ITEM: Fragment of Amphora (neck)

DATE: 550-500BCE1
FOUND: Vulci?
PROVENANCE:
Essex, England (Charles Eyre): 1830’s
London, England (British Museum): 1997 – Now
DIMENSIONS:
Height: 14cm
Length: 10cm
Width: 6.5cm
DESIGN:
Band of leaves on the rim.
Two panthers with one head on the neck.
Bulbous leaf style shapes on the shoulder.
Thin black bands separating each section.
The practice of black figure pottery painting in Etruria was mainly imported from Greek settlements
in Italy bringing their wares into southern Etruria around 750BCE.2 This cultural exchange led to
rapid development in the styles and techniques of pottery painting. Early scholars regarded native
Etruscan pottery as crude and less skilful than Greek pottery and as such scholars thought “the
underlying principle was that the better the vase, the less likely it was to have been made by an
Etruscan”34 This is due to the fact that production of painted pottery would’ve mainly been created by
settled Greeks such as the Ionians, Corinthians, and Athenians and the vases are “almost impossible to
distinguish the Etruscan from the Greek examples”.5 This attitude has changed over time and recent
scholars tend to treat the Etruscan artefacts with more care and consideration for quality of the craft. 6
Large influxes of Greek artists settled in Etruria around the 6th century BCE and founded workshops
for their crafts.7 As cultural exchange prolonged, Etruscan style would become identifiable. Etruscan
black-figure vase painting blended Greek influence to make unique pieces. 89 From this, schools of
pottery painting emerged. One core school was the Pontic school mainly based in Caere and Vulci and

1
Laura Ambrosini, “The Etruscan painted pottery,” The Etruscan World, ed. Jean MacIntosh Turfa (New York:
Routledge, 2013), 954.
2
Ambrosini, “Painted Pottery,” 943.
3
Dimitris Paleothodoros, “Reconsidering Ionian and Other Eastern Influences on Etruscan Black-Figure Vase-
Painting” Etruria and Anatolia, ed. Elizabeth P. Baughan & Lisa C. Pieraccini (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2023), 253
4
Dimitris Paleothodoros, “A Complex Approach to Etruscan Black Figure Vase-Painting,” Mediterranea 8
(2011): 33
5
Ambrosini, “Painted Pottery,” 945.
6
Scholars such as R.M Cook, D. Paleothodoros, & Laura Ambrosini
7
Giovannangelo Camporeale, “Foreign Artists in Etruria,” The Etruscan World, ed. Jean MacIntosh Turfa (New
York: Routledge, 2013), 891.
8
Dietrich von Bothmer, “Two Etruscan Vases by the Paris Painter,” The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin
14, no. 5 (January 1956): 127
founded by one prolific Ionian called the Paris Painter – although his Ionian identity has been
contested heavily in recent scholarship.10 Although he is considered to have some sort of Greek
identity, his work in Eturia constitutes his pottery as Etruscan and not a Greek import. The ‘Pontic’
name refers to the Scythians who lived on the Black Sea, also called Pontus, as coined by Dümmler in
1887 but is now a misnomer for a sub-group of these Etruscan vase painters.11
The new artefact seems to be heavily inspired by the works of the Paris painter and bears many
hallmarks of the Pontic style. The fragment itself is hard to place – it was held in the collection of
Charles Eyre of Hallingbury Place and was found in the 1830’s on his expedition to Italy much like
many other artefacts of similar function.12 It was then released and held by the British Museum since
1997. Now, scholars have guaranteed access to the artefact, it was concluded that the most likely
source of the piece comes from Vulci. This is drawn from two core reasons: One, “the overwhelming
majority of vases that do not have provenance have been unearthed at Vulci, during the 1820’s and the
1830’s.”13 Two, the Paris painter and said Pontic group are said to have mainly worked in Vulci where
their workshop may have been based although this is contested.14 With a majority of the work being
found in Vulci, it can be argued that the fragment may have been found their also.
The style of the fragment indicates that the piece may have been done by a student of the Paris painter
not by the painter himself or an imitation of the Paris painter’s style. This is due to the crude artistry
of the piece. The panthers on the neck of the amphora are misshapen and the leaves on the rim are not
consistent. The ornamental bulbs at the shoulder of the vase are not of even size and there are small
painted imperfections around the neck of the amphora. This painted piece was obviously done by a
novice when comparing against other examples that are attributed to the Paris painter. The style
similarities come from the iconography and distribution of art across the piece. The Paris painter uses
the two panthers sharing a common head and the band of leaves often in his pottery. 15 The jars are
often divided by lines to separate scenes from each other which this piece possesses. 16 It is undeniable
that this piece is either a mimic or an homage to the Paris painter’s craft. The amphora in the British
Museum (no. 1839,0214.71)17 and the oinochoe (no. 1978,0502.1)18 both have detailed panthers either
in motion or stationery and typically are surrounded by other animals. The fragment is significantly
simpler in detail and less complex in design with no moving figures or additional figures. The
question of student or mimic is then answered. A student of the Paris painter and the Pontic school
would not make such an obvious copy of designs from their master and instead this seems to be a
copy for perhaps a less wealthy individual for burial as later generations had vases produced for a
“less demanding middle-class.”19
This fragment one main point of importance; the production of pottery for the middle class. Early in
the cultural exchange, Greek vases were typically brought by wealthy for their burials but as time

