| Summary |
The purpose of this thesis is to question a previous prevailing interpretation of a the seventh century Anglo-Saxon burial mound (labeled "One" at Sutton Hoo) which excludes any contribution from Germanic sacral kingship. It is thus necessary to document the existence of sacral kingship in an Anglo-Saxon context. Because most passages referring to this institution are disputed, the present thesis examines innovative ways by which it may be verified. Among other places, new evidence is found in a study of the relationship that exists between the cult of the Roman emperor and Germanic protective amulets called bracteates. An analysis of these amulets reveals that the Germanic tribes had adopted forms of the cult of the divine Roman emperor. One may posit therefore that the concept of the divine ruler had become known to Germanic peoples before the period of the bracteate horizon. In the course of study a supplementary comparison with neighboring Celtic cultures had also been undertaken. This has revealed the existence of several seventh century texts which document the concept of sacral kingship, among the Celts in relation to fertility. As disputed Germanic references reveal the same fertility theme, and as considerable interplay existed between many Celtic and Germanic peoples, the parallels suggest that Germans were exposed to sacral kingship themes from both Celts and Romans. In conclusion, an argument for Germanic sacral kingship can be constructed as follows. Given evidence for the divine ruler in Roman culture together that of the sacral king in Celtic, the varieties of exchanges between Germans, Celts, and Romans before and after the Migration Age, suggest that the Germans would have had to be highly unusual not to have developed a sacral king even if one supposes that they did not already have that type of ruler themselves. The evidence of outside circumstances can thus add to our understanding of Germanic politicoreligiosity in this field. One may thus conclude that current interpretations of Mound One at Sutton Hoo, which do not acknowledge a sacral kingship contribution, appear to be incomplete. A more complete interpretation would hold that the ideology of sacral kingship is relevant to the Sutton Hoo context. |
