Archaeological Evidence between 5th and 8th Century in Western Britain and Scotland - Coursework Example

5th and 8th Century Archaeological Evidence The Anglo-Saxon kingdom occupies most of England especially the west and parts of Scotland today. Archaeologists who seek to comprehend migration evidence and acculturation must understand the Anglo-Saxon early archaeology identity. This concept guards against consideration of only one aspect of archaeology on its own. It ensures that various topics previously studied in isolation undergo studying together. These groups include status, ethnicity, gender, religion and age. The interpretation task proves difficult due to lack of archaeological synthesis in the Anglo-Saxon period. The new chronology and syntheses work is making this easier. This essay characterizes the archaeological evidence for the elite settlement in Western Britain and Scotland between the fifth and eighth century through an extensive study of the Anglo-Saxons who occupied this area at the time. Understanding the Roman legacy The end of the Roman Period must be under consideration to identify the archaeological evidence from the fifth and sixth century. The material culture of the Romans collapsed in early fifth century leaving a gap. This void underwent quick filling up with that of the Anglo-Saxon population rendering the natives culture almost archaeologically undetectable. However, according to Economy, society and warfare among the Britons and Saxons, “the recent metal-detectors and hoards indicate that the imports and coin use did not abruptly stop in the fourth century”1. The archaeology of the Britain and Roman military dynamics is clear but not easily understood. For example, the purpose of the Saxon Shore is unclear. It is unknown if it was a passage for commodities or for defense. Research indicates that the Saxon Shore and other installations at the coast may have had a more logistic and economic role than they are accorded. The traditional role of the Saxon alongside other continental piracy due to the names given to the forts may just be a myth. The late Roman-Britain archaeology receives dominance from a locus on the elite population over the slaves or peasants. The focus, “is on their houses, furniture, mosaics, fittings, silver plates and villas”2. This is due to the strict code that the elite upheld in the manner as to which their wealth could receive display. This provides a rich basis to learn about the material culture of the early settlers. The gap between the poorest and the richest individuals was huge. The archaeology studies have a bias on the activities of the elite and rich segment of the population. However, the archaeology of the peasants dating to the fourth and fifth century indicated enclosures or ladder field mechanisms dominance. This receives connection to extended families. In the west of England and Scotland, the hefty usage of buildings and farmsteads built using timber. This indicates a small amount of roman building mechanisms incorporation in comparison to the small group of elite’s houses. Settler evidence Anglo-Saxon community is under confirmation to have been federate troops or foederati. This is due to the Anglo-Saxon burial site excavations that revealed them wearing military equipment 4. This equipment receives tracing back to Roman forces from Roman contexts like Colchester and Winchester cemeteries. It is also evident in cemeteries like Mucking or Essex, which is a purely rural Anglo-Saxon area. The Anglo-Saxon community sites receive distribution in close proximity to the ones occupied by the Roman settlers. This indicates that the first Anglo-Saxon settlers were under the control of the Romano-British. Some archaeologists refer to all early Anglo-Saxon settlers as federate troops; however, this concept may not be true. Some different relationships may have existed between the Romano-British and the Anglo-Saxon settlers. The bigger picture indicates that no model on its own can explain the complete Anglo-Saxon settlement in Britain and Scotland and that the regional variances existed considerably. The population density varied between the eastern and southern England. Hamerow states, “Norfolk exhibits denser population of Anglo-Saxon in comparison to the Suffolk Count whereas the eastern Yorkshire is the Deira Anglo-Saxon community nucleus with more population of Anglo-Saxons in comparison to the whole of Northumbria” 3. The settlers were not all of similar types. Some were “warriors buried with their military equipment”2. However, it is not correct to assume all these warriors fought for the Romano-British and guarded this community. It is possible that some like the “later Viking settler begun differently as pirates or raiders” 2. They may have raided the community and seized the land for their own permanent settlement. Others suggest a much more humble society who had few or no weapons and likely died from malnutrition. This are categorized as the boat people. They are the refugees that came from their North Sea crowded areas made untenable by their deteriorating climatic conditions2. Tribal characteristics It is quite easy to consider the archaeology of the Anglo-Saxon community as an ethnology study. This fails to consider that the Anglo-Saxon identity is more than just the ethnicity but encompasses the family or tribe membership. The Anglo-Saxon settlers were not homogeneous. Higham states they exhibited “different characteristics and language” 4. It seems that in this period the settler’s identity was local. People must have known their neighbor but it was important to show loyalty to the tribe. This was through clothing details like fasteners. It is not likely that the settlers thought of themselves as Anglo-Saxon. They instead regarded themselves as part of a region, tribe, descendants, or followers. This identity is the key