i 
 
 Ulrich Middeldorf 
 
k - 
 
 I 
 
Digitized by tine Internet Arcliive 
 
 in 2013 
 
 littp ://arch i ve. org/detai Is/byzanti neceram icOOwal I 
 
BYZANTINE CERAMIC ART. 
 
BY THE SAME AUTHOR. 
 STUDIES IN EARLY ITALIAN MAIOLICA. 
 
 THE ORIENTAL INFLUENCE ON THE CERAMIC 
 ART OF THE ITALIAN RENAISSANCE, with 54 
 
 I LLU-ST RATIONS. I QOO. 
 
 THE ART OF THE PRECURSORS, with 9+ illustka- 
 
 TIONS. 1 90 1. 
 
 THE MAIOLICA PAVEMENT TILES OF THE 
 FIFTEENTH CENTURY, with 93 illustrations. 
 1902. ^ 
 
 OAKLEAF JARS. A FIFTEENTH CENTURY 
 ITALIAN WARE SHOWING MORESCO IN- 
 FLUENCE., WITH 83 ILLUSTRATIONS. I903. 
 
 THE AL6ARELL0. with 117 illustrations. 1904. 
 
 FIGURE DESIGN ON FIFTEENTH CENTURY 
 ITALIAN MAIOLICA. with 101 illustrations. 1905. 
 
 SEVENTEEN PLATES BY NICOLA FONTANA 
 AT THE CORRER MUSEUM, with 28 illustrations. 
 1905. 
 
JJpjanttne ceramic art 
 
 NOTES ON EXAMPLES OF BYZANTINE 
 POTTERY RECENTLY FOUND AT CON- 
 STANTINOPLE WITH ILLUSTRATIONS 
 BY HENRY WALLIS 
 
 LONDONBernard Quaritch 11 Grafton Street W 1907 
 
 J 
 
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 
 
NOTES ON EXAMPLES OF BYZANTINE POTTERY 
 RECENTLY FOUND AT CONSTANTINOPLE. 
 
 THERE are stages in the evolution of the ceramic art of 
 all countries whereof the record is still uncertain. Even 
 in the case of the best known national potteries, well 
 within historical times and of which the examples are 
 abundant, the historians are found regretting the existence of 
 unsolved problems that disturb the continuity of their narratives. 
 But respecting the pottery illustrated in the following pages — 
 that of the Greek Empire founded by Constantino the Great — 
 the record of its rise and development has hitherto been almost 
 a blank. It is not with Byzantine ceramic art that there are 
 gaps in its history, rather may it be said that its story from first to 
 last is one long problem still awaiting solution. Yet among the 
 great ceramic arts of the first rank there is, perhaps, none 
 possessing more intrinsic interest for the student than that 
 wherein the Greek and Oriental elements are so intimately united, 
 and which, moreover, was the one first drawing its inspiration 
 from the new Eaith that was to introduce fresh ideals into all 
 forms of art. Byzantine art generally was dominant for many 
 centuries in the territories once included in the Eoman Empire. 
 It may, therefore, be safe to infer that, at least for a time, its 
 
 h 
 
2 
 
 ceramic art would have exerted a similar influence on the kindred 
 arts of the countries of Western Asia and of those bordering the 
 Mediterranean. This alone should make the ceramic student 
 desirous to obtain some adequate account of its history, and 
 especially to have access to examples of its wares. As it is, so 
 complete has been the disappearance of these latter, that 
 M. Eayet, in his valuable treatise on the history of Byzantine art, 
 regretfully asked where any of those " heaux vases et belles 
 coupes " may yet be found, since in his researches in Eastern 
 Europe and Western museums he had seen none. 
 
 Tliis lack of representation may seem strange when we recall the 
 well filled cases containing the Greek vases of Antiquity in our 
 principal museums. The preservation of these incomparable 
 remains arises from their having been buried with their original 
 owners. But the pious rite of interring with the deceased the 
 objects prized by him during life, so intimately associated with 
 the ancient faith, and therefore regarded with disfavour by the 
 first converts to Christianity, had fallen into disuse before 
 Constantine conceived the project of founding his new capital. 
 The custom, however, may have lingered on in remote spots long 
 after the establishment of Christianity as the national religion of 
 the Empire, just as in Egypt the cult of Isis and Osiris was 
 continued in peaceful security at distant Philse long after Lower 
 Egypt had been purged from all taint of idolatry or even of 
 heterodox doctrine. Thus, an instance of Byzantine vases buried 
 with the dead was discovered by the late Dr. A S. Murray in a 
 Mediaeval necropolis at Cyprus (the objects are now in the 
 Mediaeval Department at the British Museum) ; still, few specimens 
 of the art can be expected to be recovered from this source. 
 It is, indeed, unlikely that more than here and there a stray 
 piece or so will be found anywhere in the East above ground, and 
 certainly not at Constantinople. The city, it will be remembered, 
 
3 
 
 sustained two of the most disastrous sieges recorded in history — 
 tliat by the Erench and the Venetians in 1203, and that by the 
 Turks in 1453. The wreckage of the works of art, both classic 
 and Christian, was the more drastic in the former, nothing then 
 escaping destruction saving portable objects in the precious 
 metals that had not been consigned to the melting-pot. Besides, 
 from our present point of view it was the more fatal, as there 
 are reasons for believing the more flourishing periods of Byzantine 
 ceramic art were antecedent to the Xlllth century. If, however, 
 there had occurred a renaissance of the art in the two centuries 
 and a half separating the sieges, few examples thereof would have 
 survived the sack and pillage of the city following its assault and 
 capture by the soldiery of Mahomed II. 
 
 Hence it will be understood how it came to pass that Byzan- 
 tine pottery was relegated to the category of vanished arts, of 
 those whose history and remains were lost past recovery. Possibly, 
 however, the case may not be quite so desperate ; or so it 
 appeared to the present writer, who had occasion nearly twenty years 
 ago to investigate the subject in the course of enquiries referring 
 to the ceramic arts contemporary with the early Persian wares. 
 The researches then made suggested that the materials for the 
 history of Byzantine pottery, or at least of many of its phases, 
 might still be recovered from the accumulated remains now 
 buried beneath the modern city of Stamboul.* It was not, of course, 
 intended to imply that the pottery would be found intact, but 
 that the remains would enable ceramic students to form a just 
 estimate of the style and quality of the wares sufficient for his- 
 torical purposes. At the same time it was well understood that 
 
 , * Por an account of the above researclies with the illustrations referring to Bj-zan- 
 tine pottery, see " Xlllth Century Persian Ceramic Art in the Collection of Mr. P. 
 DuCane Godman, F.R.S.," Vol. L 1891. 
 
 h 2 
 
4 
 
 to ask then for permission to dig within the city of Constantinople 
 would be simply to court a refusal. So far as I have been 
 informed, the ground has since been little disturbed until 
 a couple of years ago, when excavations were made for the 
 foundations of the new Post Office at Stamboul. A number of 
 pottery fragments were discovered, whereof some were acquired 
 by the South Kensington Museum, and others by the Kaiser Pried- 
 rich Museum at Berlin. It is a selection from these, together with 
 others in private hands, whence the present illustrations have been 
 taken. Hence, in a sense, the first find of Byzantine pottery may 
 be said to be due to chance ; it should, however, be added that 
 the fact of the remains being secured for the purpose of art- 
 history was mainly owing to the recognition of their historical 
 interest by Dr. P. E/. Martin, of the Swedish Legation at 
 Constantinople. Had it not been for his watchful attention, and 
 also that of Mr. C. M. Marling, of the British Embassy, at the 
 same city, it is probable the fragments would have been cast 
 aside as refuse. The thankful acknowledgments of ceramic 
 students are due to both these gentleman, and likewise to Dr. W. 
 Bode and Mr. A. B. Skinner, for the prompt acquisition and 
 exhibition of the very interesting specimens of the find in their 
 respective Museums. 
 
 TT will, of course, be understood that the present objects are 
 not put forth as in any way a complete representation of 
 the art ; this will not be discovered in a single accidental 
 disturbance of the ground for building purposes. Byzantine 
 ceramic art as a local manufacture was protracted over more than 
 a millennium, it cannot therefore be expected that the remains of 
 its multifarious wares will be foimd included beneath the span 
 of a few square rods of earth. As the revelation of some phases 
 
6 
 
 of a once famous art which, has suffered the ohlivion of centuries, 
 the fragments possess strong claims to attention. They also have 
 the additional interest of being an earnest of what future 
 excavations may bring forth ; at the same time their limitations 
 must be clearly recognized. Thus, none of the fragments bears 
 a date, nor can their chronological sequence be determined from 
 their style alone, since respecting the entire series it is doubtful 
 whether individually they belong to flourishing or decadent 
 periods ; and it is only reasonable to infer that in the space of 
 eleven centuries there would be several periods of decline and 
 renaissance. But on matters of ornamental motives, technique 
 and the like, they may have much to tell. The potters them- 
 selves have always had the reputation of being somewhat reticent 
 concerning the practice of their art. It is not so, however, with 
 these long hidden fragments. " Secrets " for them have no 
 existence. To the sympathetic enquirer they are ever communi- 
 cative ; discreetly questioned, they will acknowledge relations 
 with perfect good fellowship. 
 
