is at Villanova, near Bologna, that the first were discovered. This tomb is in the form of a well, diminishing in diameter from top to bottom, which ordinarily measures a metre and a half in diameter by a metre and a quarter, or two metres and a half in depth. At the bottom of this well opens another, which is smaller, and serves as the receptacle for the urn which contains the ashes or the calcined bones. The form and richness of these urns is infinite. We can now affirm with certainty that these sepulchres belong to the first centuries of Etruscan history. Later, the method of inhumation was substituted for cremation, and one begins to find here and there caves in which are found outstretched skeletons, and finally a time is discovered when the cinerary urns disappear entirely, to give place to bodies embalmed and ordinarily enclosed in stone coffins, or laid out upon marble slabs.
Here it is that is made manifest the importance of ceramics and the arts of secondary importance in the study of the morals and general customs of a people. The Etruscans probably believed that man, after death, commences a second life, which was only a continuation of that which he had just finished. Their conception of the ideal hereafter could not go beyond this material resurrection. They were, therefore, in the habit of enclosing in the tombs the personal accessories of every-day life, the tools of trade, the arms and the objects for which the deceased had special predilection. The examination and analysis of these accessories is, therefore, of great use, especially in the case of pottery, jewelry and the arms and armor, for they furnish the means of following step by step the progress of the race. The oldest Villanovan tombs contain coarse vases, badly polished and without decoration, while little by little we see these funeral furnishings become more beautiful, more refined, until we find in the best cave-sepulchres — in those at Corneto, Orvieto and Volterra, especially — models of decoration which evince a very advanced degree of finish. In these last tombs, mural painting and sculpture play an important part. The designs with which the pots are covered served to initiate us into the belief and the manner of living of their possessors, for they often reproduce religious subjects or scenes from life, although one has to be on his guard in dealing with these documents, which more than once, in place of being Etruscan fabrications, may have been imported by foreign merchants. In like way, among the articles of the toilet, sometimes so admirably wrought and so rich, which might give us an approximate idea of the taste and elegance of the Etruscan ladies, there must be found many which have been brought from the outside world, and which would only serve, if we could exactly determine their origin, to prove the empire which exotic ideas exercised over the customs of the Etruscans. Let us not forget, in short, that the Greek merchant communities at a given moment must have occupied important places in the maritime cities of Etruria. Certain Etruscan cities, like Cerea, for example, had treasuries in the sanctuary at Delphi. When Demaretes was driven out of Corinth by a revolution, he established himself in Tarquinii, in Tuscany, with the apparent certainty that he would find there many of his compatriots. Later, when the Carthaginians involved Etruria in an anti-Hellenic league, Tarquin, son of Demaretes, abandoned the city which his father had chosen, and, with a great number of Corinthians, fled to Rome, where, having become king, he made war against Etruria, to punish it for having espoused the quarrel of Carthage against Greece. At this time, consequently, the influence of the Oriental races in Etruria, and the commerce which brought this nation in contact with Grecian merchants, are beyond dispute. Moreover, one recognizes many amphoras ornamented with extremely fine and delicate designs, but bearing the signatures of Greek artists, which clearly show that the greater part of the objects having artistic worth are of exotic origin. I will mention at hazard, among the fine amphoras collected in the Gregorian Museum at Rome, one where is represented Achilles and Ajax at play, which is signed by the name of Enakias.
But let us leave these details, which, nevertheless, are full of interest, to speak with more definiteness of the development of Etruscan architecture, whose merits the Latin authors, beginning with Vitruvius, have so extraordinarily exaggerated. Let us first see how the Etruscans proceeded in their choice of materials. They had at their disposal granite of the island of Elba and island of Giglio, and the marble of Carrara, yet they never employed them. They preferred the volcanic and common calcareous stones, the working of which presents little difficulty, and, to crown their misfortune, they made great use of wood, especially in the framework, which exposed their buildings to the ravages of the flames and the deteriorating action of the weather. Is not this a proof that in their construction they did not aim at durability, and that they had the feeling that their works were not worthy of being shown to posterity?
On the other hand, they showed some capacity in fashioning rock in situ, especially when it was a question of rendering inaccessible the heights where they had built their cities. At other times they dug out tombs in the living rock, and at the entrance of these tombs cut façades and doorways, which present a certain interest, without, however, ever attaining the exceptional value of a monument.
