Anglo-Saxon Period--Distribution of Anglo-Saxon Population
over England--General characteristics of Grave-mounds--Modes
of Burial--Poem of Beowulf--Interments by Cremation and by
Inhumation--Articles deposited with the Dead--Positions of the
Body--Double and other Interments--Burial in Urns--Cemeteries
and Barrows.
The grave-mounds and cemeteries of the Anglo-Saxon period present
marked and decided features of difference to those of either of the
preceding periods; and again, the characters of these mounds and
cemeteries vary in different parts of the kingdom, according as such
districts were inhabited by different tribes or peoples.
The date usually assigned to the first coming of the Saxons into
England, after the final departure of the Romans, is the middle of
the fifth century. They landed on the Isle of Thanet, and shortly
afterwards established themselves in Kent, and became a kingdom.
“Within thirty years another body of Saxons settled upon the south
coast of Britain, taking possession of the tract now called Sussex,
or the South Saxons. At the beginning of the sixth century a third
detachment from the same Germanic family landed further westward, and
founded the kingdom of the West Saxons, in which was included the Isle
of Wight. From the same source which supplies the brief notices of
these events, we learn that towards the middle of the sixth century
were formed the states of the East and Middle Saxons, in the districts
which, in consequence, took the names of Essex and Middlesex. We also
gather that the Angles who settled in the east and north-east of
Britain, and in the interior parts, probably made their first descents
towards the middle of the sixth century; so that the kingdoms known
as those of the East Angles (Norfolk, Suffolk, and Cambridgeshire),
the Middle Angles, the Northumbrians (from the Humber northwards), and
Mercia (on the borders of Wales), appear not to have been definitely
settled until at least a century after the landing of the Saxons in
Kent, in A.D. 449. Vague and unsatisfactory as are most of the details
of Saxon history, the gradual subjugation of Britain by successive
immigrations of Teutonic tribes may at least be accepted as the most
reconcilable with reason; and there seems nothing very repugnant to
the more rigid rules of criticism to regard these tribes under their
historic designation of Jutes, Saxons, and Angles; and, further, to
believe that at least a century was required to transform Britain,
after the Romans, into a heptarchy of Teutonic kingdoms.
“Testing our Saxon antiquities with reference to the usually received
chronology of the advent and settlement in Britain of the Teutonic
tribes, it would be no unimportant result should they be in accordance
with accepted historical facts. They will be invested with novel and
higher interest if they should be found to carry in their form and
character certain peculiarities which suggest earlier and later dates,
and a diversity of parentage. For instance, if in the remains of the
Kentish Saxons and in those of the Isle of Wight we may recognise,
from close resemblance to each other, the weapons, the ornaments,
and the domestic implements of the Jutes; if, in the cemeteries of
Cambridgeshire, Suffolk, and Norfolk, we may, in like manner, identify
the funeral usages of the Angles; and in remains found in the midland
and western districts see still different peculiarities, but which
point to a kindred origin; it is not improbable that discoveries may
enable us to resuscitate, as it were, our remote predecessors; to
restore to those of the various Saxon kingdoms the very objects which
accompanied them when living: to the men, their weapons; to the women,
their peculiar jewellery, and those more humble and homely objects
which we may look upon as emblems of their domestic virtues. It is
not a slight analogy in some instances only that will establish this
theory; it must spring from the remains themselves, and be palpable and
convincing, or it must be rejected.”[48]
Bearing this in mind, and also bearing in mind the modifications
which only a few years make in fashions and customs; and also bearing
in mind that although for convenience sake, as well as for want of
more definite knowledge, we call the whole population by the one term
of Anglo-Saxons, yet they were divided into as distinct classes, or
families, or tribes, as at the present day; we shall quite readily
understand why the modes of burial, and the objects found in the
graves, of one district are different from those, although coeval,
found in others. At the present day we use the general term Englishmen
for the whole of our population, and no better or clearer term could
be adopted; but we must bear in mind that the differences both
of appearance, of habits, of customs, of dialect, nay, of almost
everything, are as marked among us as if the inhabitants of the
various counties were each settlers from different nations. The men
of Derbyshire, for instance, are as far removed as well can be in
general character and in language from those of Somersetshire; and
these, again, are both totally dissimilar from the “Men of Kent,”
from the Lancashire operative, from the Yorkshiremen, or the men of
Devonshire, Hampshire, and many other counties. Each of these districts
has, and always has had, and long, long may it continue to have! its
own peculiar customs, its own peculiar habits, its own peculiar
observances; and each has what might almost be termed a _nationality_
of its own, which it holds despite the levelling influence of railways
and other modern contrivances. If it is so at the present day, with a
settled population of so many centuries’ standing, how much more must
it have been so when each district was peopled by a different tribe
of settlers, speaking to some extent different languages, holding
different views, following different occupations, and observing
different customs!