 TT will naturally be enquired what is the evidence that the 
 remains are specimens of the pottery made at Constantinople 
 during the time of the Greek Empire. The fact of their being 
 dug up at the city, although it has to be taken into account, is 
 in itself no proof of local fabrication, which can only be established 
 by the discovery of the sites of the ancient potteries with their 
 analogous " wasters," which I believe have not yet been found. 
 The reply, therefore, will be that the testimony as to local 
 derivation has to be sought in the motives of ornamental design, 
 and to a less degree in the technical procedure of the objects. 
 And although it is impossible at present to produce absolute 
 proof that the fragments belonged to wares made at Constantinople 
 
6 
 
 or its environs, the probabilities are so strong that it would 
 savour rather of pedantry not to accept the attribution, or, at least, 
 until it has been disproved. As to the evidence of design ; it 
 may be pointed out that the ornamental motives are the same as 
 those found on well-known forms of Byzantine art. Thus, there 
 are the representations of the symbolical animals proper to early 
 Christian art, as the dove, the lion and the eagle, and others 
 which are fabulous, as the gryphon. Then there are the inter- 
 lacing patterns and the intricate passages of serpentine bands 
 wherein the Byzantine artists were wont to display their skill and 
 fantasy in design. Again, the manner of enclosing the symbolical 
 motives in circular medallions arranged round a central 
 medallion, is a familiar Byzantine ornamental scheme. And as 
 to the passages of conventional ornament, they may be paralleled 
 by similar motives in Byzantine sculpture, miniatures and 
 textiles. The examples of figure design in relief happen to be 
 too uncertain in style to be relied upon as evidence, but, at least, 
 they show affinities with Byzantine bas-relief. The figure orna- 
 ment in the flat is, unfortunately, limited to one example in a 
 fair state and a couple of fragments, but the foot seen beneath 
 a morsel of ecclesiastical vestment and standing on an arcade in 
 fig, 17, is so suggestive of the tall, closely draped figures 
 characteristic of Byzantine pictorial and mosaic art, and which 
 are often represented standing on arcades, that one feels the 
 vessel to which it belonged could only have come from a 
 Byzantine pottery. 
 
 Respecting the remarkable specimen of figure design in 
 Plate II, there being no known examples of Byzantine figure 
 design on vase-work with which to compare its executive methods, 
 one can only refer to the pattern of the border, and the ornamental 
 details enriching the ground, which are Byzantine. And also 
 the spirit in which the composition is conceived is essentially 
 
7 
 
 that of Byzantine art in its more imaginative aspect. The subject 
 is evidently symbolical, and probably refers to the struggle 
 between the good and evil principles. It may, however, likewise 
 illustrate some legend of the Greek Church, or a popular apologue 
 of the period. It is, indeed, reminiscent of the kind of story told 
 in the Gesta 'Romano7nmi^ and one can imagine a " moralization " 
 in which the serpent would certainly stand for the Devil and 
 possibly the Centaur for a penitent sinner ; since he is evidently 
 relying for his defence as much on the efficacy of the tablet 
 bearing the sign of the Cross as on his swordmanship. Regarding 
 the composition as a piece of decorative design, the arrangement 
 wherebj'' the Centaur fills the space shows the faculty of the 
 trained artist. So, likewise, do the force and vigour of the firm 
 sweeping lines delineating his form ; and the anatomical short- 
 comings in his muscular development detract but little from our 
 admiration for this fine example of bold, trenchant draughtsman- 
 ship. One would naturally desire to assign such a striking piece 
 of work to its true place in the chronological sequence of the art, 
 yet seeing the extreme uncertainty of the available evidence, the 
 endeavour to do so would scarcely be attended with satisfactory 
 results, and might be misleading. 
 
 Hence the attempt to classify in chronological order the present 
 series, extending as they do over a period of possibly many 
 centuries, would, until some dated specimens have been discovered, 
 serve no useful end. The wares may, however, be briefly 
 considered from the point of view of their decorative methods, 
 which are fairly wide in scope ; the processes exemplified being by 
 incising the ornamental design on a ground covered with a white 
 slip ; by stamping it, either in relief or intaglio ; by painting in 
 one or more colours; and by marbling the surface of the vessels. 
 The last named process, I have been kindly told by Mr. William 
 Burton, has been performed by dropping spots of coloured glazes 
 
8 
 
 on the white ground and dexterously shaking them whilst they 
 are in a fluid state. The stamped pieces in relief ornament in 
 the present find display rather a low level of fabrication, while 
 the moulds appear either to have been ill-made or were worn out. 
 The pieces are covered with a glassy lead glaze in green or yellow, 
 thickly applied as if to hide their defective workmanship. The 
 incised wares stand on a difiPerent footing, for while at their best 
 the stamping and moulding processes are merely mechanical, the 
 incised ornamentation is one of the most artistic methods at the 
 service of the potter. We have seen in the instance of the Berlin 
 bowl what an effective medium for vigorous design it becomes 
 in the hands of a master. But not all the specimens of the 
 process in the find are up to this standard : thus, the birds in 
 figs. 23 and 24 are examples of scamped work such as will hardly 
 be found in the commonest Italian graffiato wares. Yet the 
 miniatures in the Byzantine codices show that the artists were 
 especially clever and dainty in their bird draughtsmanship.* 
 
 One example of the process in the present find, namely, the 
 heraldic fragment in fig. 39, must not be passed over, although 
 its interest is more historical than artistic. As an ornamental 
 motive a shield of arms is not uncommon in Italian graffiato 
 wares, and if found in Italy the fragment would probably have 
 been accepted as having formed part of a native XlVth or XVth 
 century scodello, since there is nothing in the material or its 
 simple technique to forbid the attribution. But whether made in 
 Italy or on the Bosporos the arms are Italian, possibly of some 
 Fodesta or ofl&cial connected with one of the Italian trading 
 
 * For examples of Byzantine animal drawing see the birds, beasts, and 
 reptiles in the Yienna Dioscorides Codex (Ylth cent.), especially interesting in 
 connection with fig. 60 are the di'awings of snakes and eagles ; also for Byzantine 
 floral ornament the numerous plant drawings deserve attention. 
 
9 
 
 colonies having i\iQ\v fondachi at Constantinople, or across the 
 great harbour at Galata. Mr. Van de Put has obligingly informed 
 me that the arms do not occur among those carved on the ancient 
 edifices at Galata or Pera that have as yet been published. Their 
 complete identification has evaded his research ; he has discovered, 
 however, that the escutcheon of a certain Luchino de Bonavey, 
 who was Podesta of Galata from 1396 to 1397, bore three bends 
 sinister, which are rather uncommon charges. Hence if the 
 beudlets stand for Luchino's coat, the second, or impaled coat, 
 will be that of his wife. Mr, Van de Put suggests that it 
 resembles that of the Pregoso family (it will be remembered that 
 Galata was a Genoese colony), possibly near enough to be a case 
 of blood relationship ; at the same time, he thinks the resemblance 
 is too slight to be affirmed without clear proof. The discovery of 
 the fragment is important, inasmuch as it inspires the hope that 
 other like remains may come to light in future excavations, and 
 if so, they will certainly be amongst the more valuable documents 
 at the service of students of Byzantine ceramic art, and no less so 
 to students of Byzantine history prosecuting researches referring to 
 the relations of the Empire with foreign states. 
 
 Turning to the examples of the painted wares, the decorative 
 motives of some of the pieces are seen to be examples of graceful 
 design frankly painted in forcible yet harmonious colour. They are 
 the work of men who had mastered the principles on which true 
 ceramic art are based. Yet, however praiseworthy the design, 
 one is conscious that there is here none of the finer specimens of 
 the work of the Byzantine vase-painters, nothing reflecting the 
 design and colour present in the work of the other forms of 
 Byzantine art of the best periods ; such, for instance, as were 
 rendered by the enamellers and the mosaic artists, who worked 
 in, practically, the same materials, since the surface in each case 
 was a vitreous glaze fused in the furnace. The results of the 
 
 c 
 
10 
 
 inventive ability of the Byzantine artists in this direction almost 
 amounted to the introduction of a new element into the domain of 
 art. Thus, mosaic in the hands of the artists of the Roman 
 Empire was a dignified and costly form of architectural orna- 
 mentation appropriate to the adornment of the palatial halls of an 
 Imperial race, but its imaginative appeal was slender. The 
 Byzantines, however, were quick to perceive its wider capabilities 
 as a medium for wall decoration, especially in ecclesiastical 
 edifices. No ground can be conceived better adapted for displaying 
 the symbolical representations of the Christian mysteries, as 
 imagined by the neo-Hellenic artists, than the resplendent surface 
 composed of translucent tesserce, of the kind used by the Byzantine 
 mosaic workers. In the same way when the Byzantines had 
 mastered the procedure of enamelling, which had previously 
 occupied a subordinate place as an ornamental method, they at 
 once elevated it into the position of a fine art capable of 
 rendering imaginative design in refined and captivating colour- 
 schemes. It remains to be seen whether any clear proof will 
 ever be discovered determining the derivation of the Vlth 
 century enamelled reliquary Cross included in the Sancta 
 Sanctorum, but wherever it was made, the art is Byzantine and 
 it will probably always be cited as one of its masterpieces in 
 enamel Avork. In the seven compositions representing scenes 
 connected with the birth and infancy of our Lord depicted on 
 the back of the Cross, the figures are of the smallest size, yet the 
 incidents are dramatically conceived and their action natural and 
 unaffected. The child Christ in the Baptism is certainly one of 
 the loveliest creations of Christian art ; it may be taken as a type 
 of the fresh ideals inspired by the new Eaith. The examination 
 of these pictures in vitrified glazes suggests that since at this 
 period the artists could produce figure design of the above 
 quality in enamel, they would be equally proficient in the 
 
11 
 
 manipulation of the far less complex procedure of the sister art 
 of painting on faience. And, perhaps, also it will be found that 
 the figure motives will reflect the quiet, homely themes of gospel 
 narrative, such as would have awakened feelings of peaceful 
 serenity and assured hope in the souls of the believers. It would 
 appear that in those early ages the awful tragedy of the Passion 
 was not made a subject of pictorial representation. 
 
