Merovingian Mortuary Archaeology and the Making of the Early

193 Pages·2006·1.35 MB·English

by  Master Clark

Merovingian Mortuary Archaeology and the Making of the Early Middl... http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=kt967nd088&chunk.id=0&doc....
Preferred Citation: Effros, Bonnie. Merovingian Mortuary Archaeology and the Making of the Early
Middle Ages. Berkeley: University of California Press, c2003 2003.
http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/kt967nd088/
Merovingian Mortuary Archaeology and
the Making of the Early Middle Ages
BONNIE EFFROS
University of California Press
BERKELEY LOS ANGELES LONDON
2003
― ―
[Dedication]
To my parents,
Gail Hochman Effros and Richard Matthew Effros
Preferred Citation: Effros, Bonnie. Merovingian Mortuary Archaeology and the Making of the Early
Middle Ages. Berkeley: University of California Press, c2003 2003.
http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/kt967nd088/
― ―
[Dedication]
To my parents,
Gail Hochman Effros and Richard Matthew Effros
― ―
[Epigraph]
It is as though worldly stability had become transparent in the permanence of art so that a
premonition of immortality, not the immortality of the soul or of life but of something immortal
achieved by mortal hands, has become tangibly present, to shine and to be seen, to sound and to be
heard, to speak and to be read.
HANNAH ARENDT, The Human Condition
1 of 193 7/22/2006 1:55 AM
Merovingian Mortuary Archaeology and the Making of the Early Middl... http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=kt967nd088&chunk.id=0&doc....
― ―
Contents
List of Illustrations xi
Acknowledgments xiii
List of Abbreviations xvii
INTRODUCTION 1
ANTIQUARIES, HISTORIANS, AND ARCHAEOLOGISTS: CREATING A CULTURAL CONTEXT FOR
1. 12
EARLY MEDIEVAL GRAVES
2. MODERN ASSESSMENTS OF MEROVINGIAN BURIAL 71
3. GRAVE GOODS AND THE RITUAL EXPRESSION OF IDENTITY 119
4. THE VISUAL LANDSCAPE: CEMETERIAL TOPOGRAPHY AND COMMUNITY HIERARCHY 175
EPILOGUE 219
Select Bibliography 223
Index 263
― xi ―
Map and Illustrations
MAP
1. Select Merovingian-period cemeteries in Gaul and on its frontiers 4
ILLUSTRATIONS
Chart disproving the alleged transition from golden bees found in Childeric’s grave to the
1. 33
Bourbon fleur-de-lys
2. Nineteenth-century model of the development of religious architecture in France 52
Typological chart of earrings and rings for the purpose of establishing their relative
3. 58
chronology
4. Early archaeologist Émile Socley with finds at Noiron-sous-Gevrey (Côte-d’Or) 62
5. Glass serving vessels excavated at Herpes (Charente)
Beads, ring, brooch, earrings, pin, and hanging tools attributed by C. Boulanger to the
6. 68
seventh or eighth century
An assemblage of goods in their original position in a Gallo-Roman warrior’s grave at
7. 69
Monceau-le-Neuf
8. Boulanger’s idealization of male and female Frankish burials in the fifth and sixth centuries 100
Boulanger’s interpretation of the evolution of Frankish interment customs for men and
9. 101
women in the seventh and eighth centuries
10. Face of the Wittislingen brooch, seventh century 113
― xii
―
Underside of the Wittislingen brooch, with an inscription dedicated to Uffila, presumably the
11. 114
woman with whom it was buried
Face of filigree bossed disk brooch discovered at the cemetery of Hermes (Oise), seventh
12. 134
century
Backside of disk brooch shown in figure 12, with label showing cemeterial provenance and
13. 135
year of discovery
14. Row grave cemetery of Köln-Müngersdorf 136
2 of 193 7/22/2006 1:55 AM
Merovingian Mortuary Archaeology and the Making of the Early Middl... http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=kt967nd088&chunk.id=0&doc....
