Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T04:50:56.617Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The birds on the Sutton Hoo purse

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Carola Hicks
Carola Hicks
Affiliation:
Lucy Cavendish College, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the definitive publication of the Sutton Hoo ship-burial, R. L. S. Bruce-Mitford comments that the figural scenes on the purse-lid may be thought to have had a special significance known to those who commissioned them and to those who saw the purse, because they appear as part of the design on an important item of the regalia. However, the meaning of the pair of plaques which show a bird of prey grasping a smaller bird (pl. VIIa) has not yet been satisfactorily analysed. Bruce-Mitford states that no close parallels to the scene can be cited. Haseloff, in a study of the purse plaques, considers that they show the general influence of Mediterranean representational art upon the Germanic tendency towards abstraction, with the bird pairs being the adoption and stylization of a foreign theme. Werner, in a discussion of Lombardic shield mounts, suggests that the Sutton Hoo birds represent Christian ornament and therefore associates the purse with the other supposedly Christian elements in the burial. But no really convincing background for the birds has been found. This is in contrast to the other figural plaques, the man between beasts and the interlacing quadrupeds, which both belong to groups of designs of more familiar type. It is the purpose of this article to provide some sources for the bird plaques and to attempt to interpret the special significance behind the use of this design on an item of the regalia.

Type
Research Article
Information
Anglo-Saxon England , Volume 15 , December 1986 , pp. 153 - 165
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Bruce-Mitford, R. L. S., The Sutton Hoo Ship-Burial, 3 vols. (London, 1975–1983) 11, 521–2.Google Scholar

2 Haseloff, G., ‘Zu den Darstellungen auf den Börse von Sutton Hoo’, Nordelbingen 20 (1952), 9–20.Google Scholar

3 Werner, J., ‘Ein langobardischer Schild von Ischl an der Alz’, Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblätter 18/1 (1952), 45–58.Google Scholar

4 Bruce-Mitford, , Sutton Hoo Ship-Burial 11, 218–20, 354 and 522.Google Scholar

5 Jalabert, D., ‘De l'art oriental antique à l'art roman: l'aigle’, Bulletin Monumental 97 (1938), 173–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wittkower, R., ‘Eagle and Serpent, a Study in the Migration of Symbols’, Jnl of the Warburglnst. 2 (1938–1939), 293–325.Google Scholar

6 As illustrated by Minns, E., ‘The Art of the Northern Nomads’, PBA 28 (1942), 47–81, pl. x.Google Scholar

7 These conflicting views are usefully summarized by Speake, G., Anglo-Saxon Animal Art (Oxford, 1980), pp. 17–23.Google Scholar

8 Salin, E., La Civilisation Merovingienne: IV, Les Croyances (Paris, 1959), pp. 186–200.Google Scholar

9 Thiry, G., ‘Die Chronologie der Vogelfibeln’, Ipek 73 (1935), 78–84Google Scholar; Dalton, O. M., ‘Sarmatian Ornaments from Kerch’, AntJ 4 (1924), 259–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; de Baye, Baron, ‘Les oiseaux employés dans l'ornementation à l'Epoque des invasions’, Memoires de la Société des Antiquaires de la France 60 (1901), 33–52.Google Scholar

10 Jalabert, ‘L'aigle’, figs. 8, 9, 11.

11 Shown, e.g., by Jettmar, K., Art of the Steppes (London, 1964), pls. 16 and 37, fig. 108Google Scholar; Rudenko, S., Frozen Tombs of Siberia – The Pazyryk Burials (London, 1970), fig. 113.Google Scholar

12 The history is traced in detail by Thomas, A. C., ‘The Interpretation of the Pictish Symbols’, ArchJ 120 (1964), 31–97, esp. pp. 70–4 and fig. 11.Google Scholar

13 Jalabert, ‘L'aigle’, fig. 8; the scene occurs on a pair of ornamental discs from Hungary which have been compared with the Nagyszentmiklos treasure by Laszlo, G., The Art of the Migration Period (London, 1974), pl. 164Google Scholar. Laszlo stresses the significance of the late Avar/Hungarian art of eastern Europe in the development of Romanesque art. Jalabert also provides Romanesque examples of the frontal eagle with various victims.