The grave-mounds and cemeteries of these different districts exhibit
a marked difference in modes of burial, in style and decoration of
pottery, and in characteristics of other remains, which will be made
apparent in the following _resumé_ of their varied contents. Thus,
as Mr. Smith says, “in Kent one of the most conspicuous features
in the Saxon sepulchral remains is the richly ornamented circular
fibulæ. These are sparingly found beyond the district occupied by the
earliest Saxon settlers. When they do occur, here and there, they
are exceptions; but throughout the county of Kent it would be a rare
occurrence to discover a Saxon funeral deposit without an example
of this elegant and peculiar ornament. In Suffolk, in Norfolk, in
Cambridgeshire, in Northamptonshire, in Leicestershire, and further
north, these circular fibulæ do but casually appear, but others of
a totally distinct character abound. In Berkshire, Oxfordshire,
and Gloucestershire are found saucer-shaped fibulae unlike either
of these two classes, and forming a third variety. In Suffolk, in
Cambridgeshire, in Leicestershire, and in other parts, have been
repeatedly found metal implements or ornaments, which I have designated
by the modern name of _chatellaine_, to give some notion of their form
and use. These remarkable objects in no instance have been found in
Kent, but other objects have been found in Kentish barrows which have
nowhere else been discovered.”
The sepulchral remains of the Anglo-Saxons are of two general
classes--barrows and cemeteries--and in these the modes of burial have
been both by inhumation and by cremation.
The grave-mounds, or barrows, are, as a rule, of much less altitude,
and of smaller dimensions, generally, than those of either of the
preceding periods. In some districts they are found in extensive
groups, frequently occupying elevated sites; at other times they are
solitary, and frequently the elevation above the surrounding surface is
so slight as to be scarcely perceptible except to the most practised
eye. Fortunately the mounds and cemeteries are particularly rich in
remains, and thus enable us to form a clearer idea of the habits,
and manners, and lives of our Saxon forefathers than we can of their
predecessors. In Kent, Sussex, and the Isle of Wight, Saxon graves
abound on the Downs; and in Derbyshire, Oxfordshire, Gloucestershire,
Northamptonshire, Lincolnshire, Cambridgeshire, Suffolk, Norfolk, and
Yorkshire, cemeteries of more or less extent and importance exist, with
here and there a solitary barrow, or a group of barrows. Like their
Roman predecessors the Anglo-Saxons, to some extent, took possession
of, and buried in, the grave-mounds of the Ancient Britons, and it is
not a very unusual occurrence to find overlying the primary deposit an
interment of the Saxon period.
Fortunately an early Anglo-Saxon poem, recounting the adventures of
the chieftain Beowulf, is preserved to us, and gives us a valuable and
highly graphic and interesting description of the ceremonies attendant
on his burial; the lighting of the funeral pyre, the burning of the
body of the hero, the raising of the mound over his remains, and the
articles placed beside him in his last home. Dying he
bæꝺ̣ þæꞇ ᵹe ᵹe-ƿoꞃhꞇon
æꝼꞇeꞃ ƿineꞅ ꝺæꝺū
in bǽl-ꞅꞇeꝺe
beoꞃh þone heán,
micelne anꝺ mæꞃne.--
Which is translated:--
“he bad that ye should make,
according to the deeds of your friend,
on the place of the funeral pyle,
the lofty barrow
large and famous.”
His request was carried out, the funeral pile raised, and every
preparation befitting his deeds was made. The pile was--
“hung round with helmets,
with boards of war,[49]
and with bright byrnies,[50]
as he had requested.
Then the heroes, weeping,
laid down in the midst
the famous chieftain,
their dear lord.
Then began on the hill,
the warriors, to awake
the mightiest of funeral fires;
the wood-smoke rose aloft
dark from the fire;
noisily it went
mingled with weeping.”
The body of the hero having been consumed by the wood-fire, in the
midst of weeping friends, the people began to raise the barrow over his
ashes. This mound--
“was high and broad,
by the sailors over the waves
to be seen afar.
