Entierro

DEBORAH MAUSKOPF DELIYANNIS
Church Burial in Anglo-Saxon England:

The Prrogative of Kirigs*
Introduction, p. 96. - Church Burial of Anglo-Saxon Kings: Texts and Archaeology, p. 96. - Church Burial
in Anglo-Saxon England: Texts and Archaeology, p. 102. - Influences on Anglo-Saxon Church Burial,
p. 104; Church Laws about Burial, p. 105; Royl Merovingian Burial, p. 107; Pagan Anglo-Saxon Burial,
p. 113; Romano-Byzantine Burial, p. 114. - Condusion, p. 116.
INTRODUCTION '
Many early Anglo-Saxon kings who converted to Christianity were buried in
churches, often structures which they had personally'sponsored. However, it is striking
that in England before the ninth Century, burial inside a church building was extremely
rare, and appears to have been reserved for royalty, saints, and some bishops;'this
contrasts notably with practices in the rest of Christian Europe, where burial in funer-
ary basilicas was common. However, in studies of Anglo-Saxon funerary practices,
and particularly of high-status burial types, church burial is almost never considered
1
.
There no doubt existed a tension between church and "pagan-style'burial during this
period, which may have added to the symbolic meaning of each. However, ny analysis
of high-status Anglo-Saxon burial must necessarily consider church burial s a signifi-
cant Option for high-ranking Christians. The burials of early Anglo-Saxon kings known
from Christian written sources were catalogued by K. H. Krger; however, a compari-
son between the textual passages and the archaeological evidence for church burial
has never been made
2
. It is the purpose of this paper to examine all the evidence for
royal and/or church burial in Anglo-Saxon England, up to the early ninth Century, to
suggest possible influences on these practices, and to propose an explanation of the
form of church burial which was employed by Christian Anglo-Saxon kings.
CHURCH BURIAL OF ANGLO-SAXON KINGS: TEXTS AND ARCHAEOLOGY
Until the time of Alfred, Anglo-Saxon England was never united s one kingdom,
and thus there were several unrelated kings at any one time. It can probably be inferred
* This paper was presented s a Masters'Paper to the Department of the History of Art at the University
of Pennsylvania. I would like to thnk Cecil L. Striker, in whose seminr the paper originated, for his
continued encouragement and his very helpful dvice at every stage of the work, I amt also parcularly
grateful to Martin Biddle, Hagen Keller, Susan Tegtmeyer, and Bailey K. Young, who read the manu-
script at various stages and whose comments were inyaluable.
1
As noted by MARTIN BIDDLE, Archaeology, architecture, and the eult of saints in Anglo-Saxon England,
in: The Anglo-Saxon Church: papers on history, architecture and archaeology in honr of Dr. H. M.
Taylor, ed. LAW RENCE A. S. BUTLER-RICHARD MORRIS, London 1986, pp. 13.1, p. 13.
2
KARL HEINRICH KRGER, Knigsgrabkirchen der Franken, Angelsachsen und Langobarden bis zur
Mitte des 8. Jahrhunderts: Ein historischer Katalog (Mnstersche Mittelalter-Schriften 4) Munich 1971.
Brought to you by | Harvard University (Harvard University)
Authenticated | 172.16.1.226
Download Date | 3/3/12 10:09 PM
Church Burial in Anglo-Saxon England 97
that a king wold be buried somewhere in bis own realm; however,.for most of the
early kings, t}ie burial site is unknown (see Table l for a complete list, pp. 117-119).
Written sources are almost entirely Christian in orientation s well s authorship, and
thus describe only die church burial of Christian kings. A poem such s
e
Beowulf,
on the other band, implies that burial under mounds may have been radier common
even after the conversion to Christianity
3
. This may explain why so many of the royal
burials are now
e
unknown
5
, namely that since they were not located in churches they
were ignored by Christian authors; although I do not wish to imply that all such
unknown graves must be considered "pagan-style
9
burials. Since Christian authors
often identify only the graves of saintly or newly converted kings, other less exalted
kings may have been buried in churches also. Because the only identifiable graves are
those mentioned in written texts, we will examine these burials first.
The kings of Kent, first to be converted, mostly seem to have been buried at the
monastery of St. Augustine's outside Canterbury, at least according to later sources
4
.
The kings of Northumbria, next to be converted, were buried at York Minster, Whitby,
or various monasteries. The kings of Mercia were each buried in a different place,
while many of the kings of Wessex were buried at the Old Minster in Winchester,
again if later evidente cn be trusted
5
. Three kings Coenred, Caedwalla, and Ine
left their kingdoms and went on pilgrimage to Rome, where they diedând were buried.
Anglo-Saxon kings seem to have been buried in structures separate from the
main liturgical space of the church, in annexes or mausolea, if in the building at all.
Most textual references teil only that a king was buried in ecdesia, which need not even
imply burial inside the church, much less in a particular location. There are, however,
a few exceptions. In one of the most famous examples of a correspondence between
text and archaeology, Bede teils of the burials in the church of Ss. Peter and Paul at
St. Augustine's monastery at Canterbury: Defunctus est autem Deo dilectus Pater Augustinus,
etpositum corpus eius foras, iuxta ecdesiam beatrum apostolorum Petri et Pauli, ... mox v ero ut
dedicata est, intro inlatum, et in porticu illius aquilonali arch iepiscoporum decenter sepultum est in
qua etiam sequentium arch iepiscoporum omnium sunt corpora tumulata, praeter duorum tantum-
modo
f
id est, Th eodon et Beretualdi, quorum corpora in ipsa ecck sia posita sunt, eo quodpraedicta
porticusplura capere nequiv it... Defunctus v ero est rex Aedilberet die XXIIIImensis Februani,
post XX et unum annos acceptae fidei, atque in porticu Sancti Martini, intro ecdesiam beatrum
apostolorum Petri et Pauli sepultus, bt et Berctae regina condita est.
6
Upon excavation, Bede's
north and south porticus were found to have been lateral chambers flanking the nave,
containing above-ground tombs whose placing was conjQrmed by the late eleventh
3
PATRICK WORMALD, Bede, 'Beowulf, and the Conversion of the Anglo-Saxon Aristocracy, in: Bede and
Anglo-Saxon England, ed. ROBERT FARRELL (British Archaeological Reports 46) London 1978, pp. 32-
95.
4
For the complete summary, see R. . POTTS, The Tombs of the Kings, and Archbishops in St. Austin's
Abbey, Canterbury, in: Archaeologia Candana 38, 1926, pp. 97-^112.
5
A separate but relevant question, which I will not attempt to deal with here, is when and why the
burial places of kings were written down at all, and what purpose the various authors, generally writing
later than the event, had for recording these burial sites.
6
Bede, Histbria Ecclesiasdca Genus Anglorum II.3 and 11.5, ed. BERTRAM COLGRAVE-ROGER A. B. MY-
NORS, Bede's Ecclcfciastical History of the Englisb People, Oxford 1969, pp. 142-144 and 150.
98
Deborah Mauskopf Dcliyannis
2,. -iA.Ji --J
Fig. l St. Augustine's monastery, Canterbury - a: ehurch of Sts. Peter and Paul with tombs of the kings
and bishops marked; b: the entire monastic site, s known from excavatiori, sho>ing the. telative position
of Sts. Peter and Paul and St. Mary's (other structures lter) (frm ERIC FERNIE, The Architecture of the
Anglo-Saxons, New York 1983, pp. 36-37).
Century monk Gocelinus (Fig. 1). In this newly founded ehurch
7
, these flanking spaces
were clearly meant to serve s burial chapels.
Likewise, in York Minster the head of Edwin was said to have been buried in
ecdesiam beati ap o sto l i Petn, ... inp o rcu sanctip ap ae Grego r ...
8
, which indicates tjiat this
ehurch, too, had some sort of arinexed chamber containing an altar
9
. Of the three
7
Andamentis, ibid. 1.33, p. M4, '
8
Ibid. .2, p. 204.
9
It must be remembered, however, that these portics needinot have contained altars at the time of
their founding, but only by the eighth Century \when Bede was writing. See JEAN HUBERT-JEAN
PORCHER-WOLFGANG F. VoLBAGH, Europe in the Dark Ages, London 1969j p. 34.
' . Church Burial in Anglo-Saxon England 99
other kings whose burials are mentioned by Bede, Sebbi of Essex was buried in a
stone sarcophagus in St. PauTs, London
10
, Oswald of Berenicia's head was buried /;;
cymiterio Lindisfarnensis ecdesiae
11
, and Oswiu of Berenicia was buried, along with bis
wife and daughter, paits of Edwin et multi alii nobiles in ecclesia sancti apostoli Petri at
Whitby
12
.
One other important early source is an anonymous "Life of Gregory the Great
9
,
written by a Northumbrian monk c. 704714. He also describes the tomb of Edwin
at Whitby in the following passage: In quo nunc h onori ce in sancti Petri apostolorum principis
ecclesia h ec eadem sancta ossa cum ceteris conduntur regibus nostris ad austntm altaris illius quod
beatissimi Petri apostoli est nomine sancti catum
>
et ab onente illius quod in h ac ipsa sancto Gregono
est consecrata ecclesia.
1
^ The mention of 'other kings', who must have included Oswiu,
must refer to kings of Northumbria. The terminology in the text would seem to
indicate another south porticus containing an altar dedicated to St. Gregory
14
, appar-
ently a common patron of such structures.
Other sources are generally much later, and are indeed much more vague s to
the site of royal tombs; s a result, the archaeological plans of known royal burial
churches become more important. We know from Gocelinus that several kings of
Kent were buried in the Oratorium dedicated to St. Mary at Canterbury, which was
founded by Eadbald in c. 618
15
. St. Mary lay to the east, on axis, of Saints Peter and
Paul, separated from the main church by part of the monastic cemetery (Fig. 1).
This topography is also known from the excavation of another royal burial church
at Repton, where Aethelbald of Mercia was buried in 757 (Fig. 2)
16
. Recent excavations
have shown that a square crypt-structure was built to the east, on axis, of an earlier
church, sometime after 715
17
; s also at Canterbury, this structure was subsequentiy
inco orated into the body of an enlarged church. Biddle suggests that it may have
functioned s a baptistry
18
, but its presence in the middle of an existing cemetery that
continued in use around it, and the probable burial there of the kings Wiglaf (d. c. 839)
and St. Wystan (d. 849) lend credence to the idea that it may have been Aethelbald's
