OBJETIVO 2° BÁSICO

Taking an interdisciplinary approach to integrate archaeological record with historical and literary evidence, this thesis interrogates and situates the burial evidence alongside the portrayal of the body in other media. This interdisciplinary approach seeks to provide a comprehensive insight into early medieval attitudes towards the body and death, and their implications for local cultures and beliefs within a landscape of political and religious change across the fifth to eleventh centuries. This situates the Anglo-Saxon body in the wider context of its cultural, political, and religious landscape in early medieval northwestern Europe, taking into account only physical corpses, but also the manifestation of the body in different forms. Discussion draws upon and reassesses previous work on a variety of subjects, including artefacts related to bodily treatment in funerary preparations (such as toilet implements, combs, and amulets) and representation of the human body on metalwork and manuscript art (Dodwell 2000; Williams 2003, 2007a; Ratican 2014; Brundle 2014).

Latin and vernacular literature from the later Anglo-Saxon period has proven to be a fertile ground for exploration of the body, as demonstrated by previous studies (Johnson 1980; Lionarons 1994; Lees 1997, 2012; Lees and Overing 1998; O’Brien O’Keefee 1998; Scheil 2000; Karkov 2001a; Withers and Wilcox 2003; Thompson 2004; Hofmann 2007; Cavell 2014; Clements 2014). Poems, riddles, homilies, hagiographies, law codes, and medical texts are rich in references of the body, providing crucial information about the understanding of the body in Anglo-Saxon society. Art-historical evidence such as metalwork ornamentation, manuscript illustrations and stone carvings also offer a glimpse of the early medieval representation of the body (Karkov 2001b, 2003; Watt 2004; Hedeager 2010; Brundle 2014). These will be juxtaposed with archaeology to contextualise the cemetery data and to offer a view of the Anglo-Saxon account of the body over the long term. The aim is to integrate different sources and disciplinary perspectives to produce a novel and critical appraisal of

64

the notion of the body in Anglo-Saxon England from the fifth century through to the eleventh century.

3.3M

3.3.1 Data selection

In order to reconstruct and interpret the treatment of corpses and its cultural significance, detailed burial records from recently excavated sites are crucial. This research takes a national approach to scrutinise well-excavated and recorded inhumation cemeteries across present- day England. The scope afforded by a national approach offers a comprehensive insight into the regionality of practices, but is not circumscribed by presupposed geographical frameworks. The chronological focus of the cemetery data is between c AD 400 and 750, which covers the period from the end of Roman Britain to the consolidation of the Church in England.

The selection of sites is based on size (minimum of 15 graves), the availability of data, and the date of the excavation, in order to maximise the quality of the data. Sizable cemeteries afford adequate numbers of graves for meaningful intra-site analyses, thus providing insights into local funerary practices. Larger cemeteries also provide larger mass of data to produce statistically significant results (Baxter 1994: 113). The availability of data refers to access to individual grave details in the form of in situ photographs or illustrated grave plans in their excavation reports, as published papers, monographs, or grey literature. The requirement of information about in situ grave layouts rules out the majority of Anglo-Saxon cemeteries excavated prior to the 1970s, with a handful of exceptions. Using burial record from more recent excavations ensures the data were obtained by excavation methods and osteological techniques up to modern standards. This has been facilitated by the introduction of PPG 16 (Planning Policy Guidance 16: Archaeology and Planning) in 1990, which advised adequate recording and dissemination of results from developer-funded excavations.

There are two main considerations for assigning a cut-off date for the cemetery data’s chronological scope in the eighth century. Firstly, a shorter span of time may afford scope on nuanced changes and local variations, which would be difficult in a complete study of cemeteries from the fifth to the eleventh centuries. Secondly, data from cemeteries dated later than the eighth century are generally limited and inadequate. The majority of these cemeteries do not provide information about graves at the individual level, sometimes with

65

the exception of a small number of graves with outstanding features that warrant attention. This may be due to a general lack of artefact deposition in graves and the assumption that Christian burial practices were homogenous and thus uninteresting (although recent works on early Christian funerary rites in Britain have refuted this assumption, see various papers in Buckberry and Cherryson 2010; Craig-Atkins 2012; Maldonado 2013).