15. Row grave cemetery of Frénouville (Calvados) 142
Two belt buckles and counter-plaques from the Merovingian period cemetery of
16. 151
Marchélepot (Somme), dated to the seventh or eighth century by Boulanger
Merovingian bronze belt plaque-buckle, from the cemetery of Tabariane (Ariège), seventh
17. 152
century
Four chatelaines of unknown provenance depicting a horse and rider, and belt buckle found
18. 154
at Hermes (Oise), with the inscription “Va(le) at qui fecit” or “Vivat qui fecit”
19. Restored grave goods from grave 319 at Lavoye (Meuse), attributed to a Frankish chieftain 156
Artifacts from a Merovingian grave discovered at Saint-Denis, possibly belonging to an elite
20. 159
male
21. Row grave cemetery of Audun-le-Tiche (Moselle) 202
22. Necropolis of Basel-Bernerring 208
― xiii ―
Acknowledgments
This monograph represents a much-revised version of the archaeological portion of a project on
mortuary practice in Merovingian Gaul that I might never have begun had I realized the extent of its
challenges. In the years since I undertook this assessment, my research has concentrated increasingly
on historiography, causing this work to become a discussion of the ways in which changing scholarly
interpretations over the past three centuries have shaped our vision of the early medieval past. While
highlighting some aspects of the mortuary rites that appear more securely understood, I have also
pointed to the manner in which the evidence has been misused and appropriated to support causes
entirely unrelated to the populations being excavated. Many of these interpretations have
overshadowed the context from which the grave remains were unearthed in the first place. Rather
than providing a comprehensive account of the archaeological evidence, a task that would require
multiple volumes to reveal the complexity of this, above all, local and personal rite, I wanted to
compose a work focusing on the ways in which personal bias and national agendas have shaped
readings of the mortuary evidence. My own outlook being no exception, I nonetheless hope that this
piece will further debates on the importance of multi-disciplinarity in the interpretation of early
medieval sources, such as the spirited conversations already begun in the context of undertakings
such as the European Science Foundation’s “Transformation of the Roman World” project (1993–97).
In order to accomplish this goal, it will be necessary to overcome the national and disciplinary
boundaries that currently divide the field.
The successful completion of this project rests in large part on the generosity of a great number of
institutions and individuals. During my graduate
― xiv ―
studies at UCLA, a Deutsche Akademisches Austauschdienst Stipendium (1991–92), a History
Departmental Fellowship (1992–93), and an Edward A. Dickson Fellowship (1993–94) allowed me to
research and write my dissertation at the Monumenta Germaniae historica, Bayerische
Staatsbibliothek, Bibliothèque nationale, and UC Berkeley. An Izaak Walton Killam Memorial
Postdoctoral Fellowship in the Department of History and Classics at the University of Alberta (July
1994–December 1995) enabled me to continue work on the project with a reduced teaching load. I
revised significant portions of the manuscript during a semester’s residency at the Camargo
Foundation in Cassis, France (Fall 1997), and with a Berkshire Summer Fellowship at the Mary
Ingraham Bunting Institute at Radcliffe College (Summer 1998). I completed the project with a Sylvan
C. Coleman and Pamela Coleman Memorial Fund Fellowship during my year at The Metropolitan
Museum of Art (2001–02), supported also by Title F leave at SUNY Binghamton. Interaction with and
feedback from colleagues at these wonderful institutions were a source of inspiration for much of the
rethinking of this project. A Bernadotte E. Schmitt grant from the American Historical Association
(1995) provided funding for many of the photographs reproduced in this volume; Chantal Dulos,
Melanie Holcomb, Patrick Périn, and Françoise Vallet helped greatly in tracking down photographs
related to early archaeological excavations. Franz Siegmeth and Falko Daim likewise made possible the
production of a site map for the volume.
Financial support from Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville (1996–2001) has also been
pivotal to the realization of this project. Five Summer Research Fellowships, in addition to multiple
3 of 193 7/22/2006 1:55 AM
Merovingian Mortuary Archaeology and the Making of the Early Middl... http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=kt967nd088&chunk.id=0&doc....
