Sonderdrucke aus der Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg

HEIKO STEUER

Archaeology and history: Proposals on the social structure of the Merovingian kingdom

Originalbeitrag erschienen in: Klavs Randsborg (Hrsg.): The birth of Europe : archaeology and social development in the first millennium A.D. Roma: L’Erma di Bretschneider, 1989, S. [100] - 122 Archaeology and History: Proposals on the Social Structure of the Merovingian Kingdom

by HEIKO STEUER

1. Preliminary remarks institutionalized state. An empire (Reich), or a state In recent years, research into the structure of Ger- of united people, existed wherever the king resid- manic society during its prehistoric to early ed with his band of warriors and his royal wealth. modern periods has gained new momentum Tribes from many Germanic groups, such as the through the rapidly expanding archaeological data Goths and the Vandals, migrated through Europe, base. So great is the scale of increase that it even even reaching as far as the north African littoral: demands a reassessment of the written sources of the community of king and his followers, or Per- information. This paper, accordingly, is addressed sonenverbandstaat, is thus to be conceived not in to a confrontation of archaeological data with the terms of territory, but in terms of individuals, their written sources. I have been occupied with such settlements, and ultimately their burials. Further- problems for many years, and it goes without say- more, within the Frankish kingdom, family rela- ing that my conception of Germanic social organi- tions, bonds which reached beyond any narrow af- zation has changed in the course of time (Steuer filiation to a war band, the assumption of offices 1980, 1982, 1984, 1986-87, 1988). The central ele- and titular posts — such as that of count — and ments of the structure of society in the Merovin- the granting of property as rewards, were all fac- gian kingdom can be summarized as follows: in tors which provided the individual, high-ranking the period between prehistory and the medieval members of the leading groups with widely dis- state the Merovingians formed a ranked society persed properties (Streubesitz). This was a process with differences of rank between and within fami- directly opposed to concepts of enclosed proper- lies; powerful individuals were supported by ties or sharply demarcated areas of domination and groups of followers. In the following sections I shall ownership. present, in an admittedly somewhat provisional Moreover, the different types of office (Amt) also and disparate form, a series of observations on exercised dispersed authority: hence the concept both the historical and archaeological sides of the of Streugrafschaft. An individual holding a position picture. in the Alamannic area might thus have exercised his authority in various parts of the kingdom. In 2. Historic foundations fact, the concepts of districts, provinces (Page) and The Frankish kingdom of the Merovingians and counties do not occur till very late in the Carolin- the later Carolingian Empire were both founded gian period (Borgolte 1984, 248 pp.). The state on the concept of Personenverbandstaaten - states of structures under Chlodwig, founder of the united people. This is an intrinsically Germanic Frankish kingdom, arose with the installation of tradition, and not one stemming from classical an- officials, dukes and counts, who were assigned tiquity. The Personenverbandstaat is neither one of land. But it must be stressed that this property was territorial area nor of fixed borders. It reflects shift- not open to inheritance. ing personal relations. And the concept, as used The central significance of the war bands in the here, can be construed as the opposite of the later construction of the Frankish kingdom has long Archaeology and History: Proposals on the Social Structure of the Merovingian Kingdom 101

been evident to historians. "The French Kings King Eurich, there are, however, instances of land war band... (did not merely)... form the core of inheritance in special cases (Wolfram 1983, 15). the army... (but this)... archaic retinue became an The presence of these retinues as accumulated important element in the royal gentry and in the power only, is also reflected in all so-called tribal formation of the state" (Schulze 1985, 47). Schulze rights in so far as these applied not to a district, continues his summary: "The right to hold a body but to a people. The Lex Alamannorum thus applied of followers was obviously restricted to the royal to the Alamans, whether they lived in Alamannia, family in the Merovingian period" (ibid. 1985, in the Frankish settlements or in Italy (Kottje 49). Donat similarly writes: "The nobility, named 1987). in the reporting sources, did in fact belong more In Italy we find a late demonstration of widely or less closely to the royal family, or were high- dispersed retainers safeguarding the conquered ranking officials" (1988, 12). areas. After 774, the Carolingians began to secure The present state of the debate on social struc- the newly conquered province of Lombardy. This tures in the 7th century is perhaps most clearly ex- was undertaken through a determined policy of pressed by W. Stromer (1988, 224): "The last building up a loyal nobility, and filling all impor- great tribe to emerge, the Bavarians, seems to have tant posts with nobles from north of the Alps. been a voluntary group of free peasants, joining These included 360 Franks, 160 Alamanni, 15 arms together under a leading duchy. Fundamen- Bavarians and 2 Burgundians; in total over three- tally, the whole tribe was organized as a body of quarters of the counts and margraves came from followers, a structure which we see as a founda- the north. In their previous settlements all of them tion for early states". "The rule of the Bavarian had possessed additional dispersed land and each duke in the earliest era is the form of control by brought a big vassal company (Hlawitzka 1960). retainers" (ibid. 1988, 225). Several groups of re- The social order of this train of followers itself led tainers must, in this case, have been united, since to an extension of the base of the hierarchy. only five genealogiae were recorded in the Lex Baiu- There is no doubt about the importance of the variorum. Free retainer warriors ruled the country retinue or train of followers in the Merovingian with the duke, creating large courts; and huge con- period. Indeed, this concept also applies to areas tributions of land for outstanding services gradu- outside the Frankish kingdom to the north, and ally formed the basis for some rather loose form probably also to the east. The most eloquent writ- of property rights (ibid.). It was not until 770 that ten evidence for these areas remains the epic poem the Lex Baiuvariorum records the first known inci- Beowulf in which we find all aspects of the struc- dence of inheritance rights over a fief, and thus tures of personal relations characteristic of a Per- marks the beginning of continuous property rights. sonenverbandstaat. Power (in Beowulf) depends on the At the beginning of the 7th century, Dominus trains of warriors and the kings wealth, but also Chlotharius rex, Chlotar II (584-629), issued the ol- on property, which could be given away (tem- dest edition of the Lex Alamannorum to a congrega- porarily) in payment. The leading groups of the tion which included 33 bishops, 34 dukes and 72 Goths (Gautar), the Swedes (Sviar) and the Danes counts (Schmidt-Wiegan 1988, 64). This congre- are all related to each other. High-ranking warri- gation consisted mainly of the kings retainers, ors — like Beowulf himself — are portrayed as whose individual centres of power were spread leaving home at an early age to stay at the courts over the whole territory like a net. These officials of foreign kings; often adopted as sons, they might came from very different ethnic groups; they were thus return later with their own bands of warriors of variably ranking descent; and they were highly to give military assistance. The king presents mobile. The offices of the royal retainers were tem- Beowulf with property, and also with weapons and porary, and they were extremely well-paid. When gold. It is thus not sufficient merely to consider an official died, his property reverted to the king, the salient archaeological artefacts of the Migra- so that the build-up of a dynasty, or the concen- tion Period in Scandinavia — the boarhelmets, the tration of power on a territorial basis, could not, magnificent inherited swords, the burial mounds as indeed-it should not in this political system, oc- or the ringgold —, one must also look at the pic- cur. (In the western Gothic Reich of Spain, under ture of political power structures in early state- 102 Heiko Steuer

hood; and these structures do not stop at fronti- king Chlodwig, since they are documented in the ers, but stretch far beyond them owing to well- written records; but among the Germanic tribes established personal relationships. The poem can they are probably older. Already in the early im- be dated by the following circumstances: King perial period of Ariovist we may note that the core Hygelac (Beowulfs uncle) fights the Frisians in the of Germanic political units was formed by retain- Frankish kingdom, a conflict which is referred to ers. It is probably here that we should look for the by Gregory of Tours as occurring in 516-522 (Hist. roots of the later Personenverbandstaat, since Ari- Franc. III, 3). The grave at Sutton Hoo has estab- ovist s warriors and a large group called the Suebs lished a factual background to the poem (Bruce- constituted a rather similar organization. Mitford 1975, 1978, 1983). It should also be not- It is notable that the traditional, early Roman ed that Beowulf was written not in Denmark or period German tribal communities and their chiefs southern Scandinavia, where the eponymous hero disappear, as do their tribal names, from the writ- lived and acted, but in England and in Old En- ten Late Roman sources. The Franks and the Ala- glish between the 7th and 9th centuries. mans of the latter period are representatives, in The archaeological connections between Eng- short, of a new kind of group formation. land, Scandinavia and the Frankish kingdom have Such a development is repeated in the early his- been repeatedly demonstrated in the archaeologi- tory of all the Germanic peoples of the Migration cal literature. I shall here refer only to the custom Period, and is also reflected in the archaeological of using the ringsword as a retainer symbol, and record. Groups of retainers from the time of Ari- the custom of wearing a magnificent helmet as a ovist and the Suebs have been detected in contem- sign of belonging to a particular group-ideology porary weapon graves (Peschel 1977, 1978a, (Steuer 1987). In the Frankish kingdom such 1978b). A retinue can also be traced in the so- swords were used to give proof of the relations sub- called princely graves of Lubsow type (c. lst-2nd sisting between retainers. This was also true in century A.D.), in the princely graves of the Scandinavia (Arrhenius 1985), where the Hassleben-Leuna-Himlingje type (c. 300 A.D.), "Frankish" model was repeatedly copied as high- in the stately graves from the Attila and Childeric ranking warriors, who had themselves been serv- era, and in the magnificent burial sites from the ing as retainers at foreign courts, returned to their Reihengriiber civilization (6th-7th centuries) (Steuer homelands bringing with them experiences from 1982). other political structures. Traditional chiefs with Such bodies of leaders accompanied by their their limited numbers of subjects and limited eco- retinues were both the cause and the mainstay of nomic resources could not compete in this system the migrations. Their catalysts were the Roman which favoured wide support and high mobility. Empire and its army, in which Germanic troops A king of the Frankish type, the leader of a body were often incorporated as complete fighting units. of retainers from throughout his extensive realm, Returning groups of retainers and followers were had countless connections and was able to draw thus destined to change the social structure in their on support, and exercise power, wherever he hap- native lands. This poses the question of whether pened to be. He was thus also in a position to take the graves containing rich imported Roman arti- power away from the traditional chiefs. cles indicate repatriated barbarian mercenaries or A number of interesting problems are posed in perhaps even Roman citizens (Rausing 1987). I attempting to use archaeological methods to trace would assert, indeed, that the princely graves of territorial leaders who were participating in a pow- the Hassleben-Leuna-Himlingje horizon reflect er system based on mobility and personal relations. such retainer structures in society, in much the Regional chiefdom territories, as suggested for same way as the later princely graves containing southern Norway in the immediately post-Roman goldhandles, spathae, ring-swords or helmets period (Myhre 1987) and also for the Danish is- (Steuer 1987). lands in the late Roman period (Hedeager 1980), To conclude, the Frankish kingdom was a Per- are — in my opinion — not so obvious. Social sonenverbandstaat. As such, it exerted an influence structures based on dispersed retinues were cer- on the North, and caused similar political struc- tainly introduced into Gaul under the Frankish tures to emerge in the Scandinavian area from the Archaeology and History: Proposals on the Social Structure of the Merovingian Kingdom 103