element that archaeological evidence tries to comprehend and determine. Some part of the pagan period exhibited a well-furnished mix of cremation and inhumation. Evidence of this practice is in the Alwalton excavation near Peterborough 1. Uncovering of the 5th and 6th centuries has led to discovery of “2 unurned and 28 urned cremations”1. Another discovery of 34 inhumations dates back to the late 5th century and early 7th century. The book Economy, society and warfare among the Britons and Saxons states “the inhumations and cremations receive provision of grave goods or pyre” 1. Some had rich burial furnish. The excavations produced evidence of a mix of cultural practices and symbolic attire. These implicated that local variances existed according to their various family loyalties or tribes. The symbolic use of clothing or attires by different groups was distinct and noticeable from the cemetery excavations. Reuse of earlier monuments The evidence that the early Anglo-Saxon settlers reused monuments indicates several significant concepts to their culture. The ancient monuments signify a great importance in deciding where the dead would undergo burial in the Anglo-Saxon period. The secondary activity that the Anglo-Saxons performed on Roman sites and prehistoric sites locations undergoes practical explanation. However, these explanations do not indicate the types or number of graves and monuments. Anglo-Saxon period from the late sixth century to the early eight century was according to Rahtz characterized by “barrow burials”5. These barrows serve as physical expressions of the settlers of links to their ancestors and land claims. The main significance of this practice was to give the landscape a meaning in an area the settlers found worthy to erase prior significant emptiness. The reuse of monuments was highly widespread in the seventh and eighth century. This suggests that the Anglo-Saxons deliberately located the burials of the elite people near visible pre- existing Anglo-Saxon monuments. Ordinary burials dated to this time exist near prehistoric barrows. There is a huge visible difference between the practices occurring between the fifth and sixth centuries from those occurring between the seventh and eight centuries. An analysis from The Saxon and medieval palaces at Cheddar says, “Upper Thames area indicates a rise of 18% from 32% Anglo-Saxon burial locations which, is similar to the excavated cemeteries since 1945 that indicate a rise of 26% to 71% of these cemeteries”5. The increased reuse of the monuments indicates that the natives begun adopting the material practices and culture of the pre-existing immigrants. Landscape archaeology Initial beliefs indicated that the Anglo-Saxons settled in an abandoned land, which they farmed and settled in. However, by the fourth century the rural landscape consisted of cleared land with dispersed hamlets and fields with surrounding fields sharing common resources. One type of the fields consisted of irregular layouts with arable hubs receiving additional of a field after the other over the centuries. The other type consisted of regular rectilinear expanses following the topography roughly. The stability underwent revision in the early fifth century. Higham explained this as due to” the roman collapse and climate deterioration”4. The Anglo-Saxons farmers converted large ploughed areas into pastoral land and became subsistence farmers. However, abandoned arable land is not evident in archaeological studies. Evidence of the arable farming collective structure receives echoing in pre-historic Roman-Britain culture. Open field systems with shared cultivators but individual cropping indicate a link between common pasture rights and arable holdings. This is in line with structural governance and dutiful taxes to the overlord. This reveals social connections and kingship ties that continue to the sixth century. There is no evidence of destruction or uniformity due to imposition by lords, invaders savage actions o collapse of the system. This however, has implications on the later developments of the seventh and eighth century. The study of the landscape draws upon written, archaeological and topographical sources. The relation of the boundary of the Anglo-Saxon charter to the Roman estates is quite problematic. By the end of the Anglo-Saxon period, major changes had occurred to the landscape’s organization that obscured the pre-existing arrangements. Archaeologists are uncertain about late Roman Administrative structure thus hindering interpretation. However, studies done in Anglo-Saxon areas showed examples of continuous territorial boundaries such as in cases where the Roman’s villas had estate boundaries similar to the medieval estates. Nevertheless, the settlement locations in defined territories may shift. The examples indicate that the probability of the continuity of the territory was due to administration rather than exploitation. A subsidiary structure with subdivisions basis may have been in place after the disappearance of the upper level town based Roman administration. This evidence suggests that the Anglo-Saxon inherited their administration from the Late Roman era. Distribution of settlements It is difficult to categorize the Anglo-Saxon settlers as migrants. This is partly because most of the Anglo-Saxon settlements have generally yielded minimal finds. Most finds are mainly “bone and pottery” 5. Aerial photography has been unsuccessful in finding identifiable settlements easily. This is because most of these settlements exhibited a dispersed population in nature. Archeologists know of a few numbers of settlements. However, their distribution is elusive. Some settlements exist in the North-west or west midlands. Hamerow claims, “Kent is a rich Anglo-Saxon prehistoric settlement” 3. Nevertheless, the excavated settlements in that area are disappointedly