Faculty Development Fund and Graduate School Seed grants, enabled me to purchase software as well
as pursue research and travel to Cambridge, Massachusetts; Paris; Munich; and Brussels at crucial
stages of the project. In particular, I am grateful to Steve Hansen, Ellen Nore, Wayne Santoni, and
David Steinberg for their assistance in my continued search for the funding that has made completion
of this monograph possible sooner instead of later. I also wish to thank Jean-Pierre Mileur, Don
Quataert, and Dick Trexler for smoothing my transition to SUNY Binghamton during the final stages of
book production. Wulf Kansteiner and Sonja Wolf were incredibly generous in opening their home to
me weekly in preparation for my move and making me feel like a part of their family.
My debts to colleagues, friends, and family are many, and I cannot begin
― xv ―
to thank everyone by name in this short space. To start, I wish to acknowledge Richard and Mary
Rouse, without whose warm encouragement and sponsorship this project would have never been
pursued. The guidance and inspiration of Patrick Geary and Alain Dierkens from the early days of
thesis writing were invaluable to directing my approach to the material covered. Guy Halsall and Frans
Theuws both gave very generously of their time to comment on the monograph as it emerged,
providing me with thoughtful critiques, friendly advice, and hospitality even when they disagreed with
my interpretation of the data. Their influence may be seen in the pages that follow. Peter Brown, Cindy
Fulton, Marian Rogers, and Kate Toll gave much needed guidance and editorial direction along the path
to completion. Nina Caputo and Isabel Moreira read and helped me improve various chapters and were
incredibly devoted confidantes and supporters. David Conradsen provided insight into the world of
collecting, museums, and connoisseurship. Max Diesenberger, Dave Harden, Matthias Hardt, Heinrich
Härke, Christian Lohmer, Frederick Paxton, Cécile Treffort, and Bailey Young likewise raised important
questions and indicated missing bibliography along the way. To Jörg Jarnut, Patrick Périn, and Walter
Pohl, who read the manuscript in its entirety, I owe deep thanks for their commitment to my project.
During my revision of this monograph they opened many doors so that I might return repeatedly to
Europe to meet with colleagues and benefit from contact with others working on early medieval topics.
In acknowledging the support of an incredible network of friends and family whom I have not
already thanked above, I am particularly grateful to Michelle Effros, Jim Effros, Dianne Golden, Grace
Benveniste, Dorothea and Roland Stevens, Roberta Shapiro, Mitch Hart, Nicole Bériou, Beth Rabin,
Steve Finkel, Lori Weintrob, Martin Taylor, Rita and Ed Effros, Monika Kraft, Barbara Goldoftas, Sara
Wolper, Jake Viebrock, Ron Hasson, and Falko Daim for their friendship and warm hospitality
whenever I turned up yet again on one of my library quests or in search of respite. Carole Frick, Eric
Ruckh, and Anne Valk at SIUE allowed me to bounce ideas off them and fed me home-cooked meals
as the manuscript was coming into its final form. I also cannot neglect to mention George and Debbie
Hensley, who devoted an incredible amount of energy and love to caring for my dog so that I could
travel for extended periods. Shemesh, too, was good-natured and patiently endured many a delayed
walk so that I might complete this book. Finally, I owe my greatest debt of gratitude to my parents,
Richard and Gail Effros, who unquestioningly supported a daughter
― xvi ―
who possessed the inexplicable desire to become the first medieval historian of the family.
Detailed discussion of the written sources appears in Bonnie Effros, Caring for Body and Soul:
Burial and the Afterlife in the Merovingian World (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press,
2002).
― xvii ―
Abbreviations
AB Analecta bollandiana.
AFAM Association française d’archéologie mérovingienne.
AG Archaeologia geographica.
AK Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt.
AM Archéologie médiévale.
Annales ESC Annales: Économies, sociétés, civilisations.
BAR British Archaeological Reports.
4 of 193 7/22/2006 1:55 AM
Merovingian Mortuary Archaeology and the Making of the Early Middl... http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=kt967nd088&chunk.id=0&doc....
BSNAF Bulletin de la Société nationale des antiquaires de France.
CA Cahiers archéologiques.
CBA Council for British Archaeology.
CCSL Corpus christianorum series latina.
CNRS Centre national de la recherche scientifique.