beginning of the 6th century. To the East, too, presuppose at the same time that the rural popu- there was a similar development, though it was lation buried in the Reihengrfiber sites is wholly to somewhat delayed (Vignatiova 1987, Charvat be interpreted as one of manorial households (Do- 1987): there has been some discussion about the nat 1988, 21; and Bohner 1958, 336 ff.). evidence for bodies of retainers and private property at the time of the empire of Magna 3. Archaeological foundations Moravia. Investigations concerning Merovingian social or- At the end of the Migration Period Chlodwig ganization based on archaeological source material founded the Merovingian Frankish kingdom in are aimed at elucidating, or identifying, questions western and central Europe. This kingdom soon of rank, the emergence of the nobility, and its le- united the scattered Germanic tribal societies of gal and political significance. These questions are the Franks, the Burgundians, the Alamanni, the often based on models of society which presuppose Thuringians and, periodically, the Bavarians too. a class division according to the fixed steps of the Initially this Germanic acquisition of land took Wergeld of the Leges barbarorum, for instance in con- place partly with and partly without the consent nection with the legal classification "serf/unfree, of the Roman population. Consent is manifested freeborn, noble" . It therefore seemed appropri- in the system of accommodation, the so-called ate to compute the quantity and evaluate the hospitalitas (Goffart 1980, Wolfram 1983, Behrends wealth of the grave goods included in Merovin- 1986). The subsequent acquisition of land during gian burials — weapons, jewelry, tools — and also the period of the kingdoms expansion also took to take into account the overall splendour of the place partly with and partly without the consent burial practices themselves. The first analyses of of an already established Germanic population; by grave goods from the Merovingian period only which is meant simply that the Frankish aristocra- considered the graves of men and evaluated the cy acquired the areas inhabited by the Alamanni weapons included in them. According to the way and Thuringians. The conquering groups were — in which these burials were equipped, researchers according to the written sources — war bands that thought themselves able to gauge the legal status had separated from the old tribal societies. The of the deceased as respectively noble, freeborn or leader in question paid the war bands in land, i.e. unfree. Such studies, however, do not lead to con- property rights passed into their hands, but with vincing results. Christleins study (1973) took into an in-built form of dependency on the king, and account all goods included in the graves of both with the proviso that the right to hold land was men and women. These goods were counted and for a lifetime only: it was not inheritable. evaluated, and a classification of the Reihengriiber Based on the above observations and concepts, produced from the results: they range from quali- the remainder of this paper will also consider the ty group A (poor or without any grave goods in- ongoing discussions between Western and Marxist cluded) to D (almost royal) — a classification in scholars concerning the time when property rights which group C would describe Adelsgraber (nobles were established as so-called feudal property, and graves). Various summaries of these quality when the change occurred from tribal or genteel groups are given in the tables (Figs. 1-2). The nobility (artistocracy) to feudal nobility (Donat groups were equated with social ranks; thus graves 1987; 1988). I would like to propose that the emer- with swords or pairs of fibulae, for example, are gence of temporary manorial property rights, in ascribed by Christlein to group B — rich freeborns dependency on a king, coincides with the forma- with authority at the local level; graves with bronze tion of the Frankish kingdom. In the Frankish containers, riding tackle, gold jewelry and kingdom of the 5th/6th century allotments exist- weapons decorated with precious metals, to group ed no longer as freehold private property, but as C — exceptionally rich freeborns or optimates with feudal property. During the period between the more than merely local control; and graves with 5th and 8th centuries feudal conditions of produc- extraordinary objects, mainly imported, to group tion and the basic feudal classes were thus formed D — the rank of reguli or duces. (Donat 1988, 10). By pushing back the date of the Criticism of this particular approach was mainly emergence of feudal conditions of production I voiced because it assumes uniform burial practices 104 Heiko Steuer

General Male Graves Female Graves Quality Significance Group

Markedly No grave goods No grave goods / glass beads; A poor/poor /" sax" ; down and arrows; knife undecorated belt buckles Averagely Sword; "sax"; lance; shield; Fibulae; hair pin (bronze); ear- B wealthy/ decorated belt buckles; glass rings (bronze/silver); head wealthy vessel (6th century) necklace; pendants; belt attach- ments; leg bindings; shoe buckles; silver finger ring; glass vessel (6th century) Above Sword; "sax"; "ango", axe; Complete fibula jewellery; hair C averagely lance; shield; decorated belt pin (bronze or silver); earrings wealthy buckles; snaffle and horse har- (silver, gold); bead necklace; ness; gold finger ring; bronze pendants; belt chain attach- vessel; bronze fitted wooden ments; leg bindings; shoe bucket; glass vessel buckles; gold finger ring; (7th century) bronzc vessel; bronze fitted wooden chest; glass vessel (7th century) Unusually Like C, in addition specially manufactured D wealthy objects

Fig. 1. Ranking criteria and their respective order at the top of the social scale, Roman imperial territory in south-western Germany and Alemannia in the same region ca. 300-400 and ca. 500-650 A.D. (after Christlein 1978).

over a time-span from 500 to 750 AD, and from been conducted on English data. Harke (1987) has an extensive geographic area stretching from presented a dissertation in which he analyses the northern France to northern Italy, a distance of Anglo-Saxon weapon graves of the 5th to 7th cen- over 1000 km. It also assumes consistent be- turies. His analysis provides further confirmation havioural patterns through time and space of a so- that the supposed equation between the weapons ciety made up of very different tribal groups in the grave, weaponry and social structure does (Steuer 1982). Comparisons of this type are there- not correspond to reality. It also suggests that the fore valid only where they involve contemporary probabilities of being able to identify social legali- graves within one burial site, or when they deal ties, or social roles, through the archaeological with neighbouring burial sites. record are slim. His thesis reads as follows: (1) As Samson (1987) is one of the most recent scho- also on the Continent, one fifth of all graves, i.e. lars to voice reservations about Christleins half of the mens graves, contain weapons. (2) An method. These go beyond my own collected increase in the quantity of weapons in the graves, "counter-examples" , which he refers to as anec- reaching a maximum around the middle of the 6th dotal, and are more fundamental in character. He century, can invariably be registered. (3) The stresses the point that we can only penetrate into weapons in the graves are always a selection of the the former social reality if we take into account not actual weaponry, that is to say that the status, and merely the buried individual and the objects not the function, of the warrior, is represented in deposited in his/her grave, but also the motives of death. Besides, it is definitely the lifestyle, rather the group which arranged the burial and decided than the function, of the deceased that is reflected on the objects included in it. New research has also in the equipment in the grave, as shown by the Archaeology and History: Proposals on the Social Structure of the Merovingian Kingdom 105

Roman Imperial Alemannia Archaeological Quality

territory ca. 300-400 Characteristics Group Tribunus, Vir Duke, Regulus D spectabilis, later bishop (?)

High ranking officer Optimates with territorial Gold jewellery; silvered (Praefectus cohortis), rich authority belt and weapon fittings; landowner, high govern- silver, bronze and glass ment official, rich vessels merchant

Mid-ranking officer (Cen- Rich freemen with local Silver jewellery; bronze (C)-B turio), average and authority (rich farmers belt fittings; bronze smaller landowners, etc.) vessels tenant farmers, merchants

Alemannia ca. 500-600 Archaeological Characteristics Quality Group Duke Specially manufactured objects (not for sale) Freemen with above Bronze fittings; horse fittings, gold average wealth finder rings; gold handled swords

People with average wealth Pairs of fibulae; swords etc.