And they built up
during ten days
the beacon of the war-renowned.
They surrounded it with a wall
in the most honourable manner
that wise men
could desire.
They put into the mound
rings and bright gems,
all such ornaments
as before from the hoard
the fierce-minded men
had taken;
they suffered the earth to hold
the treasure of warriors,
gold on the earth,
where it yet remains
as useless to men
as it was of old.”
When the burial was simply by inhumation, the body appears usually to
have been placed in a shallow grave, over which the mound was raised.
The graves were of rectangular form, and of various depths. On the
floor of the grave or pit the body was laid flat on its back, the arms
straight down by its sides, the hands resting on the pelvis, and the
feet close together. It was buried in full dress, and surrounded by a
number of articles pertaining to the deceased--both personal ornaments,
domestic instruments and vessels, and other things--and that had been
used or valued by him or her. Sometimes the body was enclosed in a
wooden chest or coffin before being placed in the grave. The grave, in
either of these cases, was then filled in--usually with a tempered or
“puddled” earth, which formed a close and extremely compact mass--and
the mound raised over it. This mound or hillock was called a _hlœw_, or
a _beorh_, _beorgh_, or _bearw_, from the first of which the name now
commonly used, _low_, is derived, and from the last the equally common
name _barrow_ originates.
[Illustration: Fig. 325.]
With the females, necklaces, rings, ear-rings, brooches, chatelaines,
keys, buckets, caskets, beads, combs, pins, needles, bracelets,
thread-boxes, tumblers, and a variety of other articles were found.
With the males, swords, spears, knives, shields, buckles, brooches,
querns, draught-men, etc., etc., are found. The warrior was usually
laid, in his full dress, flat on his back (as already spoken of); his
spears lying on his right side, his sword and knife on his left, and
his shield laid on the centre of his body. The accompanying engraving
(fig. 325) of a grave opened by the late Mr. Bateman, on Lapwing Hill,
will pretty tolerably illustrate this mode of Anglo-Saxon burial.
Beneath the bones of the skeleton were “traces of light-coloured hair,
as if from a hide, resting upon a considerable quantity of decayed
wood, indicating a plank of some thickness, or the bottom of a coffin.
At the left of the body was a long and broad iron sword, enclosed in
a sheath made of thin wood covered with ornamental leather. Under or
by the hilt of the sword was a short iron knife, and a little way
above the right shoulder were two small javelin heads, four and a half
inches long, of the same metal, which had lain so near each other as to
become united by corrosion. Among the stones which filled the grave,
and about a foot from the bottom, were many objects of corroded iron,
including nine loops of hoop iron (as shown in the engraving) about an
inch broad, which had been fixed to thick wood by long nails; eight
staples, or eyes, which had been driven through a plank, and clenched;
and one or two other objects of more uncertain application, all which
were dispersed at intervals round the corpse throughout the length
of the grave, and which may therefore have been attached to a bier
or coffin in which the deceased was conveyed to the grave from some
distant place. Indications existed of the shield having been placed
in its usual position over the centre of the body, but no umbone was
in this instance found. The mounds are usually, as in this instance,
very low, frequently not being raised more than a foot above the
natural surface of the ground. The earth was, as I have stated, usually
“puddled” or tempered with water, and thus the body in the grave became
closely imbedded in a compact and tenacious mass.”
That the tempering, or puddling, was accompanied with some corrosive
preparation, there can be little doubt; for it is a fact, though a very
remarkable one, that whilst the skeletons of the Celtic period are
found in good condition, and in some instances perfect and sound, those
of the Anglo-Saxons have, almost invariably, entirely disappeared.
Thus, in a Celtic barrow, the primary interment of that period may be
found in perfect condition, while the secondary interment, that of the
Anglo-Saxon, although some centuries later in date, and some three or
four feet nearer the surface, will have decayed away and completely
disappeared. Thus, in a barrow at Wyaston, which had been raised over
the body of a Saxon lady, every indication of the body had disappeared,
with the exception of the enamel coating of the teeth, while a splendid
necklace of beads, a silver ring, silver ear-rings, and a silver brooch
or fibula, remained _in situ_ where the flesh and bones had once been.
