

most able, is constantly seen on pieces, the istoriati panels or

interiors of which are painted by Orazio himself or by the artist whose

works we have just considered, and may, perhaps, also have been by the

hand of the latter, a similar method of heightening with small strokes

of red colour being observable on both. Gironimo, by whom we have a

signed piece in the South Kensington museum, no. 4354, may have been

another, but his manner is of a somewhat later character.

Of Nicola, jun., we know nothing; he is mentioned in his father’s wills

made in 1570 and 1576; and that he was unfortunate or improvident would

seem probable from the fact that in the deed of contract between Orazio

and his father on the occasion of his setting up for himself in 1565 he

agrees to keep and provide for Domitilla and Flaminio, children of his

brother Nicola, for the space of three years.

Flaminio the nephew, son of Nicola, continued the works and was a

favourite of the dukes Guidobaldo and Francesco Maria; it is said that

the latter took him to Florence to teach and aid pupils studying under

Bartolomeo degli Ammanati, where he remained for some years. Under the

fabrique of Caffaggiolo we find pieces which may perhaps have been

produced under the influence of this member of the family. In form and

decoration with grotesques they are a poor reminiscence of the superior

works of an earlier period.

The work of another, a later and inferior hand, probably of the Fontana

fabrique, is abundant in collections; his manner is between that of the

Fontana and of the Patanazzi; free and effective, but loose and

careless; the Fontana pigments are used, and occasionally pieces occur

painted with greater pains. Many vases with serpent handles and other

shaped pieces were painted by this hand, of whose name we have no

record, and it would be only guessing to suggest that Guido Fontana,

junior, the son of Camillo, who died in 1605, may have been their

author.

Another important artist of the Urbino fabrique was FRANCESCO XANTO,

who, like Giorgio, adopted the unusual habit of signing in various forms

the greater number of the pieces which he painted. Although we cannot

but appreciate the modesty, the “Lamp of Sacrifice,” which induced so

many of the earlier and contemporary artists of the highest excellence

to refrain from attaching their names to the works of their hands, or at

the most to sign a few of their admirable productions in monogram, we

must regret their having used so much reserve, and that in consequence

conjecture must take so large a place in the history of this branch of

artistic handicraft.

We have little other information of this painter beyond what is conveyed

by the inscriptions on pieces by his hand.

His name is mentioned by Rog. Vincenzo Vanni, on the 29th March 1539, as

“Franciscus Xatis fictilinus vasorum pictor egregius.” A native of

Rovigo, he seems to have settled at Urbino and there produced all his

works. His true name, gathered from his varied signatures, would appear

to be Francesco Xanto Avelli da Rovigo, and the dates of his signed

works extend from 1530 to 1542, although it is highly probable that many

existing undated pieces were executed before, and perhaps after those

dates. His earlier works are generally more fully signed, while many of

the latter have only one or two initial letters. Works by Xanto are to

be found in almost every collection of any note, and among them are

examples of high artistic excellence, although very many betray want of

care and hasty execution. It appears that many of his pieces were

subsequently enriched with the golden and ruby lustre colour at the

botega of Mº Giorgio, and Mº N at Gubbio; and, indeed, it was mainly by

the observation of these, so distinctly painted and signed by Xanto at

Urbino, and to which the metallic _reflet_ had been added evidently by a

subsequent process, that it was inferred that the lustre was a special

enrichment applied at another fabrique to works painted elsewhere. Of

Xanto’s style and merits as an artist Mr. Robinson writes:

“Xanto’s works may be considered to represent perfectly the ‘Majoliche

istoriate,’ and he certainly had a talent for the arrangement of his

works in composition, nearly all his subjects being ‘pasticci’; the

various figures or groups introduced being the invention of other

artists copied with adroit variations over and over again, and made to

do duty in the most widely different characters. As an original artist,

if indeed he can be so considered, he may be classed with the more

mannered of the scholars of Raffaelle. His designs are generally from

classical or mythological subjects. Xanto’s execution, although

dexterous, is monotonous and mechanical; his scale of colouring is

crude and positive, full of violent oppositions; the only merit, if

merit it be, being that of a certain force and brightness of aspect; in

every other respect his colouring is commonplace, not to say

disagreeable even; blue, crude opaque yellow, and orange tints, and

bright verdigris green are the dominant hues, and are scattered over the

pieces in full unbroken masses, the yellow especially meeting the eye at

the first glance. In the unsigned pieces, before 1531, the glaze is

better and more transparent, the execution more delicate, and the

outline more hard and black than in the later specimens. Some of Xanto’s

wares are profusely enriched with metallic lustres, including the

beautiful ruby tint; these specimens, however, form but a small

per-centage of the entire number of his works extant. This class of

piece is, moreover, interesting from the fact that the iridescent

colours were obviously not of Xanto’s own production, but that on the

contrary, they were applied to his wares by Mº Giorgio, and the supposed

continuers of Giorgio’s ‘fabrique’ in Gubbio. Many pieces are extant,

which, in addition to Xanto’s own signature, nearly always written in

dark blue or olive tint, are likewise signed with the monagram N of the

Giorgio school in the lustre tint; and one specimen at least has been

observed which, though painted by Xanto, has been signed in the lustre

tint by Maestro Giorgio himself.”