few. In contrast, counties like Cambridgeshire, northamptonshire, Suffolk and Oxfordshire exhibit a rich early Anglo-Saxon settlement. During the Roman Empire, most inland settlers preferred to settle on rivers, which had main navigation routes. An example from Higman is Dorchester on Thames. It lay on the upper Thames. He says, “Access was through clinker-built boats known as shallow-draught” 4. In addition, Britain and the end of the Roman Empire states, “this type of settlement exists along rivers like Nene, Witham, Trent and Ouse” 2. The marshy lower Thames exhibits the same. Some Anglo-Saxon settlers located themselves nearby Roman-era towns or near them. However, it is unknown if the Anglo-Saxon occupied these areas simultaneously with the Romano-Britons. Cemetery evidence The Anglo-Saxon earliest cemeteries exist in various separate areas. Most of them receive dating back to the early 5th century. Kent, is however an exception. It exhibits a dense number of artefacts and cemeteries. This suggests that either the Anglo-Saxon community begun settling there at an earlier time or it had a heavily dense Anglo-Saxon population. Research by Dark indicates that Anglo-Saxon cemeteries increased immensely by the late 5th century where “Some of them lay adjacent to their predecessors”2. However, the newer cemeteries covered large expansion area including the Susses southern coast. By the year 2000, “approximately ten thousand Anglo-Saxon inhumations and cremations had undergone discovery” 5. These exhibitions illuminated on the huge degree of diverse styles and mortuary ritual types. These exhibitions were consistent to local activities and micro cultural practices evidence in existence. Cemetery evidence receives exhibition from material culture. This is through “discovery of weapons, clothes, personal objects and jewellery” 5. Of importance is the molecular and physical evidence obtained from teeth, bones and skeletons. In consideration of the Kent cemeteries, many of the relevant findings originate from furnished graves. However, there is presence of several unique objects. These include “urns, pots and brooches”4. The brooches served as a significant part of the female attire. It was a fastener similar to the modern pin. This brooch style or quoits is significant to the fifth century AD southern England. The highest concentration of these items occurs in Kent. In the period of political uncertainties, The landscape archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England states, “the quoit underwent construction and remaking as part of the mechanism of structuring a new group of identity”4. It serves as a step towards the development of the Anglo-Saxons in the socio-cultural mechanism context. This portrays an emerging post-Roman society. The brooch indicates that the culture did not transpose from the continent. It rather implies that the Anglo-Saxon culture was developing from an early stage. Some of the women’s fashions “like tracht are not trade goods but native attire “1. They have undergone usage as objects that distinguished and identified the settlers. Some finds from particular areas in the continent supplement these attires. A massive amount of Frankish artifacts have undergone discovery in Kent. These artifacts symbolize and reflect more of commerce and trade than early migration. For example, Yorke allows for only the possibility of some Frankish settlement. Frankish sea raids were present from long periods. There is presence of North German artifacts between East Anglia and Humber Estuary2. This indicates that the Scandinavians may have moved to Britain. However, this does not imply that the Scandinavians and Angels arrived at the same time. They may have arrived a century apart. The influence or status that they brought upon arriving is not certain. It is difficult to elucidate the assimilation and mix of the native and immigrant population with material culture. However, skeletal evidence is slightly helpful in the matter. The book Britain and the end of the Roman Empire states that, “the male average stature of individuals from the 5th and 6th century is 12mm higher than that from the 7th and 8th century”2. These individuals under study were from the Anglo-Saxon cemeteries. This development experienced mostly in Wessex with a 24mm average drop. This change cannot receive tracing to any changes in the environment. No evidence exists of diet changes or further inflow of immigrants in the seventh and eighth century. The best explanation would be that of a progressive Anglicisation or Saxonisation of native enclaves’ material culture. This would have occurred through increasing the absorption of the natives into the Anglo-Saxons. The facilitation of this process is by increased intermarriages between the two groups. The native female population is inferred from the continuous textile mechanisms (not usual in Anglo-Saxon transition from Romano-British) and epigenetic traits in burials. It is quite clear that many of the Anglo-Saxon burial sites do not represent the whole community or the age bracket. This stipulates that the Anglo-Saxon community made decision on the disposal of their death on various factors. Now, it is difficult to stipulate the exact factors. References Alcock, Leslie. 1987. Economy, society and warfare among the Britons and Saxons. Cardiff: University of Wales Press. Dark, Ken R. 2000. Britain and the end of the Roman Empire. Stroud [u.a.]: Tempus Hamerow, Helena. 2002. Early medieval settlements: the archaeology of rural communities in North-West Europe, 400-900. Oxford: Oxford University Press Higham, Nicholas J., and Martin J. Ryan. 2010. The landscape archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England. Woodbridge: Boydell Press. Rahtz, Philip Arthur. 1979. The Saxon and medieval palaces at Cheddar: excavations 1960-62. Oxford: B.A.R. Read More