332 



TABLE-TALK AND VARIETIES. 



Home. The vase remained for about 

 two centuries in the possession of 

 the Barberini family, in the same 

 city, and at last fell into the hands 

 of Sir William Hamilton, from 

 whom it was purchased by the 

 Duke of Portland about the end 

 of last century, for one thousand 

 guineas, and who ultimately de- 

 posited it in the Museum. A mould 

 of this noble work of art was taken 

 at Borne before it came into the 

 possession of Sir William Hamilton ; 

 and from this mould an English 

 modeller took sixty casts in plaster 

 of Paris, and then destroyed the 

 mould. Wedgewood, the celebrated 

 potter, also obtained a mould of the 

 vase, from which he produced thirty 

 copies, and after selling these at 

 twenty-five guineas each, destroyed 

 the cast, in order to prevent the 

 price from diminishing by the re- 

 production of the manufacture. 

 Modern art has, however, in vari- 

 ous ways, multiplied the form of 

 this exquisitely proportioned vessel, 

 imitations of which in stucco and 

 other materials are by no means 

 uncommon ; but it has failed to 

 imitate the material of which it is 

 constructed. Although it is now 

 nearly a century since the vase was 

 brought to this country, so little is 

 known of the method by which it 

 was fabricated, that we are still left 

 to conjecture what is the substance 

 of which it is made, and the me- 

 thods by which the beautiful bas- 

 reliefs with which it is adorned 

 have been attached to the surface. 

 Dr. Wollaston supposed that it was 

 formed by first producing an arti- 

 ficial opal, and then blowing it out 

 as is now done with glass vessels ; 

 after which, part of the outer layer 

 or surface was cut away, leaving the 

 figures in relief. Wedgewood was 

 of a similar opinion, illustrating his 

 conjecture as to the method of pro- 

 ducing the figures, by a reference 

 to the mode adopted in cutting the 

 finest cameos ; and hence inferring 



that the construction and ornament 

 ing of the vase must have been the 

 labour of many years. The expla- 

 nation is plausible, but not so satis- 

 factory as it would have been, had 

 Wedgewood successfully attempted 

 to follow out the process. 



The vase is ten inches high, and 

 its diameter six inches at the 

 broadest part near the centre, 

 whence it diminishes gradually to- 

 wards the base, and more rapidly 

 upwards into a narrow neck, which 

 again opens towards the lip by a 

 graceful flower-like expansion. Two 

 handles spring from over the broad- 

 est and terminate in the narrowest 

 part. The substance of the vessel 

 is vitreous or glassy, and dark- 

 bluish coloured, but translucent. It 

 is upon this dark-blue ground that 

 the figures in bas-relief are laid;, 

 and it has been remarked with j us- 

 tice, that they are so firmly united 

 to the ground upon which they are- 

 thus fixed, that they seem rather to 

 have grown out of it, and to be a- 

 part of itself, than to be fastened on 

 by art. In every view of the sup- 

 posed method of its fabrication, 

 there are difficulties which render 

 the conjectures hitherto offered on 

 the subject unsatisfactory. If the 

 figures have been placed upon the 

 surface when they were rendered 

 plastic, and the substance of the 

 vase itself adhesive, by means of 

 fire, the only conceivable agent in. 

 such a method of uniting them, how 

 is it that the finest lines in these 

 inimitable figures have not suffered 

 in the process, and by what dex- 

 terity of manipulation could this be 

 avoided ? On the other hand, if the 

 figures were relieved from the sur- 

 face, as in the production of cameos, 

 by cutting out the surrounding sur- 

 face, by what process of burnishing 

 could the surface be brought up to 

 its present crystalline smoothness 

 and transparency? Of the figures 

 themselves, as works of art, it is 

 impossible to speak in terms of 



