byzantine polychrome pottery

8/6/2019 Byzantine Polychrome Pottery

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/byzantine-polychrome-pottery 1/6

Byzantine Polychrome PotteryAuthor(s): D. Talbot RiceSource: The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs, Vol. 61, No. 357 (Dec., 1932), pp. 277+280-282+287Published by: The Burlington Magazine Publications, Ltd.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/865310 .

Accessed: 07/05/2011 15:29

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bmpl. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Burlington Magazine Publications, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend

access to The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs.

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bmpl

http://www.jstor.org/stable/865310?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp



http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/865310?origin=JSTOR-pdf




BYZANTINE POLYCHROME POTTERYBY D. TALBOT RICE

HE subject of Byzantine ceramicsconstitutes a field in which our

knowledge is still very incomplete,but now that scientific excavations

dealing with the medieval period inthe Nearer East are being undertaken on a more

extensive scale, our fund of information is slowly

accumulating and we are coming to realize that

Byzantium boasted a very definite ceramic art of

her own. In addition to sgraffito and paintedwares closely related to those of Persia and

Egypt, but developed along individual lines,

Byzantine culture was responsible for a purelyoriginal group, where the decoration of variouscolours was laid directly upon the body, the whole

being coated with a thin layer of transparent

glaze. Blue, brown, yellow, green, gold leaf,and an upstanding tomato red are the mostcharacteristic colours The decoration is oftenoutlined in manganese or black. The body is

invariably fine and delicate, the colour varyingfrom white, to pink, yellow or grey in different

regions; it is, however, never red or heavy.The ware was used for diverse purposes, for

we find vessels of every shape, for table, per-haps also for ecclesiastical uses, ornamental

plaques intended for wall decoration or as borders

and plaques bearing separate figure subjects,which may be classed as " ikons." The most

prolific finds were made at Patleina in Bulgariabefore the war; they include vessels, ornamental

plaques and " ikons," among them the superbPortrait of St. Theodore, which has been pub-lished more than once,' all dated on archaeologicalgrounds to the ninth or tenth century. Somefine revetment plaques [PLATEII] and fragmentsof vessels, dated to the eleventh century at

latest, were found during the British Academyexcavations at Constantinople in 1928, and theyare, in general, so akin to the Patleina ones thatthere can be no doubt that the two are closely

related. Further fragments of the same familywere unearthed by the author around the Churchof the Myrelaion at Constantinople in 1930, while

others, belonging to the twelfth century, werefound by Macridy Bey of the Ottoman Museum,during British excavations in the Church of St.

Mary Panachrantos in the same city.2 Portionof a plaque, bearing the figure of a Saint, prob-ably also from Constantinople, was published byEbersolt in Byzantion (vi, 1931, p. 559). Andnow Dr. Miatev, of the National Museum of

Sofia, has published further finds from the roundchurch of Preslav, which date from the end ofthe ninth or the beginning of the tenth cen-

tury. They comprise fragments of vessels andof plaques, some bearing naturalistic or formal

designs [PLATE I, E, F and G] some inscriptions,some figures of animals or Saints [PLATE I, J]l

and Fig. below. The style, the ornament andthe technique are well nigh identical with whatwe see nearby at Patleina, so that we may con-clude that these two groups are to be attributedto an art which was in general popularity andwhich was well known in Bulgaria when

Preslav was the capital of the land (893-972).

o a•L

_•I11

1I o1 II

oI *II * *1 OO Ia

--LLF

10o0.

O jo

00 0Io0 a o jj

0F

o 0

al

.

0C.

c•IoIoU-10

ia

-0 0laI

F2to 'I- 1 -II-

The pottery from both Bulgarian sites isrelated to that from Constantinople, though thereare certain differences between the various finds

1 Filow: " L'ancien Art Bulgare," Berne, 1919, pl. xlix.

Grabar: " Les Influences Orientales dans l'Art Balkanique,"1928, pl. i. D. Talbot Rice: " Byzantine Glazed Pottery,"1930. Frontispiece. A full bibliography of the subject isgiven here.

2 Archdiologischer Anzeiger, 1929, pp. 343 ff. Also articleby the author in Antiquity, iv, No. 16, December 1930, entitled" British Excavations at Constantinople."

3 K. Miatev: " The Round Church of Preslav," Sofia,1932, Ch. viii (in Bulgarian, with summary in French). Thephotographs reproduced here were kindly communicated byDr. Miatev.

S 28S

Hsiang'sAlbum

that practice was not uniform either at differentkilns or at different periods.

The conclusion is that Hsiang's Album, as

represented in extant copies, does not providea reliable basis for estimating the wares

portrayed, in respect of either form or colour.The reputed author's comments on technicaldetails are often mistaken. Bushell pointed out

errors, and the editors of the recent publicationhave made further corrections.