In built-up work, the Etruscan system can be classified into three orders: 1. The polygonal order, where the stones are quarried in such a manner as to make four, five or six sided polygons, models of which are seen in the walls of a great number of central Italian cities, notably at Saturnia, at Pyrgi, at Cosa, at Præneste, Norba, Alatrium, Signia, Ferentinum and at Alba Marsooum, upon both
sides of the Tiber. 2. The irregular quadrangular arrangement, where the faces of the blocks have the form of a tetrahedron, cut without fixed rule —- an arrangement of which numberless examples can be seen at Rusellue, Volterra, Cortona and at Vetulonii; and 3. Finally, the quadrangular arrangement, where the blocks have all the same form and dimensions; these are cut to right angles, plumb on all their faces, and laid so as to form even beds, parallel and with rectilinear joints. This fashion prevailed at Sutrium, Falerii and Ardea. It is by one of these three characteristic signs that one may readily recognize a wall of Etruscan origin, in which we always remark, also, that the blocks are laid one upon the other without mortar or ties.
The Etruscans, in the first place, practised the trabeate system of covering, which consists, as everybody knows, in placing stones horizontally upon vertical supports; but ordinarily the lintels and the architraves were of wood. Sometimes, nevertheless, they employed for this purpose monoliths of quite large dimensions. In one dome-covered tomb at Quinto-Fiorentino, near Florence, we see a doorway surmounted by a slab which measures 1½ m. long by. 404 m. thick and 2. 45 m. wide. In the matter of vaults they had not only the vault formed by corbels, but the vault with voussoirs. As is well-known the first style is composed of horizontal layers which overhang the ones below in such manner as to narrow, little by little, the opening, which is finally closed by a keystone. Sometimes the corbelling is almost rectilinear, and gives to the doorway an almost triangular shape. Sometimes the shape becomes slightly pointed. This system was known to the Greeks, Chaldeans and Egyptians, so that it is wrong to attribute its invention to the Etruscans, as certain authors have done. The vault with the voussoirs is a vault properly so-called, because it is formed of pieces with oblique joints, wedgeshaped, so that they are supported one against another. It appears that in the later days of their prosperity the Etruscans excelled in using this kind of vaulting, which is one of the most praiseworthy methods used in architecture from the point of view of elegance as well as solidity; but the use of this method of closing an opening does not date beyond the eighth or ninth century, and many reasons lead us to believe that it was not invented on the spot, but that it was introduced by the Phœnicians, to whom Italy owes so much instruction. In fact, Perrot and Chipiez declare, in their ʼʼHistory of Art, ” that the conception of the vault belongs to the Orient; but one can at least do the Etruscans justice by believing that it was through them that the vault became part of the patrimony of Occidental art. They are the ones who received the tradition from the Phoenicians and transmitted it to the Romans, who in their turn bequeathed it to us. It is almost the only thing which modern architecture owes to the Etruscans, who, however, themselves were indebted for it to the Orient.
As to the general configuration of their buildings, the Etruscans at first followed the circular form, then they adopted rectangular shapes. Whence comes this change, and why was the curvilinear form of plan first preferred in Etruria? In the first place, we know that the primitive habitation of all races had the circular form like the hut; but religious rites were not stranger to this usage. In the orientation of cities, sanctuaries and altars, the Etruscans, like the Greeks and Romans, followed principles consecrated by superstition. They consulted presages, and to aid these the priest ascended to the selected place, then with a curved stick (lituus) he traced above his head two lines crossing each other perpendicularly, the one extending from the north to south (cardo), the other from east to west (decumanus). The celestial vault thus defined was called a temple (templum). This function is often represented in certain Etruscan designs. The edifice when built must naturally correspond to the ideal form of the heavens, which was for the ancients the blue dome of heaven. This is one of the reasons why during the first centuries the buildings of Etruria were all more or less circular. Later, when they began to use wood in the framework of the roofs, they were forced to perceive that the rectangular form was more suitable to this mode of construction, and a reform took place without violating the religious traditions, for it was sufficiently de rigueur to construct a rectangle by joining the extremities of the cardo and the decumanus drawn by the priest. But in my opinion the principal cause of this innovation lies in the Grecian influence and upon this point I am quite of the opinion of M. Martha. It is known, in short, that Grecian architecture is exclusively rectilinear, and from the day when the Hellenic artists were called to work in Etruria they did not fail to make use of their own methods, superior to that used by the natives. In like manner as to the use of the column, the Etruscans in all probability learned everything from the Greeks. Before these reached Etruria, the isolated column as an element of support was almost unknown in architecture. But to adapt the Grecian column to their dwarfed and graceless style, the Etruscans made it more squat, more massive, more awkward. Then they made a jumble of the orders, and formed that which is called in architecture the Tuscan column, a hybrid conception which is connected with the Doric, through the curvature of its capital and its abacus and with the Ionic by its die, its torus, its astragals and listels which surround the shaft especially at its base.