mausoleum
19
. As it is situated on a ridge overlooking a river, it has been seen s an
10
Bede, Historia Ecclesiastica IV11 (s n. 6) p. 366.
11
Ibid. .12, p. 252. The meaning of the word cymiterio here is unclear; generally it means a cemetery,
s we use the word, but sometimes it refers to an individual tomb or a funerary chamber, see s.v.
'Sepulture . Cimetieres et Lieux de SepultureYin: Dictionnaire de Theologie Catholique, Paris 1941,
cols. 1887-1888.
12
Bede, Historia Ecclesiastica .24 (s n. 6) p. 292.
13
BERTRAM COLGRAVE (ed.), The Earliest Life of Gregory the Great eh. 19, Lawrence (Kansas) 1968, p.
104.
14
Cf. CHARLES R. PEERS-C. A. RALEGH RADFORD, The Saxon Monastery of Whitby, in: Archaeologia 89,
1943, pp. 27-88.
15
See KRGER (s n. 2) pp. 278-279; for the foundation of the church, see Bede, Historia Ecclesiastica
II.6 (s n. 6) p. 156.
16
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, a revised transktion a. 757, ed. et trans. DOROTHY WHITELOCK et al.,
London
2
1965, p. 31.
17
BIDDLE (s n. 1); HAROLD M. TAYLOR, St. Wystan's Church, Repton, Derbyshke: a reconstruction essay,
in: Archaeolo^cal Journal 144,1987, pp. 205-245.
18
BIDDLE (s n. 1) p. 16.
19
TAYLOR (s n. 17) p; 243; BIDDLE (s n. 1) p. 22.
100
Dcburah Mauskopf Deliyannis
3/4
5/6
1 m 0 1 .2 3 . 4 B,... .f
Fig. 2 St Wystan's, Repton - structural sequence of the crypt at the east end ofthe church, ^from tihe mid-
eighth to tihe later ninth Century (from BIDDLE [s. n. 1) p. 15).
ecclesiastical stne ahalogue for mounds such s those at Sutton Hpo, which overlook
the River Deben
20
, or fpr the tomb of Beowulf
21
.
Eadbert, King of Kent, was said by a furteenth Century chronicier, Thomas of
Elmham, to have been buried at Reculver
2?
, a churcfe with a plain very sitnilar ta that
20
BIDDLE (s n. 1); RICHARD Mowus-J. RXAN,
:
Churches ori Roman Buildings, in: Temples, Churches
and Religion: Recent Research in Roman Britain, ed. WAR'WICK HDDWELL, Oxford 1980, j>p. 175-209,
p. 180. . .
Church Buriai in Anglo-Saxon England
101
Fig. 3 Old Minster, Winchester - proposed first phase, c. 648-900 (from FERNIE [s Fig. 1] p. 40,
after Martin Biddle).
of Ss. Peter and Paul in Canterbury. If this is true, it is likely that he was buried in
one of the porticus known to have existed there.
The ninth-century 'Anglo-Sxon Chrpnicle' records the burial of two later kings
of Wessex, Cynewulf (d. 757) and Aethelwulf (d. 858) in the Old Minster at Winchester
(Fig. 3)
23
. The twelfth-century 'Annales
5
of Winchester claim that the Old Minster
also contained the burials of its founder Cenwalh, bis successors Aescwine and Cent-
wine, and Egbert (d. 839)
24
; however, the idea that the Old Minster had always had
special connections with the kingdom of Wessex may be a ninth Century (or later)
invention
25
. The Old Minster has been comprehensively excavated, and while the early
plan is well attested, no burials were found inside the church until the ninth Century
26
.
Unfortunately, the sothern side of the church could not be revealed, but it is thought
to have had a porticus similar to the one found on the north side
27
. If so, it is possible
that such a chamber served s the burial chapel for some of the kings of Wessex. If
21
PETER CLEMOES, Style s the Criterion for Dating the Composition of B e o i v u l f , in: The Dating of Beo-
wulf, ed. COUN CHASE, Toronto 1981, pp. 173-186, p. 184.
22
See KRGER (s n. 2) p. 279.
23
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle a. 757 (s n. 16) p. 31; ibid. a. 858, p. 44.
24
Annales monasterii de Wintonia, ed. HENRY RICHARDS LUARD (Rerum Britannicarum Medii Aevi
Scriptores, Annales Monasti 2) London 1865 (r. p. London 1965), pp. 5 and 8.
25
Alfred made Winchester his capital; he built the New Minster and was buried there in 899. Subsequently
Winchester is well documented s one of the most important royal church centers of the kingdom,
where coronarions took place s well s the burials of many of the kings of Wessex and England; these
include Edward (d. 924), Eadred (d. 955), Cnut (d. 1035), and Harthacnut (d. 1042). Hwever, even
Winchester was by no means the only place where kings were buried even in this later period.
26
BIRTHE KjOLBYE-BiDDLE, A cathcdral cemeteryi problems in excavation and interpretation, in: World
Archaeology 7, 1975, pp. 87-108. Of course, burials might have taken the form of sarcophagi placed
above ground, in which case they might have been located in any part of the church.
27
102 Dcborah Mauskopf DcHyannis
not, then perhaps the rieh burials clustered around the early church were those of the
royalty of Wessex, buricd not in the church, bat s dose s possible. No other mauso-
leum-structures were found to the east of the church, but the idea of a funerary chapel
to the south must remain hypothetical
28
.
To summarize: known or possible ryl Anglo-Saxon buriai strctures include
the following: *
Ss. Peter and Paul, Canterbury southern porticus (St. Martin)
York Mnster (southern?) porticus (St. Gregory)
Whitby southern (porticus?) (St. Gregory)
Old Minster, Winchester (southern porticus?)
Reculver? (porticus?)
St. Mary's, Canterbury eastern-axis structure
St. Wystan's, Repton eastern-axis structure
St. PauPs, London ? /
Lindisfarne in cymiteno
One other possible site may be Glastonbury, rebuilt by Ine of Wessex round the year
700, which also had north and south porticus; he may have intended to be buried
there before he decided to go to Rome, where he ultimately died.
CHURCH BURIAL IN ANGLO-SAXON ENGLAND: TEXTS AND ARCHAEOLOGY
Before attempting to analyze the significance of royal church burials, we must
examine other known examples of church burial in Anglp-Saxon England, to put the
royal graves in perspective.
Most of the written sources teil only of the burials of bishops, abbpts, abbesses*
and saints classes that had direct influcence on the allotment of the most privileged
places of burial. Saints particularly, or those whose remains were seen to cause mira^
cles, could justiflably be buried even under the main aitar in a church, and represent
a category which we shall not attempt to deal witjl here
29
.
Most of the earliest bishops were considered saints by the eighth Century, one
reason that Bede mentions thek burial places at all. As we have seen, the early bishops
of Canterbury were buried in the north porticus of Sts. Peter and Paul at Canterbury.
Birinus, apostle of Wessex, was first buried in his episcopal city of Dorchester, al-
though his relics were later translated to the Old Minster iri Winchester. Paulinus,
apostle of Northumbria, sepultus est in secretano beati apostoli Andreae, quod rex Aedilberct
a fundamentis in eadem Hrofi [Rochester]; civitate construxit. Bishop Tobias of Rochester
was apparently buried in this same church, in porticu sancti Puli apostoli quatn intro
ecclesiam sancti Andreae sibi ipse in locum sepulchn fecerat. St, Chad was first buried iuxta
20
A grave undedying the Anglo-Saxon destruption levels was fond in th^ early twentieth Century next
to a buttress of the present cathedra!; it is located opposite the north-west annex of the Anglo-Saxon
cathedra!, presmably in the southern analogue of this wing, which was built'in the early terith Century.
See MARTIN BIDDLE, Excavations at Winchester, 1964, in: Antiquaries Journal 45, 1965, pp. 230^-264,
p. 256; also KJOLBYE-BIDDLE (s n. 26).
29
For discussions with different appfoches, see PIDDLE (s n.1);. ANDR& GRABAR, Mtyriuni: Recherches
sur le culte des reliques et l'art chrotien antique, Paris 1946.
eccksiam sanctae Mariae before bis translation, the saintly bishop John pf York inporticu
sancti Petriin monastenosuo [Beverley]
30
. Interestingly, Bede teils of two saints buried in
France, both clearly inside churches, where church burial was common. Aethelberga,
abbess of Brje in France, built herseif a church to be buried in, although she was
actually buried in a different church
31
. And Fursa, an Irish monk and saint, who was
buried at Latiniacum (Lagny-sur-Marne) first inportico quondam eccksiae, donec ipsa eccl esia
dedicaretur. Quod dum post dies XXVII esset f actum> et corpus ipsum de porticu abl atum prope
al tare esset recondendum ...
32
Unfortunately, these are the only burials mentioned by Bede, and all are of excep-
tionally saindy people, who often received gravesites in a church or an annexed struc-
ture, s did the kings. Biddle notes that, "there seems to have been an early preference
to use a north porticus for the burial of those members of a Community - whether
heads of houses or persons of pastoral or scholarly distinction who were later to be
sainted (Augustine at Canterbury in c. 604609; Aethelburg at Lyminge c. 647; Bede
at Jarrow in 735) ,.."
33
, a trend replaced later by burial on a central axis. At the least,
we can see again that none of the tombs in England described by Bede was located
in the central space of a church.
It is when we turn to archaeology to learn about church burial that a remarkable
pattern emerges: burial inside a church was in fact s rare s its mention in texts. The
Information about burial inside early Anglo-Saxon churches is sparse, often due to
later construction or grave-digging, but there are enough examples of excavated
churches to confirm this trend.
At St. Paul-in-the-Bail, Lincoln, the early church has been fully excavated, possi-
bly the seventh Century church mentioned by Bede s built by Paulinus, or perhaps
an earlier building in the old Roman forum
34
. At the eastern end of the nave, on the
central axis and probably near where the altar stood, was found one grave-shaped pit
that had probably once contained a coffin, and in which was found a hanging bowl.
This was the only grave in the church: the excavators suggest that the "person of
outstanding importance" who was interred there may have been the king of Lindsey
35
;
given the central position it seems more likely that it contained the body of a saint.
In any event, it was the only grave inside the structure.
In other churches, too, burials inside the structures are extremely rare. The early
church at Deerhurst was built over an existing cemetery, which continued in use,
particularly on the south side; however, none of the burials found inside the church
postdated its construction. At Wells the earliest church was built near the site of a
Roman mausoleum that may have become a shrine, and was surrounded by a cemetery
30
Bede, Historia Ecdesiastica (s n. 6) respectively .7, p. 232; .14, pp. 254-256, V.23, p. 556; IV.3,