 ONE of the most interesting points in connection with the 
 objects under consideration is that referring to the relative 
 place of the stamped wares covered with green or yellow single 
 colour glazes, and whether they may be accepted amongst its 
 earliest productions. In order to arrive at any just conclusions 
 on the matter, it is necessary to cast a retrospective glance at the 
 latest, so-termed, Roman glazed wares, those belonging to the 
 period intervening between the end of the classical age and 
 the rise of the new era, to which the first Byzantine wares would 
 display affinities of form and technical procedure. Unfortunately, 
 respecting the history of ceramic art of that time, there are few 
 periods in its annals more obscure than the century or so 
 preceding the foundation of Constantinople. The same, indeed, 
 might be said respecting the state of art generally, there being 
 probably never a time in Avhich in all its forms it was in a more 
 apparently hopeless state of decline. The proof exists in the 
 Arch of Constantino at Rome, where all the sculpture which had 
 not been stripped from earlier monuments is barbarous in the 
 extreme. In the troublous times of the declining Empire the 
 artists found little or no employment, and would consequently 
 have lost even the manual dexterity for which the Greeks of the 
 Hellenistic times were renowned. Reduced to penury or keeping 
 body and soul togetlier by servile employment, they were 
 
 c2 
 
12 
 
 vegetating in the provinces amidst the wreckage of the Roman 
 world. Hence it must have been to them indeed glad tidings of 
 great joy when the news was spread abroad that the Emperor 
 Constantine had decided to build a city on the Thracian 
 Bosporos, which was to be the new capital of the Empire. 
 And included in the crowd of artists and artificers who flocked 
 to Byzantium, it may fairly be inferred that the potters would 
 not have been amongst the latest arrivals. If, however, we 
 may judge of their capacity from the ability displayed by the 
 architects, it was not of a high order. The latter, the reader 
 will remember, were found to be so incapable of constructing 
 edifices in a style that would satisfy the taste of the Emperor, 
 that he ordered the half- finished, buildings to be forthwith 
 demolished, and directed that schools of design should be 
 instituted where the architects could be taught the first principles 
 of their art. The texts say nothing respecting the quality of the 
 vase-work produced by the potters, or whether they too received 
 elementary instruction in the principles governing the practice 
 of ceramic art. The probability is that the first wares made 
 at Byzantium were no more than pretentious reproductions of 
 effete forms. 
 
 But the precise nature of classic pottery in its final stage 
 of decay is not of easy determination, although, fortunately, 
 important additions to its representation have of late years been 
 made at the Louvre and at Bloomsbury. As might be expected, 
 the wares mostly belong to the class of moulded pottery imitating 
 vases in metal, of the kind which originated in the Ilird 
 century B.C., at the time when the great schools of Greek 
 vase-painting had finished their careers. The Roman wares 
 were copies of the costly and ornate vessels in gold and silver, 
 onyx and murrhine, which adorned the sideboards or constituted 
 the table service of princes and the wealthy. Perhaps the best 
 
13 
 
 specimens of the art are the drinking cups, which are often 
 skilfully moulded and are probably hand-finished. The body is 
 firm and well fired and the relief ornament, which is often 
 elegant, is clearly defined. The cups are covered with a rich 
 lead glaze, the outside usually being in a deep transparent 
 green and the inside in a fine raw siena tint. Altogether, they 
 are pleasant, serviceable looking vessels, and such as no 
 respectable Roman citizen need have been ashamed of. Of 
 those, at least, where the subject of the relief ornament was not 
 distinctly an incentive to excess, which in some instances was 
 unquestionably its purport. Thus, in a handsome cantharm at 
 the Louvre the relief ornament round the belly of the cup 
 represents a dance of skeletons, the intention evidently being to 
 suggest to the drinker the enjoyment of the present hour."* 
 The well-known red Aretine pottery is evidence that carefully 
 execiited work of a substantial kind was made in the 1st 
 century a.d., and the Tliarros find in tlie British Museum shows 
 that the green and yellow glazes held their ground as favourite 
 colours, although covering barbarous ornament, up to the time of 
 Justinian and Hej'aclius. But respecting the glazed wares of 
 Greece, Syria, Asia Minor, and the islands of Rhodes and 
 Cyprus, to which the first Byzantine pottery would probably have 
 afiinities, little more can be said than that their ornamentation 
 was stamped or moulded and that the colours of their glazes 
 were green and yellow. The corresponding wares in the present 
 find are those included in figs. 1, 2, 4-10, and as their ornamental 
 motives are those of early Christian art, they may, therefore, 
 
 * For an illustration and a learned notice of the cup see E. Pettier, lievue 
 ArcMologique, 1900, Vol. I. pp. 12-16. An analogous subject occurring on a silver 
 cantharus in the Bosco Reale Treasure, which was buried in the eruption of Vesuvius 
 (A.I). 79), furnishes evidence for the date of the object. 
 
14 
 
 represent a primitive stage in Byzantine ceramic art, altliougli it 
 is, perhaps, desirable to wait for conclusive evidence before it can 
 be positively asserted. Again, it is not at present known whether 
 they are the best that the potters could produce : they may be 
 merely what the Italians call dozzinale wares — cheap stuff sold 
 by the dozen — and seeing tlie hasty character of their fabrication 
 such is not unlikely to have been the case. Nor is it certain 
 that the archaic style of their ornament is evidence of primitive 
 manufacture, since the pottery of all countries contains popular 
 types which have been maintained for centuries. 
 
 When the materials for a history of Byzantine pottery are 
 eventually collected, it will not improbably be found that one of 
 the more important factors influencing the nascent art came 
 from that fertile source of so many artistic inventions — the 
 Nile valley. The Egyptians were always accomplished ceramists. 
 They belonged to a race that stood fast to the ideals of their 
 ancient civilization, maintaining their artistic forms and methods 
 with singular pertinacity. Hence when the ceramic arts of 
 Greece and Italy were in the last stages of decrepitude, there 
 were still potters in Egypt acquainted with the traditions of 
 their past art, and in a genuine artistic spirit able to adapt 
 their practice to new conditions. With what rare qualities of 
 design, of refined colour and subtle execution they could inform 
 their work in the IVth century may be seen in the cup at the 
 British Museum, inscribed with the names of Oonstantine and 
 the Empress Eausta. The technique presents affinities with 
 the Naucratis wares of the Ptolemaic period, having the 
 ornamentation incised and then filled in with tinted slips or 
 pastes. It may, therefore, be supposed that the earlier technical 
 methods were still in the IVth century known and practised in 
 Egypt, possibly at Alexandria or in the Eayoum. In that case 
 they would be familiar to the Greeks settled in those localities, 
 
13 
 
 who, as enterprising traders recognizing tlie importance of the 
 new capital as a commercial centre, would naturally forward 
 samples of the Egyptian Avares to their correspondents at 
 Constantinople. Or the pottery may have reached the city as 
 tribute, which Egypt paid the Emperor in kind. It is, however, 
 immaterial by what agency Egyptian faience reached the bazaars 
 on the Bosporos ; what one would desire to learn is the extent of 
 its influence on the pottery works which were being established 
 on its shores. The evidence is not pronounced in the present 
 find, although it may, perhaps, be detected in the marbling of 
 the incised pottery, which imitated in the comnioner green and 
 raw siena glazes the more refined tints of the Egyptian purples 
 and blues. The illustration in Plate XXV. represents a fragment 
 of a tankard or jug in Egyptian faience of the Roman period, in 
 which the highly convcutionalized ornament is thus treated. 
 