As to details, Etruscan architecture has no real style. It united things at haphazard, without rule and without principle, and this irrational confusion ended in a disorderly eclecticism. The doors are of four kinds, two rectilinear, one of these being rectangular, the other trapezoidal; two curvilinear, one of these being the pointed door of the cellarways, built corbel fashion, and the other the
Here it is that is made manifest the importance of ceramics and the arts of secondary importance in the study of the morals and general customs of a people. The Etruscans probably believed that man, after death, commences a second life, which was only a continuation of that which he had just finished. Their conception of the ideal hereafter could not go beyond this material resurrection. They were, therefore, in the habit of enclosing in the tombs the personal accessories of every-day life, the tools of trade, the arms and the objects for which the deceased had special predilection. The examination and analysis of these accessories is, therefore, of great use, especially in the case of pottery, jewelry and the arms and armor, for they furnish the means of following step by step the progress of the race. The oldest Villanovan tombs contain coarse vases, badly polished and without decoration, while little by little we see these funeral furnishings become more beautiful, more refined, until we find in the best cave-sepulchres — in those at Corneto, Orvieto and Volterra, especially — models of decoration which evince a very advanced degree of finish. In these last tombs, mural painting and sculpture play an important part. The designs with which the pots are covered served to initiate us into the belief and the manner of living of their possessors, for they often reproduce religious subjects or scenes from life, although one has to be on his guard in dealing with these documents, which more than once, in place of being Etruscan fabrications, may have been imported by foreign merchants. In like way, among the articles of the toilet, sometimes so admirably wrought and so rich, which might give us an approximate idea of the taste and elegance of the Etruscan ladies, there must be found many which have been brought from the outside world, and which would only serve, if we could exactly determine their origin, to prove the empire which exotic ideas exercised over the customs of the Etruscans. Let us not forget, in short, that the Greek merchant communities at a given moment must have occupied important places in the maritime cities of Etruria. Certain Etruscan cities, like Cerea, for example, had treasuries in the sanctuary at Delphi. When Demaretes was driven out of Corinth by a revolution, he established himself in Tarquinii, in Tuscany, with the apparent certainty that he would find there many of his compatriots. Later, when the Carthaginians involved Etruria in an anti-Hellenic league, Tarquin, son of Demaretes, abandoned the city which his father had chosen, and, with a great number of Corinthians, fled to Rome, where, having become king, he made war against Etruria, to punish it for having espoused the quarrel of Carthage against Greece. At this time, consequently, the influence of the Oriental races in Etruria, and the commerce which brought this nation in contact with Grecian merchants, are beyond dispute. Moreover, one recognizes many amphoras ornamented with extremely fine and delicate designs, but bearing the signatures of Greek artists, which clearly show that the greater part of the objects having artistic worth are of exotic origin. I will mention at hazard, among the fine amphoras collected in the Gregorian Museum at Rome, one where is represented Achilles and Ajax at play, which is signed by the name of Enakias.
But let us leave these details, which, nevertheless, are full of interest, to speak with more definiteness of the development of Etruscan architecture, whose merits the Latin authors, beginning with Vitruvius, have so extraordinarily exaggerated. Let us first see how the Etruscans proceeded in their choice of materials. They had at their disposal granite of the island of Elba and island of Giglio, and the marble of Carrara, yet they never employed them. They preferred the volcanic and common calcareous stones, the working of which presents little difficulty, and, to crown their misfortune, they made great use of wood, especially in the framework, which exposed their buildings to the ravages of the flames and the deteriorating action of the weather. Is not this a proof that in their construction they did not aim at durability, and that they had the feeling that their works were not worthy of being shown to posterity?
On the other hand, they showed some capacity in fashioning rock in situ, especially when it was a question of rendering inaccessible the heights where they had built their cities. At other times they dug out tombs in the living rock, and at the entrance of these tombs cut façades and doorways, which present a certain interest, without, however, ever attaining the exceptional value of a monument.
In built-up work, the Etruscan system can be classified into three orders: 1. The polygonal order, where the stones are quarried in such a manner as to make four, five or six sided polygons, models of which are seen in the walls of a great number of central Italian cities, notably at Saturnia, at Pyrgi, at Cosa, at Præneste, Norba, Alatrium, Signia, Ferentinum and at Alba Marsooum, upon both
sides of the Tiber. 2. The irregular quadrangular arrangement, where the faces of the blocks have the form of a tetrahedron, cut without fixed rule —- an arrangement of which numberless examples can be seen at Rusellue, Volterra, Cortona and at Vetulonii; and 3. Finally, the quadrangular arrangement, where the blocks have all the same form and dimensions; these are cut to right angles, plumb on all their faces, and laid so as to form even beds, parallel and with rectilinear joints. This fashion prevailed at Sutrium, Falerii and Ardea. It is by one of these three characteristic signs that one may readily recognize a wall of Etruscan origin, in which we always remark, also, that the blocks are laid one upon the other without mortar or ties.