Fig. 2. Ranking criteria and their respective order as based on the "Reihengrdber" from Alemannia in the sixth to early seventh centuries A.D. (after Christlein 1978). inclusion of drinking goblets. (4) The weaponry liberi, between nobles and freeborn, appears very included is attached to particular families, and only late. Originally the Frankish law made no men- represents an act of symbolism. Solberg (1985) has tion of nobles, only freeborn, the only "nobles" incidentally attempted a similar approach for the being of the Merovingian dynastic line. It was only burials of the Merovingian and Viking periods after 770, in a supplement to the lex Baiuvariorum, found in Norway. But in his study he has, in my that nobles appeared in their own right, alongside view, jumped to conclusions about the relation- the freeborn. Hitherto only the family of the duke ship between weaponry found in graves and so- Agilofinger — related to the king of Lombardy — cial status. was mentioned in the texts, along with five other New analyses of the tribal laws of the 7th and families (genealogiae). 8th centuries have likewise shown that the legal There is yet another way of summarising the position of the freeborn has nothing in common present state of research: in general, the central with, nor is it equivalent to, their social or eco- European archaeologist prefes an inductive ap- nomic situation. Thus there is no necessary rela- proach; and this also holds good for the socio- tion between tribal rights or statements of Wergeld historical analyses of the Reihengriiber and the ob- and the contents of graves; the latter belong to a jects included in them. This has led inter alia to completely different area, namely that of lifestyle. a quantifying description as exemplified by Christ- Furthermore, the differentiation between nobili and leins approach. Since it is convenient to sort the 106 Heiko Steuer

archaeological material into prearranged slots, this • Aristocratic graves about 600 A.D Qravefields. procedure enjoys great popularity. The artificial- distribution area. ly determined "cut-off points on a continuum be- 7th century tween few and many grave goods are used to de- fine quality groups A to D, while the choice of only certain objects (e.g. bronze containers or riding tackle) as the main characteristics of these groups tends to obscure the continuum and to define, or reinforce, cut-off points where none exists in real- ity. I grant that this kind of quantifying analysis does have its merits, in that it may ease commu- Fig. 3. Distribution of "Reihengrdber" cemeteries of the nication between archaeologists, but its claims to seventh century A.D. in the north-western part of the Euro- pean continent, and selected aristocratic graves from about 600 bridge the gap between the archaeological findings A.D. (after Muller-Wille 1983 (etc.)). and their social and historical interpretation are merely illusory. I would also like to express serious misgivings tribal groups. This was one of the most decisive as to whether the statistical-topographical analyses changes in the history of the Germanic peoples. of the range of finds within (for example) "core" A specific way of life led by the leading groups wi- and "periphery" areas will enable us to describe thin the Merovingian kingdom was reflected in early statehood. We can only achieve this by me- their burial practices. ans of archaeology if we presuppose undisturbed tribal developments during the emergence of a 4.1 My first proposition refers to the social ord- genteel nobility and a chiefdomship which entailed er of the Germanic population generally in the the formation of territorial entities (cf. Hedeager period between 480 and 750 AD. It states that the 1980 and Myhre 1987, with the above comments). so-called Reihengraer burial custom (fig. 3), with The written sources from the Merovingian peri- its extensive use of grave goods, is the expression od, however, suggest in the main groups of peo- of an important facet of the way of life in the ple independent of any set territorialism. Merovingian period: a way of life compunded of A different approach opts for a deductive metho- retinue, warfare, banquets and heroic ballads. dology. In the following I will attempt to use ar- This particular burial custom had its origins in the chaeological material to analyse, or corroborate, widely branching network of the Merovingian roy- relevant information extracted from the documen- al family. The burial of Childeric, the Frankish tary sources, in particular the formation of a state Merovingian king — and Roman general — was based on a system of retainers and their property undertaken by his son Clovis. The burial had for- rights. This will be undertaken in the form of ten eign features, both Eastern and Roman in charac- propositions; these I will propound, but will not be ter, and was to set a standard, or create a fashion, able to demonstrate fully here. The propositions for all high-ranking individuals and their kin in are aimed at deducing the social behaviour of a the emerging Merovingian Empire. Depending on population that buries its dead in the so-called Rei- their wealth and possessions, families now under- hengriiber practice, and the concomitant establish- took the burial of their deceased kinsfolk with par- ment of a state organization that is not a simple ticular significance being attached to the individu- kingdom, but an empire of united people, in fact als renown. People displayed a particular be- a Personenverband. haviour in mortuary ritual in order to impress their neighbours and thus demonstrate their social rank. 4. The propositions In this context family (familia) refers to the larger The Migration Period came to an end on the Con- extended family which goes beyond kith and kin tinent with the creation of the Merovingian king- and includes servants. What was at issue in the dom under Clovis and his sons. Incorporated into burial process was not the preparation of the de- this empire were the Franks, the Burgundians, the ceased for the after-life, as this was unnecessary Thuringians, the Alamannic and other Germanic or inappropriate in a largely Christian society. Archaeology and History: Proposals on the Social Structure of the Merovingian Kingdom 10 7

More important was the manifestation of the fa- ed in terms of social or even ethnic disparities. milys own rank through a suitably striking buri- Thus, archaeological groupings determined ac- al of one of its members. (The Frankish nobles cording to the quantity or value of grave goods in- were practically all Christians since the baptism cluded in burials may lead not to a social stratum of Clovis and his army: (fig. 4)). It should be not- or class definition of the population groups of the ed that the Christian faith served to legitimize the Merovingian period, but merely to a description rule of the Merovingians when they established of local (and contingent) factors. Stated in this way their state — a situation to be repeated some 500 my second proposition is in particular a counter- years later by the Danish king Harald who had proposal to previous approaches aimed at quantify- Christ put on his famous runestone. ing grave goods with statistical procedures, right Periods of innovation, Griinderzeiten (Kossack down to cluster analysis and dendrogrammes, 1974), repeatedly lead to strikingly "representa- which shed no light on past social reality. The open, tive" burial practices. A visit to the cemeteries of ranked society of the Merovingians followed no the latter half of the 19th century would readily standardized behavioural patterns, in burial prac- confirm this. tice. The advent of social standardization in fact marked the end of the development from an open, 4.2 My second proposition therefore states that ranked society to a true state society, which has the social organization of the Merovingian king- classes into which individuals are born. Such a dom, based on the structures of retinues, was that state, in this case the beginning of the Carolingian of an open, ranked society, and that the funerary era, cannot be ascertained through studies of grave evidence for this period mirrors differences in rank goods simply because these were no longer in use. not only within families in the broadest sense Families in open, ranked societies require both (familia), but between families. The material value for the presentation of their respective rank, and of the goods included in graves and the splendour for the expression of their behavioural patterns of of the burial thus display "rank", but not social life, a burial practice which varies in splendour ac- strata or fixed classes or even group membership, cording to the "means" and status of the deceased which would have run across the whole of society and his family. The crucial factor is the burial as do modern classes. Burial variation within high- process. The objective of the activities surround- ranking families, usually called "nobles" in the ing the burial was to demonstrate the rank not scientific literature, covers anything from small merely of the deceased, but also of the group to landowners to high-ranking officians in the which he/she belonged, especially its head. I pro- Merovingian case. pose, therefore, that the splendour of the burial Starting from the centres of the Merovingian and the opulence of the grave goods were intend- kingdom, the practice of the Reihengriiber spread ed to reflect rank within and between families, and across the entire realm, also influencing neigh- to impress individuals from outside the group. A bouring regions such as England and southern note of caution, however, should be voiced about Scandinavia. But over distances of several hundred the objects buried with the dead: a belligerent kilometres and over several generations in time, lifestyle leads to a basic attire, weapons, banquet- this burial practice could not, in the nature of ing materials, etc., which are likely to be associated things, remain consistent or subject to the same with all individuals of high rank, not just a few. immutable norm. The community of a particular village would conform its behaviour to that of its 4.3 My third proposition claims that the exis- neighbours as regards burial practice through tence of war bands can be proved archaeological- mutual observation and comparison. Yet the ly. In the first half of the 6th century swords were greater the distance involved, the less people would laid in the graves of certain men; these swords dis- know of each others behaviour, thus giving rise played an intertwined pair of rings on the pom- to divergencies in practice. There are, for instance, mel — the so-called ringswords. Moreover, it can differences between Frankish and Alamannic or be observed that the rings, made out of precious Bavarian (or ratheir between western and southern materials, including gold, were mounted on the and eastern) burial sites which cannot be interpret- weapons at different times; some examples even 108 Heiko Steuer

Fig. 4. Crosses on helmets of the Merovingian period (after Steuer 1987).

show that rings had been removed (Not until the individuals whose graves were discovered by 7th century were swords produced with a device chance. The warriors buried in the "Fiirstengrab for mounting rings or with rings pre-cast into (royal grave) of Krefeld-Gellep, or from the grave place). Swords of this type are found not only in at Beckum (Doppelfeld, Pirling 1966; Muller- the Frankish Empire, but also beyond it, in En- Wille 1983) were without doubt members of a gland, Scandinavia and Italy. Recently, I have body of followers. The individual warrior buried even come across an example, shorn of rings, from at Schretzheim (Klingenberg, Koch 1974) could, Hungary. Not all the swords have gold-plated in terms of wealth, be a low-ranking member of pommels; there are also normal weapons among a body of followers. The decisive factor for our the group of ringswords. How should we interpret purpose is that warriors similar in terms of their this interesting phenomenon? social function received burials of varying In a paper written in 1987 I tried to show how "wealth" from their relatives. The amount of we can gain an understanding of a society through goods included in their graves reflected the fortune this long-debated custom of applying so-called of their family, the ringswords their social rank and "oath-rings" to sword pommels (for a discussion proximity to the king. The gold-handled spathae of the rings see in particular Evison 1967 1975). of the early 6th century presumably had a similar I conceived the owners of these swords as mem- function a generation earlier (Ament 1970; Steuer bers of a group of followers who were awarded this 1987). Werner (1980) declares the golden open- token or sign by their lord — a lord who might ended bracelets (Kolbenarmringe) in the graves of have been king or one of his high-ranking officials high-ranking individuals of Childerics time — who could "bind" and "pay" other warriors. another generation earlier — to be a sign of mem- Here we are once again dealing with groups of fol- bership of a stirps regia, an explanation which cer- lowers of varying rank, but merely in the form of tainly goes too far. But through their gold value