p. 344 and V.6, p. 468.
31
Ibid. .8, p. 240.
32
Ibid. .19, p. 276.
33
34
Bede, Historia Ecclesiastica 11.16 (s n. 6) p. 192; DAVID PARSONS, S acrariuf f r. ablution drains in early
medieval churches, in: The Angio-Saxon Church (s n. 1) pp. 105-120, p. 105, who is reporting a
personal communication from Briao Gilraour.
35
CHRJSTINA COLYER.-BRIAN GILMOUR, St. Paul-in-the-Bail, Lincoln, in: Current Archaeology 63, 1978,
pp. 102-105, p. 103.
104 Dcborah Mauskopf Deliyannis
later, in the eighth Century, The church at Barton-upon-Hurriber was built oyer a
Saxon graveyard, but the graves linder the church were apprently removed upon its
consttuction; two graves were found in the chancel. There were no graves found in
the Anglo-Saxon church of St. Paul at Jarrow, although the rnonstic cemetery ky to
the south; no burials were found at St. Martin's church at Wharram Percy ul at least
the ninth Century, although an associated cemetery stretched arourid it. Finaliy, at
Whithorn in Scotland the eighth Century (?) stone church contained one burial in the
center of the nave, probably a translation of St. Ninian, whe a cemetery extended to
the south and east, which included a rectangular stone mausoleum dkectly to the east
of the church
36
.
Burial in a churchyard, particularly a nionastic churchyard, is well attested archae-
ologically, especially after the eighth Century
37
, arid is also specifically mentioned by
Bede
38
. However, it seems clear that not only were burials within church stnictures
reserved for the highest clergy and royalty, but that evea these people were not buried
in the central space of the church, but in side chapels or,mausolea. Anglo-Saxon kings
were buried in private spaces reserved for them and their families, which in some
cases seem to have been used s dynastic mausolea, depending on- the political ckcum-
stances of each kingdom. The significance of this type of burial, whose main features
include architectural Separation from other graves and location next to a sacred struc-
ture, only becomes fully apparent when compared with bther burial practices and
traditions, both Christian and pagan.
INFLUENCES ON ANGLO-SAXON CHURCH BURIAL
The developing church laws about burial are often said to have affected the
tradition of church burial in England. In addition, three cHfferent models for high-
status or royal burial were known to Christian Anglo-Saxon kings, which could have
influenced their practices: pagan Anglo-Saxon, Christian Merovingian, and Roman and
Byzantine imperial high Status burials. We will exarnine the potential inuence of each
of these traditions in turn, in order to understand the odgins of the Anglo-Saxon
practice.
36
Respectively SUSAN M. HIRST, The Burials, in: Excavations at St Mary*s Church, Deerhurst, ed. ?
A. RAHTZ (Council for British Archaeolgy Research Report 15) Londori 1976, pp. 35-38; WARWICK J.
RODWELL, From Mausoleum to Minster: the Early Development of Wells Cathedral, in: The Early
Church in Western Britain and Ireland: Studies presented to CA. Ralegh Radford, ed. SUSAN M.
PEARCE, Oxford 1982, pp. 49-^60; WARWICK J. RODWELL-KIRSTY A. RODWELL, St. Peters Church, Barton-
upon-Humber. Excavation and Structural Study, 1978-81, in: Antiquaries Journal 62, 1982, pp. 233-
315; RosEivtARY CRAMP, St Paul's Church, Jarrow, in: The Archaeological Study of Churches, ed. PETER
V. ADDYMAN-RICHARJD MORRIS, London 1976, pp. 28-35; JOHN G. HURST, Wharrarh Percy-St. Martin's
Church, in: ibid. pp. 36-39; PETER HILL, Whithorn 3: Excavations at Whiiorn Priory, 1988-90, The
Whithorn Trust 1990.
37
RICHARD MORRIS, The Church in British Archaeolgy (Council for British Archeoiogy Research Report
47) London 1983, eh. 4, cites particularly Southampton, Raunds, Nazeingbry, and Colchester, in addi-
tion to those mentioned above.
38
Bede, Historia Ecdesiastica 11^17, IVZ, and IV.10 (s n. 6) pp. 264,356, and 362-364; the latter account
teils how, due to a lack of room in the cemetery at the monastery of Barking, the bones of the monks
and nuns were dug up and reburied within the church of St, Mary, apprently in an ossuary.
Church Laws about Burial
The Roman Laws of the Twelve Tables forbade any burial inside the city walls;
thus tombs of saints of the Roman period, later venerated s holy sites, were all
located outside Roman towns. When cemeteries grew up around these holy sites, they
essentially continued the former Roman cemeteries. The ttaditiori of funerary basilicas
founded extra-muros over the graves of saints, common in Francia and Italy, did not
arise in England, in part because of the discontinuity between Roman and Anglo-
Saxon Ghristianity during die very period (late fifth-sixth centuries) when these basili-
cas were being built elsewhere
3
^.
The issue of burial in a church is closely connected to the question of burial ad
sanctos, which has received much scholarly attention. The history of the consideration
of burial close to relics s efficacious goes back to St. Augustine. Duval has examined
literary sources and epitaphs for attitudes toward ad sanctos burial, and concludes that
the emphasis* on words indicating the proximity of the corpse to the saint shows the
populr belief in the real protective value of burial near saints, and the highly priveged
nature of such burial
40
. The first known law regarding burial within a church is found
in the Theodosian Code ,(381), in which burial in a church containing the body ( se de s)
of a saint or martyr is prohibited
41
. This rule was reconfirmed in Justinian's Code,
which was followed in the Byzantine East even at the highest level
42
. However, s
Bailey Young points out, the early church in the west did not particularly regulate
burial practices, and the actual shift firom 'pagan' to 'Christian* burial customs took
place slowly
43
. There are, however, various rulings from church councils in this period
which did attempt to prohibit church burial. Canon 18 from the first Council of Braga
39
The one location that may have contained a Christian shrine continuously from the Roman period is
St Albans, which St. Germanus of Auxerre is known to have visited in 429. Excavations have shown
that the present church is indeed sited on a late Roman cemetery; see BIDDLE (s n. 1) pp. 13-16.
40
YVETTE DUVAL, Aupres des saints corps et me: Uinhumation 'ad sanctos' dans la chretiente dOrient
et dOccident du
?
au \OI
C
siede, Paris 1988, esp. pp. 134-137. - See also s.v. 'Ad Sanctos', in:
Dictionnaire d'archeologie chretienne et de liturgie, ed. FERNAND CABROL-HENRI LECLERCQ-HENRI
MARROU, Paris 1907-1953, l, cols. 496-508; GRABAR (s n. 29) pp. 436 ff.; BERNHARD KTTING, Der
frhchristliche Reliquienkult und die Bestattung im Kirchengebude, Cologne 1965; ARNOLD ANGEN-
ENDT, In porticu e ccl e siae se pul tus'. Ein Beispiel von himmlisch-irdischer Spiegelung, in: Iconologia Sacra.
Mythos, Bildkunst und Dichtung in der Religions- und Sozialgeschichte Alteuropas. Festschrift fr Karl
Hauck zum 75. Geburtstag, ed. HAGEN KELLER-NIKOLAUS STAUBACH (Arbeiten zur Frhmittelalter-
forschung 23) Berlin-New York 1994, pp. 68-80. For a comprehensive summary of the various laws,
canons, and sources, see KTTING, pp. 31 ff.
41
CLYDE PHARR (ed. and trans.), The Theodosian Code 9.17.6, Princeton 1952. The injuction is found in
a section concerned with burial laws, which also forbids intra-mural burial.
42
See below, n. 81. The law states, Ne mo apostol orum ve l martyrum se de m bumandis corporibus e xistime t e sse
conce ssam. AEMIUUS HERRMANNUS (ed.), Corpus Juris Civilis 2, Codex 1.2.2, Lips 1843. This time the
law is found in the section entitled, 'De sacrosanctis ecclesiis et de rebus et privilegiis earum'.
43
BAILEY K. IfouNG, Merovingân funeral rites and the evolution of Christianity, a study in the historical
Interpretation of archaeological material (Ph, D. Thesis, University of Pennsylvania), Philadelphia 1975.
See also DONALD BULLOUGH, Burial, Community and Belief in the Early Medieval West, in: Ideal and
Reality in Frankish and Angto-Saxon Society, ed. PATRICK WORMALD et al., Oxford 1983, pp. 177-201,
pp. 186 f
106 Dcborah Mauskopf Deliyannis
(561) states, c o r p o r a d e f u n c t o r u m n u llo m o d o in t r a ba st t ka m sa n c t o r u t n se p e lia n t u r , se d si n e c e sse
e st d e f o r is c ir c a m u m m h a silic a e u squ e a d e o n o n bbo r r e t . ...
44
Canon 6 from an unknown syno4 sometimcs attributed to Nantes (658), states,
In e c c le sia n u lla t e n t t s se p e lia n t u r , se d in a t n o , a u t in p o r t ic u , a u t e xt r a e c c le sia m . In e c c le sia m v e r o ,
a u t p r o p e a lt a r e , M c o r p u s Do m im e t sa n gu is c o n f m Mr , n u lla t e n u s h a be a t lic e n t ia m se p e lie n d f
Because it contains the word p o r t ic u s used by Bede in several references to brial,, this
canon is often cited s the reason behind the English custom of burying people in
side-chapels
46
. Several factors must diminish the force o this argument. The first is
that all that is really known of this set of canons is that it dates to before 800, and
the provenance of Nantes in 658, assigned because no other canons ae known from
that council, is questioned by Mansi and Pntal
47
. Furthermore, even if the canon did
date to 658, this would be after the construction of the first Anglo-Saxon churches
and the establishment of the tradition prohibiting brial in them. The second ppint is
that whether these provincial synods reflected or attempted to regulate current local
customs, it is not clear how wide a jurisdiction they wcmlpHiave had in any case. And
s we will see, in France, the origin of the canon, brial in basilicas contiriued to be
common throughout the period.
By 813 the Council of Mainz stated, n u llu s m a r t u u s in f r a e c c le sia m se p e lia t u r , n isi
e p isc o p i a u t a bba t e s, a u t d ign i p r e sbyt e r i, a u t d e le s la ic i
)
effectively reversing the earlier
canons
48
. Church brial was clearly a legal issue, but just s in the Byzantine law
44
J. FERNANDEZ ALONSO, La cura pastptal en la Espana tomanovisigoda (P licaciones del Institute
Espanol de Estudios Ecclesiasticos, Seccion monogtafias 2) Rorna 1955, cura 583; also see Jos
ORLANDIS-DOMINGO RAMOS-LISSON, Die Synoden auf der Iberischen Halbinsel bis zum Einbruch des
Islam (711), Paderborn 1981, p. 85,
45
JOHANNES DOMINICUS MANSI (ed.), Sacrorum Conciliorm nova et
;
amplissima collectio, Rorerice 1759
