Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-pfhbr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T20:34:36.011Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Burial and Status in the Early Medieval West

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

Edward James
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

EARLY medieval archaeology can be said to have its origins with the investigation of burial: with Otto III's opening of Charlemagne's tomb in 1000; with medieval and early modern reports of the discoveries of the graves of kings or warriors; and, most notably, with the discovery at Tournai in 1653 of the grave of an early Frankish king, Childeric. And, until very recently, the study of burials dominated the subject. This is only natural. Graves are easily recognisable when discovered accidentally; often they were intended to be, and have remained, a very visible part of the landscape. Surviving royal burials are, of course, very rare. But there are over one hundred thousand excavated graves of lesser personages from the period between c. 450 and c. 1000: an astonishing mass of data which forms a significant proportion of the total available evidence for the early Middle Ages and which needs to be assessed and taken into count by any early medievalist interested in the totality of the period. And it can be argued that cemeteries offer rather more opportunity than the written sources to understand the world of those below the status of kings and bishops, and to do so without the ecclesiastical bias that the written sources have. We nevertheless have to remember that graves are not the unconscious waste products of society, like most of the data studied by an archaeologist: rubbish pits, building remains and so on. Bodies were deliberately and carefully placed in the ground, along with whatever accompanied them. Those responsible for the burial made a whole series of choices about the manner in which they carried out this action. A burial, like a written text, is a product of conscious mental activity, and subject to many of the problems of interpretation and analysis with which historians are familiar.

Type
Research Article
Information
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society , Volume 39 , December 1989 , pp. 23 - 40
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Historical Society 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Beumann, H., ‘Grab und Thron Karls des Grossen zu Aachen’, in Braunfels, W. and Schramm, P. E., ed. Karl der Grosse, IV (Dusseldorf, 1967), 9–38Google Scholar; Périn, P., La Datation des Tombes Merovingiennes (Geneva, 1980), 5–8Google Scholar; Kazanski, M. and Périn, P., ‘Le Mobilier Funéraire de la Tombe de Childéric: Etat de la Question et Perspectives’Google Scholar and Brulet, R. et al. ‘Nouvelles Recherches a Tournai, Autour de la Sépulture de Childéric’, both in Revue Archiologique de Picardie, no. 3–4 (1988), 13–43Google Scholar.

2 For some discussion of‘la mythe de la race nordique’ see Buchet, L., ‘Anthropologie des Francs’, Dossiers Histoire et Archiologie, lvi (1981), 78–81Google Scholar.

3 Notably since Wenskus, R., Slammesbildung und Verfassung: Das Werden der Frühmittlelalterlichen Gentes (Cologne and Graz, 1961)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 On which see above all Young, B. K., Merovingian Funerary Rites and the Evolution of Christianity (Ph.D Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1975)Google Scholar, summarised in ‘Paganisme, Christianisme et Rites Funéraires Mérovingiens’, Archéologie Médiévale, vii (1977), 5–81. See also the comments of Bullough, D. A., ‘Burial, Community and Belief in the Early Medieval West’, in Wormald, P. et al. ed., Ideal and Reality in Frankish and Anglo-Saxon Society (Oxford, 1983)Google Scholar, esp. 186ff, and Dierkens, A., ‘Cimetieres Merovingiens et Histoire du Haut Moyen Age’, Ada Historica Bruxellensia, iv (1981), 15–70Google Scholar.

5 Gräslund, A.-S., Birka IV: The Burial Customs (Stockholm, 1981), 84Google Scholar.

6 Chenet, G., ‘La Tombe 319 et la Buire Chretienne du Cimetiere Merovingien de Lavoye (Meuse)’, Prehistoire, iv (1935), 34–118Google Scholar.

7 Binford, L., ‘Mortuary Practices: Their Study and Their Potential’, in Brown, j. A., ed., Approaches to the Social Dimension of Mortuary Practices (Society for American Archaeology, Memoirs 25) (1971), 17, 21Google Scholar, as summarised by Tainter, J. A., ‘Mortuary Practices and the Study of Prehistoric Social Systems’, Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, i (1978), 125Google Scholar.

8 Tainter, , ‘Mortuary Practices’, 107ffGoogle Scholar.

9 Ucko, P. J., ‘Ethnography and Archaeological Interpretation of Funerary Remains’, World Archaeology, i (1969–1970), 270Google Scholar.