Archaeology and History: Proposals on the Social Structure of the Merovingian Kingdom 109

these rings may in fact indicate rank and mem- bership of a royal body of followers. This assump- tion finds confirmation in a comparison with the graves of the Danish Islands and finds from Sweden which contain gold snake-head and open- end bracelets (Kyhlberg 1986). The open-end bracelet in Childerics own tomb does not con- tradict this interpretation; as we have seen, the sons of kings grew up as followers at other kings courts. The ringswords in England and Sweden have to be seen in a similar light. Warriors from these countries were in the royal band of follow- ers of the Frankish kingdom, and later returned to their homelands, an observation which is also indicated by the special almandine decoration of their swords (Arrhenius 1985). In settlements near burial places containing ringswords — at Krefeld- Gellep for example — land may have been given to the deceased owners of such weapons as rewards Fig. 5. Reconstruction of the grave with several levels at Zeuzle- of property for service to a lord. ben (grave 25) (after Wamser 1984). Graves with gold-handles spathae, such as Flon- heim, or graves with ringswords, like Krefled- contain, contradict the Christian (Arian) faith. It Gellep, often belong to the earliest burials in the is important to keep the following circumstances cemeteries in question (Pirling 1986). in mind: the "wealthiest" grave was also the earli- est in the cemetery, a so-called founders grave; 4.4 My fourth proposition states that the earli- but the person buried in this particular example est burials in a particular burial place are to be recognised as those of the relatives of landed proprietors; an indication of the fact that this property was not yet hereditary. For my next ex- ample I wish to look at the so-called "Thuringian- Frankish burial places of nobles and followers of the 6/7th century near Zeuzleben" close to Wiirz- burg (Wamser 1984). The oldest and "richest" grave, number 25, is of a woman; it is placed at the centre and formed the origin of the burial site in question. It consists of a huge wooden cham- ber measuring c. 3 by 5 metres, and embedded almost 4.5 metres deep; the reconstruction (fig. 5)

shows a three-storey building. Here, in the first Baggergraben half of the 6th century, a woman was interred with

a four-wheeled wagon and the harnesses for a team PP of horses which were buried in a nearby grave. 5m Wamser, who excavated the entire burial site, in- terprets his findings as follows: those buried in it MOEN Spatha III Pfellspitzen —"iv— Sax ie Helm were members of a noble lordship with warriors d 40— Lanze P-9 Lamellenharnlsch and servants — a high-ranking body of followers. AL. Schlldbuckel P Pferd The grave-house over burial 25, and similar struc- Schlldfessel H Hund tures in the cemetery, are seen as memoria for the Fig. 6. Plan of the cemetery at Niederstotzingen (after Paul- dead, and do not, in spite of the grave goods they sen 1967). 1 10 Heiko Steuer

was a woman. We know from written tradition process was the same: holders of important posi- that she could never have been the head of a fa- tions were settled in crucial localities. The richly mily nor the landlord, but she might have been furnished graves on the old military roads have in his wife. To assess the rank of the first burial we fact always been associated with the holders of such should look not at the individual buried in it, but positions. For example, Schmidt (1976) interprets rather at those who did the burying. Thuringian graves equipped with Frankish goods The aspects important to the following argu- as being those of officials, as does Paulsen (1967) ments have already been rehearsed: the body of for Alamannic graves at Niederstotzingen in Wurt- followers, manorial lordship, nobility and Chris- temberg (fig. 6). It was not always high-ranking tianity. The first person buried in the cemetery had Frankish nobles who gained important positions, been given — from whence and by whom? — however; individuals from other tribes were also manorial disposition over this land. The individu- able to become officials, but in such cases they re- als fortune allowed, indeed required, the represen- mained dependent on the king and formed part tative burial of his deceased wife to demonstrate of his retinue. Archaeologists have also suggested his, the highest, rank in the settlement. The buri- the existence of these officials on the basis of the al place then became a burial site for all other so-called magnificent graves, the Adelsgráber, the members of the familia, their blood relatives and graves of Christleins categories C and D (1973). their followers, though not all were buried with the It is noticeable that such rich graves are particu- same splendour, of course. If the husband had died larly to be found on the eastern edge of the first, he would have received a striking burial from Frankish kingdom, where it extends towards the his family, his wife or his sons, as can be proved Alamans and Saxons (Bohem 1985; Muller-Wille from many other examples of the so-called found- 1983) (figs. 3 and 7). Officials with temporary po- ers graves. These thus indicate the rank of the sitions of power clearly wished to display their rank land-receiving family, the new landlords. The fol- in death and therefore received magnificent graves lowing examples may be cited: the burial place at (Kossack 1974). The widely dispersed Merovin- Hufingen, the "normal" Alamannic village bu- gian royal family did not need to do so, and was rial site in the Gewann "Auf Hohen" (Gewann is for a long period interred in specially constructed a plot of land in a village), and the nobles or selected churches (Kruger 1971). Moreover we cemetery "An der Giersalde" with the founders do not find any magnificent graves for several grave in a burial chamber which has been dated generations in the life-span of many of the Reihen- (dendrochronologically) to 606 AD. Among the griiberfelder, , because no "nobility" was attached to goods included in this grave is a precious harness their specific locality. Thus, in the case of the with two silver phalerae of Christian content: a Rubenach-Reihengriiberfeld, it could be shown that new lord gaining important influence in the previ- the series of particularly rich graves in the ously settled mark and expressing this influence cemetery, supposed by Ament (1973) to be those through representative burial practices, although of a family attached to a certain area, were in fact he was Christian. A further example of a high- rich graves belonging to different families that had ranking Christian grave is the burial of Eschwege come to the locality at various times (Wierczorek in Hessen with silver phalerae showing pictorial 1988). representations of both Christian and pagan con- tent (Fingerlin 1985; Sippel 1987). It should be 4.5 As my fifth proposition, I conclude that the stressed once more that the social positions of the granting of land can be demonstrated archaeolog- Merovingian period were not hereditary, but tem- ically even in later generations in an old commu- porary. nity. This can be achieved, I suggest, through the Whether, as described above, the Carolingians so-called separate cemeteries. These existed for militarily secured their Lombard lands through the settlement of high-ranking Franks, Alamans and Fig. 7. Top: separate graves in the sixth century A.D. (square Bavarians, or whether the Thuringian empire, or with frame = in or at church; small frame = grave under bar- that of the Alamans, in the 6th century, was po- row). Bottom: separate small cemeteries in the sixth and seventh litically connected with the Frankish realm, the centuries A.D. (after Warne 1985). Archaeology and History: Proposals on the Social Structure of the Merovingian Kingdom 111

q in Kirche bei Kirche ■ in einer separaten Grabgruppe O hervorgehoben durch Grabhugel

Bestattungen in separaten Grabgruppen 0 im 6. Jh. • dm 600 • im 7. Jh. O Ende des 7. Jhs. 112 Heiko Steuer

c:.

as C=3C, CIDE P giVI? CZ-3 C:V c=) O C=3cn

aga

C:3 c=) C:3 c=2 C=3 1,11 411111111 c,ORM o cp 011T aff 11111111 CD 1„11111,„, CD c,:.g ad--- C[] sm 1:::73119t) cm 0 CD CD Juni C23 Gia

11111111 mql 1111111111, qilio, aft CZ) CD

111111111 Illlllh 11111111,1 111111..i;,,,„ c=1=4:2) ■1111110 11111 1 11 0 czl 11111111,

1111111 %ter 16=1 11111111 III. • O win 1111111111 D I .•••■ %cal lug EDD 0 .11111111 cz) 111111 J111111 11,1, Eg--1 MO MID 111 1 O ■1,,1,. P 1.1ut°PI:111 11i ill „ ? c=2:5:: c:3 Mae Hi. foe 1111111111 O rr so. ° alp 1111111 CITIM zerstik t IMF= inim ® go en CD ungestOrt CR beta ubt c=J 1111:41 Ell Pt erde grab 111111111

• 111111111

Fig. 8. Plan of the "Reihengraber” cemetery at Kirchheim am Ries (after Christlein 1978).

some time during the filling of a cemetery; they another high-ranking official. In the Alamannic often contain a founders grave and other rich trap- area this procdure can be demonstrated during the pings. As an example I may point to the burial Frankish integration of the area into the Merovin- places of Fridingen and Kirchhiem (fig. 8). There gian kingdom. The burial site of Niederstotzingen have been attempts to interpret the development with its rich warriors graves has similarly been of these separate cemeteries as a visual expression interpreted as a Frankish-founded posting-station of a single familys separation from the commu- on an important land-route (fig. 6). The reorgani- nity and thus a reflection of an emerging nobility. zation of the settlement system through the aban- In a critique of this interpretation (1982) I point- donment of settlements and burial sites of the ed out that such separate cemeteries often exhibit Hemmingen type (Muller 1976) in the period not only differing wealth, but also diverging buri- around 500 AD also represents Frankish interfer- al practices; these include burial inside large tumu- ence — a point I will return to later. I stress that li, within circular trenches and under mortuary we are thus able, from the archaeological record, houses. I interpreted this phenomenon as evidence to recognise land donations and, concurrently, the of the arrival of a family from outside, which joined development of manorial lordship in its earliest the existing community. High rank is not preclud- form. (Manorial lordship later turns into "local ed. On the contrary, in the above context, the nobility", and in addition we see lordship with receipt of land can, I believe, be inferred: a new scattered land property in many places). family, in other words, has gained or received land The spread of this practice of creating separate property rights in the vicinity of an existing set- cemeteries actually moves from east to west, from tlement. Once again we have reason to assume a the Frankish to Alamannic areas, in the 6th and gift or donation from the king himself or from 7th centuries. This is exemplified in a recent map Archaeology and History: Proposals on the Social Structure of the Merovingian Kingdom 113