 A MONGST the incidental gains to art history attendant on 
 
 most ceramic finds is the identification of examples of the 
 art whose derivation had previously been regarded as doubtful. 
 In the majority of Museums there are pieces of this kind where- 
 the attributions are understood to be tentative and provisional, 
 and whereon the label may have been changed more than once. 
 There are some also so destitute of analogies to hitherto 
 discovered wares that they are allowed to remain anonymous, 
 with a note only of the places wliere they were found. Such is 
 the case with the portion of a hovil in fig. 60, which is one of a 
 small collection of fragments found at Theodosia, in the Crimea, 
 and now at the Louvre. Its technique, colour and execution 
 are in all respects analogous to the best potted fragments of the 
 class in the Stamboul find. The body is light and thin yet firm 
 and compact, the incised lines are sharply and freely cut, 
 
16 
 
 emphasis being given to certain passages by the removal of the 
 slip, as in the bird's wings. The subject is evidently one of 
 the symbolical themes, after the manner of that in the Berlin 
 bowl, wherein the Byzantines, perhaps, typified the eternal 
 warfare between the principles of good and evil, the former in 
 this instance being represented by the imperial eagle, who in 
 finely designed action has thrown himself back to give impetus 
 to the blow which will bruise the serpent's head.* An 
 interesting feature in the treatment is the clever rendering of 
 the archaic manner, for the Byzantine artists of the time were 
 of course capable of portraying animals in naturalistic style, as 
 
 * For a further illustration of the Serpent myth in Byzantine pottery see an 
 interesting study in the ceramic art of the period by the late lamented Dr. Wladimir 
 de Bock, published in the Memoires de la Societe nationale des Antiquaires de France, 
 Vol. LVI. 1897, entitled " Poteries Vernissees du Caucase et de la Crimee." In this 
 instance the combatants are a gryphon and a serpent, and as the gryphon in the art 
 of antiquity was the emblem of Vigilance, he may be supposed on this occasion to 
 stand for the good principle. Dr. Bock's study contains other illustrations of glazed 
 pottery remains found on the Byzantine Chersonese and which he was inclined to 
 believe might represent the ceramic art of those regions in the Middle Ages. At the 
 same time he admitted their possible Byzantine origin, remarking that the question 
 could only be decided by the results of future excavations at Constantinople or its 
 neighbourhood. I have not seen the originals of Dr. Bock's illustrations and 
 therefore can only speak of them under reserve ; with one exception, however, they 
 all appear to belong to types of which examples are in the present find. The learned 
 Doctor must have been aware that the inhabitants of the ports on the Cimmerian 
 Bosporos were buyers of Athenian pottery in classic times, and there do not 
 appear to be any valid reasons for supposing they would not have continued to 
 purchase their ornamental pottery from the Greek merchants trading in the Black 
 Sea in the Byzantine period. Another interesting series of illustrations of the glazed 
 faVence found in the Crimea is given in an erudite treatise by Dr. E. von Stern 
 entitled " Theodosia und seine Keramih" published in Das Museum, Lief. III. 1906. 
 In this instance the nicely coloured illustrations leave little doubt that they include 
 several examples of the types in the Stamboul find. 
 
17 
 
 exemplified in the above mentioned Vlth century animal 
 drawing in the Vienna Dioscorides Codex. Yet they, and 
 likewise the Oriental potters, preferred to retain the archaic 
 manner in their animal drawing well into tlie XVth century — 
 close upon the time when both the Christian and Moslem 
 ceramic arts were beginning to lose their higher qualities of 
 decorative design. Another instance of a probable example 
 of early Byzantine ceramic art occurs also at the Louvre — 
 fig. 59 — and is included in the magnificent collection of Ionian 
 Greek art excavated at "Myrina by MM. Pottier and Reinach. 
 On comparing it with the left-hand fragment in fig. 22 it is seen 
 that the ornamental motive in each case is the same. Both are 
 archaic, the execution in the cup being the finer, the clay also is 
 whiter and the glaze more delicate, but which need not forbid its 
 Byzantine origin. A few other glazed objects were found at 
 Myrina, one or two belonging to the late classic time, and at 
 least one subsequent to the foundation of Constantinople. (An 
 illustration of this bowl is given in Appendix Plate III. fig. 7, in 
 the previously mentioned work on the Godman Collection by the 
 present writer.) But although Byzantine in stylo it is possible 
 that botli objects were made at Myrina, which had evidently 
 been an important pottery centre in classic times and where the 
 art may have been continued even into the mediaeval period. 
 The only non-Byzantine example of a technique similar to the 
 Myrina cup, yet Byzantine in design, of which I am aware is a 
 rather elegant bottle-shaped oiiwchoe which came from Smyrna 
 (not far distant from Myrina), and is now in the British 
 Museum.* 
 
 The specimens of early wares at the British Museum showing 
 
 * For its illustration see " The Oriental Influence on Italian Maiolica," fig. I. by 
 the present writer. 
 
 d 
 
18 
 
 analogies with the technique exemplified in the present find are a 
 couple of pieces in the Italian Maiolica section of the Ceramic 
 Gallery and illustrated in figs. 57 and 58. The former is a well 
 preserved bowl in a sliape of which there were several examples 
 in the find, being also similarly formed at the foot and having 
 the exterior in the same powerful golden green glaze covering a 
 white slip. Likewise the same kind of marbled ornament on a 
 white ground was found on fragments which had evidently 
 belonged to bowls or basins, the marbling also being on the 
 insides of the vessels, hence: as these peculiarities are not, so far 
 as 1 am aware, found on any other known early wares, the 
 Byzantine origin of the vessel is, to say the least, not improbable. 
 The second instance is the basin — fig. 58 — found at Taranto 
 towards the end of the last century, in excavations made for the 
 enlargement of the naval arsenal on the shore of the Mare 
 Piccolo, and which yielded specimens of Greek, Roman and 
 Mediaeval art. The siu'face of the vessel, which in places shows 
 the effect of its long contact with moist earth, is marbled both 
 inside and out, and must formerly have been covered with a 
 bright glassy glaze. The late Sir Wollaston Franks stated that 
 this was the first example of the particular ware that he had 
 seen, which, considering his wide knowledge of ceramic art, is 
 evidence of its extreme rarity. The presence of a few fragments 
 in the find of precisely the same kind can hardly be put forth as 
 a proof of its Byzantine fabrication, but taking into consideration 
 its shape, the nature of its material, and its technical quality, 
 here again such derivation is not improbable. In the case of the 
 two bowls in figs. 61 and 62, from the Museum at Ravenna — the 
 city in all Italy where relics of Byzantine art are likely to 
 be found — stronger presumptive evidence of their locality of 
 fabrication can scarcely be desired, seeing that on all points of 
 manufacture and ornamentation they agree with examples of the 
 
19 
 
 same class in the find. The howls were formerly incrusted in an 
 outside wall of the ancient church of S. Nicolo at Ravenna, 
 wheuce they were removed by a priest at the time the church was 
 dismantled by the Prench during the invasion of Italy by the 
 army of Napoleon I. 
 
 rriHE relationship of Byzantine art generally to that of Europe 
 and the near East durinsi: the Middle Ages has been the 
 subject of frequent, and sometimes even heated controversy 
 amongst the writers on art history. It is, indeed, one of those 
 root-problems, highly provocative to disputation on matters of 
 taste, local patriotism and other such burning topics, but towards 
 whose solution the authentic available evidence is all too slight. 
 Yet for the student who would trace the course of those arts, the 
 right understanding of their relationship to that evolved at 
 Constantinople possesses an interest which is other than 
 academic, since much in their early history will always remain 
 obscure so long as the relationship is still undetermined. As to 
 the relationships of their respective ceramic arts, if they have not 
 yet been the subject of discussion it is simply because there has 
 hitherto been little that was tangible to discuss. It is true that 
 certain examples of Italian, Persian and other Oriental wares 
 have been supposed to show a Byzantine influence, and the 
 inference has, perhaps, been well founded. Still, so long as 
 actual specimens of Byzantine pottery were unknown the 
 assertion was only a statement of opinion, and it is not impossible 
 that reasons seemingly of equal validity might have been 
 advanced, in perfect good faith, to support a directly opposite 
 theory. Now, however, that sucli specimens are found the 
 question has entered upon a new phase, and one which it may be 
 hoped will eventually lead to its being brought within the range 
 
 d2 
 
20 
 
 of practical investigation. On the present occasion, however, it 
 is not proposed to consider more than a few analogies of minor 
 ornamental motives, leaving untouched the larger matters of 
 style in design, quality in colour schemes and technical procedure, 
 for which the present find does not offer suflBcient positive 
 evidence. 
 
 The details in question will be found in the simpler ornamental 
 motives on Byzantine pottery which in their origin possibly all 
 stood for sacred symbols, possessing even magical powers, but this 
 significance, except in the case of the Cross, may have been 
 forgotten before the motives were disused. Yet, perhaps some 
 nebulous traditions of their former intention still haunted the 
 popular imagination. The public expected to find them on its 
 pottery, and the potters were instinctively aware that in matters 
 of domestic art their customers, in the long run, will always 
 prefer the old familiar forms. Be that as it may, it is seen upon 
 examination that certain motives, slightly varied, are several 
 times repeated in the illustrations, hence it may be inferred they 
 were amongst the ordinary types of ornament current in the 
 potteries of Constantinople, and therefore would be accepted as 
 models worthy of imitation in places where the art was in a more 
 primitive stage. One of the most frequent of these motives is, 
 naturall)^, the Greek Cross, illustrated in fig. 8, and which under 
 its particular form is reproduced in the pottery of Christian Italy 
 (fig. 65) and Moslem Persia (fig. 78). Another often repeated 
 type is a floral motive resembling a conventional lily, trefoil at 
 the top and terminating in a point at its lower extremity. It is 
 exemplified, with trifling modifications, in figs. 21, 25, 27, 45. 
 The corresponding adaptations here given are for Italy figs. 64, 
 73, and 76, if the last is proved to be Italian, and for Persia 
 figs. 78 and 79. This floral motive appears to have been 
 employed in Byzantine ceramic ornamentation both as an 
 
21 
 
 adjunct to a more elaborate design, as in. the above instances, and 
 also to enrich the ground, much the same as spirals and dots were 
 employed for a like purpose by the early Persian vase painters — 
 see fig. 3. The motive is well known in early Italian Maiolica, 
 being found on vessels of all shapes, but usually in its more 
 symmetrical form, as in fig. 64. That it was also well known to 
 the Persians is evinced by the important place it occupies in the 
 decoration of figs. 78 and 79, although the arrangement in 
 combination with the Greek Cross was not their invention. It is 
 found filling the space between the limbs of the cross in 
 somewhat similar fashion in early Byzantine sculpture, as in 
 sarcophagi at St. Apollinare in Classe, also pictorially in 
 Byzantine illuminated codices, atid probably it likewise occupied 
 the same place in the gold and silver jewelled Utnrgical paterce, 
 from which the present examples are most likely copied. 
 