10 Young, B.K., Quatre Cimètiires Merovingiens de I'Est de la France: Lavoye, Dieue-surMeuse, Mézières-Manchester, Mazerny (BAR International Series 208: Oxford, 1984), 78–103Google Scholar.

11 Vallet, F., ‘Les Tombes de Chef, Reflets de l'Histoire de la Conquetê’, in La Pkardie, Berceau de la France (Exhibition Catalogue) (Amiens, 1986), 113–119Google Scholarand James, E., The Franks (Oxford, 1988), 222–3Google Scholar.

12 A convenient and well-illustrated introduction to the last two can be found in Doppelfeld, O. and Pirling, R., Fränkischen Fürsten im Rheinland. Die Gräber aus der Kölner Dom, von Krefeld-Gellep und Morken (Bonn, 1966)Google Scholar.

13 See the discussion in Steuer, H., Frühgeschichtliche Sozialstrukturen in Mitteleuropa: Eine Analyse der Auswertungsmethoden des Archäologischen Quellenmaterials (Abh. Akad. Wiss. Göttingen, Phil.-Hist. Kl., 3. Folge, 128) (Gottingen, 1982), 334Google Scholar.

14 Evison, V. I., ‘The Dover Ring-Sword and Other Sword Rings and Beads’, Archaeologia, ci (1967), 63–118Google Scholar.

15 Gauthier, N., in Duval, Y. and Picard, J.Ch., ed., L'Inhumation Privilégiée du IVe au Vllle Siécte en Occident (Paris, 1986), 45Google Scholar.

16 On royal burials, see Krüger, K. H., Königsgrabkirchen der Franken, Angelsachsen und Langobarden bis zu Mitte des 8. Jahrhunderts (Miinstersche Mittelalter Schriften, 4) (Münster, 1971)Google Scholar; Müller-Wille, M., ‘Königsgrab und Königsgrabkirchen: Funde und Befunde im Friihmittelalterlichen und Mittelalterlichen Nordeuropa’, Bericht der Rdmisch-Germanischen Kommission, lxiii (1982), 350–411Google Scholar; and, most recently, Anderson, H. H., ‘Vorchristliche Königsgräber in Dänemark und ihr Hintergründe’, Germania, lxv (1987), 159–173Google Scholar.

17 Burnell, S., Merovingian to Early Carolingian Churches and their Founder-Graves in Southern Germany and Switzerland: the Impact of Christianity on the Alamans and Bavarians (Oxford D.Phil Thesis, 1988), 417Google Scholar.

18 Ament, in Duval, and Picard, , Inhumation Privilegiee, 43Google Scholar, drawing on the work of R. Pirling.

19 James, E., ‘Cemeteries and the problem of Frankish Settlement in Gaul’, in Sawyer, P. H., ed., Names, Words and Graves: Early Medieval Settlement (Leeds, 1979), 55–89Google Scholar.

20 See the remarks of Dierkens, , ‘Cimetieres Merovingiens’, 43–44Google Scholar. On horse-graves see Muller-Wille, M., ‘Pferdegrab und Pferdeopfer im Frühen Mittelalter’, Bericht van de Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek 20–21 (1970–1971), 119–248Google Scholar.

21 Samson, R., ‘Social Structures from Reihengräber: Mirror or Mirage?’, Scottish Archaeological Review, iv, part 2 (1987), 117Google Scholar; Steuer, , Sozialstrukturen, 311Google Scholar.

22 Alcock, L., ‘Quality or Quantity: the Anglian Graves of Bernicia’, in Evison, V. I., ed., Angles, Saxons and Jutes (Oxford, 1981), 168–186Google Scholar.

23 Solberg, B., ‘Social Status in the Merovingian and Viking Periods in Norway from Archaeological and Historical Sources’, Norwegian Archaeological Review, xviii (1985), 61–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Steuer, , Sozialstrukturen, 314Google Scholar. The problem is also set out clearly in id., ‘Zur Bewaffnung und Sozialstruktur der Merowingerzeit’, Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte, xxxvii (1968), 18–87Google Scholar, and Werner, J., ‘Bewaffnung und Waffenbeigabe in der Merowingerzeit’, Settimane di Studio del Centra Italiano di Studi Sull'Alto Medioevo, xv (Spoleto, 1968), 95–109Google Scholar.