(fig. 7) compiled by Bohme (1985). After the con- solidation of the Merovingian kingdom there was no more unclaimed land. Instead the land was or- ganized, granted and thoroughly structured by the king and his highest-ranking officials. From its very beginning the Merovingian kingdom was "free" — in fact, an open society with ranks, although there were also dependencies on the royal or ducal lord. This is the inference that can be drawn from the archaeological record. The weapons in the grave, an expression of the rank of the free warrior (Bodmer 1957), were granted by the king or lord in question together with land as an economic basis. I believe we can actually demonstrate several stages in the granting of land after the emergence of the Reihengraber civilization; we can do so, I suggest, by means of certain kinds of grave goods like gold-handled spathae or ring- swords, or even more clearly by means of the tem- Fig. 9. Early medieval church with rich contemporary graves, poral sequence of founders grave, separate on the ruins of a Roman bath, at Regensburg (after Rieckhoff- cemetery and church founders grave. Pauli 1987). We should constantly bear in mind the written sources concerning the role of followers in the for- mation of the Frankish kingdom. The royal body (Ramqvist Muller-Wille 1988). But this is not of followers, the trustis dominica, was rewarded with the place to expand on the relationship between land and did not always stay at the court of the the later graves of Sutton Hoo, the Swedish Ven- king; its members belonged to the highest — rank- del and the Alamannic burials, deduced from the ing leading groups of the empire, the optimates. Ar- inclusion in each of decorated pressed metal sheets chaeology can furnish evidence for some of these and their pictorial content. optimates, and at the same time for the growth and spread of the Frankish Empire. An early group, 4.6 My sixth proposition puts the so-called identifiable through the presence of gold-handled church founders graves into line with founders spathae, was granted land and settled in the cen- graves and separate cemeteries. The church found- tral Frankish and bordering Alamannic region; the ers graves situated in their own churches charac- next group, associated with ringswords, already terise the later phase of the Reihengraer practice, included the entire new Frankish sphere of in- i.e. the 7th and 8th centuries. We are dealing here fluence, and at the same time reflected the inten- with burials that are located in a central site in a sive character of the Frankish model of social struc- church, but that may also contain precious goods. ture for the neighbouring areas in England, north- The church was in effect built as a cemetery for ern Italy and Scandinavia, whence members of the the land holders family. At the same time it be- royal followers had presumably come and whither came the centre of a parish, and later attracted the they had carried the idea of empire formation back burials of other dependent families (Kruger 1971; north again (Arrhenius 1985). Christlein 1974; Fehring 1987). The confirmation As early as the time of the Roman Empire, Ger- of this process lies in the very history of the funer- man mercenaries had carried the Roman way of ary churches of the royal Frankish dynasty, begin- life into the Germanic regions, such as central Ger- nig with Clovis who was buried in the church of many and the Danish islands (Rausing 1987). St. Genevieve in Paris, which he himself had built Something comparable happened during the in the year 511. Other great Franks chose their Migration Period; the burial place at Hogom in burial places in and around churches too; i.e. they northern Sweden may serve as one example would erect churches for their burial if they were 114 Heiko Steuer

"sufficiently Christian" . Subsequently other built without being used for the burial of their members of the family may also have built founder or owner or members of his family. churches over their graves. The findings at Flon- Without being able to challenge Christleins heim (Ament 1970) and Morken (Bohner 1959) previously mentioned discussion here, we can say may be cited as examples. The foundation of a that as a consequence of land gifts and the evidence church as a burial place was an important means of landlords, the newly built churches with graves of perpetuating the memory of ones forefathers were the latest link in the following chain: found- (Schulze 1986, 41; Donat 1988, 20). There were ers graves, separate cemeteries, church founders several ways of doing this: a church might, for in- graves. Moreover, once again we can observe the stance, be erected near an existing burial place — development spreading from west to east (figs. 7 as at Morken, Flonheim or Staubing in Bavaria. 10). Thus the structuring of manorial lordship, In Staubing the rich burials were situated in front and the consolidation of the system of owned of the church. Near Regensburg a church was built churches and the parish churches of organized over the ruins of a Roman bath; around it were Christianity, ran parallel to each other without any several rich graves (Rieckhoff-Pauli 1987) (fig. 9). necessary interdependence (see Dannheimer Or, alternatively, a church might be built in the 1987); Roth 1981; Muller Knaut 1987). In- vicinity of a village and attract a number of graves, cidentally the spread of the consolidation of noble while the other families in the settlement continued proprietorship from west to east is in particular to bury their dead on the old burial site (eg. shown by the richest graves of quality levels C-D Bulach, Wittislingen). Churches were also being (about 300 of which are known), by the separate

I Benweiler 14 Marktoberdorf 27 Griiningen A Augst 2 Steinfeld 15 Within,. 211 Lahr-Burgh.. B Windisch 3 Weingarten 16 r 4 Ninnies.. 17 Leuven. gsroplf,.. • O rtitanch \-) A Spaltantike Anlage S Crailsheim 11 Gruibingen 31 Oberwit E Oregenz 0 4aerte.inisoch.e gerfnscihridtert 6 Sainhofen 19 Kirchhelin/Teck 32 Spiel F Kempten 1,\. 7 Bad Wigging 20 Esslingen-Sim. 33 Billach • Staubing 21 Kornwestheim 34 Stein ii.Rh. a Welletetten ..„ e Kitister and Zed. Me 9 Barbing 22 Nulling. 35 Tu.. b Donzdarf `.. 700. 0 Aubing 23 Getting. 36 Baer c VAttislingen t Aschheim 24 Burgfelden 37 Bodmann d EbenMfen 2 Augsburg 25 Musplingen A Kirchen der Zeit bis 3 Epfach 26 Ounningen urn 700" tergroben oder dutch Bestattungen in odor bei hevtigen Kirchen- gebtiuden erschlossen. Sgt. nebenstehende Lists) n et horned, frankische Fundiandschaften Greve der Ausdehnung der merowingerzeitilcher. ReihengrOber Ms urn 700 Grenze der Ausdehming del karatingisch•ottonfighen .hengrdber tgermanisch-slawische Omni um6001

L Fig. 10. Church-buildings in south-western Germany before A.D. ca. 700 (after Roth 1981). Archaeology and History: Proposals on the Social Structure of the Merovingian Kingdom 115

• . ;‘.., • • °it.

1. : .: . "I‘ ...... •• : • O•• . •.,:. 1:. • • • .„, 4" ..:•;;;:t41. % :•.::.:"..V• .....•:...... ;..• ••,. • .. 0:-.. . 0 .. la,• • / • WI ..".:•••••• r•,,s 1 ,ihile 4 ; .4.• : • . :` •" te . ... %i;...• • : • • X....• • ,.., • , . - 4.:•. • • • • ..-. • , e el... ;.-..... • • • it • • .. - ,,,••••••:::-.7, • • • ,„•• • re •••■•‘•4• • • • • . • : •• .. • • • ? • • • • •• . ••• • • • •0 • • .4. • • • % • . . • • • •• • • •• • ). •v.,VIP • • •• • • • • • • • •••• •

• • • • s„ • • • • • •• •

I

•

•• . • •• • • • • •• • ..• • • ...• ...••

• • .9 • • • • • \• 0 • • . • • • • •

• S. • .0. %a.. C9 ° ,• •• , •• • Parthheen bei WO= • .• • , • (:)•••• • a••••

Fig. 11. Plan of the early medieval settlement with grave-groups (graves marked with dashed os) at Kirchheim bei Munchen (Munich) (after Christlein 1981). cemeteries (50 of which could certainly be named), Frankish kingdom and the power of the Merovin- and by the graves within churches (of which 50 gian kings. We cannot therefore posit any con- could be counted in 1970, as against 70-80 today). tinuity between the graves with burial goods in the The emergence of the Reihengriiber practice and Frankish cemeteries of north-east Gallia of the the end of this burial custom, or rather the aban- 4th/5th centuries, or the early Alamannic burial donment_of the burial places associated with it, de- places of south-west Germany, and the burial fine a period which covers the consolidation of the places of Merovingian times, as Werner assumed 116 Heiko Steuer

in his famous article "Zur Entstehung der Rei- lage. Forming groups of 10-30 burials, they hengraberzivilisation" (1950). The power and de- represent, it may be presumed, the small cemetery pendency relationships that developed in the of the inhabitants (familia) of a farmstead. 4th/5th centuries created a pattern of settlement that was later changed because the Merovingians, 4.8 My eighth proposition interprets the rob- on gaining the upper hand, created a new bing of graves (Roth 1977 1978), the systemat- proprietorship situation. The old burial places ic plundering of Merovingian period cemeteries, were abandoned because the old families had lost as a sign of a social situation characterized by the importance. At the same time, old burial practices predominance of fewer and more powerful lords disappeared, such as the north-south alignment of who held the majority of the rural population in graves. Weapons and precious materials charac- subjection. The abandonment of the Reihengrfiber terized the way of life both before and after the cemeteries and the shift of burial place for certain change, but there is certainly no continuity. Such families to the church or to the farmstead are in- changes in burial practices can also be registered terconnected events stretched out over a longer in the Alamannic area around the year 500 and period of time. Up to 75 % of the burials may have shortly after as the Franks expanded their power been robbed (fig. 12). There is hardly any period and integrated this region into their empire (i.e. in prehistory or early history in which the earlier the abandonment of the Hemmingen-type burial cemeteries of the same population were robbed to places). such an extent. Various explanations of this The end of the Reihengriiber practice was thus phenomenon have been offered: it was allegedly brought about on the one hand by the consolida- caused by a scarcity of precious metals; or by an tion of the ecclesiastical organisation, on the other economic decline that turned the iron in the graves by the manorial lords. into a precious commodity; or by the influence of Christianity that diminished the importance of an- 4.7 Soon dependent farmsteaders had to bury cestors. But each of these explanations can be their dead near the churches which belonged to refuted. The plundering of the cemeteries of ones their lords. As already proposed by Last and my- own people, and with it the obvious disregard for self (Last Steuer 1969) in a review of Stein (1967) the peace and inviolability of ones dead ancestors, concerning 8th century nobles graves, only the also reflects a break with the past. Irthe Migra- last of the freeborns could avoid doing so. My tion Period brought about what appears to have seventh proposition therefore claims that it was not been a revolutionary change of the older social the nobles who were buried in the weapon graves structures, which led to the development of the Rei- of the 8th century, but the last freeborn, or in- hengriiber practice — parallel to the emergence of dependent farmsteaders, who still remained in- the Frankish kingdom — then the changes lead- dependent of the great manorial lordships and ing to the abandonment of the Reihengraber sites their churches. While the latter no longer had to and to the increase in grave robberies must have demonstrate their consolidated rank through in- been even stronger. It seems as if families had lost clusion of grave goods, it remained a necessary the desire or the right, or even the possibility, of practice for the last of the freeborns to do so. They protecting the peace of their ancestors and of now buried their dead right next to their own farm- respecting the dead and their graves. Kinship rela- stead, at the edge of the farms fence. One of the tionships and family ties must have become unim- best examples is arguably the settlement of Kirch- portant, lineage irrelevant, and so been cut off heim near Munich (Christlein 1981; Geisler 1988; (Steuer 1980). Steuer 1987 1988; Osterhaus 1987) (fig. 11). It As an interpretation of the phenomenon, I pro- was not until recently, once settlements started to pose that manorial lordship was consolidated at be analyzed, that this aspect of the burial practices this time and became totally accepted. Nobles and of Merovingian times has come to be recognised. freeborn families, whose judicial status was Graves with weapons and spurs of the final Rei- guaranteed by law and birth no longer needed to hengreiber period, earlier interpreted as nobles demonstrate their social role through luxurious graves, can now be assigned to farmsteads in a vil- grave goods and burial practices. Dependent fa- Archaeology and History: Proposals on the Social Structure of the Merovingian Kingdom 117

nicht kartierter Raum mit Vorkommen des Grabraubes nicht naher bestimmbare Intensitat des Grabfrevels Angaben turn Grabraub in Prozenten fur ,0 % 100 % einzelne} Griberfelder