EME Early Medieval Europe.
FS Frühmittelalterliche Studien.
HJ Historisches Jahrbuch.
HZ Historische Zeitschrift.
JRGZM Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmu-seums Mainz.
MGH Monumenta Germaniae historica.
MIÖG Mitt(h) eilungen des Instituts für österreichische Geschichtsforschung.
MRM Musée royal de Mariemont.
― xviii ―
OUCA Oxford University Committee for Archaeology.
PZ Prähistorische Zeitschrift.
RH Revue historique.
Recueil des inscriptions chrétiennes de la Gaule antérieures à la Renaissance
RICG
carolingienne.
SC Sources chrétiennes.
SRG Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum.
SRM Scriptores rerum Merovingicarum.
TRHS Transactions of the Royal Historical S ociety.
TRW Transformation of the Roman World.
ZSSR, germ.
Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, germanistische Abteilung.
Abt.
― 1 ―
Introduction
Only since the 1970s have American scholars regularly included mortuary remains in their research on
Merovingian religion and society.
[1] Patrick J. Geary, Living with the Dead in the Middle Ages(Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994);
Bailey K. Young, “Paganisme, christianisation et rites funéraires mérovingiens,” AM 7 (1977): 5–81;
id., “Exemple aristocratique et mode funéraire dans la Gaule mérovingienne,” Annales ESC 41 (1986):
379–407.
Prior to that, most medievalists neglected archaeological evidence from burial sites in favor of more
familiar historical and documentary sources. From a European standpoint, this oversight was dismissed
as popular distaste in the United States for studies linked to death.
[2] Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie, “Chaunu, Lebrun, Vovelle: La nouvelle histoire de la mort,” in his Le
territoire de l’historien (Paris: Éditions Gallimard, 1973), 402–3; Michel Vovelle, “Encore la mort: Un
peu plus qu’une mode,” Annales ESC 37 (1982): 277.
Of greater consequence, however, were the small number of American archaeologists occupied with
the early medieval period and the inaccessibility of locally published and unpublished excavations in
western Europe. Lack of attention to important studies of Merovingian mortuary rites was thus not
altogether surprising. Growing interest in the application of anthropological methodology to historical
discourse nonetheless stimulated new inquiries and provided both historians and archaeologists with a
framework by which to reconcile inherent contradictions between written and material evidence.
5 of 193 7/22/2006 1:55 AM
Merovingian Mortuary Archaeology and the Making of the Early Middl... http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=kt967nd088&chunk.id=0&doc....
[3] Roger Chartier, “Text, Symbols, and Frenchness: Historical Uses of Symbolic Anthropology,” in his
Cultural History: Between Practices and Representations, trans. Lydia G. Cochrane (Cambridge: Polity
Press, 1988), 96–101; Reinhard Wenskus, “Randbemerkungen zum Verhältnis von Historie und
Archäologie, inbesondere mittelalterliche Geschichte und Mittelalterarchäologie,” in
Geschichtswissenschaft und Archäologie: Untersuchungen zur Siedlungs-Wirtschafts- und
Kirchengeschichte, ed. Herbert Jankuhn and Reinhard Wenskus, Vorträge und Forschungen 22
(Sigmaringen: Jan Thorbecke Verlag, 1979), 637–57.
― 2 ―
European scholars, closer geographically to the relevant excavations and trained in institutions more
prepared to fund projects of local and national historical significance, have long incorporated mortuary
evidence in their descriptions of Merovingian society. As early as the mid-nineteenth-century,
archaeologists created the framework necessary to establish a relative chronology and typology of
grave goods;
[4] For an introduction, see Patrick Périn, La datation des tombes mérovingiennes:
Historique—méthodes—applications, Hautes études médiévales et modernes 39 (Geneva: Droz, 1980);
Otto Gerhard Oexle, “Die Gegenwart der Toten,” in Death in the Middle Ages, ed. Hermann Braet and
Werner Verbeke, Mediaevalia louvaniensia, Series 1, vol. 9 (Louvain: Leuven University Press, 1983),
19–77.
throughout the twentieth century, they viewed stylistic differences as reflective of the ethnic identity of
those interred in early medieval cemeteries.