Since different types of evidence implicate different sets of considerations in reconstruction and interpretation, the main data set includes only inhumation burials that survived as dry bones. This is a methodological measure to maximise comparability within the corpus of raw data in the main data set, and thus the significance and reliability of results. Therefore, although cremation evidence of the fifth and sixth centuries and the ‘sand bodies’ discussed in the previous section fall within the chronological scope of the analysis, they will not be included in the main data set. However, cremation practice engages notions about the treatment of the corpse at its core, and necessarily involves an explicit and visible transformation of the body. The implications of cremation rites will be considered in discussion by drawing upon data from cremation and mixed-rite cemeteries, especially in parts of eastern England, to assess the practicalities of cremation, its emotive quality, and the impact of Christianisation on the practice.

While the main analysis of inhumation data will be confined to the fifth to late seventh and early eighth centuries, the study will extend the scope of discussion to the eleventh century. This contextualises the cemetery data with wider social changes that occurred over the long term, and offers a means to assess the historical context of the body in Anglo-Saxon England. Therefore, although cemeteries from the later Anglo-Saxon period will not be included in the main data set as outlined above, they will be brought into discussion to shed light on the historical development of the Anglo-Saxon account of the body and, in particular, to assess changes in the conception of the body before and after the conversion to Christianity.

3.3.2 The database

3,053 graves (3,201 individuals) from 32 cemeteries across England have been included in this study (Table 3.1) (Figure 3.1). The complete grave catalogue can be found in Appendix One, and the descriptions of the cemeteries can be found in Appendix Five. A site code

66

67

consisting two, three or four letters is assigned to each cemetery. Each grave is inputted into the master database, listed by its site code, grave number, age, sex by skeleton, gender by goods, wealth index, the positioning of arms, legs, and torso, posture type and type cluster (for a full description of the posture typology, see Section 3.4 below), orientation, assigned phase and the resolution of the dates (see below for a full explanation), a note on multiple bodies where applicable, and further remarks.

Site County Site code No. of individuals Date (century)

Dinton Buckinghamshire Din 20 5th_–6th

Alwalton Cambridgeshire Alw 33 late 5th_{–early 7}th

Edix Hill Cambridgeshire Edx 148 6th_{–mid 7}th

Gunthorpe Cambridgeshire Gun 35 6th

Oakington Cambridgeshire Oak 112 6th

Water Lane, Melbourn Cambridgeshire Wat 56 7th

Westfield Farm, Ely Cambridgeshire WF 15 late 7th

Great Chesterford Essex GC 166 5th_–6th

Sewerby East Yorkshire Sew 59 5th_–7th

Lechlade Gloucestershire Lec 223 5th_–7th

Alton Hampshire Alt 49 5th_–7th

Droxford Hampshire Drx 41 5th_–6th

Storey’s Meadow, West Meon Hampshire Sto 48 5th_–7th

Worthy Park Hampshire WP 109 5th_–7th

Dover Buckland Kent DBu 432 5th_–7th

Finglesham Kent Fin 227 6th_–7th

Mill Hill, Deal Kent Mil 81 6th

Polhill Kent Pol 138 7th

Castledyke Lincolnshire Cas 203 5th_–7th

Cleatham Lincolnshire Clm 62 5th_–7th

West Heslerton North Yorkshire WH 185 late 5th_{–early 7}th

Berinsfield Oxfordshire Ber 114 5th_{–early 7}th

Didcot Oxfordshire Did 17 7th

68

Site County Site code No. of individuals Date (century)

Westgarth Gardens Suffolk WG 66 5th_–7th

Headley Drive, Tadworth Surrey HDr 47 late 6th_–7th

Blacknall Field Wiltshire BnF 104 5th_{–mid 6}th

Charlton Wiltshire Cha 44 5th_–7th

Collingbourne Ducis Wiltshire Col 34 6th_–7th

Market Lavington Wiltshire MLa 42 5th_{–early 7}th

Beckford A Worcestershire BecA 28 5th_{–mid 6}th

Beckford B Worcestershire BecB 109 5th_{–mid 6}th

Table 3.1 List of sites in the present data set (listed alphabetically by counties) and their site codes.