Fig. 12. Frequency of grave-robbing in Central Europe during late Merovingian times (after Roth 1978).

milies who no longer had free command over their northern Germany and in the Netherlands have belongings, and who could be relocated, given shown that the settlements of the early Merovin- away, resettled or separated at the whim of their gian period were usually villages — single farm- lord, were no longer able to keep up the cemetery steads not having been established in any area at reserved for their family over generations or pro- this time — and that these villages were not per- vide their dead with precious goods. It is striking manent at the local level. Each generation moved that very often it is the richly furnished founders from its previously fixed settlement site, but at the graves, i.e. the graves of the lords, that were not same time remained within the borders of its mark. robbed. Indeed, we can go further and claim that Waterbolk (1982), for instance, has convincingly it is precisely among the latter that those who or- shown that in the Drenthe region in the Nether- ganized and carried out the tomb robberies should lands, as is also evident in other areas, it was not be sought. the village but the mark which had constituted the constant settlement factor ever since La Tene times 4.9 At this stage in our argument it becomes or the Roman period. In those regions of the necessary to move away from the burial practices Merovingian kingdom that had formerly been Ro- and look instead at the settlement pattern. My man, such as south-west Germany, the size of the ninth proposition asserts that the constant socio- mark may have stemmed from Roman subdivi- economic factor of settlement since the beginning sions. (I refer to the Roman system of accommo- of the Merovingian kingdom was not the village dation, the hospitalitas). In any case a single settle- but the village mark. Excavations in Jutland, in ment.area or mark was a possession which the king, 118 Heiko Steuer

for example, would initially transfer to his follow- in the traditional post-hole manner, and became ers as a whole. Later several lords may have owned fixed in space in the 8th century, now had to be property in a mark and severally wielded authori- renewed more frequently on the same site. This can ty over land and people. also be proved archaeologically (Steuer 1988). The archaeological picture that emerges with The transfer of a village could only occur if the regard to the Reihengraber civilisation now shows entire population were to decide on such a meas- — with variants of course — not only that the set- ure, and the same is true for the establishment of tlement shifted within the mark, but also that there a new burial site. Yet once a single lord, and later is usually evidence for several cemeteries in the a number of different lords, came to have rights same mark which may vary in size, wealth and the and property in a village, relocations of the old length of time they were in use. Previously it was type were no longer practicable, or even desira- assumed that the various burial places — mainly ble, especially since these lords owned scattered consisting of only a few graves — belonged to iso- property and did not live in the village themselves. lated farmsteads or hamlets which grew into a sin- The village thus remained in the same place as the gle village at a later date. Yet the results of recent church and its cemetery, and this situation has last- excavations have shown that during the history of ed from the eighth century down to the present a mark and settlement within it, a number of day. separate localities for burial sites, reflecting the Two examples of this phenomenon in the shifting settlement pattern within its territory, Merovingian Empire can be cited (Steuer 1988). presumably existed. In other words, we have to First, the excavated settlement site of Speyer- reckon with a complex system of settlement and Vogelgesang. This is one example of a shifting vil- burial which is far from having been satisfactorily lage (Bernhard 1982): the farmsteads were moved discovered or understood. In general terms we can several times from the 5th/6th century down to the sketch the process as follows: after receiving a mark, Middle Ages, before the settlement eventually dis- the recipient follower founded a settlement for him- solved in the municipal borough of the town of self and his people, and when either he or one of Speyer. An area extending over a kilometre in the leading members of his family died a burial length is covered with traces of settlement. The se- place was established (founders grave). This bu- cond example is the Mark of Wittislingen (Bohner rial place continued to be filled even if its respec- 1986) in southern Germany (fig. 13). Surface ex- tive village were subsequently transferred. If new ploration has revealed several as yet unexcavated families joined the village in the course of time, settlement sites and a number of cemeteries. The either because another family replaced the lord or findings suggest the presence of several farmsteads because it had gained property rights in the mark in the Mark, and the following overall picture of and built a farmstead in the village, then this fa- its settlement pattern emerges: namely, that the mily could either bury its dead in the original site of the same village was repeatedly moved, and cemetery, by now far away, or establish a new bu- subsequently new burial places were opened, pos- rial place (separate cemetery). This process could sibly by manorial lords who had amassed more and thus lead to the creation of several new burial sites more property in the Mark. This is suggested by in the same mark. When the village became perma- the rich burials accidentally discovered. nently settled on one site — a development usual- Schmid (1957) long since pointed out the low ly coinciding with the erection of a church — it is level of stability within the noble families in the possible to capture the end of this process; it prob- early Middle Ages, and spoke of "fluctuating fa- ably made no sense to let the village move away milies" which led to a high mobility of property. from the church. However, we should avoid Similarly Donat (1983, 23) writes: "Because the monocausal explanations, as changes in house con- nobles graves were often used only for a short struction show. For not long afterwards the post- period and rarely exhibit family groups, they fur- hole technique of building houses was replaced by nish evidence for a high mobility among the no- a construction which involved a solid stone foun- bles, which can only be explained by scattered dation. This effectively put an end to the movement property in more than one place" (quoted by of villages. Those farmsteads which had been built Christlein 1987). A parallel development from the Archaeology and History: Proposals on the Social Structure of the Merovingian Kingdom 119

conclusion that it was not the shifting settlement, but the Mark, that carried this name. The observation that settlements west of the Rhine in Alsace bear names ending in -heim while settlements east of the Rhine have names ending in -ingen has always been interpreted as reflecting Reilergrab iiKirche +4./ Grab der Adeligen St.Martin.++ different settlement and proprietorship movements oppidum 973 0-r++ + reiches Kriegergrab (Fingerlin 1974, Janichen 1972); for the Alaman- E t+ nic people lived on both sides of the Rhine after the conquest. A novel political influence of

Reitergrab Frankish organizational practice west of the Rhine 0 reiches Kriegergrab is thought to have brought in a new settlement pat- mit Goldblattkreuz 0 500 m tern, which is reflected in the place names associat- ed with it: the Frankish practice of naming settle- Fig. 13. The early medieval topography of Wittislingen (shaded ments with the suffix -heim in fact presupposes lo- areas = Alemannic settlements; crosses = cemeteries; circles = rich graves; F = early Alemannic settlement in Roman cally stable villages, not least because of the fre- ruin) (after Biihner 1986). quent combinations with names denoting the direction of the sun, such as Norheim, Sudheim, Westheim and Ostheim. (With shifting settlements end of Merovingian times is the abandonment of the direction of the sun could not always remain the Reihengraer, their plundering and the emer- the same). Only the Mark themselves remained gence of cemeteries near churches as well as wi- constant in their relative position. Whether the thin villages. There is a remarkable dynamism in names reflect a personal, older, genteel set--ingen the changes in the settlement area, the Mark, which tlement organization, while the -heim names evince reflects one and the same social process: the con- a more progressive manorial orientation, cannot solidation of a manorial structure. It may thus be be resolved with certainty yet (Schubert 1983). But suggested, though not demonstrated, that at the attention should be drawn to the fact that through- time when the village was not yet hereditory out the Alamannic area, far into its easternmost property, the land-lord, who was given the village region, we know -heim settlements for which Rei- by the king, could rebuild it on a new site. The hengriiber burial sites have been excavated (Kirch- constantly changing property relations thus led to heim, Sontheim) (Christlein 1978, catalogue). The changes in the villages structure. The dependence naming of the settlements in question undoubtedly of "free" warriors and their families on the king represents a procedure relevant for social history; or the highest-raking optimates who paid them with and if it is analysed in relation to the archaeologi- land, gradually turned into the dependence of the cal findings it will probably indicate the spread of rural population on a number of local nobles. In a certain type of manorial structure, or rather suc- turn this number diminished in proportion as the cessive waves of land donation. The -heim names great manorial lords accumulated property and occurring far into the east probably reflect the ex- gained scattered property in many villages. pansion of the Frankish Merovingians, and the gift of land to their followers. 4.10 My tenth proposition links the statements based on, or the inferences drawn from, historical 5. Conclusions and archaeological sources with a further source, If we try to discover the social structures and de- that of place names. Hitherto it has been assumed velopments of the Merovingian kingdom, then the in the relevant literature that the villages founded evidence of the written sources can certainly help soon after the conquest usually remained fixed in us to understand the archaeological findings. The the same locality, underlying todays villages, and common quantification of grave goods, however, that the names of the latter could consequently be presupposes a society which cannot be extracted projected back in time. In fact, variability in the from the written sources. Schulze (1985), in his settlement pattern and a fixed name only allow the "Grundstrukturen der Verfassung im Mit- 120 Heiko Steuer