14 These birds are illustrated by Rudenko, Frozen Tombs, pl. 141D (a carved wooden crest found in the coffin in barrow 2) and pl. 61C (a leather flask with applied patterns, also from barrow 2).

15 Minns, ‘Nomads’, pl. XXVII A and A2.

16 The eagle coins of the Carnutes are illustrated by Blanchet, A., Manuel de numismatique française 1 (Paris, 1912)Google Scholar, fig. 83 and by Lengyel, L., L'art gaulois dans les medailles (Paris, 1954)Google Scholar, pl. 12, no. 142 (described as an eagle holding an eaglet by the hand). Coins of the Bituriges are illustrated by Blanchet, fig. 68.

17 This is shown, e.g., on a silver bowl from Malaia Pereschepina, USSR, which has a selection of lively animal scenes and combat groups, discussed by Orbeli, J. and Trever, C., L'orfèvrerie sasanide (Leningrad, 1935), pls. 38 and 39Google Scholar. Islamic examples are shown by Smirnov, J., L'argentine orientale (Leningrad, 1909)Google Scholar, pl. LXXIX, no. 141 for the design on the base of a silver bowl; Pope, A. Upham, A Survey of Persian Art 5 (London, 1938)Google Scholar, pls. 514c and 605 and pp. 1304 and 1522 for examples of a hawk striking a goose on a polychrome plate and a stucco relief respectively, both of the eleventh or twelfth centuries. The scene also appears on the richly carved tenth-century church of Achtamar, Armenia, where a hawk attacks a duck among a range of animal and figural ornament derived from Sassanian and early Christian art; see der Nersessian, S., Achtamar, Church of the Holy Cross (New York, 1965), fig. 28.Google Scholar

18 For a brief discussion of these brooches, see Bateson, J. D., Enamel-workingin Iron Age, Roman and Sub-Roman Britain, BAR Brit. ser. 93 (Oxford, 1981), 41–4 and fig. 6.Google Scholar

19 Such bird brooches have been found at York (RCHM, Eboracum (London, 1962), pl. 34)Google Scholar; Woodeaton, Oxon. (Oxoniensia 14 (1949), pl. II, no. 12); Nor'nour, , Isles, of Scilly, (ArchJ 124 (1968), fig. 19, no. 133)Google Scholar; and Midlothian, Castlelaw (Proc. of the Soc. of Ants, of Scotland 67 (1933), fig. 13(1)Google Scholar; and there is an unpublished example in the Ashmolean Museum with no provenance.

20 There are examples in the Castle Museum, Norwich (199.961 57), from the 1957 excavations at Hockwold-cum-Wilton, in the British Museum (1926 5.6) from Suffolk; and see Henig, M. and Chambers, R. A., ‘Two Roman Bronze Birds from Oxfordshire’, Oxoniensia 49 (1984), 19–21, pl. 2, for an example from Asthall.Google Scholar

21 E.g. two examples in profile, from York (RCHM, Eboracum, p. 134)Google Scholar; in the round from Brettenham, Norfolk (Norfolk Archaeology 26 (1935–1937)Google Scholar, fig. 2, no. 8), from Lincoln, (Arch J 111 (1955), p. 127, fig. 4, no. 8)Google Scholar, from Saltersford, Lines. (Preston, H., Romano-British Remains from Saltersford (Lincoln, 1915), fig. 10)Google Scholar, and from Cornwall, Padstow (Arch J 17 (1860), p. 314, fig. 5)Google Scholar. Dove brooches in the round come from Camerton, Somerset (Wedlake, W. J., Excavations at Camerton (London, 1958), fig. 53, no. 4)Google Scholar, from Somerset, Ham Hill (Proc. of the Somerset Archaeol. Soc. 69 (1923), fig. p. 51Google Scholar, and from Dorset, Hod Hill (Brailsford, J. W., Hod Hill 1 (London, 1962), fig. 11 F. 1.).Google Scholar

22 See Arnold, C. J., Anglo-Saxon Cemeteries on the Isle of Wight (London, 1982)Google Scholar, fig. 62, fora hare brooch from Bowcombe Down, Grave 1; and see Brown, G. Baldwin, The Arts in Early Englandm III (London, 1915)Google Scholar, pl. CLVIII.6, for another from Bowcombe Down, Grave 23 iv.