[5] For a sense of how much interpretations of early medieval ethnicity in Merovingian cemeteries
have changed, see Joachim Werner, “Zur Entstehung der Reihengräberzivilisation: Ein Beitrag zur
Methode der frühgeschichtlichen Archäologie,” AG 1 (1950): 23–32; Edward James, “Cemeteries and
the Problem of Frankish Settlement in Gaul,” in Names, Words, and Graves: Early Medieval
Settlement, ed. P. H. Sawyer (Leeds: University of Leeds, 1979), 55–89.
Since the mid-twentieth century, academics in France, Germany, England, Belgium, and the
Netherlands have recognized the potential applications of cemeterial configuration and burial remains
to the study of Merovingian social structure, religious beliefs, gender ideology, and ethnicity.
[6] A sample of influential analyses published from the 1960s to the 1980s includes Frauke Stein,
Adelsgräber des achten Jahrhunderts in Deutschland, vol. 1, Germanische Denkmäler der
Völkerwanderungszeit, ser. A, vol. 9 (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1967); Alain Dierkens, “Cimetières
mérovingiens et histoire du haut moyen âge: Chronologie—société—religion,” in Acta historica
bruxellensia, vol. 4: Histoire et méthode (Brussels: Éditions de l’Université de Bruxelles, 1981),
15–70; Heiko Steuer, Frühgeschichtliche Sozialstrukturen in Mitteleuropa: Eine Analyse der
Auswertungsmethoden des archäologischen Quellenmaterials, Abhandlungen der Akademie der
Wissenschaften in Göttingen, philologisch-historische Klasse, 3d ser., vol. 128 (Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1982); Donald A. Bullough, “Burial, Community, and Belief in the Early
Medieval West,” in Ideal and Reality in Frankish and Anglo-Saxon Society (Studies Presented to J. M.
Wallace-Hadrill), ed. Patrick Wormald (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1983), 177–201. Yvette Duval and
Jean-Charles Picard, eds., L’inhumation privilegiée du IVe au VIIIe siècle en Occident (Actes du
colloque tenu à Créteil, les 16–18 mars 1984) (Paris: De Boccard, 1986).
They have used mortuary evidence to provide, among other things, critical insight into the impact of
Christian clerics on life-cycle rites practiced by recent converts.
[7] Edward James, “Burial and Status in the Early Medieval West,” TRHS, 5th ser., 39 (1989): esp.
23–26; J. N. Hillgarth, “Modes of Evangelization of Western Europe in the Seventh Century,” in Irland
und die Christenheit: Bibelstudien und Mission, ed. Próinséas Ní Chatháin and Michael Richter
(Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1987), 311–31; Heli Roosens, “Reflets de christianisation dans les cimetières
mérovingiens,” Les études classiques 53 (1985): 132–34.
Since the 1980s
― 3 ―
especially, historians and archaeologists have also demonstrated by this means some of the strengths
6 of 193 7/22/2006 1:55 AM
Merovingian Mortuary Archaeology and the Making of the Early Middl... http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=kt967nd088&chunk.id=0&doc....
and weaknesses of written sources describing early medieval social and ethnic identity.
[8] Guy Halsall, Settlement and Social Organization: The Merovingian Region of Metz (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1995); Heinrich Härke, “ ‘Warrior Graves’? The Background of the
Anglo-Saxon Weapon Burial Rite,” Past and Present 126 (1990): 22–43; Patrick Périn, “À propos de
publications étrangères récentes concernant le peuplement en Gaule à l’époque mérovingienne: La
‘question franque,’ ” Francia 8 (1980): 537–52.
Although some resistance to multi-disciplinary scholarship remains, this research has proved
definitively that we may achieve a better understanding of the complexity of Merovingian civilization if
we do not limit ourselves to just the written sources.
The shape of this monograph results from the lack of a recent comprehenssive survey of
Merovingian mortuary archaeology: none has been published in the half-century since Édouard Salin’s
pioneering study.
[9] Édouard Salin, La civilisation mérovingienne d’après les sépultures, les textes et le laboratoire, vol.