(r, p. Graz 1960-1962), 18, col. 168. - Is the word e c c le sia radier than ba siiic a significant here? This
distinction is far from clear. In the early sources, e c d e sia does seem to refer only to the main intra-
mural, episcopal churches, while ba siiic a is tised for suburban structures; see CHARLES PIETRI, Btiments
et sanctuaires annexes de la Basilique Saint-Martin de Tours, a la fin du VI
e
siecle, in: Revue d'histoire
de Teglise de France 62, 1976, pp. 223^234. MARGARETE W EIDEMANN, Kultrgeschicihte der Merowin-
gerzeit, Mainz 1982, pp. 6266 and 9799, confirms that in the wofks of Gregry of Tours, the word
e c d e st A refers to cathedrals or churches in t r a m u r o s, or parish churches in the towns; ba silt c a c all lay outside
the walls and were mostly located on cemeteries, over the body of a saint. Other sources, only slightly
later, do not have this precise distinction; for example, the Chronicle of Fredegar says that Gunthram
of Burgundy (d. 593) was buried at Chalon in e c c le sia sa n c f i. Ma r c e lli^ althopgh in the 'Liber Historiae
Francorum* die words are in ba siiic a . Ffedegati Chrdnicorum Liber Quartus cum Continuationibus IV
14, ed. and trans. JOHN M. WALLACE-HADRILL, London 1960, p. 10; Liber Historiae Francorum 35, ed.
BR UNO KRUSCH (MGH SS rer. Merov. 2) Hanover 1888, reprinted 1984, p. 302. - Since this canon
defines for itself what it means by an e c c le sia m v e r o
t
namely a place where mass is said oh the altar, this
would inciude basilicas by the seventh Century.
46
While Bede's use f the word p o r t ic u s clearly refers to side-chapels, s at Canterbury, in Qther cpntexts
the Word may have been used for the lateral porches which flanked Gallo-Roman and Merovingian
basilicas; this is how it is usually translated by French scholars. For good recent summary of the uses
of the word p o r t ic u s in England and on the continent, see DAVDD PARSONS, Books and Buildings: Archi-
tectural Description before and after Bede* Newcastle-upon-Tyne 1988, pp. 24-26.
47
MANSI (s n. 45); ODETTE PONTAL, Die Synoden, im Merowingerreich, Paderborn'1986.
48
Although perhaps a reflection of this attitiide is seen s early s .the sixth Century, in Gregry of Tours*
tw stories of the evil man Pelagis and the suicide Palladius, neither of whom was allowed to be (or
to remain, ifi the case of Pelagis) buried in a diurch.Jn -die former passage Pelgiu.s eiiiis up buried
in p o r t ic M ip sit t s ba silic a e , an example of the Frankish use of the word t rnean space outside the church.
Church Burial m Anglo-Saxon England 107
codes, more attention was pid t other matters such s grave-robbing, translation, and
reuse of tomb$. From neithr Gregoryof Tours nor Bede do we detect disapproval of
church burial, although both were pious churchmen.
A collection of canons made by Theodore of Canterbury (c. 670) includes one
forbidding the consecration of a church in which the bodies of pagans are buried,
although if a church had been consecrated akeady then burial of Christians seems to
be allowed
49
. While this may indicate that such laws were at least known in England,
the fact remains that while canons prohibiting church burial carne from the continent,
it was only in England they seem to have been obeyed. This tradition, and that of the
burial of kings and bishops only in side-chapels, began with the very first Anglo-Saxon
church at Canterbury, and thus must reflect a concept that was created or imported
by Augustine, one which had sufficient weight to influence burial practices for around
two centuries. Why this model should have been chosen can only be understood by
examining other options for royal and/or Christian burial.
Royal Merovingian Burial
There is a great disparity in the amount of attention that has been paid to royal,
or even to church burial, in Merovingian France and Anglo-Saxon England, which is
due in part to the nature of the evidence. For France, many studies have examined
the nature of privileged and royal burials, from both archaeological
50
and literary
51
perspectives. As we will see, there is a striking contrast between Christian burial cus-
toms in France and England during this period, which extends to royal burials s well.
Despite Aethelbert's close connections with the Merovingian court, he does not seem
to have borrowed Christian burial traditions from France.
such s an external porch (see above, n. 46). Gregorii Episcopi Turonensis Libri Historiarum X, VIII.40
and IV.40, ed. BRUNO KRUSCH-WILHELM LEVISON (MGH SS rer. Merov. 1.1) Manver
2
1965, pp. 406-
407 and 170-171. ANGENENDT (s n. 40) p. 77, proposes that this rule, rather than reversing the earlier
laws, instead was meant to clarify the intended practice of burying 'righteous people' inside churches.
49
PAUL W. FINSTERWALDER, Die Canones Theodori Cantuariensis und ihre berlieferungsformen, Weimar
1929, pp. 247, 267, 274, and 312 (for all the variants); BULLOUGH (s n. 43) p. 189.
50
Induding EDOUARD SALIN, La civilisation merovingienne d'apres les sepultures, les textes, et le labora-
toire, 2: Les sepultures, Paris 1952, pp. 23-33; ALAIN ERLANDE-BRANDENBURG, Le roi est mort: etude
sur les funerailles, les sepultures et les tombeaux des rois de France jusqu' la fin du 13* siede, Paris
1975; ^ OUNG (s n. 43); IDEM, Exemple aristocratique et mode funeraire dans la Gaule merovingienne,
in: Annales: Economies, Sodotes, Civilisations 41.2, 1986, pp. 379-407; MICHAEL MLLER-WILLE,
Knigsgrab und Knigsgrabkirche. Funde und Befunde im frhgeschichtlichen und mittelalterlichen
Nordeuropa, in: Bericht der Rmisch-Germanischen Kommission 63,1982, pp. 349-412; L'Inhumation
privilegjee du IV* au VIII
e
siede en Occident, ed. NOEL DUVAL-^ JEAN-CHARLES PICARD, Paris 1986;
PATRICK PERIN, Des necropoles romaines tardives aux necropoles du Haut Moyen Age. Remarques sur
k topographie funeraire en Gaule merovingienne et a s peripherie, in: Cahiers archeologiques 35,
1987, pp. 9-30; EDWARD JAMES, Royal Burial among the Franks, in: The Age of Sutton Hoo, ed. MARTIN
CARVER, Woodbridge, Suffolk 1992, pp. 243-254, p. 244.
51
E. g. WEIDEMANN (s n, 45); ELZBIETA DABROWSKA, La sepulture des eveques et des abbes dans la Gaule
du IV
e
au VHF siede, in: Actes du XI
e
Congres International d'Archeologie Chretienne (Lyon, Vienne,
Grenoble, Geneve ... 1986), ed. N O ELDU VAL, Cittadel Vaticano 1989,2, pp. 1259-1266; LUCE PIETRI,
Les sepultures privilegiees en Gaule d'aprds les sources litteraires, in: UInhumation privilegiee (s n. 50)
pp. 133-142.
108 Dcborah Mauskopf Deyannis
Grcgory of Tours states that Clovis, thc first Christian king of the Franks, was
buriecl at Paris in basilica sanctorum apostolomm, quam cum Chrodechilde regina ipse constru-
xerati Chrodechilde herseif was buried next to her husband, in sacrario basiltcae
32
, along
with various children and grandchildren. While the sacranum which contained the bucU
als was long considered to have been the sanctuary or the choir of the church, Perin,
who has recently and thqroughly discussed precisely this question, favprs the Inter-
pretation of the word s an annexed chamber next to the sanctuary
53
.
The successors of Clovis xyhose tombs are known were all buried in churches f
various types, but the locations within these churches are generlly not known, rior is
there secure archaeological evidence for most of them. Childebert I, Chilperic I and
Lothar II were all buried in the church of St. Vincent and the Holy Cross in Paris.
Also in this church, St. Germain was interred In portico bsilicae**. While St. Vincent/
52
Gregory of Tours, Libri Historiarum 11.43 and IV.l (s n. 48) pp.,93 and 135.
53
PATRICK PE R IN , La tombe de Clbvis, in: Media in Francia ... Recueil de Meianges offert K. R Werner,
Paris 1989, pp. 363-378; IDEM, The Undiscovered Grave of King Clovis I (f511), in: The Age of
Sutton Hoo (s n. 50) pp. 255264. The Merovingian church of the Apostles, referred to s Ste.
Genevieve after the ninth Century, was destroyed in the nintli Century and completely rebuilt, and again
rebuilt in the eleventh Century (MAY VIEULARD-TROIEKOUROFF-DENISE FossARtHBucENE CHATEL-CO-
LETTE LAMY-LASSALLE, Les anciennes eglises suburbaines de Paris, TV
6
X
e
siecles, in: Paris et Ile-de-
France, Memoires 11, 1960, pp. 89-229, p. 170). Although the excavations of 1807 revealed many
Merovingian stone and plaster coffms, they did not find any traces of the early church or of where
these coffins may have been placed relative to structures (ERLANDE-BRANDENBURG [s. n. 50]; also in
VIELLARD-TROIEKOUROFF). As PERIN, La tombe, pp. 365366, points out, the word sacranum in Greg-
ory of Tours generlly refers to a small side-chamber used s a sacristy, near the choir. In CHARLES Du
FRESNE Du GANGE, Glossarium Mediae et Inmae Ladnitatis, Graz
6
1954f, s.v. "Sacrarium
1
, the word
has many meanings depending on context, including pars aedis sacrae bt est altare; secretartum^ diacomcum^
sacristia-y coemeterium [a source from 1099 perhaps an interesting transfer of its burial associations];
scrin/ ' / f m, tabulariui? ^ arcbivum. Most of these meanings apply to the form of a small annexed-chamber
and refer to its function; perhaps to be called a sacranum a room had to contain an altar, shrine, or
other sacred object? See also PARSONS (s n. 34) Appendix, The meaning of sacranum, for a discussion
of meanings in the English context. PE R IN , The Undiscovered Gravej p. 258, discusses the relationship
of this Holy Apostles to that of Constantinople, and concludes that Clovis may well have been at-
tempting an imitatio impmi by building himself a mausoleum-chamber after the example of the imperial
tombs.
54
Respectively Gregory of Tours, Libri Historiarum IY20 (s 48) p. 152; Vl.46, p. 321\ j^redegarius,
Chronica IV.56 (s n. 45) p. 47; and Gregorii episcopi Turonensis Liber in gloria confessorum 90, ed.
BR UN O KRUSCH (MGH SS ret Meiov. 1.2) Hanover 1885, reprinted 1969, pp. 355-356. - Gislemar,
in the eleventh Century 'Vita Droctovei', states that eadem basilica in modum cructs aedi cataf tierat, qutuor
altana continebal... Ad meridianam quoqueplagam aedtf icatum f uerat quoddam O ratorium in b nore sahcti Simphori-
ani mariy ris, bt idem Dei sacer Gertnanus postmodum sepeliri se mandavit. Vita Droctovei 17; see K R GE R (s
n. 2) p. 117. The pordcus/oratorium of Saint Symphorian was located t the suth of the south-west
corner of the present church. To state that Childebert's church was crucifrm, however, is problematic;