23 Hawkes, S. C., ‘The Jutish Style A’, Archaeologia 98 (1961), 29–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar, pls. xiv and xvb. The delicate heads, demarcation of wings, stylized body decoration and curving tail outlines are features common to the Roman and Anglo-Saxon doves.

24 The Chessel Down brooch is illustrated by Arnold, Anglo-Saxon Cemeteries, grave 23, fig. 8 and pl. va; the Bifrons brooch by Brown, Baldwin, Arts III, pl. XXXVIIGoogle Scholar; the Finglesham brooches from grave 3d by Chadwick, S. E., ‘The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Finglesham, Kent: a Reconsideration’, MA 2 (1958), 1–71Google Scholar, fig. 9c, d, with a reference to a further unpublished example from Bekesbourne, Kent. Continental parallels are cited from Arras and Herpes, with an early sixth-century date suggested for the Frankish examples. E. Bakka regards the Finglesham brooches as Kentish-made copies of an early type of Frankish brooch from the Rhineland or Gaul, N. (‘Scandinavian-type Gold Bracteates in Kentish and Continental Grave Finds’, Angles, Saxons and Jutes, ed. Evison, V. I. (Oxford, 1981), pp. 11–38).Google Scholar

25 The Gilton mount is shown by Speake, , Animal Art, fig. 17a and pp. 82–3Google Scholar; for the Shelford mounts, see Kennett, D., ‘Some Decorative Aspects of the Anglo-Saxon Shield’, Bedfordshire Archaeol. Jnl 9 (1974), 55–70, fig. 5C-d.Google Scholar

26 For the Buttsole mounts, see Brown, Baldwin, Arts IIIGoogle Scholar, pl. xxiv.2, and for illustration and discussion of further English and Scandinavian examples, see Speake, , Animal Art, pp. 42 and 82–3, figs. 6 and 17.Google Scholar

27 ibid. pp. 81–5. Bird symbolism is also discussed in Davidson, H. R. E. and Gelling, P., The Chariot of the Sun (London, 1964), pp. 174–6.Google Scholar

28 For the Canterbury plaque, see Rescue News 19 September 1979, p. 3; for the Faversham buckle, see Speake, Animal Art, fig. 6n.

29 The bowl is illustrated by Henry, F., Irish Art in the Early Christian Period (London, 1965), pl. 26.Google Scholar

30 An eagle clutching a fish appears as the evangelist symbol for St John in the Book of Armagh, and the motif occurs in stone on the Market Cross at Kells, illustrated by Thomas, Pictish Symbols, fig. 11 (13 and 14).

31 Illustrated by Keary, C. F., Catalogue of English Coins in the British Museum: Anglo-Saxon Series 1 (London, 1887), pl. III, no. 27, type 36.Google Scholar

32 In early twelfth-century carvings at St Giles, Aston, Herefordshire (RCHM Hereford III (London, 1934), pl. 85)Google Scholar, and at St Leonards, Ribbesford, Worcester (VCH Worcester iv (London, 1971) pl. opp. p. 313)Google Scholar, a predatory bird grips a smaller one beneath it. These may represent the bestiary role of the eagle with its young symbolizing Christ with souls saved. But an identical scene in the twelfth-century manuscript of the Topographica Hibernica of Giraldus Cambrensis illustrates the pursuit of falconry (Boase, T. S. R., English Art 1100–1216 (Oxford, 1953), pl. 131 A)Google Scholar; and later manuscripts use it to illustrate falconry both in manuals of the sport and as one of the Labours of the Months (Yapp, B., Birds in Medieval Manuscripts (London, 1981), pls. 22, 40)Google Scholar. Further examples are cited by Druce, G. C., ‘Notes on Birds in Medieval Church Architecture’, The Antiquary 50 (1914), 248–53.Google Scholar