2 (Paris: Éditions A. et J. Picard, 1952).
As a historian, albeit one very familiar with the archaeological record, I have concentrated on providing
a critical reading of the development and current state of the field. A historical account of the discipline
in the first half of the book and an assessment of the assets and biases of the most recent
archaeological analyses in the second are intended to guide readers unfamiliar with the field. For those
already wellversed in these materials, my discussion also draws attention to the less-studied effects of
historical events and scholarly ideologies on the excavation and interpretation of early medieval burial
remains. At a number of opportunities, I have included discussion of contrasting French and German
views of the same evidence to highlight the impact of national consciousness on archaeological theory.
Although contact between those specializing in Anglo-Saxon and Merovingian archaeology has been
surprisingly limited, I have ventured to make a few comparative references to developments in the
former that have affected the ways in which efforts to answer similar questions on the continent have
been resolved.
In embarking on this project, however, I became aware of the difficulties of treating mortuary
custom across the geographical expanse of what is now France, western Germany, and southern
Belgium during the late fifth through early eighth century (see map 1). To begin with, my use of the
― 4 ―
Map 1. A selection of some of the Merovingian-period cemeteries mentioned in this book.
― 5 ―
7 of 193 7/22/2006 1:55 AM
Merovingian Mortuary Archaeology and the Making of the Early Middl... http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=kt967nd088&chunk.id=0&doc....
adjective “Merovingian” to describe the population of these regions is somewhat misleading, since the
term was commonly restricted to reference to members of the Frankish royal dynasty. Despite this
shortcoming, however, I have retained this terminology because it offers the benefit of not
distinguishing too sharply between Germanic and indigenous inhabitants. One of the main premises of
this book is that ethnicity was not biologically determined and that individuals of these populations
cannot currently be discerned from one another reliably in the context of graves. A second issue stems
from the fact that Merovingian Gaul was not a united political entity in the period covered. My
discussion, moreover, has exceeded the borders of the Frankish kingdoms, a consequence of modern
perceptions of western Europe rather than of contemporary realities.
[10] Michael Mann, The Sources of Social Power (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 1:
1–27.
I have nonetheless used such broad parameters to identify the great diversity of burial practice across
Gaul and neighboring regions. Written traditions and evidence of mortuary rites preserved in the
archaeological record to the north and south of the Loire reveal significant differences in attitudes and
rituals. Scholars have conversely identified commonalities between funerary traditions in communities
in early medieval Gaul and those of neighboring regions beyond the Rhine or Pyrenees. These
similarities resulted not from ethnic identity but rather from the basic commemorative functions of
mortuary rites and the available resources deemed appropriate for expressing power relationships in
this world and the next.
[11] Eric Hobsbawm, Introduction to The Invention of Tradition, ed. Eric Hobsbawm and Terence
Ranger (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983).
A complete discussion of Merovingian mortuary remains has required me to make use of multiple
methods and sources. My approach reflects a desire to maintain the integrity of the fragmentary
evidence apart from the artificial divisions created by modern academic disciplines and national
borders.
[12] Aaron J. Gurevich, “Medieval Culture and Mentality According to the New French Historiography,”
Archives européenes de sociologie 24 (1983): 168–69; François Furet and Jacques Le Goff, “Histoire et
ethnologie,” in Mélanges en l’honneur de Fernand Braudel (Toulouse: Privat, Éditeur, 1973), 2:
227–43.
The corresponding volume of data from this large geographical expanse over the course of three
centuries has therefore meant giving comparatively little detail regarding the extent to which local and
regional forces shaped the range of options for mortuary rites. I have nonetheless granted recognition
wherever possible to the ways in which individual families and communities made important personal
choices in deciding
― 6 ―
how they would bury their dead. Just as urban and rural populations were characterized by dissimilar
forms of habitation, they also adopted mortuary customs best suited to their endeavors and
environment.
[13] Patrick Périn, “Remarques sur la topographie funéraire en Gaule mérovingienne et à sa
périphérie: Des nécropoles tardives aux nécropoles du hautmoyen âge,” CA 35 (1987): 9–30.