 Another illustration of an Italian adaptation of a Byzantine 
 method of ornamentation occurs in the ancient Campanile hacino 
 in fig. 68. The original is still in situ and along with figs. 64j-67 
 have been supposed by some of the Italian archaeologists to 
 whom they are known to bo of Byzantine fabrication. Standing 
 high aloft, sun-baked and storm-beaten, their ornamentation is 
 but faintly to be distinguished from below and their technique 
 not at all. It was only on close inspection, by means of ladders, 
 that an able Italian draughtsman and vase-painter (who 
 obligingly undertook to copy them for the present publication) 
 discovered they were tin-glazed, and their technique in all 
 respects that of Italian Maiolica. Hence they cannot be the 
 bacmi originally set in the walls, but are the restoration of a later 
 period and which could hardly be earlier than the XlVth century. 
 They are not unlikely to have been free copies of the originals, 
 which may have dated from the Vllth century. With respect 
 to the bacmi in figs. 66 and 67, it is scarcely necessary to 
 
22 
 
 remark that the ornamental motives in both instances are 
 common in Byzantine art. Fig. 66 has indeed an older pedigree, 
 being found, as the student of Greek ceramic art will remember, 
 on the black and red vases, usually as a device on shields. In 
 Oriental pottery it is more freely rendered, as in the beautiful 
 basin at the British Museum found at the necropolis of El Azam, 
 in the desert behind Assiout, Upper Egypt : also a similar basin 
 forms the centre of one of the mosaic panels in the Xlllth 
 century pulpit of the church of S. Giovanni at E/avello (for 
 illustrations see " The Albarello," fig. 115, by the writer). In the 
 fragments of marbled ornamentation belonging to the Stamboul 
 find the blue veining, as befure stated, only slightly covers the 
 ground, but seeing that it was a favourite method of orna- 
 mentation it is likely to have been executed in a variety of 
 maaners. The earliest example of the style known to the writer 
 is on a small bowl found near Eerrara, and which may either be 
 of Byzantine or Italian fabrication : it is scaled and in a damaged 
 state, the blue marbling, however, wliich covers the ground is 
 plainly perceptible. A good example of the ware of a later 
 period — possibly of the XVth century — 'is seen in a scodello at the 
 British Museum, and is labelled " Padua" (see fig. 69), which was 
 a pottery centre where the Byzantine influence was strongly 
 pronounced. A further illustration of the same influence on an 
 Italian hoccale is shown on Plate XXIIL^ wherein the shape and 
 colour of the vessel are reminiscent of the enamelled Venetian 
 liturgical vases which were essentially Byzantine in character. 
 The illustration on Plate XXIV. represents a hoccale which evi- 
 dently also belongs to the Paduan School, and shows an example 
 of the single colour glaze found on some of the Byzantine fragments. 
 Both pieces belonged to the late Prof. E. Argnani, who assigned 
 the former to the XVth and the latter to the XVIth century. 
 The numerous instances of green glaze amongst the fragments, 
 
23 
 
 suggests that it was a popular colour in Byzantine faience, 
 althougii whether the spirit of partizanship in the factions of the 
 Greens and the Blues was displayed also in the colours of their 
 household pottery has not been recorded. Yet seeing that in 
 Italy the Guelfs and the Ghibellines affirmed their party 
 -allegiance by the fashion of their silver drinking cups — plain or 
 figured — it may be so. The above instances of relationship are 
 adduced merely to show that within the limited range of a few 
 objects fortuitously collected such examples may be found, but it 
 may be expected that others, vastly more important, will reward 
 carefully organized research in the future. 
 
 Twenty years ago the proposal to disturb the sacred soil of 
 Stamboul for purposes of artistic research would have been 
 scouted as at once impious and absurd. Times, however, have 
 changed at the Turkish capital. The Seraglio now boasts its 
 Museum, which is other than the old Repository of Antiquities, 
 and the exhibition of masterpieces of Greek sculpture so far from 
 having exercised any baleful influence on the followers of the 
 Prophet, is acknowledged to be a valuable auxiliary to the 
 adjoining very promising school of art. An esteemed corre- 
 spondent has informed me that the authorities lately sent an 
 agent to inspect and report upon the excavations at Bakka, in 
 Syria, where a few years ago the remains of extensive mediaeval 
 pottery works were discovered by some Arabs, and have, 
 probably, already been cleared out by them. The official action 
 rather recalls the proverbial precaution of shutting the stable 
 door after the steed was stolen. Still, the intention was praise- 
 worthy, since in the interest of art-history it is undesii-able that 
 the search for objects of past arts should be left in the hands of 
 the " Oriental nomad," who when selling the wares he may have 
 found can never be trusted to state the place or the circumstances 
 under which they were discovered. In numerous cases, however. 
 
24 
 
 the Turkish authorities have succeeded in securing admirable 
 specimens of Greek art, which are now in the Sera^^lio Museum. 
 So that, on the whole, the prospects of excavations being 
 prosecuted at Constantinople and its environs are distinctly 
 brighter than they were formerly. 
 
 A few words will suffice to explain the intention of the 
 remaining illustrations of early Italian and other pottery 
 presenting analogies to some of the ornamental motives in the 
 Byzantine wares. Thus fig. 74 is a typical example of Paduan 
 adaptation of Byzantine practice in incised wares where the 
 ornament is left in relief by the removal of the slip covering the 
 body. It reproduces in faience the low relief ornament on the 
 sarcophagi and other decorative marble slabs, on some of which 
 this motive is found. Fig. 73 shows a medallion on a Faventine 
 boccale wherein the general design and the separate motives are 
 Byzantine, but arranged with a certain formal grace characteristic 
 of Italian early quattrocento art. Pretty much the same may be 
 said of figs. 71 and 72, which from the thickness of the body, the 
 scaling of the glaze, due to imperfect firing, and the general 
 primitive technique, indicate the pieces to be of a very early date. 
 Pig. 71 is a good illustration of the charming rendering of a 
 graceful theme by conventional design, and which could not be 
 accomplished in vase painting by naturalistic treatment. It is 
 the attempt to render by conventional lines and tints those 
 nature pictures w^hich the early Italian poets painted in words, as 
 Dante in his immortal " La lodoletta die in aere si spazia." 
 Pigs. 76 and 77 represent the only specimens of what may 
 possibly be Byzantine pottery now remaining in the Greek 
 Monastery founded by St. Nilo at Grotta Perrata, in the 
 year 1004. The Rev. Father Sofronio Gassisi, the courteous 
 Keeper of the Museum, informed me that the pieces were found 
 
25 
 
 within the precincts of the Monastery, in the ground near the 
 stately and venerable Campanile; it is therefore possible they 
 were once incrusted in its walls. There are still some few of the 
 old bacini existing in the tower, and one sees places whence others 
 have fallen, but whether those still in the walls date from the 
 Xlth century can only be determined after careful examination 
 of their design and technique, which, of course, is not possible 
 from the ground below. It is recorded that the monastery 
 buildings were in a ruinous condition at the end of the XVth 
 century, before the sweeping change made by Pope Julius II, 
 who practically converted the Abbey into a fortress. The 
 Campanile may also have then been restored and the bacini 
 renewed, but in any case the bowls here illustrated are earlier 
 than the time of Julius II, supposing them to be Italian ; there 
 seems, however, to be nothing in their technique or orna- 
 mentation incompatible which their being Byzantine, since it is 
 tolerably certain that Byzantine pottery was in use at the 
 Monastery in the Xlth century and after. Or again, as the 
 Basilian monks always cultivated the arts of design, they may 
 have established works for the fabrication of artistic pottery at 
 the Monastery itself, in w^hich case the decorative motives on the 
 wares would naturally have affinities with the style of orna- 
 mentation prevailing at Constantinople. Instances of confronted 
 birds occur in the pottery of antiquity, also, in Persian Mediaeval 
 wares the motive is found on Xlllth century lustred ware, as in 
 a fragment at the British Museum (see the Godman Collection, 
 Plate XXI.). Again, in Syrian pottery may be cited a tile at 
 South Kensington of about the same date (see " The Oriental 
 Influence on Italian Maiolica," fig. 21), but in none of these is 
 the " floral motive," which occupies a prominent place in fig. 76, 
 combined with the birds. I do not recall an example in Oriental 
 
 e 
 
26 
 
 ceramic art of the complicated and extravagant arrangement of 
 confronted birds like those in fig. 77, although one occasionally 
 comes across somewhat similar ornamental motives in Byzantine 
 illuminated codices, and as the Basilian monks were famous 
 illuminators this particular arrangement may be the invention of 
 some erratic genius belonging to the fraternity. 
 