Gislemar's text describes a church completely rebuilt after its destruction in 861. Recent excavations in
the south-west corner of the Standing church seern to indicate that there, at least, even the eurrent
church is built on the Merovingian foundations. J E AN DERENS, A propos des foules de la chapelle
Saint-S}Tnphorien de Saifit-Germain des Pres: la basilique de Saint-Vincent, puis Saint-Germain des
Pres, des origines au XI
e
siede, in: Paris, foyer d
?
art au Moyen Age (Document Archeologia 3). Dijon
1973, pp. 11-27; PATRICK PE R IN (ed.), Catalogue des collections mferovingiennes du Musee Catnavalet,
Paris 1985, pp. 271-272. This implies that Gislemar's text was based on a sixth Century document,
which might prove that the early church was also crucifofm; however, s yet only the south-west end
has been understood, and the form and extent to the east are unknown; for an alternate view, see
St. Germin was known to have been an important burial church for the Merovingian
dynasty, fitde can be said about its architecture or the location of die royal tombs.
Saint-Denis is known to have contained the tombs of at least two kings, and has
been thoroughly excavated and published. Even before Dagobert I (d. 638), various
royal relatives were buried in basilica, including the young son of Chilperic and Frede-
gonde, a cousin of Chilperic named Theodetrudis, and the brother of queen Nante-
childe
55
. Dagobert himself rebuilt the church and was buried in it; two sources are
somewhat precise about the tpmb: it was in eadem sancti Dionjsii basilica sub arcu in latere
dextro, or simply iuxta eorum [the martyrs] tumulum in dextro latere
56
. This
e
right' side
probably means the south, assuming that the authors are facing the altar. Sub arcu is
more obscure; it could refer to an arcade, meaning that Dagobert was buried in an
aisle; it could mean an arch that screened off the sanctuary from a transept or the
nave itself; or it could even indicate some kind of memorial or arcosolium built over
the tomb
57
.
Excavatins at St.-Denis have uncovered a large number of Merovingian sarco-
phagi in the area of the church, several direcdy to the west of the earliest church,
including no. 49, the so-called grave of Arnegunde, located in the midst of many
others
58
. The richness of the objects found in her tomb show that this woman was
VIELLARD-TROIEKOUROFF et al. (s n. 53) pp. 92-94. A church in modum cruas need not have had an
integrated structure; it could have had transepts or even small side-chapels which would still be consist-
ent with Gislemar's description. In that case, it is conceivable that these contained burials. - Excavatins
in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries produced various stone and plaster sarcophagi from the
choir of the Standing eleventh and twelfth Century church, some of which bore inscriptions of the royal
names Childeric (II) and Chilperic (I), and which were said by the discoverers to have contained many
precious objects a crown, buckles and Ornaments, cloth of gold, a sword, silver plaques, clothing, a
glass jar, etc., all now lost See PERIN, pp. 275-277; VIELLARD-TROIEKOUROFF, pp. 102-106. It seems
unlikely that any of the sarcophagi were in their original Ipcations.
55
See K RGER (s n. 2) pp. 179-180.
56
Respectively Vita Eligii Episcopi Noviomagensis 1.33, ed. BRUNO KRUSCH (MGH SS rer.. Merov. 4)
Hanover 1902, p. 689; Gesta Dagobert! I regjs Francorum 43, cd BRUNO KRUSCH (MGH SS rer. Merov.
2) Hanover 1888, reprinted 1984, p. 421.
57
Excavatins under Saint-Denis have revealed traces of the first two churches, presumably the one built
by Genevieve and the enlargement of Dagobert. According to Crosby, Dagobert's church seems to
have incorporated the earlier structure s a choir, with a lengthened nave with side-aisles and a narthex
to the west The remains were too scanty to indicate whether or not there were lateral annexed cham-
bers, which might have had an entrance arch; however, the church does seem to have had aisles,
allowing for the possibility that Dagobert was buried in the southern one. SUMNER McK. CROSBY , The
Royal Abbey of Saint-Denis from its beginnings to the death of Suger, 475-1151, ed. and completed
by PAMELA BLUM, New Haven 1987.
58
The chronological relationship between the grave and the surrounding church structures is significant:
if the burial was that of Queen Arnegunde, either she was buried to the west of Genevieve's church,
perhaps in an atrium, or she was buried inside a western extension dating earlier than the additions of
Dagobert MICHEL FLEURY -ALBERT FRANCE-LANORD, La tombe d'Areogonde, in: Bijoux et parures
merovingiens de la icine Areogonde, belle-fdle de Clovis (Dossiers de l'archeologie 32) Dijon Jan.-Feb.
1979, pp. 27-42, p. 42, argue that because the tombs in this area were never affected by rainwater, they
were always under some structure. - If the deceased was not Queen Arnegunde at all, but a high-status
seventh Century woman, s the style of her jcwelry may more properly date her, she was buried inside
Dagobert's church. See EDWARD JAMES, The Franks, Oxford 1988, pp. 157-159. - Because of the
stylistic dating of the jewellery to the 590's at the earliest, PATRICK PER IN, Pour une revision de la
datation de la tombe d'Aregonde, cpouse de Clotaire I
ec
, decouverte en 1959 dans la basilique de Saint-
HO Dcborah Mauskopf Dcliyannis
considered of very high rank at her death, but was buried in the midst of many other
pcople, not all of whom could have been royal.
Information about the location of other royal burials is even more limited, and
much of it comes from much later sources
59
. For few of the kings is any further
indication of location within a church given
60
.
It is often stated that aristocratic burial in a diurch began with Clovis' example,
which was then imitated throughout Gaul
61
. If this were tfue, then the influence of
his choice would be remarkable, affecting s it did the many Christians who had been
living in the area for generations, s well s his fellow invaders* In fact, both before
and after the conquest, many different types of burial were practiced by Christians.
For the Gallo-Roman period, written sources teil of various high-status burials in
churches, the most notable being that of the former western Emperor Avitus at the
feet of St. Julien in Brioude in 457
62
. The body of Saint Martin was buried in 397 in
a chapel that he had built in the Christian cemetery outside Tours
63
, and several other
such examples are known, mainly of early bishops buiied in chapels or churches
dedicated to the Apostles, the Virgin, or St. Stephen, but later known under the name
of the sainted bishop
64
. Funerary basicas, developed on a previous cemetery site or
over a specific memoria or mausoleum, were used coiitinuously for burials
65
; archaeol-
ogically kown examples of funerary basilicas in use from the fifth Century and continu-
ing into the Merovingian period include Montferrand, Civaux, Saint-Seurin at Bor-
deaux, and St. Peter and St. George in Viehne
66
.
Denis, in: Archeologie Medievale 21, 1991, pp. 21-50, concludes that the original analysis of the skele-
ton, which declared that the body was that of a 45 year old woman, was defective. He proposes that
in fact Arnegunde must have been close to 80 when she died, thus arund the year 590. Perm, s most
other scholars have done, assumes that the ring was that of Queen Arnegunde and that it must have
been buried with the queen; the possibility that she might have beqeathed her ring to someone eise,
with whom it was buried, is not considered. It is doubtful whether these questipns can be fully
resolved; it is unlikeJy that a queen would be buried outside the church, even in an atrium, when other
people from the same period were buried inside the earliest church, unless there were some Spiritual
reason for doing so, such s s a gesture of hmility; see ANGENENDT (s n. 40).
59
See KRGER'S catalogue (s n. 2) pp. 30-250.
60
Gunthram of Burgundy was buried at Chalon in e c c l e s ia s a nc ti Ma rc e l l i in mona s tmo, que m ip s e c ons truxe ra t.
Fredegarius, Chronica IV.14 (s. n. 45) p, 10. In the eleventh Century 'Vita Sancti MedardT by Radbod,
Lothar I is said to lie in Soissons a nte s a nc tum ( s e rv i) De i Me da rdi a / ta re > See KRGER (s n. 2) p. .131; this
may refer to a later translation, or may be a figure of speech. - The eleventh Century 'Vita Dagoberti*
states that Dagobert II was buried at Stenay^ in ora toriol o s a nc ti Re migti rc h ie p is w p i. See KRGER, p. 192.
61
For example, JAMES (s n. 58) p. 145; PATRICK PERIN, L'assimilauon ethnique vue par rarcheologie, in:
Histoire et archeologie: les Dossiers 56, Sept 1981, pp. 38^47, p. 47.
62
Gregory of Tours, Libri Historiarum 11.11 (s n. 48) p. 61.
63
CROZET, Chapelles et Basiliques Funerakes en France, in: Actas del VIII Congresso internacional
de Arqueologi cristiaria, Barcelona 1969, Barcelona 1972, pp. 247^259, p. 247,
64
See ibid. pp. .247-250, for a comprehensive Jist.
65
PERIN (s n. 50) pp. 12-14. '
66
RespectivelyjEAN AUDY-RAVMOND RJQUET, La basilique c6m6teriale de Montferrand (Aude): contribu-
tion a l'etude du peuplement des grandes invasions en Gaule, in: Comptes-Rendus des Seances de
TAcademie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettes, Paris 1961, pp. 185-204; EDUARD JAMES, Merovingian
Archaeology of South-West Gaul (British Archaeologfcal Reports, Spplementary Seties 25) Oxford
1977, pp. 175-176 (Montferrand and Civaux); R DURU, Aux origines chretiennes de Bordeaux: les
fouilles de Saint-Seurin^ in: Archeologia 47, 1972, pp. 18-24; MONIQUE JANNET VALLAT>-ROGER
YNAUD, Vienne aux premiers temps chretiens (Guides archelogiques de
While the sptead throughout France of identifiably 'Frankish
9
graves outside
basilicas mdicates either a large influx of population or an acceptance of 'Frankish'
burial traditions by the native inhabitants, the Frankish aristocracy, indeed following
Clovis, appareritly adopted the practice of building churches to contain their burials
and those of their foHowers
67
. At the same time, however, the old Gallo-Roman
aristocratic families, such s that of Gregory of Tours, were doing with their dead s
they had always done; to give one example, Gregor/s brother Peter was buried in
Dijon beside the sainted bishop Gregory of Langres, their great-great-grandfather,
presumably in a basilica^
8
.
As Young points out, almost every known Merovingian church, large or small,
was filled, undef its floor, with graves
69