Another instance (to which I shall have occasion again to allude) which
may be named, was the barrow at Benty Grange--a mound not more than
two feet in elevation, but of considerable dimensions, and surrounded
by a small fosse or trench, raised over the remains of a Saxon of
high rank. In this mound, although a curious and unique helmet, the
silver mountings of a leather drinking-cup, some highly interesting
and beautiful enamelled ornaments, and other objects, as well as
indications of the garments, remained, not a vestige of the body,
with the exception of some of the hair, was to be seen. The lovely
and delicate form of the female and the form of the stalwart warrior
or noble had alike returned to their parent earth, leaving no trace
behind, save the enamel of _her_ teeth and traces of _his_ hair alone,
while the ornaments they wore and took pride in, and the surroundings
of their stations, remained to tell their tale at this distant date.
In a barrow at Tissington, in which the primary (Celtic) interment was
perfect, the later Saxon one had entirely disappeared, while the sword
and umbone of the shield remained as they had been placed.
The mode of interment with the funeral fire, as well as the raising
of the barrow, is curiously illustrated by the opening of two Saxon
graves at Winster. A large wood fire had, apparently, been made upon
the natural surface of the ground. In this a part of the stones to be
used for covering the body, and some of the weapons of the deceased,
were burned. After the fire was exhausted the body was laid on the spot
where it had been kindled, the spear, sword, or what not, placed about
it, and the stones which had been burnt piled over it. The soil was
then heaped up to the required height to form the mound.
Usually, of course, the graves contain only one body, but instances
occasionally occur in which two or more bodies have been buried at the
same time. For instance, at Ozengal a grave has been opened which was
found to contain two skeletons. They were those of a man and a woman
who were laid close together, side by side, with their faces to each
other. In another were three skeletons, those of a man, a woman, and a
little girl. The lady lay in the middle, her husband on her right hand,
and their little daughter on her left; they lay arm in arm. In other
cases two or more interments have been found, usually lying side by
side, on their backs.
In many Anglo-Saxon barrows, bones, thrown in indiscriminate heaps
or otherwise, are found at the top, over the original interments.
These are, very plausibly, conjectured to be the remains of slaves or
captives slain at the funeral, and thrown on the graves of their master
or mistress.
When the burial has been by cremation, the ashes, after the burning
of the body which is so graphically described in the extract I have
given from Beowulf, were collected together and placed in urns. These
were usually buried in small graves, and their mouths not unfrequently
covered with flat stones. Some very extensive cemeteries where the
burials have been by this mode, have been discovered in Derbyshire,
Nottinghamshire, Northamptonshire, and other counties. With these it is
very unusual to find any remains of personal ornaments or weapons. Two
extensive and remarkable cemeteries of this kind have been discovered
at Kingston and at King’s Newton, both near Derby. At the first of
these places an extensive cemetery was uncovered in 1844, and resulted
in the exhumation of a large number of urns--indeed, so large a number
that, unfortunately, at least two hundred were totally destroyed by the
workmen before the fact of the discovery became known. On the surface
no indication of burials existed; but as the ground had, some sixty
years before, for a long period been under plough cultivation, and as
the mounds would originally have been very low, this is not remarkable.
The urns had been placed on the ground in shallow pits or trenches.
They were filled with burnt bones, and the mouth of each had been
covered with a flat stone. They were, when found, close to the surface,
so that the mounds could only have been slightly elevated when first
formed. Of the form of the urns I shall have to speak later on. The
cemetery at King’s Newton was discovered during the autumn of 1867, and
a large number of fragmentary urns were exhumed. The mode of interment
was precisely similar to that at Kingston, and the urns were of the
same character as those there discovered. There were no traces, in
either instance, of mounds having been raised, although most probably
they had originally existed. To the pottery found in these cemeteries
I shall refer later on. Cremation was the predominating practice among
the Angles, including Mercia, and the modes of burning the body, and
of interment of the calcined bones in ornamental urns, which I have
described in the two cemeteries just spoken of, are characteristic
of that kingdom. King’s Newton is within three miles of Repton
(Repandune), the capital of the kingdom of Mercia, and the burial place
of Mercian kings, and Kingston is also but a few miles distant.
In some cases the burial has been without urns--the ashes being simply
gathered together in a small heap in the grave, or on the surface, and
the mound raised over it.
I will now, as in the previous divisions, proceed to speak of the more
usual descriptions of relics which are found in the grave-mounds of
the Anglo-Saxons, and I will, as in those divisions, commence with the
fictile remains.