ByzantinePolychromeottery

in the latter city which suggest that they are not

only of different ages but were also made indifferent workshops, albeit, under the same

inspiration. Thus there is more redand gold onthe plaques from the Myrelaion than on anyothers known; those from Panachrantos are

bright and shiny [PLATE I, A, B], whereas those

from the region of the great palace are matt intexture [PLATEII] ; the Saint published by Eber-solt is executed in much thinner and washiercolours than are other plaques from Constanti-nople or Bulgaria. Moreover, it is, as Ebersoltpoints out,.strikingly Hellenistic in style, where-as the Patleina St. Theodore is typically"Oriental." That the Hellenistic and "Oriental"

styles developed along contemporary lines in

Byzantine lands is well known, but in this caseit is tempting to suggest that the differencesare to be accounted for by date, and, as the St.Theodore is to be assigned to the ninth-tenth

century, the Constantinople plaque may perhapsbe

putback before the iconoclast

period.Various suggestions have been put forwardasto the origin and manufacture of this wa're.Grabarthought that the Patleina examples weremade by Eastern workmen, either in the East orafter their immigration to Bulgaria; Strzygowskiwas of much the same opinion, but consideredthe masters Armenian; the author of this article

suggested that the examples from the region ofthe great palace at Constantinople were made at

Nicaea, the Turkish Isnic, and that they were thedirect precursors of the famous Turkish potteryformerly known as " Rhodian." But untilMiatev's excavations of 1928, no actual kiln sitehad been found. He, however, was lucky

enough to discover close to the church somewasters, heaps of clay, vessels containing colourand glazing material, and other debris which

pointed to the existence on the spot of a potter'sworkshop. It is one of the most important dis-coveries made in connexion with Byzantineceramics, for it tells us where some, at least, ofthe examples that we know were made, but itstill leaves us in doubt as to who the workerswere and as to whether those of Bulgaria werethe same as those whose products we find at

Constantinople.I have pointed out elsewhere that many of the

motives which we see on the plaques from the

palace region at Constantinople are of an Hellen-

istic character [PLATE II], and that others are tobe associated with ;Moslem, rather than with

Sasanian art in the Near East [PLATE I, H].And though there can be no doubt of the Sasanianaffinities of many of the Bulgarian examples,there seems no reason to believe that any of the

specimens that we know or even their predeces-sors are contemporary with the Sasanian

dynasty. They are, it would seem, one and all

of a much laterdate, and though they owe a greatdebt to Sasanian art, there is no reason to sup-pose that this debt is a directone. We see manyof the same motives developed and used inMoslem art as we see in Bulgaria, and we mustconclude that it was by way of Moslem art ofSasanian style that they reached the West.

But though the motives are often enough ofEastern inspiration, the technique, the coloursand style are peculiar, as.far as we know at pre-sent, to Bulgaria and Constantinople, though ithas been suggested that similar wares might befound in Armenia. Nothing that could everbe mistaken as an example of the ware has

appeared in the East, in Egypt, Mesopotamia,Syria or Persia, and the possibility that modelswere imported from these countries in largequantities is thus definitely excluded. It seems

equally rash to conclude that artisans from oneor other of these lands were entirely responsiblefor the work. A few designers may have come

westward, but had more than avery

few of thesebeen potters at this early, ninth-century date,one would surely expect to meet in the West a

style and technique of a definitely easterncharacter in addition to an Eastern motive ofdecoration. In the thirteenth and fourteenthcenturies we see so close a relationship betweenthe sgraffito potteries of Byzantine lands, of

Egypt and of Persia, that the transportnot onlyof numerousvessels, but also,of the potters them-

selves, can hardly be doubted, but this is neverthe case with regard to the polychrome ceramicswhich we are discussing. We prefer to con-clude in this case that the models reached theWest in the form of drawings, of textiles, and of

perhaps a very few actual vessels, both of bakedclay and of metal.

It has usually been suggested that this Eastern

inspiration came to Bulgaria owing to a directcommunication between the Balkans and the

East, independentof Constantinople. But recentdiscoveries in the two areas show exampleswhich are so close (see PLATE I, A-F), that aconnexion between the Byza'ntineand the Bul-

garian capitals is not to be doubted. In addition,we have examples from Constantinople which

suggest a direct Moslem inspiration [PLATE I,

H], so that there is no reason to suppose a round-about connexion with the East by way of Bul-

garia. We must hence conclude that Bulgaria

was influenced from the East, in some cases atleast, by way of Constantinople, though theexistence of an additional and independent route

is not, of course, to be denied.In spite of the fact that the Hellenistic style

which we see at Constantinople does not seem

to have been popular in Bulgaria, there is everyreason to suppose that the two groups shared acommon origin. We have attempted to show

28z



SHORTER NOTICESA REDISCOVERED PICTURE BY JAN

LIEVENS.-In the Liechtenstein Gallery, Vienna,is a Portrait of a Girl, attributed until now to Rem-brandt's pupil, Ferdinand Bol. On the back of this

picture is an old inscription " Rembrandt " and the

words " Prince Regniant Joseph Wenceslaus deLichtenstein " (died 1772) [PLATE'A].

At the request of the author, Professor Eigen-berger of Vienna was so kind as to have the picturecleaned. After the removal of dirt and over paint-ings, one had the impression that the technique ofthe painting recalled not so much Bol's manner asthat of Lievens. The background and the coloursare so thin that the brownish red wood shines

through. This effect is especially remarkable in the

part where the girl's flowing light hair lies on hershoulder. The hair is held together by a red bandwith yellow spots. Moreover, a certain stiffness of

profile is characteristic of Lievens, for he was morea technical expert than a master portraitist like,Rembrandt.