From the earliest stages of research, an acknowledgment of the short-comings of the evidence at
the disposal of historians and archaeologists, particularly in the case of material remains, has shaped
my approach. Chapter 1 therefore constitutes a historiographical essay in which I address the manner
in which contemporary events and intellectual developments affected scholarly interpretations of
Merovingian mortuary remains from the Middle Ages through the early modern period. I identify the
implications of the fact that prior to the late nineteenth century, antiquaries’ primary interest lay in the
collecting of excavated objects and stone epitaphs of great beauty or value; they frequently removed
them from their original locations without regard for the role of provenance in understanding these
artifacts. As a result, it is rarely possible to match either written representations of the deceased or
material artifacts to specific human remains excavated before the 1950s. Orthography, vocabulary,
technology, and style must instead provide the less-than-optimal basis for determining the provenance
of epitaphs and burial artifacts.
The legacy of these problems has been significant. Bias in the dating and identification of grave
8 of 193 7/22/2006 1:55 AM
Merovingian Mortuary Archaeology and the Making of the Early Middl... http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=kt967nd088&chunk.id=0&doc....
goods and epigraphy, for instance, has enabled scholars intent on demonstrating the success of the
Carolingian Renaissance to attribute less aesthetic pieces to the “barbaric” Merovingian period. In
research stretching back to the mid-nineteenth century but continuing up to the present,
archaeologists and historians have also sought to use human and archaeological remains to identify
the ethnicity of the dead buried in early medieval row grave cemeteries (Reihengräberfelder). Not only
do such analyses rely upon the unproven hypothesis that the Franks represented foremost
blood-based bands of warriors, but they also depend upon the anachronistic belief that they formed
immutable “culture groups.” On this shaky basis, many archaeologists have been led to identify graves
devoid of extravagant adornment as Gallo-Roman and those replete with the same as Germanic.
In Chapter 2, I discuss the manner in which professional scholars dealt with the antiquarian
legacy. Antiquaries, who were largely self-taught, worked simultaneously in a variety of fields. Their
discoveries guided and,
― 7 ―
in turn, were divided among several disciplines by their successors engaged in academic and curatorial
research employing mortuary evidence. More recent archaeological studies, the heirs of these early
traditions, have demonstrated that material remains, just as textual sources, present only a partial
view of the subjective construction of the deceased’s identity by his or her kin group or monastic
family.
[14] Lewis R. Binford, “Mortuary Practices: Their Study and Potential,” in Approaches to the Social
Dimensions of Mortuary Practices, ed. James A. Brown, Memoirs of the Society for American
Archaeology 25 (Washington, D.C.: Society for American Archaeology, 1971), 17–23; Härke, “’Warrior
Graves,’ ” 22–24.
Even the employment of a multi-disciplinary methodology, as I have presented here, does not
eliminate all obstacles to gleaning desirable information from the evidence. Although anthropological
analysis gives access to the rites of a broader segment of the population than the small minority
described in written sources, it cannot fully reveal the thought-world or ideologies behind such ritual
activities.
[15] Patrick J. Geary, “The Uses of Archaeological Sources for Religious and Cultural History,” in his
Living with the Dead, 30–45; Heinrich Härke, “The Nature of Burial Data,” in Burial and Society: The
Chronological and Social Analysis of Archaeological Burial Data (Åhrus: Åhrus University Press, 1997),
19.
Archaeological evidence is by nature biased toward the most outstanding examples of material
culture from early medieval Gaul, as these are the most easily observed. Consequently, scholars
cannot describe Merovingian mortuary practice among poorer or female inhabitants with nearly the
same degree of accuracy possible with male members of the secular and ecclesiastical elite. Similarly,
assessment of urban areas, the destruction of subsequent habitation notwithstanding, consistently
proves to be easier than the study of larger, more anomalous rural regions.
[16] Périn, “Remarques sur la topographie funéraire,” 9–30.
Recent studies have shown mortuary display to be a type of social ideology manifested through ritual
activity; it integrates many aspects of a society’s worldview and power relationships but must
constantly evolve in order to do so effectively.
[17] Halsall, Settlement and Social Organization, 245–82.