telalter", asserts that the foundation of the from the 7th century onwards" (quoted by Donat Frankish kingdom was one of the most consequen- 1988, 26). tial results of the Germanic Migration Period, At the end of the Merovingian period, and its with the Frankish manorial system as an element transition to the Carolingian epoch, the open, of Germanic origin fulfilling a most decisive ranked society was replaced by an hierarchically role. structured, closed society in which a noble class The Reihengráber are an expression of the open, with birthrights had emerged. This class society ranked society of the Merovingian kingdom, in no longer needed a luxurious burial cult for its own which the farmer-warriors were dependent on the self-presentation. It was characterized instead by king and a few magnates such as the dukes, mem- stable property, settlement in fixed places, and bers of the Merovingian family, in the broadest solidly built churches. Many archaeological facets sense of the term, or on high officials. Landowner- of the Reihengráber reflect this wider transition of ship characterized the situation right from the be- the Merovingian kingdom from a state of follow- ginning of the conquest. Around 500 AD there was ers to the Carolingian Empire, a true feudal state. as yet no feudal property, as Keller (1984) writes: It would indeed be a fascinating task to follow up "(the) optimates cultivated their land themselves or the very similar but chronologically different with the help of serfs, like other estate owners" . process for the Norse empires or the society of Ma- He continues: "It was not until the land gifts in gna Moravia, again on the basis of archaeological connection with the expansion of the Frankish or- sources. ganization of the kingdom that the nobles were To conclude, the formation and spread of the able to enforce a position beyond the community magnificent burials during and after the Migra- of the settlement, as it is reflected by the growing tion Period reflect the creation and spread of a state number of nobles graves or of graves in churches organization based on bodies of warriors.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A. Ament, Chr. Neuffer-Muller, Das frcinkische Grcibedeld von R. Bruce-Mitford, The Sutton Hoo ship-burial 1-3 (London Riibenach, Stadt Koblenz (Berlin 1973). 1975-83). B. Arrhenius, Merovingian Garnet Jewellery. Emergence and social P. Charvat, On the question of private property of land in implications (Stockholm 1985). Great Moravia. Arch. Rozhledy 39, 1987, 672-679. 0. Behrends, Einquartierungssystem. Reallexikon der germanischen R. Christlein, Das Reihengrdberfeld und die Kirche von Staub- Altertumskunde Bd. 7, Lfg. 1/2 (Berlin/New York 1986), ing bei Weltenburg. Arch. Korrespondenzblatt 1, 1971, 51-55. 24-33. R. Christlein, altbaierischer Kirchhof. Stupinga - Staub- H. Bernhard, Die frahmittelalterliche Siedlung Speyer- ing, Ldkr. Kelheim. Fiihrungsblatt: Aus der archäologischen Denk- "Vogelgesang". Offa 39, 1982, 217-233. malpflege in Bayern 1973/2. J.P. Bodmer, Der Krieger der Merowingerzeit und seine Welt Eine R. Christlein, `Merowingerzeitliche Grabfunde unter der Pfarr- Studie iiber Kriegertum als Form der menschlichen Existenz im Frith- kirche St. Dionysius zu Dettingen, Kr. Tubingen, und ver- mittelalter (Zurich 1957). wandte Denkrnale in Saddeutschland. Fundberichte aus Baden- H.W. BOhme, `Untersuchungen zur Sozialgeschichte im 5./9. Wurttemberg 1, 1974, 573-596. Jahrhundert, Jahrbuch des Riimisch-Germanischen Zentralmuse- R. Christlein, `Besitzabstufungen zur Merowingerzeit im Spiegel ums Mainz 32, 1985, 709-710. reicher Grabfunde aus West- und SUddeutschland. Jahrbuch K. B6hner, Die friinkischen Altertiimer des Trierer Landes (Berlin des Riimisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz 20, 1973, 147-180. 1958). R. Christlein, Die Alamannen. Archiiologie eines lebendi gen Volkes K. B6hner, Das Grab eines frdnkischen Herren aus Morken (Stuttgart 1978). im Rheinland. Ftihrer des Rheinischen Landesmuseums in Bonn R. Christlein, `Kirchheim bei Munchen, Oberbayern: Das Dorf Nr. 4 (KOln/Graz 1959). des friihen Mittelalters. Das archaologische Jahr in Bayern 1980 K. Miner, Reihengraberfelder als Zeugnisse fur die Verdn- (Stuttgart 1981) 162f. derung von Siedlungsstrukturen im alamannischen Raum H. Dannheimer, Auf den Spuren der Bajuwaren. Archhologie des fruhen Sild-westdeutschlands. Acta Archaeologica Lovaniensia 25, 1986, Mittelalters in Altbayern. Ausgrabungen-Funde-Befunde (Pfaffen- 53-66. hofen 1987). M. Borgolte, `Geschichte der Grafschaften Alemanniens in P. Donat, `Siedlungsforschung und die Herausbildung des frdnkischer Zeit. Vortrcige und Forschungen Sonderband 31 (Sig- Bodeneigentums bei den germanischen Stdmmen. Zeitschrift maringen 1984). fur Archaologie 19, 1985, 155-168. Archaeology and History: Proposals on the Social Structure of the Merovingian Kingdom 121

P. Donat, `Archaologische Quellen zur Herausbildung des 359-377. Bodeneigentums bei den germanischen Stammen. Eigentum. K.H. Kruger, KOningsgrabkirchen der Franken, Angelsachen und Lan- Beitrdge zu seiner Entwicklung in politischen Gesellschaften. Wern- gobarden bis zur Mitte des 8. Jahrhunderts (Munchen 1971). er Sellnow zum 70. Geburtstag (Weimar 1987) 169-183. 0. Kyhlberg, Late Roman and Byzantine Solidi, An archaeo- P. Donat, `Gentiladel-Feudaladel. Forschungen in der BRD logical analysis of coins and hoards. 5. Kolben Armlets. Ex- zur Adelsentstehung. Jahrbuch fur Geschichte des Feudalismus cavations at Helgii X (Stockholm 1986) 13-126, 66-73. 11, 1988, 9-27. M. Last, H. Steuer, `Zur Interpretation der beigabenfUhren- 0. Doppelfield, R. Pirling, Friinkische Fiirsten im Rheinland (Dus- den Grdber des achten Jahrhunderts im Gebiert rechts des seldorf . 1966). Rheins. Nachrichten aus Niedersachsen Urgeschichte 38, 1969, V. Evison, The Dover ring-sword and other sword-rings and 25-88. beads. Archaeologia 101, 1967, 63-118 (London). H.F. Muller, Dos alamannische Grdberfeld von Hemmingen (Kr. Lud- V. Evison, Sword rings and beads. Archaeologia 105, 1975, wigsburg) (Stuttgart 1976). 303-315. W. Muller, M. Knaut, Heiden und Christen. Archaologische G.P. Fehring, Einfiihrung in die Archdologie des Mittelalters (Darm- Funde zum frUhen Christentum in Salwestdeutschland. stadt 1987). Kleine Schriften zur Vor- und Friihgeschichte Sidwestdeutschlands G. Fingerlin, Zur alamannischen Siedlungsgeschichte des Bd. 2 (Stuttgart 1987). 3.-7. Jahrhunderts. W. Hilbener (Ed.), Die Alemannen in der M. Muller-Wille, Royal and aristocratic graves in central and Frithzeit (Buhl/Baden 1974), 45-88. western Europe in the Merovingian period. Vendel period studies G. Fingerlin, `Ein alamannisches Reitergrab aus Hiifingen. (Stockholm 1983) 109-116. Studien zur vor- und friihgeschichtlichen Archdologie. Festschr. J. B. Myhre, Chieftains graves and chiefdom territories in south Werner, Teil 2 (Munchen 1974), 591-628. Norway in the Migration period. Studien zur Sachsenforschung H. Geisler, Haus und Siedlung. Die Bajuwaren. Von Severin 6, 1987, 169-187. bis Tassilo 488-788. Gemeinsame Landesausstellung des Freista- U. Osterhaus, `Wurde aus ri5mischer Badruine eine frUhmit- ates Bayern und des Landes Salzburg (1988), 179-184. telalterliche Kirche? Zu den Ausgrabungen in Regensburg- W. Goffart, Barbarians and Romans, A. D. 418-584. The techniques Harting. Das archdologische Jahr in Bayern 1983 (1984) 148-151. of accomodation (Princeton 1980). U. Osterhaus, `Ein frUhmittelalterliches GehOft mit Gräber- H. Harke, Angelsdchsiche Waffengrdber des 5. bis 7. Jahrhunderts feldbon Burgweinting. Das archnologische Jahr in Bayern 1986 n. Chr. Masch. Diss. Gottingen 1987. (Stuttgart 1987), 139-140. L. Hedeager, `Besiedlung, soziale Struktur und politische Or- P. Paulsen, Alamannische Adelsgrdber von Niederstotzingen (Kreis ganisation in der filteren und jiingeren rOmischen Kaiser- Heidenheim) (Stuttgart 1967). zeit Ostdanemarks. Prdhist. Zeitschrift 55, 1980, 38-109. K. Peschel, `FrUhe Waffengraber im Gebiet der sallichen Elb- L. Hedeager, Empire, frontier and the barbarian hinterland: germanen. Ausklang der Latine-Zivilisation und Anfange der ger- Rome and northern Europe from A.D. 1-400. In K. Kris- manischen Besiedlung im mittleren Donaugebiet (Bratislava 1977), tiansen, M. Larsen, M. Rowlands (Ed.), Center, periphery in 216-281. the ancient world (Cambridge 1987), 125-140. K. Peschel, Die Sueben in Ethnographic und Archäologie. Klio L. Hedeager, K. Kristiansen, Bendstrup — en fyrstegrav fra aldre 69, 1978, 259-309. romerskjernalder — dens sociale og historiske Kuml 1981. K. Peschel, Anfange germanischer Besiedlung im Mittelgebirgs- J. Herrmann, `Okonomie und Gesellschaft an der Wende von raum. Sueben - Hermunduren - Markomannen. Arbeits- der Antike zum Mittelalter. Sitzungsberichte der Akademie der und Forschungsberichte zur sachsischen Bodendenkmalpflege Wissenschaften der DDR Gesellschafiswissenschafien 1979 Nr. 13/G Beiheft 2 (Berlin 1978). (Berlin 1979). R. Pirling, Romer und Franken am Niederrhein (Mainz 1986). E. Hlawitschka, Franken, Alemannen, Bayern und Burgunder in P. Ramqvist, M. Muller-Wille, `Regionale und Uberregion- Oberitalien (774-962). Forschungen zur oberrheinischen Lan- ale Bedeutung des vOlkerwanderungszeitlichen GrAberfeldes desgeschichte 8 (1960). von Hogom, Medelpad, Nordschweden. Germania 66, 1988, H. Janichen (Bearbeiter), Der alemannische und frdnkische 95-134. Siedlungsraum 1. Die Ortsnamen auf-ingen, -heim und - G. Rausing, Barbarian mercenaries or Roman citizens? Forn- dorr Historischer Atlas von Baden-Wiirttenberg Blatt 4.1 (Stutt- vdnnen 82, 1987, 126-131. gart 1972). S. Rieckhoff-Pauli, Archdologisches Museum im BMW Werk Regens- H. Keller, `Archdologie und Geschichte der Alamannen in burg, Einfiihrung und Katalog (Regensburg 1987). merowingischer Zeit. Zeitschrift fur die Geschichte des Oberrheins H. Roth, Temerkungen zur Totenberaubung wdhrend der 129, 1984, 1-51. Merowingerzeit. Arch. Korrespondenzblatt 7, 1977, 287-290. K. Klingenberg, U. Koch, `Ein Ringschwert mit Runenkreuz H. Roth, `Archaeologische beobachtungen zum Grabfrevel im aus Schretzheim, Kr. Dillingen an der Donau. Germania 52, merowingerreich. In: H. Jankuhn, H. Nehlsen, H. Roth. 1974, 120-130. (Hrsg.), Zum Grabfrevel in vor- und frageschichtlicher Zeit. Un- G. Kossack, PrunkgrAber, bemerkungen zu Eigenschaften und tersuchungen zu Grabraub und "haugbrot" in Mittel- und Nordeuropa. Aussagewert. Studien zur vor- und fruhgeschichtlichen Archdologie. Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Gottin- Festschrift J. Werner Teil 1 (Munchen 1974), 3-33. gen, Phil.-Hist. Klasse, 3. Folge Nr. 113 (Gottingen 1978), R. Kottje, `Zum Geltungsbereich der Lex alamannorum. Die 53-84. transalpinen Verbindungen der Bayern, Alemannen und Franken bis H. Roth, `Christentum der Bekehrungszeit. III. Ar- 122 Heiko Steuer