The attribution to Lievens receives further supportby a fact hitherto unknown. The Vienna picture isa counterpart of the etching, Rov. 25, by the master

[PLATE B]. This etching belongs to a series, added

to by Lievens about 1637, at Antwerp, achieved byworking up some early pictures after the more elegantmanner of Van Dyck's etchings. No. 25 is, there-

fore, the reproduction of a picture belonging to the

master's early period. This coincidence and,above all, the technique of the painting which

betrays the hand of the clever friend of Rembrandt,lead us to assume that the picture in Vienna was

painted about 1631-32.It should be mentioned that, in the eighteenth

century, the painting was extended to the right and

left by 14 mm., and at the foot by 35 mm.; these

parts are now covered over by dark paint, so thatthe picture is once more in its original form.

CARL ERNSTKO)HNE

ByzantinePolychromeottery

that the prototypes are not to be sought in theEast (Mesopotamia, Persia, Syria, Egypt). ButArmenia is still an unknown quantity; Anatoliastill remains unexplored in this respect; we knowall too little of Bulgaria and the soil of Con-

stantinople, the great mother city of the middle

ages, has but been scratched. And though thelatter area must always be regarded as the

greatest emporium, to which of them must be

assigned the invention of our group will only beknown when further and much more extensiveexcavations have been undertaken.

THE STEFAN VON AUSPITZ COLLECTION.-In Vienna, to be sure, the collecting of fine

pictures and other works of art has traditions of

long standing: and no greater praise could beaccorded to the collection, formed in the last thirtyyears or so by Herr Stefan von Auspitz, than sayingthat it worthily upheld those traditions. The break-up of the collection is one of the direct consequencesof the acute financial crisis which developed inVienna during the spring and summer of 1931; andwe owe it to these tragic circumstances that someof the finest paintings in the collection should now,by courtesy of Herr Walter Bachstitz, be on exhibi-tion in London, at Messrs. Agnew's Galleries.

The selection on view-comprising some thirtypictures-gives a good idea of the Viennese collec-

tor's catholicity of taste and exacting standard ofartistic excellence. Within the space at our dis-

posal, it would be impossible to deal adequately withall the points, which suggest themselves for dis-cussion by the several pictures,: and we will there-fore in the main restrict ourselves to a few com-ments on those of the examples of which we are ableto give reproductions.

The noble portrait of an old woman by Memling(PLATE I, A) will probably be new to most visitors tothe exhibition. Though it belonged for years

to.a

well-known Berlin collection, that of the late Herrvon Hollitscher, it was never, so far as I am aware,either then or when it belonged to Herr von Auspitzlent to any public exhibition, and has indeed but

comparatively recently been introduced by Dr.Friedlander into art literature.' The singularlyimposing simplicity of design, and powerful inter-

pretation of character give the panel a place apartamong Memling's works as a portrait painter, anddenote indeed the closest point of affinity to, themanner of Rogier van der Weyden ever reached bythe Bruges master. As regards the date of this

work, it has been thought that it should be placedin the neighbourhood of works such as the Chats-worth triptych and the Danzig altarpiece, both ofthem painted about 1470 : and characteristics of styleno less than certain details of costume may be said

entirely to bear out this suggestion.A later Netherlandish master who may be seen at

the exhibition to particular advantage is Joos vanCleve. There is, for one thing, by him the charminglyfantaisiste half-length of Lucretia stabbing herself,a comparatively early work, dating from about

1520and still entirely conceived in the Gothic spirit-

the spirit, that is, of flamboyant Gothic. There isfurther the lovely Madonna (PLATEI, B) which dis-

closes the full extent of the approach to the idealsof the Italian Renaissance which, in the course ofthe next twenty years, was made by the master.

Indeed, I think it possible to point to the verypicture by Raphael which haunted the artist's

imagination when he conceived his design: it was,surely, the Bridgewater Madonna, the Infant Christin which is very distinctly echoed in the presentpicture. Of course, Joos van Cleve, being the fine

artist that he is, had no need to follow his modelslavishly: but the source from which he got his cue

is, to my mind, quite unmistakable. The picture has

extraordinary charm of positive, harmonious colour :

and altogether serves to demonstrate once againhow Joos van Cleve, unlike so many contemporaryFlemish artists, managed to retain an indisputable

1 See M. J. Friedliinder," Altniederliindische Malerei," Vol.

vi, No. 139.

287



Fragments of Revetment Plaques from Constantinople, showing Hellenistic motives

Plate II. Byzantine Polychrome Pottery

A-Portrait of a Girl, here identified as by

Jan Lievens. Panel, 46.7 by 36.2 (Liechten-stein Gallery, Vienna)

B-Portrait of a Girl. Etching by Jan Lievens (Rov.,No. 25)

Shorter Notices: A rediscoveredPicture by Jan Lievens

byzantine polychrome pottery

Documents