33 The sources of the Sutton Hoo millefiori are examined by Bimson, M. and Oddy, W. A. in Bruce-Mitford, , Sutton Hoo Ship-Burial III, ch. XVIII.Google Scholar

34 Bruce-Mitford, , Sutton Hoo Ship-Burial II, fig. 48.Google Scholar

35 Speake, , Animal Art, pp. 49–50.Google Scholar

36 These brooches are illustrated and discussed in Arnold, Anglo-Saxon Cemeteries, figs. 4 and 9 for graves 3 and 40. He suggests that they resemble Style I birds but with non-Germanic body decoration.

37 Speake, , Animal Art, p. 49, fig. 17bGoogle Scholar; he compares the brooch to the Sutton Hoo duck in the treatment of the head.

38 Kennett, ‘Anglo-Saxon Shield’, fig. 5e.

39 Werner, ‘Ein Langobardischer Schild’, pp. 57–8.

40 Stevenson, R. B. K., ‘Aspects of Ambiguity in Crosses and Interlace’, Ulster Jnl of Archaeology 44/5 (1981–1982), 1–27, figs. 3, 12 and 13.Google Scholar

41 Fully described by Akerström-Hougen, G., The Calendar and Hunting Mosaics of the Villa of the Falconer in Argos, Skrifter utgivna av Svenska institutet i Athen 23 (Athens, 1974)Google Scholar. The mosaics are illustrated in colour in Lindner, K., Beiträge zu Vogelfang und Falknerei im Altertum, Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte der Jagd XII (Berlin, 1973), pls. 64–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

42 Illustrated in Brett, G., The Great Palace of the Byzantine Emperors, First Report (Oxford, 1947)Google Scholar, pl. 35. A very much later version of the scene appears among the panels of the carved wooden doors of St Nicholas, Ochrid, whose decorative scheme includes many earlier Byzantine motifs and may have been inspired by textile patterns. See Brehier, L., La sculpture byzantine et les art mineurs (Paris, 1936), pl. XLIIIGoogle Scholar; a marble bas-relief from Athens which has a predatory eagle standing on the back of another bird is shown in pl. ix.

43 Shown by Lindner, , Beiträge zu Vogelfang, figs. 40 and 40a (Leiden, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit, Voss. Lat. oct. 15, 200v).Google Scholar

44 See the discussion of figural iconography in Biddle, M. and Kjølbye-Biddle, B., ‘The Repton Stone’, ASE 14 (1985), 233–91, esp. 256–73.Google Scholar

45 Bruce-Mitford, , Sutton Hoo Ship-Burial III, 1–201 and 732–52, esp. 741, n. 4Google Scholar. For the carved plaque, see Grainger, G. and Henig, M., ‘A Bone Casket and a Relief Plaque from Mound 3 at Sutton Hoo’, MA 27 (1983), 136–41.Google Scholar

46 The origins of the sport are discussed by Epstein, H., ‘The Origins and Earliest History of Falconry’, Isis 34 (1943), 497–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Harting, J. C., Essays on Sport and Natural History (London, 1883)Google Scholar; and Allen, F. M., Falconry in Arabia (London, 1980).Google Scholar

47 References to the early continental legislation are provided in Akerström-Hougen, G., ‘Falconry as a Motif in Early Swedish Art’, Figura 19 (1981), 263–93Google Scholar; by Hoffman, G., ‘Falkenjagd und Falkenhandl in den nordischen Ländern während des Mittelalters’, Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutscht Literatur 88 (1957–1958), 115–49Google Scholar; and by Epstein, ‘Origins’, pp. 506–7.