Grave numbers in the present database correspond to the numbering of graves given in the site reports. In the rest of this thesis, mentions of specific graves in the data set will be given as [site code] [grave number], e.g. GC 55 (=Great Chesterford Grave 55). At sites where the graves are not re-numbered post-excavation, such as at Alwalton, the present grave catalogue will retain these numberings, e.g. Alw 1032 (=Alwalton Grave 1032). At sites where burials are given two numbers (grave numbers and skeleton numbers), such as at Edix Hill, the present catalogue will follow only the grave number, e.g. Edx 79 (=Edix Hill Grave 79, Skeleton 428). In the case of multiple burial, the coding of skeletons follows the preference in the site reports, e.g. Edx 96A (=Edix Hill Grave 96, Skeleton 547A), Lec 81/4 (=Lechlade Grave 81/4).

Age and sex are assigned according to the specialist reports in the excavation publications, with the exception of Berinsfield, Worthy Park, and Alton for which more recent osteological analysis has been undertaken and made accessible for this research (courtesy of Dr Rebecca Gowland). In the database, age is classified by the present author using the following categories:

I 0–2 Infant

II 2–6 Younger child

69

IV 12–17 Adolescent

V 17–25 Young adult

VI 25–40 Middle adult

VII 40+ Old adult

adult — Unaged adult

subadult — Unaged subadult

unaged — Unaged

These categories are designed based on previous research on age threshold and lifecycle (Stoodley 2000; Gowland 2006), to examine the significance of life stages including puberty and sexual maturity on body image and representation. However, methods and categories used for ageing are not standardised across different osteological reports. In cases where the age range spans two age groups, the mean number will determine the group in which the grave belongs. If the mean number falls on the boundary, it will be placed in the upper age group. In cases where the age range spans three or more age groups, the burial will be classified as adult, subadult, or unaged.

Sex is assigned according to the information given in the excavation reports as male (M), possible male (M?), female (F), possible female (F?), and unsexed (U). The two ‘possible’ groups include probable and possible males or females as given in the reports. Juvenile skeletons and unsexed adults are both placed in the unsexed category. In case of doubt, apparent misprint, or discrepancies in the reports, the skeleton in question will be classified as unaged and/or unsexed to avoid skewing the results.

Previous studies have shown that in early Anglo-Saxon England, gendered grave goods correspond largely consistently (although not invariably) with the biological sex of skeletons (Stoodley 1999: 74–75). In the database, gender is assigned by the present author to account for the relationship between material manifestation of gender and body representation. Furthermore, it allows unsexed and juvenile skeletons to be examined in terms of gender identity. Burials containing shield bosses, fittings, spearheads, or swords are classified as masculine (M); burials containing brooches, wrist-clasps, weaving tools, or girdle items are classified as feminine (F); burials containing no identifiable gendered goods are indeterminate (ID); burials with no recorded grave goods are grouped under no finds (NF).

70

Some artefacts such as beads and pins may belong to either the feminine or indeterminate group, depending on their numbers and positions in the grave. For example, if more than 7 beads were found in the neck area, the grave would be classified as feminine on the account that the beads probably represent the presence of a necklace (e.g. Edx 5).

In terms of the material wealth of the grave, the database adopts the scoring method of ‘Range of Identifiable Artefact Categories’ (RIAC), developed by Malim and Hines (1998: 301–302). The value of RIAC records the number of the different categories of artefacts recovered in the grave, as opposed to the number of objects. This method avoids giving misleadingly high scores to objects that tend to occur in large quantities, such as brooches, beads, and wrist-clasps. In the present database, animal remains constitute a category and add towards the RIAC value.

Body positions are recorded in terms of arms, legs, and torso. The positioning of the individual arm is recorded, in terms of its flexure and the placement of the hand. Thus, those skeletons with only one preserved arm can also be included in the database, which allows analysis of patterns related to laterality. Arm flexure is recorded according to the degree of flexure at the elbow as follows: extended (approximately 150°–180°), flexed (approximately 90°–150°), folded (approximately <90°), and unknown (not well enough preserved to be discerned). The position of the hand is recorded with reference to the torso as side, abdomen,

waist, chest, shoulder, raised, front, back, or unknown. The front position is associated with one-

sided deposition which offers a dimension of arm placement unattainable if the body was buried supine or prone. The hand position is considered in relation to the body itself: a hand placed in the front of the abdomen in a prone burial, for example, will be recorded as abdomen instead of front or back.

