Part 7 Treasure
Large silver
dish
Who was Anastasius
anyway? ( A mini history lesson. )
Who owns what?
Treasure trove
or what?
Iron Axe
Silver cup
The sword
The gold buckle
|
© copyright Glen Ray Crack -
Battle - East Sussex - United Kingdom
Submitted 10th January 1998
1998 - 1999 - 2000 - 2001 - 2002 - 2003 - 2004 - 2005 - 2006 - 2007 - 2008
t is impossible for me to comment on all the artefacts found in the Sutton
Hoo burial site, or to include graphics of all the items. I am not an expert
on Saxon art and would refer you to books or other sources of information
that can be found on the net. This section would not be complete however,
if I did not attempt to include some of the more significant finds. The
list above, whilst not being exhaustive, does include most of what was
recovered and I have attempted graphically repair certain items that were
damaged when the burial chamber roof collapsed. Every graphic you see has
been generated electronically from original 2D photographs, drawings and
diagrams and given depth and lighting in an attempt to reproduce them in
their original condition. Each legend will explain what the original item
was, condition it was found in and any assumptions I have made in the re-generation.
I am limited in that many of the drawings and photographs I have had to
work in are in black and white. Many of the original photographs having
been destroyed in the London Science Museum during the bombing of the Second
World War. For copyright reasons, I have am not able to include any actual
photographs of the site and have not visited Sutton Hoo at the time of
writing. I am working on this and hope to include some in the near future.
nown as the Anastasius dish, It is a large dish 72.5 cm wide and constructed
of silver and is basically flat with a reasonably large foot ring. When
recovered it was damaged by other items that had bent the foot ring. In
particular the silver ladle and possibly the silver bowl. It was also bent
on the rim and straightened later by the unbelievable procedure of blowtorch
and hammer. The platter consists of concentric engraved or stamped rings
of which the inner one contains an eight sided star with the impression
of winged bird of some creation. Towards the rim is another concentric
circle about 25 cm in diameter and 2 cm wide. Within this ring are designs
of Byzantine nature which are difficult to discern. Within this ring are
four circles that seem to have been added as an afterthought because they
are of dubious circularity and do not seem to be 90 degrees equidistant.
These roundels contain engravings of seated humans and standing figures.
The rim is decorated in the same manner and I discern about 8 roundels
which again, seem to leave something to be desired as far as geometry is
concerned. Looking at this dish, you perceive the impression that the maker
could have done better. On the underside of the foot ring is two stamps
that indicate that this dish was made during the reign of Emperor Anastasius.
eno was the Emperor of Rome from AD 474 to 491. His real name was Tarasicodissa
and originated from Isauria. A military man, he was unpopular for a number
of reasons. Partly because of his associations with the Vandals who were
involved in the earlier sacking of Rome and his fiscal policies that lead
to a number of uprisings which he managed to quash. In 475, an uprising
by Leo's wife who was named Verina and her brother Basiliscus, Zeno fled
back to his homeland. Basiliscus sent another Isaurian by the name of Illus
to capture him. Unfortunately for Basiliscus, Illus's siege failed and
circumstances led to Zeno and Illus making a pact to regain power which
was accomplished in August 476. By 478, Verina who was still upset at the
betrayal perpetrated on her son by Illus, plotted his assassination. This
failed and resulted in her imprisonment in Isauria. Verina by 479 was still
plotting the death of Illus. This time she encouraged her son-in-law Marcian
to oblige. Again, Illus put down the revolt. Zeno realised that Illus should
be moved to Antioch for his own safety with a less controversial post.
In 482, Zeno made comments that led to Pope Felix III excommunicating Acacius
the Patriarch of Constantinople. For reasons unknown, Zeno's brother was
arrested and held hostage by Illus. When Zeno requested his release, Illus
refused and was dismissed. Illus revolted in 484 and was a kinsman by the
name of Leontius against him. Illus was not captured but made a pact with
Leontius which led to Verina supporting Leontius. Leontius and Illus were
eventually captured and executed in 488. Zeno suffered many uprisings but
managed to survive until his death in 491. Anastasius was born in Dyrrachium
which is better known today as Albania. Anastasius was a minor court official
of Zeno but was in the right place at the right time on Zeno's death. Anastasius
followed a religious life and became Bishop of Antioch in 488. The power
vacuum and his familiarity with Ariadne - Zeno's wife led to him being
put forward as the new Emperor. On the 11th April 491 he became so. Five
weeks later he married her. One thing Anastasius realised was that there
were too many bitter Isaurians who thought they had a better clam to his
position than he did. To counter the threat, he removed all Isaurian officials
which in turn lead to constant revolt. It took about 7 years to counter
the threat. Raids by the Bulgars across the Danube instigated the building
of walls and in 492 he was at war with Persia. Anastasius is probably best
known for his modification to the coinage system and minting of a wide
range of bronze coins . He is also known for his complex tax system which
on his death in 518 left the economy in a strong position.