The Etruscans, in the first place, practised the trabeate system of covering, which consists, as everybody knows, in placing stones horizontally upon vertical supports; but ordinarily the lintels and the architraves were of wood. Sometimes, nevertheless, they employed for this purpose monoliths of quite large dimensions. In one dome-covered tomb at Quinto-Fiorentino, near Florence, we see a doorway surmounted by a slab which measures 1½ m. long by. 404 m. thick and 2. 45 m. wide. In the matter of vaults they had not only the vault formed by corbels, but the vault with voussoirs. As is well-known the first style is composed of horizontal layers which overhang the ones below in such manner as to narrow, little by little, the opening, which is finally closed by a keystone. Sometimes the corbelling is almost rectilinear, and gives to the doorway an almost triangular shape. Sometimes the shape becomes slightly pointed. This system was known to the Greeks, Chaldeans and Egyptians, so that it is wrong to attribute its invention to the Etruscans, as certain authors have done. The vault with the voussoirs is a vault properly so-called, because it is formed of pieces with oblique joints, wedgeshaped, so that they are supported one against another. It appears that in the later days of their prosperity the Etruscans excelled in using this kind of vaulting, which is one of the most praiseworthy methods used in architecture from the point of view of elegance as well as solidity; but the use of this method of closing an opening does not date beyond the eighth or ninth century, and many reasons lead us to believe that it was not invented on the spot, but that it was introduced by the Phœnicians, to whom Italy owes so much instruction. In fact, Perrot and Chipiez declare, in their ʼʼHistory of Art, ” that the conception of the vault belongs to the Orient; but one can at least do the Etruscans justice by believing that it was through them that the vault became part of the patrimony of Occidental art. They are the ones who received the tradition from the Phoenicians and transmitted it to the Romans, who in their turn bequeathed it to us. It is almost the only thing which modern architecture owes to the Etruscans, who, however, themselves were indebted for it to the Orient.
As to the general configuration of their buildings, the Etruscans at first followed the circular form, then they adopted rectangular shapes. Whence comes this change, and why was the curvilinear form of plan first preferred in Etruria? In the first place, we know that the primitive habitation of all races had the circular form like the hut; but religious rites were not stranger to this usage. In the orientation of cities, sanctuaries and altars, the Etruscans, like the Greeks and Romans, followed principles consecrated by superstition. They consulted presages, and to aid these the priest ascended to the selected place, then with a curved stick (lituus) he traced above his head two lines crossing each other perpendicularly, the one extending from the north to south (cardo), the other from east to west (decumanus). The celestial vault thus defined was called a temple (templum). This function is often represented in certain Etruscan designs. The edifice when built must naturally correspond to the ideal form of the heavens, which was for the ancients the blue dome of heaven. This is one of the reasons why during the first centuries the buildings of Etruria were all more or less circular. Later, when they began to use wood in the framework of the roofs, they were forced to perceive that the rectangular form was more suitable to this mode of construction, and a reform took place without violating the religious traditions, for it was sufficiently de rigueur to construct a rectangle by joining the extremities of the cardo and the decumanus drawn by the priest. But in my opinion the principal cause of this innovation lies in the Grecian influence and upon this point I am quite of the opinion of M. Martha. It is known, in short, that Grecian architecture is exclusively rectilinear, and from the day when the Hellenic artists were called to work in Etruria they did not fail to make use of their own methods, superior to that used by the natives. In like manner as to the use of the column, the Etruscans in all probability learned everything from the Greeks. Before these reached Etruria, the isolated column as an element of support was almost unknown in architecture. But to adapt the Grecian column to their dwarfed and graceless style, the Etruscans made it more squat, more massive, more awkward. Then they made a jumble of the orders, and formed that which is called in architecture the Tuscan column, a hybrid conception which is connected with the Doric, through the curvature of its capital and its abacus and with the Ionic by its die, its torus, its astragals and listels which surround the shaft especially at its base.
As to details, Etruscan architecture has no real style. It united things at haphazard, without rule and without principle, and this irrational confusion ended in a disorderly eclecticism. The doors are of four kinds, two rectilinear, one of these being rectangular, the other trapezoidal; two curvilinear, one of these being the pointed door of the cellarways, built corbel fashion, and the other the