. Archaeologically known examples occur,
among others, at St. Laurent-de-Choulans outside Lyon, and Saint-Marcel, Saint-Vic-
tor, and Saint-Medard outside Paris
70
. Of course, some of these tombs would have
contained clerics or bishops, not just secular aristocrats; it is difficult to distinguish
between the two except in the cases where clearly secular grave-goods were included.
From written sources, too, we know of many cases of church burial in the Merovingian
period, of both ecclesiastic and secular persons. Weidemann summarizes the references
to burial found in the works of Gregory of Tours
71
. Saints and bishops, senatorial,
royal, and noble families are buried in cripta, atria, ctmeteria, cel l u l ae, oratona, absidae,
porticu s, or simply in basil icis. The use of all these terms emphasizes the variety of burial
structures, a variety known from monuments such s the Hypogeum of Mellebaudis
in Poitiers and the crypt at Jouarre, s well s from many small mausoleum-type
structures
72
. There does not seem to have been any difect correspondence between
type of burial structure and specific Status of the occupant. We can assume that the
Merovingian kings, too, occupied a variety of tombs over time; some in annexed
chapels to a basilica, some in the body of a basilica kself, some in crypts, some in
other unknown places.
Remarkably, the tomb of Clovis' father, Childeric I, was discovered at Tournai in
1653, and illustrates the burial practices of Frankish rulers immediately preceding their
la France) Paris 1986; MONIQUE JANNET-VALLAT, Saint-Georges Saint-Pierre, Btiments et Necropoles
du IV* siede a la Revolution franp aise, These du doctorat, Universite de Provence, Aix-Marseille I
1987.
67
PERIN (s n. 50) p. 15.
68
Gregory of Tours, Libri Historiarum V.5 (s n. 48) p. 202,
69
YOUNG (s n. 43) p. 92.
70
Respectively JEAN-FRANCX MS REYNAUD-GEORGES VICHERD, Fouilles recentes de l'ancienne eglise Saint-
Laurent de Choulans a Lyon, in: Comptes-Rendus de rAcademie des Inscriptions et Beiles Lettres 46,
Jul.-Oct. 1976, pp. 460-487; and PERIN (s n. 54).
71
WEIDEMANN (s n. 45) 2, pp. 1-22. Weidemann confcludes that up to the end of the fourth Century a
crypt was the typical gravesite (most of those mentioned are of martyrs and bishops), while in the fifth
Century cemeterial basilicas became more common.
72
For example at SL Just, Lyon, see JEAN-FRAN$:ois REYNAUD-MONIQUE JANNET-VALLAT, Les inhu-
marions privilegiees a Lyon et a Vienne^ in: Llnhumation privilegiee (s n. 50) pp. 97-107; behind St.
Pierre, Vienne see JANNET-VALIAT, Saint-Gcorges (s n. 66); see also JEAN-FRANC;OIS REYNAUD et al.,
Les edifkes funeraires et les necropoles dans les Alpes et k Vallee du Rhone. Orig^nes et premiers
developpements, in: Actes du XI
e
5 International d'Archoologie Chretienne (Lyon, Vienne, Gre-
noblc, Geneve ... 1986), ed, NOEL DUVAL, Vatican City 1989, 2, pp. 1475-1514.
112 Dcborah Mauskopf Dcliyanis
conversion to Christianity
73
. Childedc's grave contained a mass ofcoins, weapons, and
jewelry including a scal-ring with bis name on it. Around the tomb a cemctery had
grown up, of both men and women of middJe to high rank, s indicated by the variable
quality of their grave goods, probably close associates of the king. While it is not
known whether any above-ground memorial or mound marked the site of the king's
burial, it is certain that it was not located near a church
74
.
The royal sarcophagi found at Saint-Germain apparently also contained very rieh
grave goods, and we can probably conclude that this was a common practice among
die early Merovingian upper classes
75
. Given the prevalence of burial in the nave of a
basilica, s seen for example at Saint-Denis, it is possible that royal tombs were distin-
guished not by location at all, bt by the amount of wealth deposited in the tomb, a
continuation of the tradition seen in the burial of Childeric I
76
. Furthermofe, Young
suggests that in these churches, contining a tradiition seen in pagan cemeteries such
s Tournai or Krefeld-Gellep, the founder's tomb was surrounded by the tombs of
his entourage
77
. This is a very significant point, s it irnjplies that pagan ideas abput
73
See JO ACH IM WE R N E R , N eue Analyse des Chderichgrabes von Tournai, in: R heinische Vierteljahrsblt-
ter 35,1971, pp. 43-46; IDE M, Childeric, histoire et archeologie", in: Histoire et archeologie: les Dossiers
56, Sept. 1981, pp. 20-29; R AYMO N D BR ULE T-MAR IE -JE AN N E GH E N N E -DUBO IS, Autour de la tombe de
Childeric, in: Archeologia 189, Apr. 1984, pp, 34-37; JAME S (s n. 50) pp. 245-247.
74
JAME S (s n. 50) p. 247, notes that "Childeric
>
s paganism must not be taken for granted, s it long has
been: we have enough evidence from our other royal graves to know that extensive grave-goods do
not imply paganisra ..."
75
O ther examples include the excavated graves of the unidentified woman and young boy, dating to the
early sixth Century and located under the present cathedral of Cologne, which were both richly furnished
with O rnaments and Utensils and buried-not in the early church but in a small chapel in its atrium. See
JAME S (s n. 58) pp. 152-155; YO UN G (s n. 50) p. 390.
76
Perhaps this is also the reason that written sources do not name precise burial spots that they were
deliberately obscured to prevent tomb-rbbiiig. Although some graves, especially of saints, are described
by Gregory of Tours s marked by coverings, epitaphs, or other.monuments, none of the royal tombs
are so described; WE IDE MAN N (s n. 45) pp. 126129. In a few cases we do have recorded memories
of outstanding richness in grave-goods: for exarnple in a few passages in Gregory f Tours* works such
s Libri H istoriarum VIII.21 (s n. 48) p. 387; in this case the grave-goods are stolen. But obviously
the actual excavated cases that we know about remained undisturbed fter burial, indicang powerful
disincentives for robbing them. Dc?spite the arrival of Christiariity, burial with grave-goods did not
cease until the late seventh Century in France; BAILEY K. YOUNG, Paganisme, christianisation, et rites
funeraires merovingiens, in: Archeologie Medievale 7, 1977, pp. 5-81, p. 15; PAULA. FE VR IE R , La mort
chretienne. Du simple fidele a Teveque venere, in: Atd dell trentatresima Settimana di Studio: "Segni
e riri nella chiesa alto-medievale occidentale", Spoleto, l H l 7 Aprile 1985, Spoleto 1987, pp. 943-952.
The extremely rieh 'tombes de chefs' do disappear from parts of France in the sixth Century; BAILEY
K. YO UN G, Quatre cimetieres merovingiens de l'Est de la France: Lavoye, Dieue-sur-Meuse, Mezieres-
Manchester, et Mazerny. E tde quantitative et qualitative des pratiques funerakes (BAR International
Series 208) O xford 1984.
77
YO UN G (s n. 50) p. 390. The excavation of other burial churches has often turned up one grave which,
because of its richness of goods or size or chronology is identified s the grave of the founder: thus
for example at Flonhejm, Arlon, H ordain, and Saint-julienên-Genevois. See respectively H E R MAN N
AME N T, Adelsgrber und .Kirche, ia: iFrnkische Adelsgrber von Flonheim in Kheinhessen (G. D. V.
Series B. 5) Berlin 1970; ALAIN DIE R KE N S, La Tombe Privilegêe (TV^VIIF siedesj d'apres les trouvail-
les de la Belgique actuelle, in: L'Inhumation privilegiee (s n. 50) pp. 47-56; PIE R R E PE MO LO N , ametiere
et chapelle rurale merovingieris H ordain (N ord), in: Septentrion 4, 1974,,pp. 71-72; MICHEL CQLAR-
DELLE, Sepulture et traditions funeraires du Vau XIII
C
siede dans les campagnes des Alpes franfaises
du N ord, Grenoble 1983. - The position of the founder's tombs in these churches, ho>yever, is not
the way society is oiganized, and the way that this Organisation should be reflected in
a cemetery, influenced the nature of royal burial in churches.
The evidence suggests that in Merovingian France, Christian people of rank were
buried in a variety of structures, and that kings, s far s we can teil, were buried in a
similar variety of locations, usually in connection with the great .extra-mural or mo-
nastic basilicas founded by themselves for this purpose. They combined a late Roman
tradition, found all over the empire, of burial in a basilica, with the pre-Christian
customs of distinguishing important graves by the quality of their grave-goods, on
sites that became filled with the graves of their less exalted associates. Archaeologically,
the differences in rank are immediately apparent, but at the time they may not have
been. The royal foundations were undoubtedly larger and more magnificent than those
of the mere aristocracy, but the principle was the same.
It would seem.that radier than initiating a trend, Clovis in fact appropriated one
of the traditions of highly privileged burial that he found in the semi-Christian lands
he conquered, and abandoned some, but not all, of the customs of his pagan ancestors,
exemplified in the grave of his father Childeric. Although diese particular customs
were not adopted in England, the significant influence of certain 'pagan' practices on
Christian burial in Merovingia leads us to consider the analogous influence of burial
customs of the pagan Anglo-Sxons on Christian burial in England.
Pagan Anglo-Saxon Burial
While the Anglo-Saxons were first converted to Christianity at the level of the
aristocracy, strong Symbols of leadership from the pagan past were no doubt retained
by the new Christian rulers, at least in the period just after the conversions, and one
of these Symbols was burial. As we have seen, the Merovingian kings, who began to
be buried in churches, retained, at least for a while,'the custom of including rieh grave-
goods in a tomb, and seem also to have followed the custom of burying a king among
his retainers. England's
e
pagan' burial customs have been comprehensively studied,
and seem to have similarly influenced the first Christian kings.
In Anglo-Saxon cemeteries, burial with grave goods was common; variations in
amount and/or quality of grave goods are generally thought to indicate degrees of
differentiated social Status. In addition, some of these tombs were intended to be
visible on the surface, by means of an earthen mound or stone marker. Earlier, people
of all classes might be buried in the same graveyard; however, in the late sixth
Century, a new type of cemetery began to appear, which consisted solely of very rieh
graves, often under mounds. These burials have been linked to the concept of heredi-
tary kingship, which is thought to have been developing in England only at this