he Sutton Hoo treasure opens a completely new can of worms as far as treasure
trove is concerned. No legal remedies seem to be in place even today for
who the legal owner would be when articles are found with no intention
of recovery. Sutton Hoo was such a case. Taking into account the enormous
importance of the find, the initial thought would be that the state would
declare it treasure trove and impound the contents. On the other hand it
falls outside the true definition of treasure trove. So it was on the 14th
August 1939 a coroner's court was convened to dispute the legal ownership
of the treasure. In true English tradition, a court with 14 jurors was
set up in the local Sutton village hall to decide who owned the find. It
was decided that the artefacts were not treasure trove and hence were awarded
to Mrs Pretty. As you can imagine, this was not welcomed by the academic
world who saw these historically important items being lost to the nation
in front of their eyes. Fortunately, Mrs Pretty who eventually died in
1952, donated them to the state. If she had not, it was almost certain
that the coroner's court decision would have been contested. What leg the
state would have stood on is open to question. It has been usual practice
for burial mound excavations to proceed only with the blessing of the state
since the 14th century.
plain silver cup was found that was bent due to the pressure of the burial
roof collapse. It and the ladle were responsible for the footing damage
and vice versa of the Anastasius dish.
f the many items recovered that indicate this to be the burial of a high
ranking official, the remains of the sword indicate the fact to perfection.
To the fighting man, the quality of his sword said more about him and his
wealth than anything else. The complex construction of this sword shows
how high the status of this man must have been. In those days it was impossible
with the technology available to create a quality sword out of a single
piece of metal. The Sutton Hoo sword was constructed using the process
known as pattern welding. Pattern welding is undertaken by using thin strips
of iron and twisting them together whilst red hot and hammering them into
the correct shape. This left the characteristic shape of a zig zag or herringbone
feature that indicated quality. This sword was no exception. Analysis showed
that it consisted of 7 thin rods platted together to form the basic design
and combined with another 4 bundles of 7 rods to produce the basic shape
of the sword. It was here that the makers art and design could shine through.
To the handle end was attached by heat and hammering 2 tongues that were
for attaching the handle. After the basic shape was formed by heating and
beating the cutting edges were applied. Steel making is a complex subject
and it is interesting to wonder how much the maker knew about the process.
The quality and strength and brittleness of steel is determined by the
amount of carbon within it. The more carbon the stronger the blade. If
you increase the carbon content too much, the steel becomes brittle and
useless for sword purposes. It becomes what is known as cast iron and impossible
to work. To make steel of the right constituency would have taken great
skill. High carbon steel has a property that no other steel possesses.
It can be heat hardened and annealed. The hardening process consists of
heating the metal to a cherry red colour and quickly quenching it in cold
water. This procedure hardens the metal and makes it brittle. Quite useless
as a sword blade. The oxidation from the metal blade would be removed ready
for annealing. Annealing is the process of heating the metal under controlled
conditions whilst waiting for the metal to discolour. These colours are
known as temper colours. They can vary depending on the carbon content
but usually start from yellow and progress to blue. This procedure gradually
softens the metal from its brittle state to a condition of hardness that
makes it durable. It is important that the colours are observed closely
and the sword quenched in cold water to stop the temper colours at the
correct point and position. The skill of the sword maker would be paramount.
The Sutton Hoo sword blade therefore consisted of -
.
robably the grandest and finest of all the artefacts recovered from Sutton
Hoo, the gold buckle is the premier find in my estimation. When observed
from the front, it is difficult to discern its exact function. It consists
of 4 main pieces and an ingenious locking system. Weighing about 420g and
constructed of cast gold, the main body at the front which extends to the
hinges at the oval shaped top piece. three oval headed pins extrude to
the back which are locked by three small circular plates on the thinner
back plate which is also hinged as indicated in the graphic. The oval top
piece hinges backwards to allow the leather to be fed through prior to
locking at the rear. I have looked at this buckle for some time and still
find it hard to visualize how it would be worn securely. It would probably
only be worn for ceremonial functions due to the pure beauty and value
of it. The style originates from Germany of which a number have been recovered
but none seem to be of this quality. Dating to the sixth or seventh century,
it gives us valuable information as to who this may have belonged to. Note
the symmetry of the left and right sides of the design of the main body
and the predominance of birds of prey such as the beaks or talons on the
left and right of the top two locking pin heads. Many of the finer gold
pieces depict similar ornithological features.