 But for the ornamental letter painted inside the Ravenna 
 scodello in fig. 70, one might have been in doubt whether it was 
 not of Byzantine importation. Its chief interest arises from the 
 suggestion that the Italian fashion of painting an initial letter in 
 the centre of a bowl was an adaptation of the Byzantine method 
 of incising one in the same place, see figs. 11-15. On the Italian 
 wares the letters are the initals of the persons for whom the 
 vessels were made * ; ife has been supposed in the case of the 
 Byzantine wares they stood for the names of the potters. The 
 customary and appropriate place for the potter's mark is beneath 
 the foot of the vase, although it is occasionally found on the 
 inside or outside of classical and Aretine vases, but occupying a 
 subordinate position amongst their ornamentation. Sig. Andrea 
 Zoli, Director of the Classense Library, Baverma, informed me 
 that comparing the fVl with others in early Xlllth century 
 documents in his library, he thought it would be of that time. 
 Fig. 75 is the only instance of vase work found in the Sancta 
 Sanctorum. In all that wealth of imaginative design, wrought 
 in rare and precious materials, it is perhaps the least costly object 
 in the collection ; yet from the excellent quality of its fabrication 
 it seems nowise out of place. Touching and attractive in its 
 unpretending simplicity, it strikes no discordant note in the 
 general harmony of those masterpieces of Christian art. There 
 
 * See F. Argnaui, Ceramiche e Maioliche Arcaiche Faentine, 1903, Plates V. and 
 XIX. The original of the latter is now in S. Kensington Museum. 
 
27 
 
 can be little doubt that like the other objects it is of Eastern 
 derivation and of an early period*. The shape is that of the little 
 unguent vases in white or, more rarely, claret coloured glass, 
 which are usually labelled "late Roman" and " Syrian"; specimens 
 have also been found in Egypt along with so-called Coptic 
 remains. The simple ornamentation resembles in character that 
 on the faience found by Wood at Ephesus, when excavating on the 
 site of the ruins of the Temple of Diana. In that case, however, 
 the ware is of a commoner kind, having a red body covered with 
 a slip ; consequently its surface has none of the pearly tones of 
 the present object, neither have the passages of manganese and 
 rich floating green their same caressing quality. It may be 
 fairly assumed that the Ephesus vases were of local fabrication, 
 or, at least, from a Lydian pottery. But it needs stronger proof 
 than this possible analogy in the manner of ornamentation to 
 assert that the little vase is of Ephesian fabrication. At present, 
 like certain other interesting pieces, it stands alone, and so must 
 remain anonymous until other examples of its fellows have been 
 discovered and identified. 
 
 If the cases in the great National Museum where the student 
 might expect to see specimens of Byzantine ceramic art are still 
 untenanted, at least in those devoted to the display of the other 
 forms of Byzantine art, he will find much representing its finer 
 achievement. It is mainly from these sources that the materials 
 for the foregoing all too imperfect notes have been collected. 
 I beg, therefore, to offer my grateful thanks to the Authorities of 
 
 * I regret the repetition of the phrase " early period " iu these pages, but where 
 the evidence as to date is either non-existent, or so vague as to require constant 
 qualification, it seems preferable to employ a conventional formula rather than fatigue 
 the reader by the discussion of what in the present state of our knowledge can be 
 little more than mere guessing. 
 
28 
 
 the various Museums for facilities afforded in studying the 
 objects under their charge, and especially to the very E,ev. P. 
 Franz Ehrle, Prefect of the Vatican Library, to Dr. Bartolomeo 
 Nogaro, and to Barone Rodolfo Kanzler, Director of the Vatican 
 Museum of Christian Art. I have much pleasure in again 
 expressing my obligation to Mr. P. Du Cane Godman, F.R.S., 
 for kindly permitting me to copy his beautiful Persian bowl, 
 liikewise, I am much indebted to M. E. Pettier, Conservator of 
 the Greek Antiquities at the Louvre, and to Mr. C. H. Bead, 
 Keeper of the Mediaeval Antiquities at the British Museum, 
 for valuable assistance received when making studies of the 
 objects in their respective Departments. H. W. 
 
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.* 
 
 PLATE I. 
 
 Fig. 1.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl : hollow foot. White 
 body : green lead glaze, unglazed on outside. Figure ornament 
 stamped in relief. H. 74 mm. Dr. F. R. Martin. 
 
 Fig. 2.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl : hollow foot. Whitish 
 body : pale yellow lead glaze ; unglazed on outside. Ornament, a 
 Grj^phon stamped in relief, portions being indistinct and merged in 
 the ground. H. 9 cm. Dr. F. R. Martin. 
 
 PLATE II. 
 
 Fig. 3.— SHALLOW BOWL (partly restored) : hollow foot. Red 
 body : pale yellow lead glaze on inside and outside. Ornament, a 
 Centaur fighting with a Serpent ; incised. D. 204 mm. 
 
 Kaiser Friedricli Museum, Berlin. 
 
 PLATE III. 
 
 Fig. 4.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. W^hite body : deep 
 yellow, almost orange lead glaze; the outside is unglazed. Ornament, 
 stamped in relief. H. 107 mm. 
 
 Fig. 5.— FRAGMENT. Inside of a bowl. White body : pale 
 yellow lead glaze. Ornament, stamped in relief. H. 10 cm. 
 
 PLATE IV. 
 
 Fig. 6.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Pale buff' body : 
 pale yellow lead glaze, same on outside, but none within the ring 
 on the foot. Ornament, stamped in relief. H. 88 mm. 
 
 South Kensington Museum. 
 
 * The objects belonging to the find finish at Fig. 52. The dotted lines signify that 
 the forms are not clearly defined in the originals. 
 
 a 
 
2 
 
 LIST OF ILLUSTKATIONS. 
 
 Fig. 7.— FRAGMENT. Inside of a bowl. White body : pale 
 groenish-yellow lead glaze. Ornament, stamped in relief. H. 138 mm. 
 
 Kaiser Friedrich Museum, Berlin. 
 
 PLATE V. 
 
 Fig. 8.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. White body : pale 
 yellow lead glaze. Ornament, stamped in relief. H. 8 cm. 
 
 Fig. 9.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. White body : pale 
 yellow lead glaze. Ornament, stamped in relief. H. 9 cm. 
 
 Fig. 10.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. White body : pale 
 yellow lead glaze. Ornament, stamped in relief. H. 8 cm. 
 
 PLATE VL 
 
 Fig. 11.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl : flat foot. Red 
 body : yellow lead glaze, also on reverse. Incised monogram. 
 H. 7 cm. 
 
 Fig. 12.— FRAGMENT. Inside of a bowl : small hollow foot. 
 Red body : pale yellow lead glaze. Incised monogram. H. 9 cm. 
 
 Fig. 13.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl : deep hollow foot. 
 Red body : pale yellow lead glaze, outside unglazed. Initial letter 
 incised. H. 7 cm. Soutli Kensing-ton Museum. 
 
 Fig. 14.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : pale 
 yellow lead glaze. Initial letter incised. H. G7 mm. 
 
 Fig. 15.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : pale 
 yellow lead glaze. Incised monogram. H. 65 mm.* 
 
 Fig. 16.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : yellow 
 lead glaze, the same colour outside, but also marbled in red and brown. 
 Ornament, stamped in intaglio. H 45 mm. Dr. F. R. Martin. 
 
 The letters and monograms on Figs 11-16 are possibly stamped. 
 
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 3 
 
 PLATE VII. 
 
 Fig. 17.— FRAGMENT. A portion of a plate. Red body : yellow 
 glaze. Ornament, a foot and portion of embroidered vestment of a 
 figure standing on an arcade, incised. H. 8 cm. 
 
 Fig. 18.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : sea- 
 green glaze, also on outside. Ornament, incised. H. 85 mm. 
 
 Fig. 19.— FRAGMENT. A part of a bowl or basin. Red body : 
 deep yellow glaze. Ornament, incised. D. 6.5 mm. 
 
 Fig. 20.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : yellow 
 glaze. Ornament, incised. H. 65 mm. 
 
 PLATE VIII. 
 
 Fig. 21. — BOWL. Red body: pale yellow glaze. Ornament, incised 
 and tinted green in places. D. 14 cm. 
 
 Fig. 22.— TWO FRAGMENTS. The inside and border of bowls, 
 similar in material but not in design. Red body : yellow glaze, 
 green on outside. Ornament, incised. L. 14 cm. 
 
 Fig. 23.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : yellow 
 glaze. Ornament, incised. H. 9 cm. 
 
 Fig. 24.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : yellow 
 glaze. Ornament, incised. Outside green and brown. H. 72 mm. 
 
 PLATE IX. 
 
 Fig. 25. — BOWL. Red body : pale yellow glaze. Ornament, incised 
 and tinted green and raw siena. D. 15 cm. 
 
 South Kensington Museum. 
 
 Fig. 26.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body, yellow 
 glaze, green band on outside. Ornament, incised and tinted green 
 and deep yellow. H. 17 cm. 
 
 PLATE X. 
 
 Fig. 27.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Pale red body: pale 
 yellow glaze. Ornament, incised and tinged with green in places. 
 H. 9 cm. South Kensington Museum. 
 
