Apparently, the burial (inhumation) of a teenage girl, about 16 years old, was found near Cambridge. The burial was dated to the mid 7th century AD and the article states that this was the time when Christianity would have started to be introduced to the Pagan Anglo-Saxon kings. The girl was buried on a wooden bed, and was found with a gorgeous gold and garnet cross on her chest, that would have possibly been sewn on to her clothing.
Originally, I was thinking it was pretty neat that they may have found evidence of the transition period between Christianity and Paganism. However, I got so caught up in this, I completely overlooked the idea of gender and status, other than what was stated in the first article.
When I read the original article, I hadn't thought about the tendency to think about how if we find a burial with lots of stuff, or really nice stuff, we automatically jump to royalty or elite because they stand out. I suppose, after having read so much about these types of burials (after all, they are the ones people tend to talk about), perhaps it was just second nature to me? Maybe I was just tired and not thinking. After discussing this in class, I realized that this happens a lot, and really should be taken into account if we are to look at status of an individual objectively. Just because we call them 'princes' or 'princesses' or anything else, really, doesn't necessarily mean that's what they were. Interpretation is a powerful tool. We need to make sure we're not jumping the gun on how we interpret a grave just because there are pretty sparkly things. Don't get me wrong, though, I definitely like the pretty sparkly things. Overall, I think it was probably a good assumption in this case that whoever this girl was, she was probably well off, or, at the very least, whomever buried her was, given the types of things she was buried with and the location in which she was buried. To go as far as to call her a princess, seems a bit of a leap for me, though. That said, I've always been a bit wary of titles like that without significant proof, rather than a hypothesis.
When we discussed this in class, the idea of the women being Nuns intrigued me. Another article mentions that it appeared all of the women found died at approximately the same time. They cite Anglo-Saxon chronicles as stating England had been hit by the plague around 664 AD, and mention that archaeological evidence suggests these four women died around that time. Archaeologists also found the remnants of a long timber structure, as well as other buildings with storage nearby. It was concluded that the 'princess' and the other women may have been a part of a monastery based on their gender, burial, the nearby structures, and the presence of the cross. I feel like this interpretation is sound given that many different factors were taken into account, and they weren't just basing it off of simply the cross, or simply the gender, etc.
In any case, this find is very interesting to me. I am absolutely looking forward to reading more about it in the future. Feel free to discuss if you disagree (or agree) with my thoughts, or simply would just like to comment!
References:
BBC News, 2012. Anglo-Saxon Christian grave find near Cambridge 'extremely rare'. [online] Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-17378845 [Accessed 16 March 2012].
Keys, D, 2012. Remains of dark ages princess in a field in Cambridge. [online] Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/remains-of-dark-ages-princess-found-in-field-in-cambridge-7574249.html [Accessed 24 March 2012].

No comments:
Post a Comment