25 Solberg, , ‘Social Status’, 75Google Scholar.

26 Alcock, , ‘Quality or Quantity’, 177Google Scholar.

27 Christlein, R., ‘Besitzabstufungen zur Merowingerzeit im Spiegel reicher Grabfunde aus West- und Seutschland’, Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanisches Zen tralmuseum, Mainz, xx (1973), 147–80Google Scholar.

28 Burnell, , Merovingian to Early Carolingian Churches, 397Google Scholar.

29 As in Arnold, C.. ‘Wealth and Social Structure: A Matter of Life and Death’, in Rahtz, P., Dickinson, T., and Watts, L., ed., Anglo-Saxon Cemeteries 1979 (BAR British Series 82: Oxford, 1980), 81–142Google Scholar.

30 Shephard, J., ‘The Social Identity of the Individual in Isolated Barrows and Barrow Cemeteries in Anglo-Saxon England’, in Burnham, R. and Kingsbury, J., ed., Space, Hierarchy and Society (BAR Supplementary Series 59: Oxford, 1979), 47–79Google Scholar. (For some criticisms, see Richards, J.D., The Significance of Form and Decoration of Anglo-Saxon Cremation Urns (BAR British Series 166: Oxford 1987), 12–13Google Scholar.) Similar flexible scoring methods have been adopted by Brenan, Jane in ‘Assessing Social Status in the Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Sleaford’, Institute of Archaeology Bulletin 21–22 (1984–1985), 125–131Google Scholar.

31 Waugh, E., The Loved One (Harmondsworth, 1951), 37Google Scholar.

32 Jacob, J.P. and Mirbeau-Fauvin, J.R., ‘Heergewäte et Gerade: “Les Mots et Les Choses”’, Bulletin de Liaison de I'Association Française d'Archéologie Mérovingienne, iii (1980), 81–85Google Scholar.

33 Alcock, , ‘Quantity or Quality’, 176Google Scholar.

34 Cf. Behm-Blancke, G., ‘Trinkgaben und Trinkzeremonien im Totenkult der Völkerwanderungszeit’, Alt-Thüringen, xvi (1979), 171–227Google Scholar.

35 Most conveniently seen in Werner, J., ‘Frankish royal tombs in the Cathedrals of Cologne and St-Denis’, Antiquity, xxxviii (1964), 201–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

36 Monumenta Germaniae Hislorica, Leges Nat. Germ., IV (i), ed. Eckhardt, K. A., now with a convenient translation by Rivers, T.J. as The Laws of the Salian and Ripuarian Franks (New York, 1986)Google Scholar.

37 Steuer, , Sozialstrukturen, 52–53Google Scholar, 329.

38 Whitelock, D., The Beginnings of English Society (Harmondsworth, 1952), 85Google Scholar.

39 Quoted by Claude, D., Geschichte der Westgoten (Stuttgart, 1970), 143 n. 115Google Scholar, referring to Lex Visigothorum 8.4.16.

40 ‘Balances and Weights from Early Anglo-Saxon Graves: Implications for the Contexts of Exchange’, in the Résumés des Communications for Peuplement el Echanges, Hie IXe Siécles (the 39e Symposium Saxon de l'Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur Sachsenforschung [sic], Caen, 12–16 septembre 1988).

41 For a smith, see james, , Franks, 207–9Google Scholar; for possible ‘merchant-graves’, see Gräslund, , Birka, 79–81Google Scholar.

42 Steuer, , Sozialstrukturen, figs 2–7, pp. 19–24Google Scholar.

43 Ibid.,314.

44 Ibid., 324.

45 So far published only in summary form in Bulletin de Liaison de I'Association Française d'Archéologie Mé'rovingienne, xii (1988), 50–52Google Scholar.

46 Cf. the discussion of children's graves in Burnell, , Merovingian to Early Carolingian Churches, 450ffGoogle Scholar.

47 Pader, E.J., Symbolism, Social Relations and the Interpretation of Mortuary Remains (BAR British Series 130: Oxford, 1982)Google Scholar.

48 Richards, Significance of Form; and id., ‘Style and Symbol: Explaining Variability in Anglo-Saxon Cremation Urns’, in Driscoll, S.T. and Mieke, M. R., ed. Power and Politics in Early Medieval Britain (Edinburgh, 1988), 145–161Google Scholar.

49 T. M. Dickinson, ‘Material Culture as Social Expression: The Case of Saxon Saucer Brooches with Running Spiral Decoration’, in the publication cited in n. 40 above.