4 
 
 LIST OP ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 Fig. 28.— FRAGMENT. The inside o£ a bowl. Red body : whitish 
 glaze. Ornament, incised and tinged with green, raw siena, and 
 manganese-brown. H. 16 cm. 
 
 PLATE XI. 
 
 Fig. 29.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : yellow 
 glaze. Ornament, incised; outside brown. H. 46 mm. 
 
 Soutli Kensington Museum. 
 
 Fig. 30.— TWO FRAGMENTS. Hard red body : deep yellowish 
 glaze. Ornament, incised. H. 8 cm. 
 
 Fig. 31.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : yellow 
 glaze. Ornament, incised and tinged green in places. H. 85 mm. 
 
 PLATE XII. 
 
 Fig. 32.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : pale 
 yellow glaze. Ornament, incised and painted in raw siena. 
 H. 105 mm. South Kensingrton Museum. 
 
 Fig. 33.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body: pale 
 yellow glaze. Ornament, incised, the dark portions painted in 
 manganese on body. Outside, manganese and green glazes. 
 H. 10 cm. South Kensing-ton Museum. 
 
 PLATE XIII. 
 
 Fig. 34.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : yellow 
 glaze ; outside, brown and green glaze. Ornament, incited. 
 H. 8 cm. South Kensing-ton Museum. 
 
 Fig. 35.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : yellow 
 glaze. Ornament, incised, the darks strengthened with manganese. 
 H. 105 mm. 
 
 PLATE XIV. 
 
 Fig. 36.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. White body : 
 green lead glaze on inside and outside. Ornament, stamped in 
 relief, damaged. H. 102. Kaiser Friedrich Museum, Berlin. 
 
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 5 
 
 Fig. 37.— FRAGMENT. The inside o£ a bowl. Pale red body : 
 mottled lead glaze in deep green, manganese and raw siena. 
 Ornament, stamped in relief, much worn and chipped. 
 
 Fig. 38.— FRAGMENT. A part of a cup with handle. Buff body: 
 pale yellow glaze. Ornament, incised ; the ornament to 1. is on the 
 inside of cup and has a hole in it. H. 7 cm. 
 
 PLATE XV. 
 
 Fig. 39.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : yellow 
 glaze. Ornament, incised and tinted green, manganese, and raw 
 siena. Outside, unglazed. Hollow foot. H. 15 cm. 
 
 PLATE XVI. 
 
 Fig. 40.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : vitreous 
 pale blue glaze, much scaled. Ornament, painted in dark blue, out- 
 lined in black. H. 7 cm. South, Kensington Museum. 
 
 Fig. 41.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : pale 
 yellow vitreous glaze. Outside, white slip not covering the foot. 
 Ornament, stamped in relief and painted in cobalt. H. 96 mm. 
 
 South. Kensington Museum. 
 
 Fig. 42.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Pale red body : 
 blue vitreous glaze, scaled. Ornament, painted in black. Trace of 
 slip on outside and also of a pale green glaze. H. 85 mm. 
 
 South Kensington Museum. 
 
 PLATE XVII. 
 
 Fig. 43.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : trans- 
 parent vitreous glaze covering white slip. Ornament, outlined in 
 black and painted deep bine. Slip on outside and three concentric 
 lines in red. L. 18 cm. South Kensington Museum. 
 
6 
 
 LIST OF ILLUSTKATIONS. 
 
 Fig. 44.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. White body : trans- 
 parent vitreous glaze. Ornament, outlined in black and painted in 
 green and blue. A red cross in the centre of the hollow foot. 
 H. 11 cm. 
 
 Fig. 4.5.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. White body: trans- 
 parent vitreous glaze. Ornament, outlined in black, painted in red, 
 green, and blue, reminiscent of the colours of Rhodian wares. 
 H. 6 cm. 
 
 PLATE XVIII. 
 
 Fig. 46.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body: vitreous 
 glaze over white slip. Ornament, painted in purple-manganese. 
 Outside, concentric circles in green, the foot is unglazed. H. 16 cm. 
 
 Fig. 47.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body: vitreous 
 glaze over white slip. Ornament, painted in manganese and cobalt. 
 Outside, concentric lines in green. L. 23 cm, 
 
 PLATE XIX. 
 
 Fig. 48.— FRAGMENT. A portion of a bowl. Red body : vitreous 
 glaze on white slip. Ornament, painted in black and cobalt. Outside, 
 scroll-work in black. L. 22 cm. 
 
 Fig. 49.— FRAGMENT. A portion of a bowl. Red body : vitreous 
 glaze on white slip. Ornament, painted in black and blue. Outside, 
 green band. H. 18 cm. 
 
 PLATE XX. 
 
 Fig. 50.— FRAGMENT. A portion of a bowl. Red body : vitreous 
 glaze on white slip. Ornament, outlined in black, painted in deep 
 cobalt. Outside, scroll-work. H. 15 cm. 
 
 Fig. 51.— FRAGMENT. A portion of a bowl. Red body : vitreous 
 glaze on white slip. Ornament, oiitlined in black, painted in deep 
 cobalt. H. 18 cm. 
 
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 7 
 
 PLATE XXI. 
 
 Fig. 52. — BOWL. A large piece is missing. Red body : vitreous 
 glaze on white slip ; hollow foot. Ornament, painted on the inside 
 in dark blue, on the outside in green lines. D. 135 mm. 
 
 South. Kensington Museum. 
 
 PLATE XXII. 
 
 Fig. 53.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Pale red body ; 
 lead glaze over white slip. Incised ornament, marbled in yellow, 
 manganese, and greenish grey. The outside in yellow glaze. Paduan. 
 XVth century. For spirals on the background, see Fig. 48. 
 H. 10 cm. Henry Wallis. 
 
 PLATE XXIII. 
 
 Fig. 54. — EWER (partly restored). Pale red body covered with 
 white slip ; marbled in blue. A shield of arms at the base of spout, 
 the blasonry incised. Paduan. XVth century. H. 21 cm. 
 
 PLATE XXIV. 
 
 Fig. 55. — EWER. Pale red body covered with white slip. Deep 
 green lead glaze. Paduan. XVIth century. H. 20 cm. 
 
 PLATE XXV. 
 
 Fig. 56.— FRAGMENT. From an Egyptian vase. White body : 
 transparent vitreous glaze on the outside, the inside covered with a 
 brilliant turquoise glaze. Ornament, in relief, and incised in places ; 
 marbled in blue and manganese-purple. H. 9 cm. Henry Wallis. 
 
 PLATE XXVI. 
 
 Fig. 57. — BOWL. Red body covered with white slip : hollow foot. 
 Inside marbled in blue, the outside covered with bright green glaze. 
 From South Italy. D. 12 cm. Britisli Museum. 
 
 Fig. 58. — BASIN : on a slightly raised hollow foot. Pale red body : 
 warm toned lead glaze. Ornament, inside and outside marbled in 
 red, olive-green, brown, and yellowish white. Abraded and the glaze 
 has lost its polish. Found at Taranto. D. 21 cm., H. 87 mm. 
 
 Britisii Museum. 
 
8 
 
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 PLATE XXVII. 
 
 Fig. 59. — CUP. White body : pale greenish-yellow lead glaze. 
 Ornament, incised. Compare with Fig. 22. See E. Pottier and 
 S. Reinach. La Necropole de Myrina. 1887. Tome I. p. 238. 
 Found at Myrina. H. 8 cm., D. 10 cm. Musee du Louvre. 
 
 Fig. 60.— FRAGMENT. Red body, hard and thin, covered with 
 white slip. Rich greenish-grey lead glaze on inside ; green glaze 
 on outside where it covers slip, a rich chocolate where it covers the 
 body. Ornament, incised. Found at Theodosia. H. 9 cm. 
 
 Musee du Louvre. 
 
 PLATE XXVIII. 
 
 Fig. 61. — BASIN. Red body : pale yellow glaze. Ornament, 
 incised and tinted in places raw siena and green. This and Fig. 43 
 were incrusted in the W. front of the church S. Nicolo at Ravenna. 
 D. 16 cm., H. 7 cm. Archaeological Museum, Ravenna. 
 
 Fig. 62. — BASIN. Red body : pale yellow glaze. Ornament, 
 incised and tinted raw siena and green. From the church of 
 S. Nicolo, Ravenna. D. 16 cm., H. 75 mm. 
 
 Archaeological Museum, Ravenna. 
 
 PLATE XXIX. 
 
 Fig. 63.— FRAGMENT. The centre o£ a bowl. Pale red body : 
 yellowish glaze. Ornament, incised and marbled green and raw 
 
 siena. H. 16 cm. Archseolog-ical Museum, Ravenna. 
 
 Fig. 64. — BOWL. Maiolica. Buff body : stanniferous glaze. 
 Ornament, outlined in black and painted, for the centre flower in 
 pale yellow, the rest in emerald-green, on white ground; the wavy 
 line is in cobalt. D. 45 cm., depth 12 cm. 
 
 PLATE XXX. 
 
 Fig. 65. — BOWL. Maiolica. Buff body : stanniferous glaze. 
 Ornament, outlined in black and painted in emerald-green on 
 white ground. D. 28 cm., depth 7 cm. 
 
LIST OF ILLUSTEATIONS. 
 