always the same, or even always what we would consider to be the most prominent Tomb 10 at Arlon
was located in the south-west corner; tomb 260 at Hordain was just south of the central axis; at Saint-
Julien-en-Genevois tomb 14 lay along the south wall, apparendy in an arcosolium. In western Switzer-
land tombs of founders often lay along lateral walls, sometimes under arcosolia; see CHARLES BONNET,
Llnhumadon privilegjee du IV
6
au VllI* siede en Suisse occidentale, in: L/Inhumation privilegiee, pp.
109-116. The features identifying the important tombs (to us) are all archaeological, that is, they would
not have been visible above ground, unless marked in some way.
114 Dcborah Mauskopf Deyannis
time
78
, The best-known site of this type is Sutton Hoo, whicb appears to have been
exdusively a high-status burial ground; the inclusion of children's grves is an inctca-
tion that the linege itself was considered ennobling. The tomb at Sutton Hoo of an
early seventh-century ruler, who has been identified s King Raedwald of East Angli,
shows the contination of these traditions, involving great wealth and a large mound
with a boat, clearly meant to impress contemporaries with the power of the ruling
line
79
. Christian liturgical implements found in the tomb, whether or not they actualiy
correspond with Bede's account (Historia Ecclesiastica 11.15) of Raedwald's conversion
to Christdanity and subsequent appstasy, demonstrate that this type of burial could
occur in England after the conversion to Christianity had begun
80
.
The relationship between the development f kingship and the rise of exclusive
burial grounds may have influenced the newly developing Christian traditions also.
Aethelbert of Kent, who married the Frankish Christian Bertha, mst have been influ-
enced by Merovingian royal concepts, and may have been thinking of himself s a
king on the continental model when he converted to.Oiristianity. But s an Anglo-
Saxon king, he may also have been influenced by the newly-developing traditions of
his own people, which had recently come to include burial on a site restricted to
royalty. Perhaps for this reason, he and future Anglo-Saxon kings were buried in
chambers annexed to churches, a privilege reserved for royalty alone among the laity,
in spaces segregating the royal farny from everyone eise. Furthermore, the prohibitdon
against burial in the main part of a .church, which may have owed something to canon
or Roman laws, may also have been observed, for almost two centuiies, in order to
maintain the distinction of royal burial.
This model, in bpth Christian and pagan contexts, was very different from that
of the Merovingians, where a ruler was buried among his followers. But why would
the Christian kings be buried in annexed chambers rather than in the church itself?
Again, one reason might be the laws about burial in chrches, such s they were, but
we must also look at the royal traditions which were known to the. Roman missionaries,
and which they may have brought, along with architectural plans, from Italy to Eng-
land.
Romano-Byzanti ne Buri al
Constantinople's Church of the Holy Apostles, the first Christian imperial burial
church, was inside the city walls; the emperors, their relatives, and the patriarchs were
the only people allowed to be buried intra murs. However, even the emperors were
not allowed to be buried inside a church which contained relics of saints, and by the
78
HELEN GEAKE, Burial Practice in Seventh- and Eightn-Century England, in: The Age of Sutton Hoo
(s n. 50) pp. 83-94, esp. pp. 85-86, who smmarizes the various theoretical models.
79
Although, s noted by J OHN M. WALLACE^HADRILL, The Grves of Kings, in: Early Medieval History,
collected papers by jM. Wallace-Hdrill, Oxford
2
1975, pp. 39-59, none of the grave-goods found in
these grves can necessarily be identified s royal, npr is a large quantity of good riecessarily a sign of
royalty. . '
80
MARTIN CARV ER, The Anglo-Saxon Ceinetery at Sutton Hoo: an Interim Report, in: The Age of Sutton
Hoo (s n. 50) pp. 343-367, Between the mounds at Sutton Hoo are several curious flat grves, of
persons buried without grave goods and often in strnge positions indicating that they were executed;
these "ritual abuse" grves may be indkations of a defiant paganism in the face of Christianity.
late fourth Century the tradition of burying the emperors in a mausoleum, which
probably lay to the north-east of the church, had been established
81
. Justinian rebuilt
die church and built a new mausoleum which contained the tombs of subsequent
emperors until die nirith Century, when they reverted to Constantine's mausoleum.
In Rome, most of die emperors were buried in either Augustus's or Hadrian's
mausolea, both large, centrally-planned structures located just outside the city limits.
The emperors of the tetrarchy were buried in various places, but all in mausolea
outside city walls
82
. The Christian emperors of the west, who would have been the
most accessible imperial prototypes for the barbarin kings, were buried in a mauso-
leum to the north of St. Peter's in Rome, attached to the church, and hence outside
the city walls. The so-clled Mausoleum of Galla Placidia in Ravenna is a small cham-
ber dit was originally attached to the narthex of the church of the Holy Cross, inside
die walls but not in the olapomrium of the city, although it is by no means certain
dit she (or anyone eise) intended to be buried there
83
. Theodoric, too, constructed a
mausoleum for himself outside die walls of Ravenna.
Thus, in both Constantinople and Italy, emperors and kings, following laws pro-
hibiting burial in churches, were buried in separate mausoleum-structures, next to but
separated from important churches. The imperial examples were all centrally planned
structures, modelled on free-standing examples from die Roman empire; in England,
many of the burial structures were chambers attached to the side of the main church
or built behind it, perhaps with an altar s a central focus but without distinct central-
ized plans, s far s we know. Only the concept of a private structure near a church
was borrowed, radier than specific forms. Why this feature should be used for royalty
in England but not in its closest neighbor, Merovingian France
84
, may point to influ-
ences in this practice which were brought direcdy from Rome. The church of Sts.
Peter and Paul at Canterbury, begun under the archepiscopate of Augustine, may thus
have been direcdy inspired, by die imperial mausolea that flanked the sides of St.
Peter's
85
.
Bertha would have known of the need for a king to be buried in a church, from
her Merovingian background; Aethelbert would have stated bis need to be buried in
a uniquely privileged location, along with his family, following recent Anglo-Saxon
81
According to one tradition, Constantine was first buried inside the church; upon the acquisition of
relics of the Apostles beginning in 361, his body had to be removed in accordance with the law, and
was placed in the mausoleum. See RICHARD KRAUTHEIMER, On Constantine's Church of the Apostles
in Constantinople, in: Studies in early Christian, Medieval, and Renaissance Art, translated by C. L.
Striker, New York 1969, pp. 27-34, esp. pp. 29-30. It is not clear whether this move actually happened,
or whether the church itself was actually built after Constantine's mausoleum by Constantius; see PHILIP
GRIERSON, The tombs and obits of Byzantine emperors (337-1042), in: Dumbarton Oaks Papers 16,
1962, pp. 1-64, p. 5,25. - Interestingly, the mausoleum is called a sacrarium in the tenth Century source,
the 'Necrologium Imperatorum* (GRIERSON, p. 6). See above, note 53.
82
Outside Milan: Maximian, Valentinian , Gratian; in the villa at Split: Diocletian. See G. WAURICK,
Untersuchungen zur Lage der Rmischen Kaisergrber in der Zeit von Augustus bis Constantin, in:
Jahrbuch des Rmisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 20, 1973, pp. 107-146, esp. pp. 119 ff.
83
See FRIEDRICH W. DEICHMANN, Ravenna, Hauptstadt des sptantiken Abendlandes, 2.1, Wiesbaden
1974, pp. 63-66 for a discussion of this monument
84
Except in the case of Clovis; see note 53.
85
This idea is not new; it is found in GRABAR (s n. 29) pp. 491-492.
116 Dcborah Mauskopf Dcliyannis
customs. St. Augustine would have proposed a side-chamber on the Roman model, s
a burial place only for royalty. This model so successfully combined the different
needs of the Anglo-Saxon Christian kings that it was adopted by many of them for
their burial churches.
CONCLUSION
The precise nature of social relations in England in the sixth and seventh centu-
ries are still not known, nor is the network of influences which led to the development
of kingship fully articulated^
6
. Pagan Anglo-Saxon rulers did have contact, both politi-
cal and economic, with the Christian Merovingian kings on the continent, and may
have been influenced by Frankish models of power in the development of their own
forms of kingship
87
. The missionaries who came tp England from Rome brought
with them definke concepts of kingship, based on both the imperial traditiil and the
Bible. The idea of burying a king in or near a church js^cornmon to both cultures,
understandable given the privileged nature of ad sanctos burial. However, the Anglp-
Saxon development also owed a great deal to pagan traditions of social structure,
which included evolving ideas about suitable funerary rituals. While the AngJo^Saxori
kings clearly appropriated the Christian privilege of burial in pr near a church, in
addition, following a recent Anglo-Saxon custom, they reserved it for themselves
alone, except for those for whom the Church mandated a church burial.
While contrasting with the Gao-Merovingian burial customs, the Anglo-Saxon
kings, influenced by Augustine and his missionaries, may have derived the idea of
adjunct chambers s burial spaces frorn imperial examples, especially from Rome. The
form of the porticus, found in both the south and north of England, may have
been adopted in Anglo-Saxon churches because of the need to provide privileged and
distinctively separate spaces, clpse tp relics, for the burial of kings.
86
See most recently C. Scuu, Before Sutton Hoo: Structures of Power and Society in Early East Anglia,
in: The Age of Sutton Hoo (s n. 50) pp. 3-23.
87
See IAN WCXJD, Frankish Hegemony in England, in: The Age of Sutton Hoo (s n. 50) pp. 235-241.
Church Burial in Anglo-Saxon England