In their privileged access to and display of the artifacts necessary for such rites, the early medieval
ruling elite had plentiful opportunities to misrepresent historical realities.
[18] Georges Duby, “Ideologies in Social History,” in Constructing the Past: Essays in Historical
Methodology, ed. Jacques Le Goff and Pierre Nora (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985),
151–60.
A certain degree of disorder also affected the mortuary process.
[19] Lorna Campbell, “Traces of Archaeology,” in Archaeological Theory: Progress or Posture? ed. Iain
M. MacKenzie (Aldershot: Avebury, 1994), 140–51; Fredrik Barth, “Towards Greater Naturalism in
9 of 193 7/22/2006 1:55 AM
Merovingian Mortuary Archaeology and the Making of the Early Middl... http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=kt967nd088&chunk.id=0&doc....
Conceptualizing Societies,” in Conceptualizing Society, ed. Adam Kuper (London: Routledge, 1992),
17–33.
For these reasons, I have identified many of
― 8 ―
the obstacles to full reconstruction of early medieval social and cosmological interactions related to
burial.
[20] Frans Theuws and Monica Alkemade, “A Kind of Mirror for Men: Sword Depositions in Late Antique
Northern Gaul,” in Rituals of Power from Late Antiquity to the Early Middle Ages, ed. Frans Theuws and
Janet L. Nelson, TRW 8 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2000), 401–76.
In Chapter 3, I give attention to the symbolic value of mortuary objects described in contemporary
written sources as well as the material worth of the burial artifacts.
[21] Roland Barthes, “Written Clothing,” in Rethinking Popular Culture: Contemporary Perspectives in
Cultural Studies, ed. Chandra Mukerji and Michael Schudson (Berkeley: University of California Press,
1991), 432–45.
Not only did corporal decoration serve as a medium of visual communication in early medieval Gaul,
but competition over the commodities involved in such displays reinforced and validated the social
order.
[22] Ellen-Jane Pader, Symbolism, Social Relations, and the Interpretation of Mortuary Remains, BAR
International Series 130 (Oxford: BAR, 1982), 18 ff.
Especially in the case of luxury goods, whose primary function was rhetorical and social, their
restricted availability reinforced this hierarchical ideology and influenced other forms of exchange.
[23] Arjun Appadurai, Introduction to The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective,
ed. Arjun Appadurai (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 38–40.
Garments and personal possessions such as weaponry might have had their own biographies;
[24] Igor Kopytoff, “The Cultural Biography of Things: Commoditization as Process,” in Social Life of
Things, ed. Arjun Appadurai, 66–67.
in the early medieval West, they fulfilled important amuletic, magical, and votive functions.
[25] Lynda L. Coon, Sacred Fictions: Holy Women and Hagiography in Late Antiquity (Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press, 1997), 52–70; Bonnie Effros, “Symbolic Expressions of Sanctity:
Gertrude of Nivelles in the Context of Merovingian Mortuary Custom,” Viator 27 (1996): 1–10.
As noted by Walter Pohl, clothing, armament, and personal adornment, in contrast, did not necessarily
express their wearers’ ethnic identity.
[26] Walter Pohl, “Telling the Difference: Signs of Ethnic Identity,” in Strategies of Distinction: The
Construction of Ethnic Communities, 300–700, ed. Walter Pohl and Helmut Reimitz, TRW 2 (Leiden: E.
J. Brill, 1998), 27–69; Halsall, Settlement and Social Organization, 245–46.
As a whole, these observations contribute to a better understanding of the purpose of burial
goods, since kin groups frequently utilized everyday rather than specially produced objects in outfitting
graves. In the funerary context, the artifacts acquired new symbolic meanings and aided in the
― 9 ―
transition of the deceased to ancestral status.
[27] Cécile Barraud, Daniel de Coppet, André Iteanu, and Raymond Jamous, Of Relations and the
Dead: Four Societies Viewed from the Angle of Their Exchange, trans. Stephen J. Suffern (Oxford:
Berg Publishers, 1994), 33–35, 102–4.
Mortuary goods therefore constituted former commodities, since they were removed from further
10 of 193 7/22/2006 1:55 AM