 9 
 
 Fig. 66. — BOWL. Maiolica. Bnff body : stanniferous glaze. 
 Ornament, outlined in black and painted in emerald-green for the 
 centre, the rest yellow, on white ground. D. 28 cm., depth 7 cm. 
 
 P'LATE XXXI. 
 
 Fig. 67. — BOWL. Maiolica. Buff body : stanniferous glaze. 
 Ornament, outlined in black and painted deep manganese, on white 
 ground. D. 45 cm., depth 12 cm. 
 
 Fig. 68. — BOWL. Maiolica. Buff body : stanniferous glaze. 
 Ornament, marbled in blue, with black touches. D. 45 cm., 
 depth 12 cm. 
 
 PLATE XXXII. 
 
 Fig. 69. — BOWL. Mezza Maiolica. Red body covered with a 
 
 white slip. Transparent lead glaze : marbled in blue. Paduan. 
 
 D. 115 mm. Britisli Museum. 
 
 Fig. 70.— FRAGMENT (portion of a two-handled scodello). Mezza 
 Maiolica. Buff body ; inside covered with a white slip; pale yellow 
 lead glaze. Flat foot. Ornament, an M painted in black with six 
 fleurons in black and copper-green. Found at Ravenna. Xlllth 
 century (?). H. 55 mm. Henry Wallis. 
 
 PLATE XXXIII. 
 
 Fig. 71.— FLAT DISH, with small handle (restored). Mezza 
 Maiolica. Pale buff body covered with white slip: transparent glaze. 
 Ornament, outlined in manganese and painted in blue, pale green, 
 pale yellow, and black on the inside. The outside plain but showing- 
 traces of the pink glaze, as in Fig. 72. Found in same excavation as 
 Fig. 72. Early XVth century (?). D. 20 cm. Henry Wallis. 
 
 Fig. 72.— BOWL (restored). Mezza Maiolica. Pale buffi body 
 covered with white slip : transparent glaze. Ornament, painted in 
 blue on the inside. The outside is plain but covered with a pink 
 glaze of the same tint as that on the outside of dishes found in 
 excavations at the Castle of St. Angelo, Rome. Found in excavation 
 for building purposes at Florence. Early XVth century (?). 
 D. 23 cm. Henry Wallis. 
 
 b 
 
10 
 
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 PLATE XXXIV. 
 
 j^ig. 73.— BOCCALE (restored). Maiolica. Buffi body : tin glaze. 
 
 Ornament outlined in manganese, painted in blue. Faventine. 
 XVth century. H. 20 cm. f 6- Henry Wallis. 
 
 Fig. 74.— FRAGMENT. Mezza Maiolica. Palish red body covered 
 with white slip: pale yellow lead glaze. Ornament, incised and with 
 the slip cut away so as to leave the design in relief ; slightly marbled 
 in green on the inside. The glaze covers the hollow foot. Paduan. 
 H. 11 cm. Henry Wallis. 
 
 PLATE XXXV. 
 
 Fig. 75.— UNOUENT VASE. White body : pale greenish-grey 
 lead glaze on outside, inside yellowish grey. Ornament, boldly 
 drawn vertical lines on the belly in manganese, between them thick 
 blots of rich green which have run in the firing. Well potted, thin 
 sides, light in weight: the lines of the string with which the jar was 
 cut from the wheel are seen on the flat foot. Found with the other 
 objects of the Sancta Sanctorum in the ancient church, formerly the 
 chapel of the old Lateran palace, at Rome. H. 8 cm. 
 
 Vatican Museum of Gh.ristian Art. 
 
 PLATE XXXVI. 
 
 Fig. 76.— PART OF A BOWL. Pale red body covered with white 
 slip: transparent glaze on inside, unglazed on outside, except at the 
 edge, where the glaze from inside has run over. Ornament, outlined 
 in manganese, painted, for the birds' bodies and wings and the 
 "floral motive," in pale green. The body is thin and light; the 
 hollow foot is pierced with a hole. D. 16 cm. 
 
 Monastery Museum, Grotta Ferrata. 
 
 Fig. 77.— PART OF A BOWL. Pale buff body covered with white 
 slip: transparent glaze. Ornament, on inside outlined in manganese, 
 painted in green and yellow. The body is thin and light; the hollow 
 foot is pierced with two holes. D. 25 cm. 
 
 Monastery Museum, Grotta Ferrata. 
 
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 11 
 
 PLATE XXXVII. 
 
 Fig. 78. — BOWL. White body covered with a deep blue glaze 
 ■ inside and outside. Ornament, on the inside outlined in white; red 
 bands bordering the cross and the " floral motives " in the spaces 
 between the limbs of the cross ; red rim, beneath it a black band. 
 Within the red borders of the cross and " floral motives " squares of 
 gold and small scroll-work in white. Outside, vertical lines in red 
 and white. Persian. D. 17 cm. British Museum. 
 
 PLATE XXXVIII. 
 
 Fig. 79. — BOWL. White body covered with a transparent glaze 
 inside and outside. Ornament, on the inside outlined in dark lines; 
 palish-orange bands bordering the cross and " floral motives." 
 Within the border the cross is painted dark blue, on which are 
 squares of gold and small scroll-work in white: the ornament within 
 the " floral motives " is outlined in dark colour with traces of gold 
 squares. Outside, dark vertical lines. The surface of the vessel is 
 covered with a slight iridescence, acquired from being buried in 
 the earth. Persian. D. 19 cm. Mr. F. Du Cane Godman. 
 
 PLATE XXXIX. 
 
 Fig. 80.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Light red body : 
 yellow glaze, brown where the slip is cut away ; green on outside. 
 Ornament, incised. From Pergamon. H. 92 mm. 
 
 Kaiser Friedrich Museum, Berlin. 
 
 Fig. 81.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Yellowish body: 
 warm yellow glaze. Ornament, incised. From Pergamon. 
 H. 102 mm. Kaiser Friedrich. Museum, Berlin. 
 
 Fig. 82.— FRAGMENT. The inside of a bowl. Red body : yellow 
 glaze. Ornament, incised. L. 77 mm. 
 
 Kaiser Friedricli Museum, Berlin 
 
12 
 
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 PLATE XL. 
 
 Fig. 83.— FRAGMENT, part of large bowl or dish. White body 
 covered with a deep turquoise glaze inside and outside, except at the 
 hollow foot. Ornament, painted in black under the glaze: on the 
 outside two lines near the foot, above vertical lines. Eygptian. 
 Found at Fostat. Compare with Fig. 46. H. 15 cm. 
 
 Henry "Wallis. 
 
 PLATE XLI. 
 
 Fig. 84.— FRAGMENT, part of a large bowl. White body covered 
 with a transparent glaze inside and outside, except at the hollow foot. 
 Ornament, on inside outlined in black, painted on the body of the 
 bird in turquoise blue, the dots in the circles and the ground of the 
 motive behind the wing in cobalt blue : on the outside a band near 
 the foot with vertical lines in black above it. Syrian. Found at 
 Fostat. A typical example of highly conventional bird design on 
 Syrian pottery. The same ware as the well-known, so-called Siculo- 
 Arab vases at S. Kensington. H. 14 cm, Henry Wallis. 
 
ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
Fig. 1. 
 
 PLATE I. 
 
 Fig. 2. 
 
PLATE II. 
 
PLATE III. 
 
PLATE IV. 
 
 Fig. 6. 
 
 Fig. 7. 
 
PLATE V. 
 
 Rg. 10. 
 
PLATE VI. 
 
PLATE VII. 
 
 Fig. W. 
 
PLATE VIII. 
 
PLATE IX. 
 
PLATE X. 
 
 Fig. 28. 
 
PLATE XI. 
 
 Fig. 30. 
 
 Fig. 81. 
 
Fig. S2. 
 
PLATE XIII. 
 
 Fig. 35. 
 
PLATE XIV. 
 
 Fig. 88. 
 
PLATE XV 
 
PLATE XVI, 
 
 Fig. 42. 
 
PLATE XVII 
 
 Fig. 44. 
 
PLATE XVIII. 
 
PLATE XIX. 
 
Fig. 50. 
 
 Fig. 51. 
 
PLATE XXI. 
 
PLATE XXII. 
 
PLATE XXIII. 
 
PLATE XXIV. 
 
PLATE XXV. 
 
 Fig. 56. 
 
PLATE XXVI. 
 
PLATE XXVII 
 
 rtg. 60. 
 
PLATE XXVIII. 
 
 Fig. 61. 
 
 Fig. 62. 
 
PLATE XXIX 
 
 Fig. 64. 
 
PLATE XXX 
 
 Fig. 66. 
 
PLATE XXXI. 
 
 Fig. 68. 
 
PLATE XXXII. 
 
PLATE XXXIII. 
 
 Fig. 71. 
 
PLATE XXXIV. 
 
PLATE XXXV, 
 
PLATE XXXVI. 
 
PLATE XXXVII. 
 
PLATE XXXVIII. 
 
PLATE XXXIX. 
 
 Fig. 82. 
 
PLATE XL. 
 
 Fig. 8S. 
 
PLATE XLI. 
 
 Firj. S4. 
 
664 — Byzantine ceramic art. Noiea 
 
 examples of byzantine pottery recently 
 found at Constantinople. London 1907. 
 28, 12 S. u. 41 Taf., von denen einige in 
 Farbliclitdruck. OHLwd. 95,— 
 
 r 
 
 3 3125 00928 7620