We cannot entirely agree with this somewhat severe judgment upon his

artistic merits.

We have no evidence to confirm Passeri’s supposition that BATTISTA

FRANCO painted pieces and initialled them with the letters B. F. V. F.

That artist was called to Urbino in 1540, by Guidobaldo II., to make

designs for various pieces, and these initials are on some of the vases

in the Spezieria at Loreto. He returned to Venice where he died in 1561;

one of his cartoons for a plate is in the British museum, and others are

preserved.

Of FRANCESCO DURANTINO, of Urbino, we know nothing more than his signed

works, and one of these gives rise to the question whether he ought to

be ranked among the potters of Urbino, or as having a small

establishment of his own at Bagnolo, or Bagnara, near Perugia. A plate

in the British museum representing the meeting of Coriolanus and his

mother is signed “frācesco durantino 1544,” as in the woodcut.

[Illustration]

A yellow tone of flesh, flowing drapery, animals (particularly horses)

drawn with great vigour of action, a fine and delicate outline, with

careful execution but occasional weakness of effect and a peculiar

softness on some of the smaller and more distant figures, are

characteristic of this artist’s style: the landscapes are executed with

care and good effect. An example in the British museum has, however, all

the richness of colour and force of the works of the Fontana.

GUIDO MERLINGO or MERLINI or NERGLINO seems to have been a proprietor of

a botega in Urbino, although his name does not occur as the actual

painter.

In the Brunswick museum a dish representing Mark Antony is signed, “fate

in botega di Guido de Nerglino.” In the Louvre is a plate, subject

Judith and Holophernes, signed at the back, “ne 1551 fato in Botega de

Guido Merlino.”

CÆSARE DA FAENZA worked in his fabrique about 1536, as proved by an

agreement dated 1st January in that year, in which he is styled “Cæsare

Care Carii Faventinus.”

Among other recorded names are those of--

_Federigo di Giannantonio_, }

_Nicolo di Gabriele_, } who worked about 1530.

_Gian Maria Mariana_, }

_Simone di Antonio Mariani, about 1542._

_Rafaelle Ciarla_,

_Luca del fu Bartolomeo, about 1544_, _and_

_Guy, from Castel Durante_.

FRANCESCO SILVANO had a botega in Urbino, at which Xanto worked in 1541,

as proved by the signature on a plate representing the storming of

Goleta.

GEORGIO PICCHI or PICCI the younger, of the Durantine family, painted at

Urbino. Pieces signed by him are extant. Borders of Cupids among clouds

or covering the surface is a favourite decoration.

In the decline of the Urbino potteries must be placed the productions of

the members of the PATANATI or PATANAZZI family. They do not appear to

have succeeded to any of the former eminent artists as masters of a

fabrique, but painted at the establishment of Joseph Batista Boccione,

as we are informed by a signed example. Passeri only mentions them as

being of a noble family and as finding their names inscribed on

specimens which he instances. One of these is at South Kensington; a

large dish, no. 2612, signed ALF. P. F. VRBINI. 1606. The young

_Vincenzio_ is the last whose name occurs. Passeri cites a piece by him,

“Vincenzio Patanazzi da Urbino di eta d’anni tredici, 1620.”

Another piece by this youthful phenomenon is in the collection of

monsignore Cajani at Rome, representing the expulsion from paradise. It

is a most inferior production and not meritorious even for so young an

artist.

With the exception of some large dishes and a few others the wares of

Urbino, as a rule, are not ornamented on the reverse. The more usual

pieces are edged with a yellow line which is repeated round the foot or

central hollow, in the middle of which the titular inscription or date

is written in manganese black, dark olive, or blue colour. The paste is

sometimes of a pink hue, produced by the colour of the clay shining

through the glaze, but in other cases of a purer white. In the “sopra

bianco” grotesques the ground is rendered unusually white by an

additional surface of _terra di Vicenza_ or _bianco di Ferrara_; the

glaze is of fine quality and even surface. It may be here noticed that

the wares known of the Lanfranco fabrique at Pesaro have similar

characteristics, and it is not possible to distinguish between them.

That wares of a better class were occasionally produced at Urbino during

the last century is proved by a lamp in the South Kensington collection,

no. 6856; made, as the inscription tells us, at the _Fabrica di Majolica

fina_, which seems to have been established or conducted in that city in

1773 by a French artist named Rolet. We hear of him previously at Borgo

San Sepolcro in 1771, but all further record of his productions or his

success is unknown.

We are not aware that Urbino at present produces any artistic pottery.

Maiolica · 第 13 / 16 章