- Armando Cherici –
cause and effect. Why the next steps toward actual scientifi c progress did not occur is
diffi cult to say. Perhaps because of the gradual marginalization of Etruria compared to
that world of contacts and exchanges that will give life to Ionian philosophy, and then
to Hellenistic science. Perhaps because an important scientifi c tool precociously and
systematically used by the Etruscans, the hoarding of wisdom literature in the pages
of written texts, has not permitted the subsequent development of a doctrine or of an
observation, but rather its crystallization. Its ultimate codifi cation with the written
word, once data is written down, excludes the need to continue the direct observation of
natural phenomena that had served as the raison d’etre of the book itself. A book that, as
a further element of “crystallization,” was attributed to semi-divine sages – Tages, the
nymph Vegoia, the “sage” of the passage in the Suda, perhaps even Pythagoras^7 – who
were believed to be infallible, like their writings. This “fossilization” of the written
data recurs often in the history of science, e.g. the contrasting positions of Galileo’s
experimentalism and the Aristotelians who, having drawn their positions on the texts
and the weight of one particular author, denied the need for further direct observation of
nature. But, in the case of the Etruscans, there defi nitely was observation of nature, and
it was translated into a magico-empirical culture that is not quite science because, as
far as we know, it did not result in the formulation of laws that explain phenomena, but
it was the antechamber to science, and it has sometimes caused science-like outcomes,
especially in practical matters.
The scientifi c orderliness of successive empirical observations has provided us with
one of the symbols of the Etruscan civilization: bucchero pottery. A production that
mimics – and sometimes goes beyond – the prestige of metal ware: in form, in thickness,
delicacy, color, surface, even in sound. It took modern science a long time to understand
the degree of absolute specialization of this ceramic, made in special kilns that consumed
(reduced) the oxygen content of the clay:^8 the Etruscans surely did not come to determine
the chemical and physical mechanisms that produce this result, but with observation,
with an endless series of tests, with the ability to record the results, they had fi nally
identifi ed components and constructed the kilns in order to obtain a product of the
utmost specialization. This is empirical science, or scientifi c empiricism.
A similar procedure was evident in gold-working, by developing unsurpassed
techniques such as granulation, a polviscolo granulation (use of components the size of
dust) and fi ligree. Even here there is no detailed elucidation of the physical-chemical
mechanisms that allowed the goldsmith to manufacture and solder in a pattern tiny
gold spheres or fi laments, without melting them all. The technique (colloidal soldering)
that the artisans of the Orientalizing period are proven to have demonstrated, however,
is undoubtedly the result of long experimentation made possible by a rich and stable
society, able to accommodate, train, and retain craftsmen who were not only working
in material of great intrinsic value, but also needed time, protection and security,
which would enable them to develop and impart their knowledge. The disappearance
of bucchero sottile (“delicate bucchero”) during the Archaic period, along with the
fi nest gold-working techniques, is probably due to the waning of favorable economic
conditions that had supported the progress of this research and the transmission of
acquired skills.
For ceramics and jewelry the archaeological evidence can attest, for other areas in
which Etruscan empirical science has achieved lasting results, at least in part transmitted
to other cultures, we must return to the scant traces of literary sources. More than one