9
Ruth Olsen Carlucci, “An Etruscan Black-Figure Gigantomachy in Minneapolis,” American Journal of
Archaeology 82, no. 4 (Autumn 1978): 545-549.
10
Paleothodoros, “Reconsidering,” 250-266.
11
Bothmer, “Two Etruscan Vases,” 127.
12
Dyfri Williams, “The beginnings of the so-called “Pontic” Group and other Italian black-figure fabrics,”
Aeimnestos: miscellanea di studi per Mauro Cristofani ed. B. Adembri (Florence: Centro Di, 2005), 352.
13
Paleothodoros, “A Complex Approach,” 37.
14
Williams, “’Pontic’ group,” 355.
15
Lise Hannestad, The Paris Painter (Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1974), 12.
16
Hannestad, Paris Painter, 12.
17
“Amphora,” The British Museum, access May 2, 2024,
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/G_1839-0214-71.
18
“Oinochoe,” The British Museum, accessed May 2, 2024,
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/G_1978-0502-1.
19
Ambrosini, “Painted Pottery,” 952.
went on, a gradual shift emerged with vases being found in graves of non-elites. 2021 With this
knowledge, it can be inferred that vases of different quality were made for different groups of people
which assumes an interesting environment about the Etruscan people and the stratification of their
society. Middle class people were buying native and foreign vases for burials, this must mean that the
rate of import and the buying power of lower classes was high. Furthermore, even with the quality of
Greek pottery, middle class and elites still opted to buy Etruscan as something potentially “principally
ideological.”22 Etruscan vases were just as important as Greek vases even when it copies a master of
the Etruscan craft. This shows a complex economic system with goods being made for several groups
in various degrees of quality. It also exemplifies a focus on Etruscan artistry in companionship with
Greek imports which shows the interconnected Mediterranean in terms of trade relations. 23

In conclusion, this fragment may have been found in Vulci and very clearly copies the style of the
Etruscan Paris painter. It is assumed that the piece is not of a student but a copy of his style and
reveals a lot about the economic and social reasons behind the production of vases in Etruria during
the 6th century BCE. The fragment represents the production of vases for the middle class and how
that concept extends into the Etruscan world and inferences we can make about it.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Ambrosini, Laura. “The Etruscan painted pottery,” in The Etruscan World, edited by Jean MacIntosh
Turfa, 945-973. New York: Routledge, 2013.
Camporale, Giovannangleo. “Foreign Artists in Etruria,” in The Etruscan World, edited by Jean
MacIntosh Turfa, 885-902. New York: Routledge, 2013.
Carlucci, Ruth Olsen. “An Etruscan Black-Figure Gigantomachy in Minneapolis.” American Journal
of Archaeology 82, no. 4 (Autumn 1978): 545-549.
Hannestad, Lise. The Paris Painter. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1974.
Paleothodoros, Dimitris. “A Complex Approach to Etruscan Black Figure Vase-Painting,”
Mediterranea 8 (2011): 33-82.
Paleothodoros, Dimitris. “Reconsidering Ionian and Other Eastern Influences on Etruscan Black-
Figure Vase-Painting” in Etruria and Anatolia, edited by Elizabeth P. Baughan and Lisa C. Pieraccini,
250-265. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2023.
Terranto, Nicola. The Early Roman Expansion into Italy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2019.
The British Museum. “Oinochoe.” Accessed May 2, 2024,
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/G_1978-0502-1.
The British Museum. “Amphora.” Accessed May 2, 2024,
https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/G_1978-0502-1.
20
Ambrosini, “Painted Pottery,” 952.
21
This idea is contested by D. Paleothodoros
22
Paleothodoros, “A Complex Approach,” 68.
23
Nicola Terranto, The Early Roman Expansion into Italy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019), 32.
Von Bothmer, Dietrich. “Two Etruscan Vases by the Paris Painter.” The Metropolitan Museum of Art
Bulletin 14, no. 5 (January 1956): 352-360.
Williams, Dyfri. “The beginnings of the so-called “Pontic” Group and other Italian black-figure
fabrics,” in Aeimnestos: miscellanea di studi per Mauro Cristofani, edited by B. Adembri, 352-360.
Florence: Centro Di, 2005.