48 See Oggins, R. S., ‘Falconry in Anglo-Saxon England’, Mediaevalia 7 (1984 for 1981), 173–208Google Scholar, for a thorough discussion of the sport and its association with kings and nobles in this period (and pp. 175–7 for Boniface's letters).

49 ibid. pp. 179–83.

50 Asser's Life of King Alfred, ch. 76, in Keynes, S. and Lapidge, M., Alfred the Great (Harmondsworth, 1983), p. 91.Google Scholar

51 The social ranking of hawks is discussed in Dalby, D., Lexicon of the Medieval German Hunt (Berlin, 1965), p. xxvi.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

52 The Rickeby burial and other Swedish examples are described by Vretemark, M. in Sjösvard, L., Vretemark, M. and Gustavson, H., ‘A Vendel Warrior from Vallentuna’, Vendel Period Studies, ed. Lamm, J. P. and Nordström, H. A., Museum of National Antiquities, Stockholm, Studies 2 (Stockholm, 1983), 133–50, at 139–42Google Scholar. Sparrowhawk remains were also found in middle Saxon levels at North Elmham and Thetford, Norfolk; see Clutton-Brock, J., ‘The Animal Resources’, The Archaeology of Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Wilson, D. M. (London, 1976), pp. 373–93.Google Scholar

53 Akerström-Hougen, ‘Falconry’, pp. 269–71.

54 Lindqvist, S., Gotland's Bildsteine (Stockholm, 1941–1942), pl. 55, fig. 134Google Scholar; this has been compared with the shaft fragment from Sockburn, where a similar rider bears a hawk on his wrist (Lang, J. T., ‘Illustrative Carving of the Viking Period at Sockburn-on-Tees’, AAe 50 (1972), 235–48, pl. xxi, 2)Google Scholar. Further examples from Billingham and Kirklevington are cited by Cramp, R., County Durham and Northumberland, Brit. Acad. Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Stone Sculpture in England I (Oxford, 1984), 136.Google Scholar

55 Oggins, ‘Falconry’, fig. I. In the light of the Biddies’ suggested identification of the Repton cross-shaft rider as King Æthelbald of Mercia (to whom, as we have seen, hawks had been sent by Boniface), might the Bewcastle falconer also be a secular portrait of royalty?

56 Henderson, I., The Picts (London, 1967), pl. 62Google Scholar. Another example of the scene occurs on a Lombardic panel from San Saba, Rome, where there is a mounted huntsman with hawk on his wrist; see Haseloff, A., Pre-Romanesque Sculpture in Italy (Paris, 1930), pl. 56a.Google Scholar

57 Kermode, P., Manx Crosses (London, 1907)Google Scholar, pl. LII (Thorwald's slab, Andreas) and pl. LV (Joalf's slab, Michael). The elaborate iconography of the former with its contrasting pagan and Christian scenes recalls Werner's interpretation of the purse birds as symbolizing Odin and Christ (above, p. 162).

58 Wilson, D. M., The Bayeux Tapestry (London, 1985), pls. 8, 16.Google Scholar

59 Although the word ‘hawk’ can be used to describe any bird of prey, there are two main categories, the long-wings (falcons) and short-wings (hawks). It is the peregrine falcon which is regarded as the most skilled bird of prey and which, by the Middle Ages, was permitted to be used only by royalty. Peregrines and gerfalcons are the only birds which can snatch and strike dead in flight a fast-flying victim such as wild duck, goose or pigeon, by closing the wings and plummeting onto the victim from above. Such game birds are the main diet of the peregrine. It is only the falcons which use the beak to assist the taloned foot in killing the prey. So the Sutton Hoo purse scene depicts clearly the capture of a duck by a bird which has the characteristics of a peregrine falcon. See Brown, L., British Birds of Prey (London, 1979).Google Scholar

60 Akerström-Hougen, ‘Falconry’, pp. 263–5.

61 I am grateful to Gunilla Akerström-Hougen for permission to reproduce her photograph of the Argos falconer mosaic, to Martin Biddle, Martin Carver and David Gurney for information and to Simon Keynes for his references and helpful comments.