T
A
B
L
E

1
:
g
Z
O
tt
^
o
u
c/j
G
L
O
-
S
A
X
O
N

K
I
N
G
Z
O
2
D
1
*o
S
'S
C/3
P
l
a
c
e

o
f

b
u
r
i
a
l
f
C
c
2
K
i
n
g
d
o
m
/
00
tu
T
PQ
1
a
i
8
43
co
5
6
0
-
6
1
6
K
e
n
t
A
e
t
h
e
l
b
e
r
t
0 o
, -fi
ss
CN
CN _
a n
||
6
> > > %
s s
11
!?
6
1
6
-
6
4
0
6
4
0
-
6
6
4
6
6
4
-
6
7
3
E
a
d
b
a
l
d
E
a
r
c
o
n
b
e
r
l
E
g
b
e
r
t

I
|
r-<
0
CN
S
.S
o
U
1
s
1
cu
* o
1
H
S
t
.

M
a
r
y
'
s
,

C
a
n
t
e
r
b
u
r
y
S
t
.

M
a
r
/
s
,

C
a
n
t
e
r
b
u
r
y
m
5
H
l
o
t
h
e
r
e
6
8
5
-
6
8
6
6
7
6
-
6
9
2
?
E
a
d
r
i
c
S
u
a
e
b
h
a
r
d
s
0
T-
CN
g
O
S
t
.

M
a
r
y
'
s
,

C
a
n
t
e
r
b
u
r
y
-
6
8
7
6
8
8
-
6
9
0
?
1J
U
r-3
0
v
D
1
c5
S
t
.

M
a
r
y
'
s
,

C
a
n
t
e
r
b
u
r
y
6
9
0
-
7
2
5
W
i
h
t
r
e
d
0
-
in m
< r - > r-
^0
g
II
cd S
*o * o
0 0
H H
s
ja
S
t
.

A
u
g
u
s
t
i
n
e
r
s
,

C
a
n
t
e
r
R
e
c
u
l
v
e
r
CN CN in 4- vo i-
vo vo VO OO C\ O
CN <N Tl- C\
r- r* r- t^
U
-5 - - B - B - B
00 CN 00 00 00 00
CN
T
O CN ^CN
ri S S a S
p q ^ ig
55 ' jTl 2C
*T i <u" <"
'U o *" P^ '
4) O
w
k^ 4) 1
CQ PQ > CQ PQ
^
a
m
1
1
f 1
1^1 1 tf
sf f s Ij s-
1 - 'S 1 11
^ ^ > < 3 ^
CN r- -^C\
cn m m r - Tt r*^
VO *<* t-< CO r-i
r- rr m . co ^
\O vo vo vo vo
'S J 1 -5 ^S j J
Q W O W < O O
o
f

s
o
u
r
c
e
s
.
8
1
^
1
1
s
.0
rt
' u
1

!
A-l
?
CN
c?
c
c
7
.S
1
1
1
!s
1
*
i
1
118
Dcborah Mauskopf Ddiyannis
U U U U
f 33
l
4
l
l
d rt
u O0
t/)
s
(
' f
jO
i
S
\
ot -*-
O <** T-
h~ r* r-
p: p: f 2 f
r*- h r*- r-
5S
r L 4
3$
ia
p p
.,
S S
- '
Chutch Burial in AngJo-Saxon England
.
. - -f i
< N es c^ oo \
i
O
I
l
C/3
.
Il
l

Entierro

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Entierro

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

DEBORAH MAUSKOPF DELIYANNIS

Church Burial in Anglo-Saxon England:

S-ar putea să vă placă și