Legs are considered in terms of their flexure, which is recorded in a similar way to that of arms. Categories are assigned according to the degree of flexure at the knees as: extended (approximately 150°–180°), flexed (approximately 90°–150°), folded (approximately <90°), and unknown (not well enough preserved to be discerned). In the case of significantly different degrees of flexure between the two legs, flexure will be determined by the more tightly bent leg. The arrangement of the legs is recorded in a separate column as:

71

- Parallel: where legs are placed alongside each other

- Crossed: where one leg crosses over the other leg

- Splayed: where legs projects outwards

- Left: where flexed or folded legs pointing left

- Right: where flexed or folded legs pointing right

- Unknown: where not well-preserved enough to be discernible

The deposition of the body is recorded in terms of the placement of the torso in the grave as: supine, prone, LS (left-sided), RS (right-sided), sitting, or unknown.

Two columns in the database, ‘Type’ and ‘Cluster’, identify the posture type and type cluster that the burial has been assigned to, according to the typological method used in the present study. A burial may be assigned one of 53 types and one of seven type clusters. This will be fully explained in Section 3.4 below. Not all burials have been assigned a type (e.g. if only one arm was preserved), in which case these two columns are left blank.

‘Orientation’ is the articulation of the body in relation to cardinal directions, recorded in terms of the position of the head. For instance, ‘W’ denotes the positioning of the head at the west end of the grave, and by implication the feet at the east.

The ‘Multiple’ column identifies multiple burials in the data set, which describes the number of bodies contained in the grave, given as tuples. This column only notes the multiple burials that can be confidently attributed to deliberate human actions: either burials that contained multiple individuals buried at the same time, or burials that had been reopened at a later event to fit another interment. A separate catalogue for multiple burials can be found in Appendix Two.

‘Dates’ records the assigned chronological phases of the burials. Seven phases have been classified, by drawing upon the recently published Anglo-Saxon Graves and Grave Goods of the

6th and 7th Centuries AD: A Chronological Framework (Bayliss et al 2013). The date ranges of the

seven phases are designed to capture the points of change as identified in the Anglo-Saxon

Graves and Grave Goods project (Bayliss et al 2013: 459–462). They are intended to scrutinise

the relationship between changes in burial positions and in the deposition of grave goods, as well as to provide an anchor point from which burial positioning practice can be

72

contextualised within established chronological frameworks. Dates are recorded in the database using the following shorthands which correspond to date ranges:

a. AD 450–500 b. AD 500–550 c. AD 550–585 d. AD 585–610 e. AD 610–640 f. AD 640–680 g. AD 680–750

The dates for the graves in the database are assigned according to their dates postulated in their respective excavation reports. Some reports provide dates for individual graves, but some provide only general dates for the whole site. If a grave spans more than one date range (e.g. AD 525–600), all of relevant date ranges are recorded (e.g. b, c, d). For the undated graves, they are recorded according to when the cemetery was postulated to be in use. For example, for cemeteries that spanned from the fifth to the eighth centuries, the undated graves within them are recorded as ‘a, b, c, d, e, f, g’ (i.e. all the possible date ranges). A small number of graves have been archived in the online Anglo-Saxon Graves and Grave Goods project database (Hines 2013). These graves are assigned phases by referring to the grave good typologies, radiocarbon dates, date phases published in the project monograph (Bayliss et al 2013). Only a handful of graves in the whole data set can be closely dated to only one phase; the vast majority of them span multiple phases. The column ‘Date Resolution’ records the number of phases which the grave spans (for example, a grave that is given date ranges ‘b, c,

d, e’ has a date resolution of 4). The smallest possible value for date resolution is 1, and the

largest possible value is 7. The smaller the value means the higher the resolution, and thus the more refined the dates are for the grave. The way in which date resolutions is utilised in analysis will be explained below in Section 3.3.3.