4. (Berlin/New York 1981), 585-595. Sozialgeschichte des 5. bis Jahrhunderts. Akten des 26. Deut- R. Samson, Social structures form Reihengraber: Mirror or schen Rechtshistorikertages. Studien zur europáischen Rechtsgeschichte mirage? Scottish Archaeological Review 4, 1987, 116-126. Bd. 30 (Frankfurt a.M. 1987) 443-453. K. Schmid, `Zur Problematik von Familie, Sippe und Gesch- H. Steuer, `Zur Berechnung von BevOlkerungsgrae und lecht, Haus und Dynastie beim mittelalterlichen Adel. Vor- Beviilkerungsentwicklung in einer Siedlungslandschaft der fragen zum Thema "Adel und Herrschaft im Mittelalter". Merowingerzeit. Saeculum, Jahrbuch fur Universalgeschichte 39, Zeitschrift fur die Geschichte des Oberrheins 105, 1957, 1-62. 1988, 119-126. B. Solberg, Social status in the Merovingian and Viking peri- H. Steuer, `Standortverschiebungen friiher Siedlungen- von ods in Norway from archaeological and historical sources. der vorriimischen Eisenzeit bis zum friihen Mittelalter. Person Norwegian Arch. Review 18, 1986, 61-76. und gemeinschafi im Mittelalter, K. Schmid zum 65. Geburtstag (Sig- B. Schmidt, `Reihengraber und ihre historische interpretation. maringen 1988) 25-59. Romer und Germanen in Mitteleuropa (Berlin 2. Aufl. 1976), W. StOrmer, Zur gesellschaftlichen Entwicklung. In: Die 203-217. Bajuwaren. Von Severin bis Tassilo 488-788. Gemeinsame Lan- R. Schmidt-Wiegand, Franken und Alemannen. Zum desausstellung des Freistaates Bayern und des Landes Salzburg 1988 Gebrauch der Stammesbezeichnungen in den Leges Barbaro- (1988), 224-228. rum . Person und Gemeinschaft im Mittelalter, K. Schmid zum 65. H. Vierck, westalisches "Adelsgrab" des 8. Jahrhunderts Geburtstag (Sigmaringen 1988), 61-71. n. Chr. Zum archdologischen Nachweis der frUhkarolin- E. Schubert, `Entwicklungsstufen der Grundherrschaft im gischen und altsachsischen Oberschichten. Studien zur Sach- Lichte der Namenforschung. In H. Patze (Hrsg.), Die Grund- senforschung 2, 1980, 457-488. herrschaft im Mittelalterspiiter. Vortrage und Forschungen 27 (Sig- J. Vignatiova, `Zur Frage der Gefolgschaftsspuren in den gro g maringen 1983), 75-95. Sbornik praci filos.fak. Brnenske Univ.-mahrischen Siedlungen. H.K. Schulze, Grundstrukturen der Verfassung im Mittelalter E 32, 1987, 101-108. 1-2; (Stuttgart 1985-86). L. Wamser, Eine tharingische Adelsgrablege des 6. Jahrhun- K. Sippel, merowingisches Kammergrab mit Pfer- derts bei Zeuzleben. Das archaologische Jahr in Bayern 1983 degeschirr aus Eschwege, Werra-Meitner-Kreis (Hessen). (Stuttgart 1984) 133-138 und 1984 (1985) 131-134. Germania 65, 1987, 135-158. L. Wamser, Eine thfiringisch-frankische Adels- und Gefolg- F. Stein, Adelsgriiber des 8. Jahrhunderts in Deutschland (Berlin 1967). schaftsgrablege des 6./7. Jahrhunderts bei Zeuzleben. Weg- H. Steuer, Die Franken in Köln. Aus der Kiilner Stadtgeschichte (Köln weiser zu vor- und fruhgeschichtlichen Stãtten Mainfranken 5 (Wiirz- 1980). burg 1984). H. Steuer, Friihgeschichtliche Sozialstrukturen in Mitteleuropa. Eine H.T. Waterbolk, `Mobilitat von Dorf, Ackerflur und Gthber- Analyse der Auswertungsmethoden des archiiologischen Quellenmateri- feld in Drenthe seit der Latenezeit. Offa 39, 1982, 97-137. als. Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Got- R. Wenskus, Stammesbildung und Verfassung. Das Werden der frith- tingen, Phil.-Hist. Klasse, Dritte Folge Nr. 128 (Gottingen mittelalterlichen genies (Ki5ln Wien 2. Aufl. 1977). 1982). J. Werner, `Zur Entstehung der Reihengräberzivilisation. Arch. H. Steuer, Die frUhmittelalterliche Gesellschaftsstruktur im Geographica 1, 1959, 23-32; wieder abgedruckt (mit Nachtrag) Spiegel der Grabfunde. Hessen im Friihmittelalter. Archãologie in: Siedlung, Sprache und BevOlkerungsstruktur im Frankenreich. und Kunst, hrsg. von H. Roth, E. Wamers (Sigmaringen Wege der Forschung 49 (Darmstadt 1973) 285-325. 1984), 78-86, 196-199. J. Werner, Frankish royal tombs in the Cathedrals of Cologne H. Steuer, Da Teodorico it Grande a Carlomagno. In B. and Saint-Denis. Antiquity 38, 1964, 201-216. Lyon, A. Guillou, F. Gabrieli, H. Steuer, Carlomagno e J. Werner, Der goldene Armring des Frankenkonigs Childerich Maometto. Bisanzio, Islam e Occidente nell'alto Medioevo. Le Grandi und die germanischen handgelenkringe der jiingeren Kaiser- Stagioni (Milano 1986) 169-280. Die Kultur der Germanen zeit. Friihmittelalterliche Studien 14, 1980, 1-41. von Theoderich dem GroLen bis zu Karl dem GroBen. H. A. Wieczorek, Die friihmerowingischen Phasen des Grdber- Pirenne, Mohammed und Karl der Gry3e. Die Geburt des Abend- feldes von Rubenach. Mit einem Vorschlag zur chronolog- landes (Stuttgart Zurich 1987), 207-300. sichen Gliederung des Belegungsareals A. Berichte der Riimisch- H. Steuer, Helm und Ringschwert. Prunkbewaffnung und Germanischen Kommission 68, 1987, 353-492. Rangabzeichen germanischer Krieger. Eine ijbersicht. Stu- H. Wolfram, `Zur Ansiedlung reichsangehOrigen FOderaten. dien zur Sachsenforschung 6, 1987, 189-236. Erkldrungsversuche und Forschungsziele. Mitteilungen des In- H. Steuer, `Archfiologie und die Erforschung der germanischen stituts fiir Osterreich. Geschichtsforschung 91, 1983, 5-35. THE BIRTH OF EUROPE:

ARCHAEOLOGY AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE FIRST MILLENNIUM A.D.

EDITED BY KLAVS RANDSBORG

ROMA 1989 LERMA DI BRETSCHNEIDER ANALECTA ROMANA INSTITUTI DANICI Edited by Accademia di Danimarca, 18 Via Omero, 00197 Roma Editor: Tage Nielsen Sub-editor: Karen Ascani, M.A. Photocomposition: Arti Grafiche Fratelli Palombi, Roma Printed by F. Hendriksens Eftf., Copenhagen © «LErma. di Bretschneider, Roma ISBN 88-7062-662-8